Peter K Burian

Peter K Burian

Lives in Canada Toronto, Canada
Works as a Photographer, writer, editor
Has a website at www.peterkburian.com
Joined on Feb 11, 2002
About me:

Stock photographer and Contributing Editor to PHOTO LIFE, PhotoNEWS, and Australian Photography magazine.

Also, Author of Magic Lantern books about Sony and Pentax DSLRs (but I test all brands of products for the magazines.) Co-author of some David Busch Guides as well.

www.peterkburian.com

Comments

Total: 258, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Markie77: In my opinion (and I may be wrong) National Geographic magazine today is just another starving magazine that is barely scraping by. Nobody buys magazines anymore, the magazine in its current state is mostly pretty pictures with hardly any written content, in addition to that, the images are over processed and don't reflect reality. Even people who appreciate good photography don't buy the magazine anymore, because reality and the internet is where it's at. How the magazine manipulated their images 30 years ago is irrelevant, and what they do today is irrelevant, because their audience today is very tiny and continually shrinking. This generation's attention is currently focused on facebook, buzzfeed, twitter and snapchat, they don't care or have the patience to appreciate artsy manipulated reportage photos from 'masters' either from 30 years ago or from today.
To sum up, how they search for altered photographs is about as relevant as what brand of coffee they drink at their offices.

Newer info from Wikipedia (with info from The Washington Post) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Geographic_(magazine)

"As of 2015, the magazine was circulated worldwide in nearly 40 local-language editions and had a global circulation of approximately 6.5 million per month according to data published by The Washington Post (down from about 12 million in the late 1980s) or 6.7 million according to National Geographic. This includes a US circulation of 3.5 million."

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 17:10 UTC
In reply to:

Markie77: In my opinion (and I may be wrong) National Geographic magazine today is just another starving magazine that is barely scraping by. Nobody buys magazines anymore, the magazine in its current state is mostly pretty pictures with hardly any written content, in addition to that, the images are over processed and don't reflect reality. Even people who appreciate good photography don't buy the magazine anymore, because reality and the internet is where it's at. How the magazine manipulated their images 30 years ago is irrelevant, and what they do today is irrelevant, because their audience today is very tiny and continually shrinking. This generation's attention is currently focused on facebook, buzzfeed, twitter and snapchat, they don't care or have the patience to appreciate artsy manipulated reportage photos from 'masters' either from 30 years ago or from today.
To sum up, how they search for altered photographs is about as relevant as what brand of coffee they drink at their offices.

You're partly right: many people no longer buy magazines. But it's not fair to say "nobody" does. I do, for example and National Geographic still sells numerous copies each month.

In fact, they sell roughly 3.1 million copies per month, in the US alone, according to a spring 2015 audit. http://www.nationalgeographic.com/mediakit/pdf/ng-magazine/NGM_Media_Kit_2016.pdf

And another 3 million in foreign languages https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/national-geographic-magazine-shifts-to-for-profit-status-with-fox-partnership/2015/09/09/7c9f034e-56f0-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 16:42 UTC

It's important to note that some photography is for purposes of art (pictorial) and that may be totally impressionistic. If so, any modifications in software are fine. (Just as a painter does not necessarily strive to produce an exact replica of a scene.)

Of course, when it's photo journalism - to illustrate an event or scene - it must be true to the original. We have a right to expect the New York Times, Washington Post, National Geographic, etc. to publish only such truly accurate images. But those who do not shoot for such purposes should not be bound by those constraints.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 16:29 UTC as 3rd comment

Yeah! I never did understand why they would spend so much money on such a concept. I did test an early version and it was definitely Not Ready for Prime Time ... apparently, newer models were not either.

This was NOT the proverbial "better mousetrap".

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 14:54 UTC as 16th comment
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)

The XQD memory cards have been around for a while but very, very few cameras accept them. Unless that changes -- and soon -- this card format will be another one that is obsolete.

I have a memory card reader that accepts many types of cards but not XQD. So that is another drawback; would need a new card reader.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2016 at 14:32 UTC as 6th comment
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardly: DPR should be going to the Olympics with the Nikon D5 and Canon 1DX Mark ll for the ultimate real world head to head challenge. So DPR, are you up to it?

They could not get a press pass.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2016 at 13:10 UTC

They should be smaller and pocketable? Well, that aspect is already taken care of by cell phone cameras. .... Camera makers won't even try to compete with those, so larger, more versatile and capable of much better image quality makes sense as the development goal.

btw, we were on a Caribbean cruise with 2900 other people recently. We went ashore on islands and I watched to see what kind of camera they were using. Some days, I did not see a single person with a DSLR. Overall, I would say that 90% were using cell phone or iPad cameras. It was almost surprising to see a real camera in use ....... Scary for the industry.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 12:48 UTC as 22nd comment | 3 replies

People are claiming to already own these cameras... are they even for sale yet??? And some already had one??

2 I own it ... 75 I want it.... 5 I had it

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2016 at 12:43 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply

Pentax showed actual mockups of the camera at a couple of trade shows. Lots of photos of the mockups at http://www.ogunturkay.com/blog/?tag=ff

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 14:37 UTC as 2nd comment | 3 replies
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (617 comments in total)

Why can't DP Review give us an article with paragraphs and headings about each topic. Instead of giving us 16 individual pages, each with just a short blurb about one topic.

Do readers have a short attention span? If so, why publish 20-30 page test reports on cameras??

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 14:27 UTC as 32nd comment | 5 replies
On article Readers' Choice Awards 2015: The winners (63 comments in total)

In my estimation, ANY people's choice award is questionable. Have the people voting actually tested all of that equipment?

Or are they voting for their favorite brand? Or the "coolest" camera?

Even if they closely studied the previous articles, such as Best High End Cameras, their votes might make sense. But I suspect that many simply vote based on less logical criteria.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 14:25 UTC as 3rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

LJ - Eljot: The Arri Amira for 40000$ or the Photorito lens wrap for 20$? I can not decide, they are both awsome.

Well, nobody can complain that the gift guide recommends junk products!!

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

electrophoto: Buy buy buy... it's christmas time again....

Oh, not yet; just US Thanksgiving and the shopping frenzy Black Friday.. we will see more of this kind of stuff as we get closer to Christmas.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

DF58: Does anyone find these formats of guides (on screen representation of two portrait orientated a4 pages side by side) totally unsuitable for easy reading on a laptop?
I suspect that you need some huge Mac style designer's screen - probably like the monitors used by the people who put these publications together!

I agree! Maybe you're supposed to print it; not sure if that is possible because I did not try. btw, I had posted a similar comment before I saw this one.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 19:29 UTC

Not sure what the value of such gift guides is, but this one is in pdf format and is very difficult to size properly for reading on a computer monitor. Frankly, more trouble than it's worth, I think.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 19:28 UTC as 3rd comment

The photo lab where I get oversized prints does use a wide format Epson printer. Fabulous print quality and archival (fade resistant for 100 years on the paper I choose)

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2015 at 13:15 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS Rebel T6i Review (311 comments in total)

◾Practically impossible to focus on moving subjects in live view ..... Wow, that will be a real problem for parents who want to shoot hockey, football, baseball, soccer etc. They typically use Live View and expect the camera to provide effective AF-C (servo) autofocus to keep the subject in focus as it approaches the camera.

The real question is, Is this a common problem with many DSLR and Mirrorless cameras?

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2015 at 14:18 UTC as 21st comment
On article iFixit tears down Sony's new a7R II to find its secrets (268 comments in total)
In reply to:

Valiant Thor: Putting it back together is not as easy as disassembly due to the fact that it is almost impossible to re-align the six hydrocoptic marzul vanes with the malleable logarithmic casing which would result in exposure duractance.

Yeah ... and I would not want to be the person to buy this camera after it's been taken apart and put back together, without the expertise available at the manufacturing facility.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2015 at 12:54 UTC
In reply to:

Vanitas Photo: These awards are akin to participation prizes... Just because it was launched that year taddaaah award meh
..

BTW I am a Canon shooter but I dont see whats the big deal of the new 5Ds other than having bazillion megapixels and reaching diffraction at f5.6 :P

The Criteria make sense to me: EISA chooses the products it awards from the pool of cameras and lenses its member magazines have tested, with the proviso that the products must have been launched within a particular 12 month period leading up to the awards. The awards are given on test results and the majority of members need to have published technical articles about awarded products.

Awarded products must be for sale to the general public no later than the 1st October in the year an EISA Awards is conferred and in at least 10 European countries.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2015 at 14:34 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Kempen: Leica Q wins European premium compact camera award and is selling faster than Leica can manufacture

I can hear the haters already "at that price etc etc"

Europeans care about quality and buy to their requirements - these awards are probably a very accurate reflection of where the industry stands

Well done to all the winners

I don't think that distribution channels matter at all in EISA awards.

CRITERIA: EISA chooses the products it awards from the pool of cameras and lenses its member magazines have tested, with the proviso that the products must have been launched within a particular 12 month period leading up to the awards. The awards are given on test results and the majority of members need to have published technical articles about awarded products.

Awarded products must be for sale to the general public no later than the 1st October in the year an EISA Awards is conferred and in at least 10 European countries.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2015 at 14:31 UTC
Total: 258, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »