Dougbm_2

Joined on May 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 434, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Its only image number 2 that is outstanding. Others are competent, over processed or ordinary. Disappointing.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 05:19 UTC as 12th comment
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1088 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: But still the main difference between mirrored and mirrorless is the optical verses electronic viewfinder. As much as the EVF is useful for judging exposure when it comes to critical shooting and clearly seeing the scene the optical viewfinder wins.

tbcass. It's pretty hard for it not to be my opinion! ; )

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 03:46 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: It's really a shame the went to being totally web based.

They're making money simply be people getting a free starter month with their new device and then forgetting to unsubscribe.

Adobe used to be great when you could bootleg their stuff but now there's no point in even trying to work with them.

A significant problem with the current subscription model is that is doesn't distinguish between heavy users and light users. e.g. I cannot justify having the full Adobe CC suite so still use an older iMac with Indesign and Illustrator CS4 for occasional use. I do have Photoshop CC which I use with Bridge. It is not as stable as CS4 but it does render files from my D7200 better.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 03:14 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1088 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: But still the main difference between mirrored and mirrorless is the optical verses electronic viewfinder. As much as the EVF is useful for judging exposure when it comes to critical shooting and clearly seeing the scene the optical viewfinder wins.

MickDK. Thats a good point re low light.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 03:06 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1088 comments in total)

But still the main difference between mirrored and mirrorless is the optical verses electronic viewfinder. As much as the EVF is useful for judging exposure when it comes to critical shooting and clearly seeing the scene the optical viewfinder wins.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 07:38 UTC as 25th comment | 11 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (402 comments in total)
In reply to:

hfjacinto: Finally! A review of a camera that interested me enough to actually want to get it. Nice pictures and some great features! I was getting tired of expensive gear that produced soft focus and odd colors...

But you get grainy images at medium ISO's

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 07:48 UTC
In reply to:

darrinlingle: i would consider it if it had better color than the previous G series. that's the only reason I went back to Olympus for use with the Leica 100-400 lens.

Darrin Lingle, Colorado

Not a Panasonic strong point.
They have slowly improved.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 08:47 UTC

Now please make an LX200 with a longer lens (24-125mm/f1.8 - f4) than before a much better EVF and this 20MP sensor.
Oh and better built. I had expensive issues with two LX100s.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 08:39 UTC as 24th comment | 3 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: I had one and loved the acuity or 'natural' detail. But sometimes the level of detail was too distracting. Colours (especially the level of natural saturation - like film - there I said it!) were often impressive but occasionally were not quite right and there was no way to adjust colour temperature in the camera or in SPP with is a major failing. The kit 17-50 lens was outperformed by the sensor and was soft at the edges. As result my old 5D MK1 with a 70-200 IS L lens out performed the SD1 with the kit lens. Ok I could have/should have bought a decent Art lens but the colour temp thing was the main reason I sold it. I had no problem with af and the wait time for processing didn't affect shot to shot times at all, until you filled the buffer and then you may have to wait 2 minutes. The other factor that caused me to sell was the very average viewfinder (narrow eyepoint). No better than an entry level DSLR. Disappointing. Great image quality. Disappointing flaws.

No Kelvin adjustment. 17-50 lens only good not great.
Curvature makes it perfect for interiors?!

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 05:29 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)

'Announced in 2010' but came out in 2012.
It's not THAT old.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 01:00 UTC as 3rd comment | 2 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)

I had one and loved the acuity or 'natural' detail. But sometimes the level of detail was too distracting. Colours (especially the level of natural saturation - like film - there I said it!) were often impressive but occasionally were not quite right and there was no way to adjust colour temperature in the camera or in SPP with is a major failing. The kit 17-50 lens was outperformed by the sensor and was soft at the edges. As result my old 5D MK1 with a 70-200 IS L lens out performed the SD1 with the kit lens. Ok I could have/should have bought a decent Art lens but the colour temp thing was the main reason I sold it. I had no problem with af and the wait time for processing didn't affect shot to shot times at all, until you filled the buffer and then you may have to wait 2 minutes. The other factor that caused me to sell was the very average viewfinder (narrow eyepoint). No better than an entry level DSLR. Disappointing. Great image quality. Disappointing flaws.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 00:57 UTC as 4th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

El Chubasco: I really dislike LR user interface. I wish I could switch to a different platform and stop feeding this beast. Unfortunately there is no other option in the market as robust and efficient as LR is.

I have always preferred Bridge with Photoshop. Efficient workflow. Never liked Lightroom. Especially the importing business/

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: It's really a shame the went to being totally web based.

They're making money simply be people getting a free starter month with their new device and then forgetting to unsubscribe.

Adobe used to be great when you could bootleg their stuff but now there's no point in even trying to work with them.

Bootleg! It's because of people like you that they had to go to the subscription model.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 21:19 UTC

I don't mind paying for Photoshop which I regularly use but there needs to be a better model for programs I only use occasionally such as Indesign or Illustrator.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 21:18 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Petr Klapper: Seems a bit like re-inventing mouse-wheel? Anyway, would be much better with at least 5 customizable smaller wheels on the keyboard to skip the need for midi-controllers for LR for example.

With any tool in PS you can change the opacity by simply entering a number on the keyboard. e.g. 2 = 20%. For finer graduations enter 2 numbers rapidly e.g. 22 = 22%. Same for layer opacity etc
Where there are two tool parameters e.g. Opacity and Flow hold shift to alter the second dialog e.g. Flow. Shift 2 = 20% Flow.
Also other keyboard commands exist such as [ and ] to increase a brush size and { and } (or shift [ and ] ) to harden or soften a brush (in preset increments).

Wherever you can use a keyboard command it is usually faster and more precise than a mouse command or in this case a wheel command.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 01:24 UTC
In reply to:

zettlers: Sony 33
Nikon 20
Canon 19

use Nikon at work since film days

About the same for me Sony 30, Canon 21, Nikon 21

Link | Posted on Aug 28, 2017 at 02:32 UTC

: (

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 05:37 UTC as 137th comment
In reply to:

TheDman: Isn't everyone done with the spinning steel wool yet?

Blame Canon not Sony or DPR

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2017 at 10:20 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (643 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: Viewing the images they appear to have a very fine 'sandy' grain which is new for Foveon.
I don't see any advantage over a higher end bayer camera eg a D810 that is so much more versatile.
Was the SD1 the last true Foveon?

@obsolescence: Of course they shot Raw but XF3 not DNG.
Any DSLR (and many compacts etc) EXCEPT Sigmas previous cameras has a white balance setting for RAW or jpeg. Except a pinhole camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2017 at 09:20 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (643 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: Viewing the images they appear to have a very fine 'sandy' grain which is new for Foveon.
I don't see any advantage over a higher end bayer camera eg a D810 that is so much more versatile.
Was the SD1 the last true Foveon?

Baumgratner: I downloaded the DNG of the red mustang and boy what a sandy grained and posterised image with terrible colour tone transitions on the car. Is this the best from Quattro? I wish they had also shot some XF3.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2017 at 06:47 UTC
Total: 434, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »