Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: rehess
Page: <<prev 1 ... 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 ... 1126 next>>
Apr 16, 2018 12:43:10   #
wmdooley wrote:
That view of the cameras shows why some people feel the need to downsize their gear.

Yes, the camera with the smaller sensor will tend to be smaller.

The OP called this an "unfair test". For one thing, there are no images where higher ISO is needed, framing in the third comparison set was different, and apparently VR len(es) not used.
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 12:32:57   #
drmike99 wrote:
After a little more than a year of GAS I have developed a serious problem with GUD (Gear Utilization Dysfunction). It started last year with my upgrading from my D5000 to a D7100. Then I added the 10-20 DX Nikkor. Then I picked up a used AF Nikkor 35-105 which is primarily for my film FE but also works on the D7100. Then a late summer flurry which involved a full CLA on my Rolleicord III making it usable again, a cheap 500 Bower mirror lens for the FE (CAN be used manually on the D7100), a one month project acquiring a used Bronica ETRSi with 4 lenses and two film backs, the 40mm micro-Nikkor for the D7100, and finally a PhotoDiox adapter allowing me to use all 4 Bronica Zenzanon lenses on the Nikon FE or D 7100. AND an eBay pickup of an Olympus XA 35mm pocket rangefinder camera. I've stopped the GAS, but now... I've got a DSLR with a bunch of new lenses, a film Nikon SLR with additional lenses, the full Bronica 645 kit, the newly refurbished Rolleicord 6x6, and my old standby Pentax 6x7 with 3 lenses. So digital, 35mm SLR & pocket RF, and 3 formats of film MF. Sometimes it's random which camera I'll take out with me. It's become overwhelming. Beware uncontrollable GAS especially when it's in 4 different directions at once!
After a little more than a year of GAS I have deve... (show quote)

So, start wandering around with camera, and post pictures in the Gallery. I don't see a problem here.
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 10:43:50   #
redron57 wrote:
when you edit in raw and save it you keep all the editing open in the file so you can go back and change it
this is the master file when you save it as a jpeg it combines all the layers created in raw and is no longer able to edit it except for color and basic stuff but as a jpeg every time you edit you lose picture quality So raw is the bomb.
also most websites will only accept jpeg as a file as raw can become very large
ron

I don't understand why all this is here. The OP asked about cropping - that is all, not about other editing, and certainly not about posting to the web. The OP is saving in raw, but even if that were not the case, he could crop and save JPEG and lose nothing.
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 09:31:15   #
DAN Phillips wrote:
Please excuse the ignorance, but what is an OP? (I'm a new user)

Depending on context it is either Original Post or Original Poster.
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 09:23:26   #
GAS496 wrote:

The snapping of the shutter is just a small part in the art of photography, especially film photography. Much of my enjoyment comes from the work in the darkroom, the chemistry of photography. The brown glass bottles of magical liquid that turns silver halide crystals into permanent images never stops intriguing me. The final image is only the last step in a very pleasurable experience.

It all depends on who you are. During the age of film, I shot slide film, mostly Kodachrome, and left developing to automation. I follow the same habits today, and choose to follow the ethics and workflow of a photojournalist. To me, the effort and joy come before pressing the shutter, but you're allowed to operate otherwise.
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 08:58:24   #
gwilliams6 wrote:
Not sure your point here TheDman, but lets just move on. Any further thoughts on the OP's thread question/statement , "the reign of DSLRs is almost over" ? There is another thread running in UHH , "DSLR vs mirrorless" that is just as opinionated in its discussions and responses. Cheers

Are you ready to set example of moving on???
gwilliams6 wrote:
There are other excellent mirrorless cameras now competing for consumers. All staking their claim to part of the market share from DSLRs.

Panasonic G9 Long-Term Review vs. Sony A7 III & Fuji X-H1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bROfk7UOup8&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=sdPgOzfijWs7d_oG-6
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 08:55:22   #
Jimmy T wrote:
Thank you for your response, however, there are no experienced or knowledgeable folks involved in this church website. We are the great uninitiated (two folks) standing alone shoulder to shoulder in this endeavor. However, we have a lot of enthusiasm and are eager to learn from our fellow UHH Brethern. JimmyT sends BT
Thank you for your response, however, there are no... (show quote)

Pixel dimensions, not physical size / 'dpi', is what matters here. Get a 1920x1080, or better even smaller, monitor of any size and evaluate what you see. Ultimately, that is the best anyone can do.
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 08:47:39   #
Longshadow wrote:
If a 2.8 lens has a 1.4 option, wouldn't it be a 1.4 lens???

Silly me .... I read that as meaning 'alternative' - you could purchase an f/2.8 lens or you could purchase an f/1.4 lens, the two being essentially the same but the latter being much more bulky and expensive
Go to
Apr 16, 2018 08:26:48   #
Gene51 wrote:
Not sure I understand your drift. Thanks for considering me as an artist. This is fairly new territory for me - I'm finally taking pictures I like, primarily for my own enjoyment, and to share with those that like my work. for years I was a "hired gun" taking pictures for others strictly for pay. Tremendous feeling of freedom.

As far as your drift - I take a fairly contemplative approach, when I have the time - as in landscapes and other types of images where you have more than a moment to capture them - and I try to bury my first impulse to trip the shutter - I take note of everything that is in front of me BEFORE I even bring the camera to my eye. Sky, wind (ripples on water or moving foliage), cloud positions, etc - all the while my mind is reacting to what is going on before my eyes. I decide whether I can do a pano, or if I should try and capture the scene as a single shot. I am often prepared to do either - when I go for landscapes/cityscapes I almost always have my PC-E lenses - 24mm, 45mm and 85mm in the bag. this process is as automatic for me as breathing or putting one foot in front of the other to get from here to there - I don't think about it much. Once I have made my gear and settings choices the rest is quick. It has to be, since in many situations, the lighting and sky situations, especially at dawn or just before sundown, can change rapidly.

The camera records my vision. The image I want is already formed in my head before I press the shutter. Often, as in the SOOC pano I posted above, I know ahead of time about how many shots I am going to need to get what I want, and I know through previous testing, what the threshold of highlight exposure is and how close I can get to it without blowing the important stuff.
Not sure I understand your drift. Thanks for consi... (show quote)

My Original Question was about the power and utility of editing in camera, especially doing this in the field instead of using that valuable time to add to the contents of your memory card. The "drift" of my recent comments was that your recent posts, and that example you've brought out on several occasions, don't really advance that subject because I cannot see your doing that kind of work in camera. In fact, after all this discussion, I still see little application for that power other than snapshots. In the case of snapshots, I figure it would make more sense to do that editing in smart phone.
Go to
Apr 15, 2018 18:18:31   #
MMC wrote:
If you have 2 eyes and anaglyph glasses you will see 3D effect only with opened 2 eyes and wearing anaglyph glasses.

See the comment I added while you were posting this - it is physically impossible for me to do this; while I was in grad school, I consulted med-school physicians, who told me that even with corrective surgery, I would never be able to see 3D because of brain wiring issues. My older daughter's eyes point in the same direction, but it turns out that brain wiring also deprives her of 3D vision.
Go to
Apr 15, 2018 17:58:37   #
MMC wrote:
I can understand your '1. No point - I don't have 3D vision' only if you can see only by one eye. If I am wrong please explain me.

One eye at a time; I switch.

added: technically I have "outward strabismus of greater than 45 prism diopters" .... what this means in practical terms {other than the 4F that kept me from going to Vietnam - I'm sorry, but I think of LBJ every time I see your avatar} is that the eye I am not aiming forward is so far outward that my brain cannot use it to get 3D info
Go to
Apr 15, 2018 17:49:22   #
rehess wrote:
I don't care how a camera 'looks'. Backs when cameras were more svelte, I learned to cradle a long lens with my left hand, so when I get a Pentax KP, which is svelte for this generation of DSLRs, a grip is the last thing I would think of getting.
ltj123 wrote:
Svelte? Most mirrorless look a lot like bricks IMHO. Not saying their not awesome tools, just that many are squared in corners etc w/o graceful ergonomics. But then beauty is always in the eye of the beholder...

I specifically referred to a Pentax DSLR, plumper but with the same lines as this Pentax SLR


Go to
Apr 15, 2018 17:35:19   #
Gene51 wrote:
I cannot imagine any scenario that can create an image like the one I posted within a camera, or with a SOOC approach. The fact that it is a 12,939x10,204 px - or 132 mp image - taken with a 36 mp camera is the first thing. Then the various manipulations to dodge and burn both color and tone into the shadows, and add structure to the sky - all local adjustments, would not have been possible, even in the days of film, at last not on a color image, much less a digital SOOC image. Cameras cannot be made to respond to the wide variety of tone and color selectively - with simple, coarse camera settings, or even with some very coarse editing.

BTW, this was my final image, which came after a first scouting trip a couple of days earlier. It took me a couple of shots to get to the composition I was looking for, but the sky was wrong and too distracting. I came back two days later and everything, including the sky was as I wanted it to be. Luckily this is about 40 mins from my home. See attached below.

.
I cannot imagine any scenario that can create an i... (show quote)

My original thought was that artists like you need a very precise view of the image, and I don't see your getting that from any camera. In-camera processing has traditionally worked for automated activities, where humans provide direction, but not detailed control.
Go to
Apr 15, 2018 15:07:10   #
BebuLamar wrote:
Do you have this on a website somewhere? I would like to see it on my phone. I think the images would take less percentage of the phone screen because the phone has more pixels than either one of your display.

No, I don't have a convenient way to do that right now.
Go to
Apr 15, 2018 13:19:18   #
dsmeltz wrote:
To be honest, I really like a lot of what mirrorless has to offer. However, I have never considered weight the issue so many others seem to make of it. In fact, I think I would buy a grip if I ever went mirrorless just for the balance and feel. So many mirrorless cameras with long lenses look front heavy.

I don't care how a camera 'looks'. Backs when cameras were more svelte, I learned to cradle a long lens with my left hand, so when I get a Pentax KP, which is svelte for this generation of DSLRs, a grip is the last thing I would think of getting.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 ... 1126 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.