tdkehoe

tdkehoe

Lives in United States Boulder, CO, United States
Joined on Oct 4, 2012
About me:

Darkroom manager and yearbook editor in college, continued with photography as a hobby and occasionally in my job.

Comments

Total: 38, showing: 21 – 38
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

A 34 Mpix zoom lens on a 42 Mpix camera and the pixel shift still sharpens the image! You don't need super-premium prime lenses to take advantage of this feature. This supports my view that your camera should have more pixels than your lens.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 01:56 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

Marcos Villaroman: I wonder what factors surrounded the exploding Li-Ion battery. Cheap 3rd party battery? Battery dropped a few times too many and already showed signs of damage (e.g., swelling)?

Yeah, I'd like to hear if it was a $50 Nikon/Canon/Sony battery or the $2 Hu Flung Pu batteries I buy on eBay. :-)

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 01:48 UTC

How fast does it take the four pictures? Is it like HDR, where you get ghosting if the subject isn't perfectly still?

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 02:23 UTC as 125th comment | 6 replies

The full frame pictures all look better to my eye, except the first, where the full-frame lens caught the sun. Better tonality in her skin, mostly. And the a9 sensor is said to have somewhat worse dynamic range than the a7. I'll take my $1150 used-on-eBay a7 with a Zeiss 24-70mm f/4 over both of those cameras.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2017 at 01:09 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

tdkehoe: 94! That beats my Sony a7's DxOMark score of 90. I'm trading in my a7 for an iPhone. :-)

And my Sony a7's apps suck! No decent games or social media. Just stuff like time lapse and star tracking. And, I hate to admit that I'm an old person, but I actually make telephone calls sometimes and the a7 is the worst phone. I can't get any bars, even when I'm in a bar. Hands down, the iPhone 8 wins!

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2017 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

tdkehoe: 94! That beats my Sony a7's DxOMark score of 90. I'm trading in my a7 for an iPhone. :-)

Seriously, why does DxOMark have different scores for mobile devices and cameras? What would the iPhone 8+ rate on the camera scale? I'll take a guess...the sensor is 1/55 the size of a full-frame sensor, so the iPhone would rate around a 2.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2017 at 00:24 UTC

94! That beats my Sony a7's DxOMark score of 90. I'm trading in my a7 for an iPhone. :-)

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 02:54 UTC as 84th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

mosc: I understand why you would want an 800mm mirror lens but I can't fathom the 400mm. You can get zooms that go out that far for not much more money and they're SO much better (and AF)

Less weight. My 70-300 stays home on most hikes.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 02:32 UTC
On article How to buy used gear (and not get burned) (141 comments in total)

My tip: buy a full frame camera. The market for full frame lenses is bigger than the market for AFS and other smaller formats. New, smaller cameras and lenses are cheaper, but used full frame lenses are cheaper and more available than used smaller lenses. My Sony a7 will take any lens made in the past 50 years, with adapters. In particular, I got great deals on Sony A-mount lenses. They're as sharp as the FE lenses, but I don't have auto focus or optical stabilization. For lenses that I don't use often this isn't a problem.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 02:36 UTC as 14th comment

How to carry a camera with my backpack is one of my obsessions. A case is essential, to protect the camera. I attach a Lowe Pro or similar case to my backpacks' shoulder straps. That way I can have the camera's neck strap around my neck, the camera in its case unzipped, and I can get the camera out fast yet it's protected. There's zero swinging or movement of the camera.

As for weight, this year I'm using a Sony a7, the smallest and lightest full frame camera. A Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f/4 is fairly light and covers 98% of my pictures. A Trailpix 6-ounce tripod is essential (it uses my trekking poles as two legs).

My problem is that sometimes I need a 20mm lens or a telephoto. But most trips I never use the telephoto, and take maybe one picture with the 20mm. Should I carry that extra weight and not use it, or miss a shot?

A few years ago I carried a Sony RX100. Great little camera, and just eight ounces! I liked how I could pull it out of my pocket and shoot one handed.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 04:18 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

rainrunner: The reason why I carry more weight while backpacking is so I can get night pictures. I love to get up during the night and enjoy the quiet and the stars in the sky and spend about an hour shooting pictures. The new 1 inch point and shoots can capture some night scenes, but the larger the sensor the better the capture.
My pack in an REI flash 65 which is probably a pound lighter than his Osprey, and I do carry a tripod, but don't pull it out until I make camp. I have also rigged my REI hiking pole with a tripod head to use as a monopod, it has the same tripod head as my tripod so I use the same quick release plate. I use the monopod while hiking for those times my hands might be a little bit shaky after a strenuous hike. To adapt the tripod, I just had to add a thread adapter to switch from the camera mount thread to the tripod thread mount.

Here's a link to one of my recent backpack shots.

... https://www.viewbug.com/photo/74249550

Great pictures! How do you get light and color on the mountain at night? My night sky pictures just have black outlines of mountains. Do you shoot in moonlight?

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 04:06 UTC
In reply to:

jorg14: If you're primarily into hiking and photography as a second, then one of the Sony RX100's would certainly do the trick. I keep mine on my belt in a hard leather case I can grab with one hand in about a second. 24-70 f1.8. DXO: 70. Total weight: 297 grams (+ 80 for the case.)

I've owned a lot of cameras over the years, and if I count the most best photos my RX100 would likely be the winner. The pictures aren't as good as my a7 but the pictures are good enough. You can shoot one-handed with the RX100, pull it out of your pocket to snap a picture without thinking twice.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 03:57 UTC
In reply to:

retr01976: Save money on your wedding, skip hiring a photographer and tell everyone to take pictures with their phones and upload them to a centralized photo hosting service. Yes you won't get some of the pretty formal shots, but you will get a great selection of incredible memories that photographers miss. Those formal shots are nice for a while and make a few great framed pictures, but those casual phone shots are fun and tell a story from many different perspectives. Just my 2 cents, I wasted money on a pro and regret it.

My ex-wife did this (she and her family planned the wedding) and the pictures were bad. The closest thing to a formal picture was taken on my Canon pocket camera, in bad lighting. My ex-wife then wanted it blown up to some huge size. I did everything I could in Photoshop and made it acceptable, barely. A friend recently asked me to be her wedding photographer. I told her to hire a real wedding photographer, this is an area that takes a lot of skill and experience. People skills, mostly. I said I'd be happy to shoot candids of her guests.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 02:34 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2740 comments in total)

Does the a9 have less "ghosting" in Auto HDR mode? This is one of the biggest problems I have with my a7. Or is ghosting solely dependent on shutter speed? I.e., at 1/125 second, will the a9 take three pictures faster than my a7?

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 14:09 UTC as 156th comment | 1 reply
On article In praise of shooting monochrome landscapes (335 comments in total)

I'm seeing a red filter making the clouds stand out. Limiting the light to certain frequencies or blocking other parts of the spectrum can make elements stand out that otherwise would be flat and boring, e.g., clouds. You can 't do this in color, usually. I remember a recent color photo from Myanmar that used an orange filter that looked nice. But a red filter is too extreme for a color photo, and the extreme results are what makes it look good in black and white.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 03:13 UTC as 5th comment
On photo Thunderheads With Egret in the Wings challenge (32 comments in total)

Wow! It's like a painting! And birds are hard to photograph.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 03:19 UTC as 22nd comment
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2740 comments in total)

How fast can it shoot HDR? That's two questions. How fast does it take three, bracketed shots, i.e., does the electronic shutter reduce ghosting? Second, how fast does it process and store an HDR shot, i.e., spf (seconds per frame, my RX100 Mk1 was 10 seconds per HDR frame, my a6000 and a7 are around 3 seconds per HDR frame).

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 15:03 UTC as 455th comment | 1 reply

Faster HDR too? My first generation RX100 is 10 seconds per frame (10spf? 0.1fps?) for HDR. Great pictures but slow.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 20:24 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
Total: 38, showing: 21 – 38
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »