October 31, 2014, 02:24:11 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Albi86

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 56
286
My pet peeve at the moment is the use of the word 'photographer'. Last week a good friend updated her fb info to state that she was a 'photographer'.  She likes taking a photo but more often models in them with a friend shooting for her. Some of the shots she actually takes are good but she has never taken the camera (a 60d) out of full auto.  She only posts her shots on fb and has never sold one or been contracted for a shoot.  A couple of months ago I even offered to show her the different functions of her camera but she never took me up on the offer and has never even taken a workshop or viewed youtube clips and yet she considers herself a photographer. 

At the same time another person has posted on the work social media site 'I am a great photographer!' along with an iphone photo of computer monitors in a poorly lit room that had been used in a work web article.

Do you think either deserve to call themselves photographers??

There's no state exam to become a photographer, so the title is free for everyone.

In the end it depends on the context. In common situations many people mean professional photographers, but in other circumstances it merely identifies the subject holding a camera and most likely in the act of taking a picture.

287
I'm not offended/irritated either.

I've never been an ambassador of "gear doesn't matter", but if I could choose I would prefer something like "wow, you definitely know how to pick the right gear and put it to good use, as well as being clearly proficient in post-processing!"

That's ultimately what taking pictures means, in my opinion.

Guess it would be too long though :p

288
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus Initial Impressions
« on: November 18, 2013, 04:36:30 PM »
Sorry but the world's best DSLR lens would have AF....

It wouldn't, because that would add the camera as a big part of the equation. Then we would hear endless talks about Zeiss' poor QC :)

289
The DRiarrhea debate... once again hijacking all topics here on CR. MR would be proud!
How dare you call it "hijacking" ... don't you know DR is everything! ... with enough DR in the sensor, you can even put an empty toilet roll tube and take awesome images, coz everything is auto freakin matic! ;D

As with the a7 debate, some people are convinced that what's good for them must be good for everybody, otherwise it's just lack of skill.

Still I can't help thinking that if it was the Canon EOS 7, with its high DR 36mpx sensor, the music here would be somewhat different.

They seem to be brilliant cameras. Of course a first attempt is not quite going to destroy a technology matured over decades, but I believe it's very shortsighted to ignore its potential and the many advantages.

290
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-104 f/4 lenstip's review
« on: November 18, 2013, 07:54:10 AM »
I agree that reviewing a lens sample received from its manufacturer leaves more than a few doubts.

In fact for a FF zoom of this range I find the performance quite impressive. It's sharp edge to edge at the wide end on moderate stopping down, and wide open on the long end. It's pretty much what a standard zoom should be like. No lens is flawless, but here Sigma seems to have achieved a very reasonable set of flaws.

The price tag of 999€ is too high, but I expect it to go down in the 799€ range soon enough - especially the Canon version.


291
1. How many times did you hit the kids with your 1D X + 24-70 and 70-300? ;D

And

2. How many advil did you take after that trip? ;D

I would go that route if there is no other choices. Here we have some options to choose, why not use that as our advantage.

None and none.  I don't have any problems with my coordination, and I've spent so much time carrying my kids around as they're growing up that even my 1D X + 600/4L IS II doesn't seem like that much of a load...

Choices are good, but we make them based on priorities. Sometimes small size is most important, but often with kids I prioritize AF, frame rate, and high ISO performance. 

Also, are the Sony cameras weather sealed?  Beyond water rides at amusement parks, I live in New England.  We have this stuff here called weather (well, they call it weathaaah, but since I was born in California and lived there for over 30 years, I know how to use the letter 'R'), that you don't get in CA.  ;)  A sunny, 85° day can turn quickly to a 'wicked bad downpoaaah', you're a target in a snowball fight whether or not you're holding a camera, etc.

Yes, they are fully weather sealed.

292
By Sony: “the pre-ordered quantities are almost 200% bigger than expected"

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/from-source-sony-a7-a7r-preorders-200-more-than-expected-from-sony-sony-a7r-review-at-cameralabs/

Ok...let see more prime lenses please :o

It can only be good.

It means sony will be encouraged to invest in the system, and other 3rd party manufacturers will enrich the lens lineup.

293
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 13, 2013, 09:40:50 AM »
What I meant is to sober up people who assumed they would all be L lenses :)

294
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 13, 2013, 05:02:26 AM »
BTW, why hasn't anyone considered some of those 8 lenses might be for cinema?

+1

And also EF-S and EF-M...

295
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 58/1.4 - $1,700!!!
« on: November 13, 2013, 02:55:26 AM »
Now that DXO has tested it and a better way of looking at the performance is shown on DPR, Its not very impressive considering the price.  It is pretty good at f/11, but so is a coke bottle.
 
There must be something that I'm missing that makes it worth more than $500.  Perhaps the gold ring?  :D

The rendering and the bokeh. The samples I have seen so far look spectacular.

+1

It looks more like a 50L successor (or competitor, of course) than a kin to the old Nikkor 58/1.2.

296
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 13, 2013, 02:53:35 AM »
I suspect the Df is one Nikon body the price might actually drop on in a shorter time frame because of the lacklustre sales.
If it does, I'll be ready to pounce if I still have a paycheck by then.
+1 ... but only if the price goes below US$ 1500

They'd rather discontinue it and call it a limited edition :P

297
I like this guy's idea  8)
Actually, since Sony and Zeiss often make AF lenses together, I wonder if there will be an AF-version of Otus 55 mm for Sony.  That would tip the scale for me for sure..


Sony A7r Zeiss Otus 55mm by drjlo2, on Flickr

The lenses you're talking about are actually made by Sony. Zeiss provides the QC and certifies their performance - thus the Zeiss logo and names.

Anyway, Zeiss has confirmed that they will make MF lenses for the a7 same as they do for Canon and Nikon ;)

298
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Japan Teases a White Kiss
« on: November 11, 2013, 10:55:39 AM »
Now they only have to price it like the 7D2 (it's not a FF, so it can't be priced like the Df) and the deal is struck.

299
By the numbers:

  • Nikon reported a 1H-FY13 (Mar-Aug, 2013) drop in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓28.5%
  • Canon reported a 2Q13 and 3Q13 (Apr-Sep, 2013) drops in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓4% and ↓3%, respectively

So for a similar 6-month period, Nikon had an 8-fold greater drop in unit sales compared to Canon.  Nikon's already-lower dSLR market share is dropping fast...

Actually, according to this article, the situation is a bit different:

Quote
Canon has sold 23% less cameras than a year earlier, Nikon is down 18.2%, and Sony and Fujifilm are each off about 35%.

I would argue that a year-to-year comparison is more reliable than a quarter-to-quarter one.

The quote you excerpted refers to "cameras" which includes both dSLRs and P&S units.  I'll grant that it's a bit ambiguous in the linked article, and that's either bad writing or quite possibly intentional.   I was referring to dSLRs only, using data from Canon's and Nikon's own quarterly financial presentations.

Also, I compared a 6-month block of time with the same 6-month block from the previous year (which is what y/y means - year-to-year).   I doubt looking at a full year would have made a difference in the trend, and doing so is more difficult because Canon and Nikon use offset fiscal years.  If you'd like to comb through their Investor Relations pages and present full year data for dSLRs, I'd be interested in your findings.

Yes, I agree that it's ambiguous. The point of the article, however, seems to me that it's the steep decline in interchangeable-lens cameras, as opposed to a well known decline of P&S and the likes.

The problem with comparing semesters is that the data can be confused by recent product releases, holidays, festivities, etc. This is why I find more reliable to do such calculations based on a whole year.

then do it for the whole year and show us the results.
as neuro said it´s not as easy as looking at the 6 month report numbers.

posting a link to overall camera sales when we talk about DSLR sales is of not much help.... so much is certain. ;)

As it seems you haven't grasped the sense of the lines you quoted, the point is in fact that the article is about DSLR sale decline, though it's not clear if the figures refer to that or to camera sales in total.

Something being easy doesn't make it correct, by the way.

300
By the numbers:

  • Nikon reported a 1H-FY13 (Mar-Aug, 2013) drop in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓28.5%
  • Canon reported a 2Q13 and 3Q13 (Apr-Sep, 2013) drops in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓4% and ↓3%, respectively

So for a similar 6-month period, Nikon had an 8-fold greater drop in unit sales compared to Canon.  Nikon's already-lower dSLR market share is dropping fast...

Actually, according to this article, the situation is a bit different:

Quote
Canon has sold 23% less cameras than a year earlier, Nikon is down 18.2%, and Sony and Fujifilm are each off about 35%.

I would argue that a year-to-year comparison is more reliable than a quarter-to-quarter one.

The quote you excerpted refers to "cameras" which includes both dSLRs and P&S units.  I'll grant that it's a bit ambiguous in the linked article, and that's either bad writing or quite possibly intentional.   I was referring to dSLRs only, using data from Canon's and Nikon's own quarterly financial presentations.

Also, I compared a 6-month block of time with the same 6-month block from the previous year (which is what y/y means - year-to-year).   I doubt looking at a full year would have made a difference in the trend, and doing so is more difficult because Canon and Nikon use offset fiscal years.  If you'd like to comb through their Investor Relations pages and present full year data for dSLRs, I'd be interested in your findings.

Yes, I agree that it's ambiguous. The point of the article, however, seems to me that it's the steep decline in interchangeable-lens cameras, as opposed to a well known decline of P&S and the likes.

The problem with comparing semesters is that the data can be confused by recent product releases, holidays, festivities, etc. This is why I find more reliable to do such calculations based on a whole year.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 56