Posts for: ralphfr
Feb 5, 2018 21:01:12 #
andrec1 wrote:
Hi. It fits any FX camera. Thanks
Doesn't the "Di" mean DX(Crop) for Tamron?
Nevermind. Di II is DX. Di is FF. Sorry!
Feb 1, 2018 10:38:25 #
Feb 1, 2018 10:36:45 #
Feb 1, 2018 10:34:30 #
WOW! You'd never know you airbrushed the surfer out this beautiful image! 
Couldn't resist!
I love the monochromatic element of this photo. Absolutely gorgeous!
Couldn't resist!I love the monochromatic element of this photo. Absolutely gorgeous!
Jan 31, 2018 14:22:45 #
Gene51 wrote:
Hmm. . .Now what would I do with $14K - well, I wouldn't spend it on camera gear, that's for sure.
On the other hand, that RX10M4 was surprisingly good for what it is. I have no regrets.
Now for some real, hard numbers for you.
I paid $1700 for a used D810, and a $1200 for a used Sigma 150-600 Sport. Before that I paid $1800 several years ago for a used D800.
And this is what I took with the Sigma and either of these cameras.
On the other hand, that RX10M4 was surprisingly good for what it is. I have no regrets.
Now for some real, hard numbers for you.
I paid $1700 for a used D810, and a $1200 for a used Sigma 150-600 Sport. Before that I paid $1800 several years ago for a used D800.
And this is what I took with the Sigma and either of these cameras.
Me neither. I'd have a boat!
What happened to the 600mm Nikkor? My pricing was for all new. One body and the 2 lenses. Either way your photos are awesome. That owl photo is my favorite of the ones you posted. It's your avatar so you must like it too!
Without question you can see the jump in IQ with the DSLRs. I however would be ecstatic with your M3/M4 images. You obviously know your way around a camera of any type as your M3/M4 pics show. Thank you for sharing them.
Jan 31, 2018 13:55:25 #
Jan 31, 2018 13:09:17 #
How old is that plant? Just kidding! Nice photos! How about a slower shutter speed? Smoke trails.
Jan 31, 2018 13:06:13 #
Jan 31, 2018 12:58:44 #
a6k wrote:
Gene51's opinion of the camera is correct in my opinion. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, merely to give a tip to those who have it.
Question. Was your original post directed at PRO bird photographer's? If so then Gene's assessment is cogent. What about us "just-below" pro members like myself?
TFIC. If my math is correct Gene's kit would cost me between 13 and 14K. I could by near 8 RX10M4s. I have been trying unsuccessfully to take decent bird photos with a bridge camera myself. It's not easy with my measly 1.2/3" sensor. I would be absolutely giddy to own an RX10M4.Gene this in not meant in anyway to be offensive to you. I understand you're not implying you need your kit to take bird photos. I also understand even if I buy 8 RX10s I'm still not getting close to your image quality. It's just I have seen some excellent photos taken with this bridge camera and if anyone is considering a bridge camera I would urge them to consider this one if at all po$$ible.
a6K thank you for the tips. Signed RX10M4 Fan Boy!
Jan 31, 2018 11:47:44 #
Pegasus wrote:
TriX is doing an excellent job of debunking misund... (show quote)
Agreed. I mean unless your storing the secret 11 herbs and spices for KFC Chicken or the Classic Coca-Cola formula you can't beat the convenience of cloud storage. Unless you're a serious survivalist!
Jan 31, 2018 11:44:27 #
TriX wrote:
Only if you believe that you’re less likely to be hacked or infected with a virus or malware than Amazon (or Google or Microsoft or Apple)...
True. I was thinking more along the lines of unwarranted access to your data by hackers.
Jan 31, 2018 11:00:04 #
It's a question of reliability vs security. No way the cloud is more secure than local memory. No way local memory is more reliable than the cloud. Pick your poison.
Jan 31, 2018 07:47:19 #
Longshadow wrote:
Not directed at you, I agree with you. Directed in general, and I think you know what I mean.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I do. No coffee yet!
Jan 31, 2018 07:45:19 #
Jan 31, 2018 07:42:20 #
Longshadow wrote:
That and a lot of people stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.
A quick format clears the FAT table (file index list) leaving the actual file data; low level format puts ones or zeros in all of the cell (storage) locations, wiping the file data.
A quick format clears the FAT table (file index list) leaving the actual file data; low level format puts ones or zeros in all of the cell (storage) locations, wiping the file data.
Snarky comments aside, if you go back and read some of the comments it was not made clear in some cases that the image files, though still on the card, were no longer accessible. That's all I'm trying to clarify.