Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: jackebenton
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
Jul 29, 2022 16:29:50   #
Retired CPO wrote:
I have yet to see a first reminder that mirrorless cameras are superior. I guess they are superior to Brownies???


Amen, brother.
Go to
Jul 28, 2022 21:50:22   #
camerapapi wrote:
This is my take on this and my personal opinion. Mirrorless cameras are the future not only because of their superior technologies but also because they tend to be small and practical, especially for travelling. Shutter count has been discussed but it has also been discussed that it bears little when considering the wear of the camera. Modern shutters can take at least 150,000 actuations without issues. The better cameras can double that figure. Nobody can deny that a large group of professional photographers have adopted mirrorless.

Mirrorless wear like any other camera, they do not last forever but surely many of them will outlive us. The recent discussions about Nikon and Canon abandoning the research and production of new dSLR cameras tell me a lot. I do not know about other places but most recently in Japan a mirrorless camera, the Olympus EM-10 Mk II was the camera that most Japanese favored. It is a solid fact that mirrorless cameras are selling far better than dSLR bodies and that new mirrorless cameras are better than ever.

I do not believe the dSLR will disappear forever since there will be ample supplies of used models and manufacturers will be keeping parts and servicing these cameras. What could happen is that eventually and, at the present trend, there will be a better market for mirrorless and less for dSLR cameras.
This is my take on this and my personal opinion. M... (show quote)


And it is inevitable that,sooner or later, the next technical innovation will obsolete mirrorless cameras just, as some say , mirrorless
have obsoleted DSLRs. Nonetheless, excellent photography is produced by DSLRs, rangefinder cameras, twin lens reflexes, medium format, 4x5s, 8x10s, et al. The artistic eye of the photographer has far more to do with producing spectacular photographs
than any other element in the process.
Go to
Jul 16, 2022 20:03:57   #
My "get away from it all" diversion is listening to the score of Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake".
Go to
Jul 15, 2022 15:55:56   #
therwol wrote:
I personally think that an extensive discussion of orbital mechanics would make everyone here smarter.


Or, perhaps, quantum mechanics with a link to the relevant mathematics.
Go to
Jul 4, 2022 09:39:00   #
User ID wrote:
"Most viewers" cant see a difference ? Acoarst not, cuz there is none. Cameras dont make prints. Printers make prints.

You cant choose a camera for "how it prints" just as you cant choose a TV for how it shoots movies.

Regardless, hogsters do get weird ideas.


"Acoarst?" Perhaps you meant "Of course". Nonetheless, what was implicit in what I said is that a print is made from the image
captured by the camera ("duh"). Ipso facto, prints made from either camera are indistinguishable given that prints from both cameras are made on identical printers.

As long as I have been a participant on this forum you have a strong tendency to be a harsh critic of those with whom you disagree.
English has enough words to make it possible to criticize constructively without condescension or derision. Try it - you might like it.
Go to
Jul 3, 2022 21:23:21   #
jcwall396 wrote:
Thank you for this! And you are spot on, it's essentially the same camera without a mirror. Now I'm thinking about that Z7ii instead....I am keeping the D780, but I'm thinking you might be right - it may go the way of the do-do bird once I start shooting with a 45MP camera.


If the 45MP option is such a strong appeal you might consider the D850. An additional plus to the D850 is that you don't need to change your lenses or use the FTZ. For the most part it would be difficult for most viewers to be able to distinguish a print from the
Z7II and one from the D850 no matter what the size of the print.
Go to
Jun 28, 2022 22:41:26   #
PM sent.
Go to
Jun 28, 2022 17:40:13   #
Steve E wrote:
I have taken this drug for cancer under the name of Revlimid. It worked, at a cost of $10,500 a month. By Biologics Inc. in North Carolina. USA


I am currently taking Revlimid (a,k,a, lenolidimide) for the treatment of MDS (Myelodisplastic Syndrome). The rights to it now belong to Bristol-Myers-Squibb and they completely cover co-pays. It has also been used for the treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) which, lucky me, I also have I was unaware of the prior ownership by Biologics as, when I started using it in 2017, the rights were owned by Celgene. Celgene, in turn, was purchased by.Bristol-Myers-Squibb last year. This drug has traveled.
Go to
Jun 21, 2022 09:34:02   #
My dad had a '55 Starfire convertible. Too bad I wasn't old enough to drive. That was one fantastic automobile.
Go to
Apr 11, 2022 17:48:14   #
Your title alone does justice to my comment.

Despite some commentary from some other hoggers, the lifespan of non mirroless camera as well as other photographic equipment genres is far from being dead. They ALL have their still active places.
Go to
Feb 15, 2022 16:46:20   #
OldSchool-WI wrote:
It is not "shopkit" but "shotkit." And they emphatically make the claim about the Sigma lens, the topic of this thread. And even one UHH quoted the estemed Rockwell with agreeing with the Shotkit reviewers. Certainly all photo gear is not the highest prices that B&H can muster. And paying more is not the sign of "SERIOUS PURSUIT." We have thrown around the terms---serious---professional---and amateur plenty on this site and each time are called out for further definition. So I will ask you just what make a photog seriously pursuing photography rather than one not seriously pursuing photography?

Perhaps the answer to your closing question is that those "seriously pursuing photography" are those who have already disposed of their DSLRs and jumped into the mirrorless market (which group does not include me). What will be the mantra when mirrorless gives ground, as it will inevitably will at some point in the future, to the next technological advance?
Go to
Feb 6, 2022 15:02:10   #
Alafoto wrote:
Some more than others... i.e.; politicians, lawyers, used car salesmen.


Similar to a quote attributed to Benjamin Disraeli: "There are liars, damned liars and statisticians.".
Go to
Jan 16, 2022 05:58:37   #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
Well, to be honest, he gave good advice about using fast lenses. You put negative spin on that advice without considering all the reasons one might want fast lenses to shoot in potential low light situations. Yes modern cameras can be pretty amazing at higher ISO’s, but larger apertures also have something to do with AF performance.


Yes, he gave good advice and is, clearly, well-informed about most topics re photography However, his replies are often laden with sarcasm, snarkiness and condescension. That is highly undesirable IMHO.
Go to
Jan 15, 2022 19:38:26   #
Rick from NY wrote:
Throw stones? Wow! So anyone who posts a reply that does not agree with your gospel is throwing stones? I’m done participating in this sad conversation.


You certainly hit the nail squarely on its head. Just as clearly, alas, it will likely have no effect.
Go to
Jan 12, 2022 20:26:26   #
Thank you, John.

Jack
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.