|
Forum: General Talk
11-22-2012, 06:04 PM
|
| |
They're telling you how much it is off list price, not their usual price, which is typically lower than list.
It's just marketing I guess, it's not completely clear that they're only discounting a small amount off *their* usual price, but not sure that makes them scammers.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
11-22-2012, 05:55 PM
|
| |
Hey Larry,
Just a few bits of info:
- I know some people mentioned it already, but low signal is definitely a battery drain as your device is constantly searching for or trying to re-establish a connection. I've noticed the same issue where I live with certain cell phones since I don't have great signal myself.
- You mentioned that you only have 1x data where you live. In short that means you're using the same network for voice and data. So if your data signal is low, your voice is as well. It's just that typically voice seems to be more forgiving of low signal.
- As for apps - I won't go into details, but some apps that are intended to conserve battery life can sometimes be a hindrance. Might be worth experimenting with or looking into that.
- If your phone heats up, that's definitely an issue (heat is just spent energy) and may possibly be an indicator of a problem with the phone itself. I know you've swapped out the battery a few times, have you been able to try a different phone yet by any chance?
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
11-17-2012, 02:42 PM
|
| |
I do find it somewhat puzzling that you had that much invested in it and have to ask random people who never met you why you didn't like your gear - especially after you sold it.
If you're happier with what you've got, don't bother asking why. Just enjoy it for what it is :)
|
|
Forum: General Talk
07-01-2012, 09:26 PM
|
| |
You can turn off all the wireless radios on the Kindle. I only ever turn it on when I'm downloading a new book. I only really do that to conserve battery though. You also don't *have* to sync all that information up - whether it syncs anyway on the sly I'm not completely sure.
They have to have permission to store all that info so because there are many users that have more than one device that accesses the Kindle services. Cell phones, tablets etc all can. That way you can read something on a tablet and can pick up where you left off on your phone. I don't really do that, so I don't need the wireless on.
I know there are some concerns if you are very selective about your privacy, but that's what the technology and convenience requires. Just like anything on any network, you have to give up a certain level of privacy to share anything with others or even with yourself.
Working at a telecommunications company as I do, perhaps I'm just more used to the fact that user traffic is often visible plainly at some point on its voyage. I'm also used to the fact that the people that can access the info don't really care about it and only do so on an as needed basis (on pain of unemployment).
Not sure that I'd be too worried about Amazon know what books I read, how fast, or whether I bookmark or notate anything anyway - but that's me of course.
The Bill of Rights also allows you to use an offline e-Book Reader :)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
06-15-2012, 02:41 PM
|
| |
If you can see the halos that strong HDR forms in areas of high contrast, I find it distracting. Otherwise - it's too hard to judge whether strong HDR is "good" or not. Good for a fine art portrait or landscape, or good for album art or product packaging? Those are very very different things and I can see unrealistic colors working or album art and packaging (as it often does). This question ends up being too broad and subjective to draw any meaningful conclusions.
However, note that typically the garish colors people associate with HDR are from specifically the Tone Mapping part of the process - if I'm not mistaken.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
06-07-2012, 05:49 PM
|
| |
/facepalm
Is it me or are people dragging God/religion into non P&R forum threads in completely irrelevant ways lately?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
06-07-2012, 02:06 AM
|
| |
It's funny, I never ever heard anyone argue that an APS-c sensor doesn't have an advantage over a Point & Shoot camera's small sensor. Never heard anyone say that a Medium Format sensor doesn't have an advantage over APS-c or even FF.
But man, you get into the APS-c vs FF waters - watch out! I mean, the principle is exactly the same, why doesn't it apply? Whether it makes enough of a difference, now that's a different question entirely. Here where you're stepping out of the objective to the subjective ... and where you just make your own decision. Quality just gets better at every sensor size over time though, so there's a ton more to factor in besides just sensor size which is I think what makes this topic generate so much debate.
In response to the original topic though (does anyone remember what that was? :) ) - I've always disliked that people talk about extra "reach" with APS-c when it is just cropping. It honestly confused the daylights out of me when I first got a DSLR and made my first lens purchase a bit scarier than it needed to be - it took some time to be convinced I knew which field of view I would be getting.
At least now you can easily show someone what the extra reach looks like. Get a Nikon D800 (maybe other models do this too). Shoot one picture normally and another in DX mode. There's your "reach", enjoy ;)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
06-05-2012, 05:46 PM
|
| |
Art is subjective and all - so typically I'm pretty indifferent about the fact that people love work that I don't care for (add Francesca Woodman's work to the list) - but just some of the descriptions of her photos even on Wikipedia just absolutely killed me. I clicked the first few and didn't see anything great so I then read the descriptions and only clicked the ones that looked like they could seem interesting.
There's this one: "Sloan appears as the artist's doppelganger... as an angelic figure hanging from the doorway of a Roman palazzo" - that sounds pretty darn fascinating! Click the image and what do you get? A picture of a girl (whose face is behind her arm) wearing a shirt that's too big for her, holding herself up on the frame of a doorway inside a very much regular looking house. Oh that's nice I gue- wait, where's the Roman palazzo part come in? How about the angelic figure? Why exactly is she a doppelganger and not just herself? I want my money back, Wikipedia and Flickr - and random description writer person!!
|
|
Forum: General Talk
05-30-2012, 03:41 PM
|
| |
Gruesome images would certainly give another perspective of the realities of war, but these pictures are just as relevant.
A possible violent end is what happens to the soldiers.
A lifetime of mourning is what happens to the family.
Neither one is pretty (even if you happen to think that it's a picture of an "American beauty hanging out with a casket"). Losing a loved one is extremely ugly, no matter what your surroundings are.
Take into account though that disturbing images might distract more than they communicate and really aren't quite appropriate for all audiences - aside from the fact that the families of the deceased may find it disrespectful.
For example, a family member of mine might literally (not joking) pass out at seeing a picture like what you described. Any message is really lost at that point. That may be an extreme example, but many others I'm sure just wouldn't be able to tolerate that kind of imagery along with absorbing the meaningful message that came with it. However, seeing a picture of a mourning family member would certainly convey to her the message of the ugly pain war brings - especially since this person has been through losing a family member before (non war related though).
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
05-25-2012, 04:48 PM
|
| |
Just a note since I've looked at Canon and Nikon lens prices a lot recently - and I love primes too - that's why I clicked this thread after all :)
You could go for these lenses instead, in all cases, you make a very slight sacrifice in maximum aperture, but still keep their best AF motors in the lens. I really think that unless you are always in the dark or always need the thinnest DOF possible, the difference between 1.2 and 1.4 or 1.4 and 1.8 will likely not be important - certainly not $1600 worth of important (in the Canon 85mm's case).
Canon:
50/1.4 - $369
85/1.4 - $389
Nikon:
50/1.8 - $217 - more than one review I've seen actually says this more modern lens is actually *better* than the more expensive 1.4 in all areas besides max aperture. But people see 1.4 and assume it's worth paying more than double the price.
85/1.8 - $499
Just throwing this info out there for anyone who cares, that's all :)
|
|
Forum: General Talk
05-19-2012, 12:42 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-21-2012, 09:06 PM
|
| |
I understand your sentiments for the most part. I do think you went a little bit overboard with your analogies, but I understand.
I also understand Pentax's reasoning for their price increases and it makes sense.
I do have to respectfully disagree on at least one point ... yes, $1600 wouldn't be too much for excellent glass. I was strongly considering the DA*16-50 at around 800 - it was very likely my next lens. At that price, it seemed a little iffy according to a lot of reviews and comparisons with similar lenses. At $1600? It's not even a consideration anymore.
Similarly built lenses by major competitors can be had for the same price or less in some cases. It doesn't seem that they do so by offering less in quality - just see the 16-50 comparison with the Sigma and Tamron alternatives on this very site.
A high quality zoom lens with similar focal length to the DA* 16-50 on a FF Canon/Nikon would be similar in price, but give you more service/support options (not to mention not such a seemingly maligned AF system). That is a pretty big deal in my opinion.
My next lens now? I don't even know what brand it will be, but I'm actually disappointed that it very well may not be a K mount.
Hopefully this is just a rough phase though and Pentax will be able to be strengthened by the recent changes in the long run.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-21-2012, 09:53 PM
|
| |
Allow me to respectfully disagree here ... but I feel that if you specifically want a camera to be all black, then it's just as much a "fashion accessory" for you as it is for the person who wants some color in theirs. It just so happens that your camera fashion sense is more in line with what's currently accepted as the traditional color for cameras.
But then again, hey, cameras have always been all black right? :p
 |
|
Forum: General Talk
01-21-2012, 07:45 PM
|
| |
I'm glad they at least cover her profession at all - though of course they didn't cover this event :(
A few years back, Mike Aitken, a pro BMXer suffered some really bad injuries and they had to raise money to cover costs for him too. Apparently no insurance company would ever cover him (or presumably other pro BMXers) at all, so insurance isn't always an option for people who do something a bit dangerous for a living unfortunately.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
01-03-2012, 02:43 PM
|
| |
To me, this just says "You need to do a really good job photoshopping your image for it to still be called a photo." :p
The fashion and advertising industries invest a lot in manipulating photos in ways that aren't easy to detect, but they're still always called photos.
That being said, I agree in a sense with what you're saying. A lot of people/companies produce art that involves photography, but photography is certainly not the only art in use. In the end, what do you call such a mixture of mediums? Seems to me that trying to define this is like trying to define what art is ... I'm not sure that coming to a final answer is possible.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
12-28-2011, 03:56 PM
|
| |
I see what you're getting at, but before you decide on the quality of a picture you view, do you check the EXIF info and make sure the person used a MF prime first? How could you tell what was used once you're just viewing the image? I thought it was all about what the artist painted, not what brushes were used.
Rons,
Buying primes has been the best thing I've done. I've noticed the color, contrast and sharpness difference has been huge. I started with the 35mm 2.4 and then got the 70mm 2.4 Limited. I rarely use my kit lenses now that I have these two. In a sense, yes you're more limited due to the fixed focal length, but as has been mentioned you then think more about composition - and you get a better quality image in return (at least technically, the artistic part is up to you of course :)).
You could try the route of getting an old manual lens (the 50s are especially cheap), or get that 35mm 2.4 since it's currently only $170 (!!!) on B and H and has auto focus / aperture and all that to get you started in the prime world while being able to use all the modern conveniences to help you adjust - Pentax 35mm DA L F2.4 AL Lens 21987 B&H Photo Video |
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
12-14-2011, 08:23 PM
|
| |
Well certainly there is that too. Please don't misunderstand, I think he was amazing at what he did and certainly that's why he has so many who love his work.
It's the way photography captures history and makes a scene immediately interesting that I was specifically referring to.
For example - show me a picture of Time Square in NY today and I would likely not be interested at all, but I was looking at pictures of Times Square from the Life Archive the other day and was so fascinated by the many changes that were captured in one photo. Not all the pictures were very good technically, but it's that glimpse of the past that was instantly captivating.
I just think that in addition to the great talent Henri Cartier-Bresson applied to his images, capturing that piece of history also adds to their appeal.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
12-09-2011, 07:50 PM
|
| |
Thanks for that link - very inspiring. :)
What stood out to me a lot while watching this was how even somewhat mundane things, when recorded become so much more special later in time.
|
|
Forum: General Talk
12-09-2011, 07:49 PM
|
| |
And if a cucumber causes you to sin, cut it up and use it in a salad.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
10-03-2011, 07:21 PM
|
| |
I'm a newbie at cameras so bear with me here, but in the world of PCs there's a somewhat similar situation where the GPU manufacturer who sold the most units was actually Intel.
Now, no one even buys an Intel GPU on purpose - it just happens to come with the computer they buy.
I know no two situations are exactly the same, but jump on to any 3D modeling, gaming or video processing forums and you surely won't hear anyone talking about Intel GPUs replacing discrete ones any time soon.
I believe that the same would apply for cameras, where any photo work that requires a bit more oomph will require a dedicated camera for the foreseeable future - but who knows, with how tech changes day by day.
|
