Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: jimsz
Page: 1 2 next>>
Feb 4, 2015 17:31:01   #
You might try "Foto Forum". It is located on 7th street just a few feet south of Camelback rd. on the west side of 7th street. They are the only true camera store left in the valley now.
Regards, Jim
Go to
Sep 23, 2013 14:52:32   #
Bill, look closely at the camera model you are posting about. It is the G15, not the SX50 that is the small sensor "super zoom" camera that I am talking about.
Regards, Jim

Bill Houghton wrote:
I only know what it says in the reviews I've been reading, I not about to try and measure the one my camera. LOL

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/17/Canon-releases-PowerShot-G15-12MP-enthusiast-compact-with-F1-8-2-8-lens-and-SX50-HS-with-50X-zoom

There wording.
The PowerShot G15 features a new Canon 1/1.7-type high-sensitivity CMOS sensor that offers even greater light gathering abilities than its predecessor, resulting in outstanding flexibility during low light shooting.
I only know what it says in the reviews I've been ... (show quote)
Go to
Sep 23, 2013 14:50:10   #
R.G. Note I said all "super zoom" cameras, not "bridge cameras". There is a difference between them and presently, the only way technology will allow these extreme zoom ranges while keeping the overall size/cost down is by utilizing the smallest sensor size of 1/2.3.
You are correct on the 2/3 sensor sizes, but those are not "super zoom" cameras.
Regards, Jim

R.G. wrote:
Some of the Fuji bridge cameras have bigger sensors - 2/3" if I remember right.
Go to
Sep 23, 2013 14:09:37   #
Bill, I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but the SX50 sensor is not 1/1.7" as you posted. The bad news is that it is even smaller than that! Yup, it is the smallest teeny tiny little green box size at the very bottom of your graph @ 1/2.3 as are all "super zoom" cameras.
Regards, Jim


Bill Houghton wrote:
The SX50 - For what you get is well worth the money, but it does lack in many ways compared to a DSL, Low lite limitations for one. But as I mentioned for the Sensor size it does not have the zip of a larger DSL sensor. Remember it's only 1/1.7 inches, that is the little orange box on the graph. A great lens, a great snap shot camera.
Go to
Aug 4, 2013 22:27:55   #
pjreed wrote:
Welcome to the UHH :thumbup:

I am an hour west of you.

Hi, pj. Now you are pretty "far out there", huh? Mileage wise, I mean :)
Nice to hear from the far west side!
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 3, 2013 22:20:28   #
etcraig wrote:
Greetings from Chandler---stay cool

Hellllloooo Chandler. As you wished me to stay cool over here, let me wish you to stay dust free down there!
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 3, 2013 00:12:20   #
kevin519 wrote:
Thx.

Hi, Kevin. I am especially glad to see you sign on today as that means I am no longer the newbie from Arizona!!!
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 3, 2013 00:03:40   #
rmalarz wrote:
Yo!, back to you from another photographer in Tempe.
--Bob

Nah, really? Another shooter here in the valley? Well, two more and we can form an association here in the desert :-D
Thank you, Bob, for the hello from way over there in Tempe.
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 17:46:31   #
mwsilvers wrote:
If it really doesn't have a white balance tool, then FastStone would be a nonstarter in my book and I would look elsewhere. With no WB, why do you use it every day? White balance is the first thing I check and adjust for.

I use FS first to search/cull files and it is very fast to do so. Then, I use it to compare like images side by side up to four at a time. Finally, I like to use it if I want/need to do any batch work and it is very fast in this regard as well. I do relatively little PP in FS due to LR being my tool of choice for much of my PP. Each new iteration of FS adds new features and they have done well over the years, but somewhere along the way developers dropped the ball re: WB.
It really is what I call a "handy" program in my workflow. I do not use it as a first line editing tool in my usage of it, even tho I open it first to get the dirty work out of the way quickly before moving on to my other editors of choice.
It really does deserve a look see, I think, even w/o the much needed WB tool (yet).
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 16:51:55   #
wings42 wrote:
But FastStone Image Viewer does much of what LR 5 does, is excellent for working with RAW files, and costs a lot less than LR 5 (it's free, contributions welcome). Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FastStone_Image_Viewer first, and then try the program.

I think people in this thread are recommending a Massarati or Lamborghini to somebody asking for a recommendation for a car to go to the neighborhood grocery store.

There are courses and book available to get somebody started in LR 5. All the person asked for is something to work with RAW files, probably something that doesn't require more skill and knowledge to use than the camera taking the pictures.
But FastStone Image Viewer does much of what LR 5 ... (show quote)

David, I agree with your assessment of FastStone and have used it for several years as well as several other like programs. But I have this grievance with the program, even tho it is my first go to editor/sorter, why no white balance tool? I mean this is basic to editing and still, no WB tool in the last 4.8 update . I know I can try and work around this with various sliders, but that never comes to what a good WB dropper can do for you. Other than that little gripe, I love and use FS everyday and will continue to do so, even while grumbling under my breath :?
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 16:19:21   #
Wall-E wrote:
I get similar responses when I show up with my D200, battery grip, SB800 with a Lumiquest and an external power pack.

I used to get the same reaction when I had an Olympus OM4 with a winder 2, and my Sunpak 622 potato masher.

If I use my wifes P&S? Nothing. It's like I'm not even there.

Appearance is everything. If you look like a pro, they'll treat you like one.

Walter, It is nice to see (any) reference to the venerable old SunPak 622 anymore. I have a whole stable full of these brutes and every head and accessory ever made for them. I flat out love them and use them as often as I can, especially the bare bulb heads and ring light heads.
Thx for making me feel warm and fuzzy all over with your 622 posting!
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 16:09:11   #
kevin519 wrote:
wecome, I just joined also, your avitar reminds me of the old Bank of Arizona on 32nd and Shea I had an account in for my first new truck. Grew up there at Tatum n Shea. Now I live right at the base of the Superstition Mtns.

Hi, Kevin. Ahhhh, you live out there in "real" photographic country don't you? Love to shoot out that way whenever I have the opportunity and the mercury drops under 90 degrees or so. I've become awfully soft in my declining years... :cry:
That Kachina in my avatar, which is about 30' tall or so, is in a bank bldg. in downtown Glendale.
Thx for the welcome!
Regards, Jim (over by the White Tanks)
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 16:03:10   #
ksudad wrote:
It is a wonderful place for morning coffee or an afternoon cool spot here in the valley. Welcome to UHH

Well, hello, neighbor! I, too, live in the west valley. Still waiting for the temps to drop to something more reasonable b4 I haul this ol' body out to make a day of shooting! I finally got cabin fever awhile back and grabbed my smallest, most inconspicuous camera (GF-1) and headed over to Arrowhead mall to do some "on the sly" street shooting. That lasted until I finished my lunch in the food court. As I got up to walk a bit more, a young security chap came along and asked if I was taking pics in the mall. My camera was hanging over my shoulder, but I had to answer him that I had shot a few. You know the rest of the story.... So, here I sit, in front of my 'puter gazing at a beige screen with funny little fonts all over it and wait...
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 14:19:58   #
Wahawk wrote:
Posting photos on other peoples threads is ANOTHER forbidden item according to FORUM RULES, unless they ask you to post, which this person DID NOT!!

Wahawk, I just joined UHH a few days ago and so I plead ignorance regarding your statement about forum rules forbidding the posting of photos on another's thread unless asked to do so. I just went through the rules to familiarize myself with the site and could not find that particular ruling, but I want to be sure, so thought I would ask you for clarification. Forum rules do ask that we not use upper case (shouting) and I note you have done so. Please help a newbie out by clearing these questions up for me so I do not become a violator here :-D
Regards, Jim
Go to
Aug 2, 2013 13:30:42   #
bcheary wrote:
Welcome aboard Jim. You will find plenty to keep you occupied with this site. Beware, it is more addictive than marijuana (so I have been told :lol ) :thumbup: :thumbup:

Hello back to you there in Florida, bcheary. Or "so you've been told", eh :roll:

Well, I think my (advanced) years have finally given me the right to sit down in front of this 'puter and just be fat and lazy for awhile and enjoy some company from around the world and mix it in with a joint love of photography. Bring on the addiction I say! I say all this until "she who rules" calls out from the front room for me to "come and take care of this"...
Regards, Jim
Go to
Page: 1 2 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.