Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jan 7, 2014


Total: 525, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Aaron801: Not that the performance is necessarily lacking but it does seem kind of odd to me to buy a 5K camera and then use a $200 lens on it. I guess that if I had the camera though I would HAVE to own this lens, because even if I rarely used it how could I not own it for that price?

Oh yeah... I totally get that it "isn't the tool" that makes a photo. Some of my favorite images were made on an Olympus EM10, which served my purposes very well and is a very inexpensive camera (particularly used, which is how I got it). It just seems odd to me to make gear enough of a priority to by such an expensive camera body and then use such inexpensive lenses on it... I do have to say that the images from it look good and furthermore as someone who bought a fisheye just to play with (and because it was cheap), I've come to the conclusion that it's far more versatile than I thought that it would be...

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 18:10 UTC

Not that the performance is necessarily lacking but it does seem kind of odd to me to buy a 5K camera and then use a $200 lens on it. I guess that if I had the camera though I would HAVE to own this lens, because even if I rarely used it how could I not own it for that price?

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2021 at 05:05 UTC as 9th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Jeff Greenberg: -----
"fisheye lens"
2 tormenting words painfully remind me of
my most wasteful equipment purchase...
like child's toy played with few times
then decades in closet ignored...

I kind of felt the same way about these things and I still do with the circular fisheye types of lenses. I bought a rectilinear type, a Rokinon for my m43 setup and I've been very happy with it. I don't use it much but if I'm taking a bunch of shots of the same scene, then a couple with the fisheye is a nice way to get another type of perspective out of it. These things are cheap enough too to where one doesn't feel that they have to use them a lot to get their money's with... and this one looks to be really sharp and with the fast f-stop really versatile too.

There's a way to use these things too where you can make the result look less obviously "fisheye" which makes them a bit more versatile than folks give them credit for.

If I had an ASPC camera, I'd have to have one of these!

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2021 at 18:27 UTC

I thought at first that this zoom is a really an odd range. Then I thought about the lenses that I use to shoot live music stuff, which is often 25mm and 45mm primes. This lens would be perfect for that as I really hate to deal with lens changes, but I still want something that's fast for low light and for subject isolation. The only stopping point for me is the price, which is way more than it would be worth it to me for the occasional live music shooting that I do... but if I were made of money I'd have to have this thing! I think that a really short range zoom like this can make sense if it is really fast, as this one is...

... and the IQ looks really nice, but I would expect that.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2021 at 01:45 UTC as 6th comment | 2 replies

If I'm always shooting in either aperture priority or full manual, then it seems that electronically controlled aperture in the lens really doesn't buy me anything... Am I missing something?

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2021 at 21:40 UTC as 1st comment
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Z fc (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Cameras: 12 buttons, 5 rotary dials/wheels, 3 rotary selector switches and 1 four-way pad. Unless I missed something. There’s got to be a better way. It would be bold of Nikon to create a true retro camera by forcing you to use the retro controls and eliminating some of the traditional digital control.
My first camera, bought brand new, was a Nikon FE2 (still have it, still works great). To turn on the camera you pulled out the wind lever to a 30 degree stand-off position, to turn off the camera you pushed it flush with the back. I’d love a lever like this to turn on/off this camera, just to compete the retro theme.

I don't have a problem with it. I like some of the old school controls that this thing has, but I know that I'd like the option to have some settings be mapped to buttons so that I'm not searching menus to find them. Even if you don't use the buttons much, they're there when you might want to use some of the deeper type features and that doesn't seem like such a bad thing... no?

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2021 at 21:33 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon Z fc (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ivar Dahl Larsen: What makes the design so New when Fuji has had the same for many years, incl., shutter wheel on camera, aperture on lens and iso wheel on the body too. And 24mp on all the New xt. There is no reason to go kind'a flabbergasted about this one I say. But it is looking good.😀

Yeah, I own m43 gear and not Fuji, but for a long time I've been thinking that the Fuji design is really the perfect sort of thing for what I like. I dig the old school controls, the IQ, the lens lineup and I have to admit, the aesthetics as well. Seems like Nikon is tapping into that as well. Maybe the smaller ASPC format isn't so dead as so many folks were predicting. Seems to me that one can get a lot of IQ from just this small format, and judging at least for the one new 28mm lenses that just came out, lenses might be a fair bit cheaper than FF as well.

Not the the megapixel count is a be-all, end all type of thing, but it does seem that with so much pixel destiny in lots of the FF gear available that they might have made this thing with a bigger megapixel number. That might be the thing that would be the tipping point for someone to get this, rather than a current FF model...

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2021 at 21:31 UTC

It's actually aNish kapoor...

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2021 at 04:35 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article Ricoh's Pentax K-3 III 26MP DSLR is finally here (346 comments in total)

I've always shot mirrorless, m43 in my case, but if I was wanting something with a mirror and had the cash, I might be looking at this camera. I hear that Pentax is super durable, weather resistant and though it's not a really important factor, I like it aesthetically more than just about any other DSLR.

I'd like to see what Pentax might do with mirrorless...

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2021 at 01:39 UTC as 70th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony a1 review (2596 comments in total)
In reply to:

mmditter: I got nothing against this camera, nothing at all. I don't need one, can't afford one, don't want one... but I think that last is my point: I don't want one. Time was that when the newest shiniest whiz bang gear came out from one of the big camera makers, I drooled over it, coveted it, and cried that I couldn't afford one. That's still the case sometimes. The Fuji X100 cameras are jewels, and I'd love to get one some day. So are some of the Leica rangefinders. But this one from Sony? A machine. Or tool even. An extremely capable one, but not something I'd in any way characterize as pretty. I also agree with havanna60: the name A1 is just wrong. It should be the A9III.

I figure, if you're going to spend all that money you could get a Leica that's prettier and has some kind of fairy-dust magic to it... Or you could by something like this Sony which leaves nothing to be desired as far as perfomance and features. Capable to shoot action, high res, high ISO, with the latests video specs, etc. Neither choice is wrong but if I bought the Leica. I might be having second thoughts about not buying the higher perfomance, more versitile model...

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2021 at 21:07 UTC

Very well stated: digital is an objectively better medium but not necessarily more enjoyable than film. My film days are almost certainly behind me and yet I totally understand the appeal of film. The film vs digital in photography debate in photography is much like the analog vs digital one in audio. Though I believe that sonically, at it's very best digital is the superior medium, I still enjoy collecting LPs... Often enjoyment and perfection aren't the same thing...

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2020 at 19:38 UTC as 162nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Hayden N: Micro 4 thirds was always doomed to fail when smartphones started to gain popularity. You can't fit it in your pocket you still need a bag to carry all your lenses and other accessories so what's the point? Might as well just use a cellphone on the go or buy Apsc or full frame if you need more quality and for planned trips.

To me it stands to reason that as cell phone tech improves so will the bigger formats. So all things being equal, at last for certain kinds of things where a bigger sensor is advantageous (not to mention the flexibility of using different lenses, etc) at any given point int time, it's always going to have an edge over a smaller format, like a cell phone.

For me m43 is about as large as I like to cary and since I just really don't enjoy shooting with a cell phone it's really the ideal format... and I imagine that I'm not alone in thinking this way...

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2020 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

nathantw: The product looks good, but what's with people using wide angle lenses for portraits? It doesn't do the model any justice whatsoever. I can understand if it's an environmental portrait where you need the background, but for a straight up headshot you might as well use a cellphone selfie camera. If you're going to take the time to shoot, do it right and use the right lens for the task.

I think that portraits shot with longer lenses are generally more flattering, but not necessarily more interesting, more compelling images. I see the choice of lens as something that's all about what the image is meant for...

Link | Posted on May 7, 2020 at 03:40 UTC

I think that it's cool! The photographer directed what was going on, right? That makes it pretty much like if he was directing the model in the same room, I think. The bigger point to me is that the result is a really striking, moody portrait and the way that it was made merely makes it interesting but doesn't change the fact that it's a very nicely made image...

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2020 at 20:31 UTC as 28th comment
On article Fujifilm X-T4 review (1491 comments in total)
In reply to:

GreatOceanSoftware: I had hoped I would never find myself saying this, but when my XT-3 dies and is no longer available, I will part ways from the XT line. I've had the XT-1, 2 and 3 and each has improved on the last for my use. But I'm a stills shooter. Never have and don't anticipate ever shooting video.

Up until now, I've been able to ignore all of the video features without it interfering with my work, but every video control, menu and feature on the camera is a waste for me. Now with the articulating screen, I can no longer ignore it. 60-70% of my shots are waist level and I guess that's the tipping point. And I also use the metering switch.

I've used all brands and though I have my favorites, I don't mind switching again. Just purchased into a lightweight travel option from Canon. Fun so far, but eventually I'll have to replace my main system. Shame. But I hope all manufacturers don't fall wholly into the hybrid shooter model, and will keep some cameras that are focused on still shooters.

I don't shoot video and would prefer the old style LCD. That being said though stuff like the new IBIS is so much more what I care about so that I could live with the newer, more video-centric LCD. I don't see it as that big a deal.

Besides, if you don't shoot video and really don't care about the IBIS (the big improvement on this camera, the way that I see it), then it seems that there's little reason to upgrade from the last model anyway.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2020 at 18:55 UTC

I didn't really understand the appeal of interchanageble lens 110 and don't get why you would want to use fixed aperature lenses on digital... With so many other options..?

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2020 at 03:33 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply

I want one... but I don't see myself using it for any kind of "mobile photo studio." Nor would I be wanting to pay $8k+ for one... That's double what I spent on my last car (used, of course)!

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 19:21 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

JE River: What Flickr can do to help boost their user base and paid subscriptions, is to create a system that showcases the best work submitted to the site. Sort of what 500PX used to do with their popular page and pulse system.

Flickr has an explore page, but it is geared more towards giving everyone a chance at being seen on the explore page, without much regard for the quality of the work. 500PX used to have a balanced system where only the best work was voted to the top, but eventually people found ways to scam the system, and on top of that, users with 100,000+ followers get every image they post to the top of the popular page regardless of quality. They have thousands of followers who will vote for it when it pops up in their feed, thus screwing it to the lower-ranking members who might have images worthy of the top of the popular page.

As of today, there really isn't a photo sharing service that showcases images based on their individual merit. (CONTINUED BELOW)

I think that as far as showcasing work, it's really a case of "no accounting for taste." What really would be the "best work" anyway? What I like about Flickr is the groups and the way that you can favorite both images and photographers. if you spend some time checking out and joining groups as well as making connections with other photographers you can end up seeing the kind of work that inspires you... and that's really all that matters. Some folks on there seems to get way too caught up in the whole Explore thing and get bitter when their images don't end up on there. I've got a few things in Explore but I don't really sweat it; those images aren't my favorites and I'd rather get feedback from other photographers who I respect rather than some faceless Flickr bot...

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2020 at 21:51 UTC

Well... I hope that this doesn't mean the end of Flickr. I haven't yet paid the pro rate as I'm still 150 or so images away from the 1000 mark (having been on there since '14) but once I go over the free level, I'll be happy to pay that $60. I really like Flickr and feel that it offers me everything that I want... I've been encouraged to check out Instagram and it offers me pretty much nothing that I'm very interested in...

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2020 at 21:40 UTC as 69th comment | 1 reply
On article DPReview TV: Canon 1D X Mark III for video (96 comments in total)
In reply to:

LoneTree1: That picture says it all. Who wants to support 5-6lbs of camera on the end of a stick?

Sure, I get that pros are willing to deal with more inconvenience from their gear to get the shot... of course, they're getting paid to do a job. Still, all things being equal, it seems to me that a lighter rig would have a big advantage in that it could be held steadier (like on a pole) for lots of different kinds of shooting scenarios...

Even for pros it seems to me that extra weight (at least for a portable type rig) is going to be somwhat of a disadvantage...

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2020 at 19:19 UTC
Total: 525, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »