This is Dennis's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Dennis's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Rumormongering is such a funny business. In that linked blog post (phoblographer) the author writes: "Very few pieces of news make me almost drop my coffee cup while inbibing some precious morning java, but a report from Fuji Rumors did just that." followed by "Insane, right?" Why is news that a camera company is going to release a new camera "insane" ? It seems like (many) camera buyers are in a perpetual state of angst about their gear. Is my brand going to go out of business tomorrow ? Are they ever going to make another camera ? Are my lenses all going to be obsolete ? Something's insane about it all.
Wow ... Mr. Turnley has seen a lot of stuff since McClellan Street, I guess. What a book the photos in that video would make !
I'm not sure there's much to compare between the SL and the 645Z aside from system price. The 645D is a bigger, 51MP camera for slower, more deliberate photography, while the SL advertises its fast AF and 11fps frame rate. Basically, I would hope that for anyone looking to spend $10K to $20K or more on a system, the choice between those two would be dead straightforward, based on how/what they shoot. The A7 series are probably more of a toss up; I could see people wanting the Leica, but settling for one of the Sonys. IBIS, choice of sensors, price and lens lineup are pretty compelling advantages. Especially price. I think the SL isn't for the dyed in the wool Leicaphile, but for the people who always wanted to be Leicaphiles, but didn't really want a rangefinder.
We live on 6 acres; 1/4 or so of it is a swampy area with deciduous trees, another 1/4 or so is a grove of pines (planted by the man who built the house). We have scrub cherries lining two sides of the property, but the house sits in a lawn with precious few trees. The "green desert" we call it in the summer. All the leaves from all those trees fall straight down or blow around, never enough to worry about doing anything other than mowing over. And get this - we haul bagged leaves from my in-laws' 1/4 acre lot in a downtown residential neighborhood to our house to add to our garden every fall. His lawn looks a mini version of yours - mature maples that drop a thick carpet of leaves. I think you're a little far for me to haul your leaves, though.
I do that. I'll spend time post processing it, get it "just so". Then I'll look at it and realize it wasn't worth the time and toss it, like I should have done from the start. I have to believe there's something worthwhile in the exercise. Your photo is actually almost really good. Get rid of the guy in the white shirt (or reposition him), maybe orient yourself a little differently and you get a great line of "men in black" (though you'd probably need them to be positioned a little more fortuitously). The instinct was there, but you don't find great shots on a "hit and run". I actually realized that with my nature photography years ago. I'd go somewhere like Yellowstone Park or the Smokies and come home with "nice" shots, but what can someone who doesn't know the area do in a one week trip at some arbitrary time of year, at the whim of the weather, compared to photographers who live and breathe the area. I remember spending 15 minutes at a popular picture spot overlooking Yellowstone Falls. In that time, I couldn't count how many other people came and went, including one young guy with some sort of large format camera ! (Nothing too big, might have even been a Graflex ?) How many people visit it in an hour, a day, a year ? And how many opportunities does someone who lives there have to get there in different seasons and weather ? I think it's fun to dabble in things we're not good at, good to be honest about it. The best photographers are usually the ones who work the hardest, so no reason to expect greatness at something you don't do regularly.
Toggle Commented Oct 29, 2015 on Wishful Photographing at The Online Photographer
p.p.s. While I can't pick a best R&R song, I can pick a best album. (And that album wouldn't even have any of my candidates for best song, oddly enough). Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms. Lots of contenders, but if I were told I could pick any album to listen through from start to end, I'd pick that more often than any other.
Toggle Commented Oct 18, 2015 on What's It Gonna Be? at The Online Photographer
p.s. I see other people didn't feel limited by one lens, so I'll follow up my previous answer. If multiple lenses are allowed, then I'd go for a Nikon D750, I think.
Toggle Commented Oct 18, 2015 on What's It Gonna Be? at The Online Photographer
Assuming one camera and one lens only, then probably the Sony RX10 (might as well go for the newer one if money no object). Not ready to spend 4 years without that kind of range right now. If multiple lenses, then I'd change that. Best rock n roll song ? Only one ? I can't think of any song that isn't matched by 100 others.
Toggle Commented Oct 18, 2015 on What's It Gonna Be? at The Online Photographer
I'm going to have to figure out how to change how my name shows up now. Not that I don't sympathize with the other Dennis' take on Jeff Wall a little. But I'll freely admit that there's just a whole little piece of society that finds something to appreciate in art that I just don't get at all. Staged photographs are a challenge for me, right off the bat, because they're nothing I have any interest in shooting. But I certainly like plenty of stuff I don't shoot. I like Julie Blackmon's family scenes, for instance (and could fully understand it if someone doesn't like her stuff). And I can enjoy looking at (some of) the works of photographer artists, like Stephen Shore and Eggleston. So Jeff Wall's stuff does nothing for me (at least not in a small web image on my laptop) ... that says more about me than it does about his work. One other note - I give artists with that kind of reputation credit for talking about their work. I recently heard about John Luther Adams because he was at a local performance of "Inuksuit" to benefit a local charity. The articles I read talked about him being a grammy winning composer and the whole thing seemed impressive. Someone I know attended the show and said the music was "magical" with sounds coming from all over, though they got a little bored halfway through. I looked into it a little more and watched a couple videos including one in which the composer talked a lot about the work. And the more he talked, the more the whole thing seemed phony. I think that with any art that's not very accessible and depends on context to be appreciated, the artist walks a fine line in talking about the work.
Toggle Commented Sep 14, 2015 on Wall's Walls at The Online Photographer
I'd love to photograph interesting houses and yards; not so much interesting in and of themselves, but interesting because of how they look like with people in them; with curtains, open windows, kids toys in the lawn, etc. Our house was built in 1979 and lacks character. It's practical. Like my cars and cameras. I live in CT, where, according to zillow, the 1950s is most highly represented. I can think of many neighborhoods full of 1950s houses, yet can't think, offhand, of anyone I know who lives in a 1950s house. Older and newer houses, certainly.
Congratulations ! But may I say that as nice as it probably is to work on that porch, it looks like a nicer place to enjoy a cup of coffee or a glass of wine with (or without) company. (I think the region is pretty well known for its wineries, too). I've wanted to get over to that area for a while now, mostly to see Letchworth State Park, though the whole region is supposed to be very scenic. (The Adirondacks are much closer to me, so it's hard to justify the 6-hour trip). Maybe a TOP workshop will be in my future.
Toggle Commented Aug 21, 2015 on Move Complete at The Online Photographer
In reply to Gordon Lewis you wrote: "The smaller, vaguely retro mirrorless cameras are the ones that tend to give me the warm fuzzies" I've been referring to my A6000 with 28/2 as my "digital HiMatic". I used, and still own, a Minolta HiMatic 7sII, with its 40/1.8 lens. I've been looking for a digital version of that for years. There have been other solutions that come close in one way or another, and this option still falls short in some ways, but it gives me a similar enough experience.
Well stated ! With the EM1 and a really good sensor, the f/1.8 primes and eventually, the f/2.8 zooms, Oly "arrived" a couple years ago. Panasonic is right behind. Fuji has an enticing system and Sony is pouring technology into cameras (even if the ecosystem around them is less enticing, depending on your needs). And there are deals to be had on this amazing stuff. My A6000 was under $600 back in December (I recently bought the FE 28/2 for it). And after digicams went through the doldrums, Sony and Panasonic have great (if expensive) digicam lineups. We bought my daughter an FZ200 recently, a three year old camera, and I'm amazed at what she gets handholding a camera with a 1/2.3" sensor shooting backyard wildlife, after having dabbled in it myself with a 400mm lens on a tripod years ago.
I'm partial to "Home" myself. I never knew anyone who had a house with a name; I'd only ever seen that in books or movies about rich people. I can't really see the point of it unless you have multiple homes and need to differentiate them. "We'll have to spend the summer at Twin Pines while Split Rock is being renovated".
Ouch ! That hits close to home ! I am aware of it, and not thrilled with it. But life gets in the way (or maybe I'm not dedicated enough) and it's a lot easier to find time to read than to shoot.
Toggle Commented Aug 4, 2015 on Diversions at The Online Photographer
There's some nice technology in some of the recent cameras (Sony & Panasonic, in particular) ... but I wonder how they're going to make out at these high price points relative to previous models, when all that's changing is electronics (not lenses) and the market has gotten accustomed to digital toys getting cheaper and/or better over time (not more expensive). The RX100-IV is amazing, but $949 ($1300 for the latest RX10) is a high price to pay for a pocket camera ... $599 for a 1/2.3" sensor camera (FZ300), $1200 for the new Panasonic GX8 ... maybe $500 DSLR kits will see a resurgence in popularity.
Toggle Commented Jul 17, 2015 on I Take It Back at The Online Photographer
The LX100 is a nice camera and a lot of people could be happy with it. It's $800 for a fixed lens camera, so if/when it breaks, the whole thing needs to be replaced/repaired. The zoom range is modest and a lot of average people like more magnification. It's compact. Should be easy to use and generate great results. I have to think someone should be able to put a 1" sensor in a more "mainstream" body for $500-600. The RX10 is probably on the big side for a lot of people, but I'd tend to recommend it over the LX100 thinking that the zoom range makes it more appealing to more people. But I don't think there is a single easy-to-recommend camera any more than there's a single easy-to-recommend car.
Someone above wrote what's probably a common sentiment: "BTW why would an "ordinary normal regular non-enthusiast" want to purchase a camera? Hasn't the iPhone replaced the camera for the great unwashed 8-)" I know a lot of my friends have had smartphones for years - my wife has had an iPhone 5 for 2+ years (I only got my first smartphone earlier this year). I don't have a good sense of how long the majority of people (in the US, anyway) have been using a smart phone as their primary camera. But I'm seeing anecdotal evidence of "phone fatigue". People who gave up the "big camera" are finding that the phone just doesn't cut it all the time. Two of my friends have recently said they're planning to buy a camera soon. No idea if they'll actually go through with it. My daughter (age 12) loves her camera and vastly prefers it to her ipod touch, even if it means waiting a day or two for dad to download the pictures to her computer, and she has at least one friend who has a camera (and a tripod !) who is dabbling in photography and video as a small hobby. Recommendations are tough ... the RX100 line (never mind RX10 !) is expensive; cheaper digicams suffer from a combination of small sensor and slow lens (the exceptions are the ones to look for) and anything with a big sensor is only reasonably affordable and compact when used with slow kit zooms that carry compromises that might not be ideal for a lot of people.
The A7R II is awesomer. But most people would would choose the Canon. Because at the end of the day, you still have to put lenses on it. And yeah, I know the Sony supposedly focuses faster than a speeding bullet with Canon lenses, but the Sony is only awesomer with Sony lenses; with Canon lenses it's a Frankencamera, not an ubercamera.
Toggle Commented Jul 9, 2015 on Reigning Übercamera at The Online Photographer
I don't know ... let's say a cheap Versa (either base model or demo with an automatic transmission) is $12K. Put $2K down and finance the balance over 4 years and you're paying $200 or so a month. Buy a car outright and start saving that instead. You'll have repairs covered in no time. Sure, you don't want a lemon, but a mechanic should be able to help you avoid that. The problem with a cheap little car like that is that by the time you've paid it off in 4 years, you're probably dying to upgrade to something with padded seats and acoustic insulation. I'm making that up, but when Kelly Blue Book's review says that "better candidates include" the Ford Fiesta and Honda Fit, this doesn't sound like a satisfying car. Lack of power windows and door locks sounds aggravating enough. It strikes me very much as a "starter car" which implies short term ownership and cycle of debt.
I would advise option 1. Get out of the cycle of debt ASAP. It costs more to be poor because you're always behind; anything outside of your budget requires a loan. There's a difference between wealth and income. Wealth (some relative degree of it) can come from savings. Buy the used car and start saving for the next car (plus maybe some repairs along the way), drive it into the ground (you just have to figure out when it's starting to cost too much to maintain, which is always tricky). Ideally, when you have enough for your next car, you'll *still* keep driving the old one until you have enough for the next one plus a new washer and dryer :) (Get a Speed Queen).
"The local summer grocery store near where my new house is ... is open from May 1 to October 31st" That's not raising any red flags ? I suppose coming from Wisconsin, you'll be ready for anything. Maybe your Museum of Photographic Curiosities would, in turn, be featured in a future book of roadside attractions. Which, of course, you could feature in the museum.
Toggle Commented Jun 30, 2015 on Photo Geekery at The Online Photographer
I remember someone telling me "two moves equals a fire". That seems like a gross exaggeration, as our only real move (20 years ago) resulted in virtually no damage. I wish you good luck with it all. So making Eastlake a photographers destination would make the area even more compelling. I'm about 5 hours away and have been thinking about visiting Letchworth State Park. (We have vacationed in the nearby Adirondacks a few times recently, though). Like a few others, I'm not too surprised at this turn of events :)
Toggle Commented Jun 30, 2015 on Blog Note at The Online Photographer
John (Slaytor), That was a great blog post on the christening w/very nice photos - the family must be happy. You wrote above that pixels are irrelevant since the Nikon D70, yet on your blog, in your D810 review, you wrote: "The depth of detail in images is bewildering and I realise this is a medium format camera. In 2005 I started off with the Nikon D70 and over time upgraded. This is the first camera that startles me with its ability to capture detail." All around the web, wisdom that "3MP is all anyone needs" and the like is countered by rave reviews of high res cameras and sharp lenses. The truth is all of it all rolled together, somehow. And our society isn't one that was built on an embracing of sufficiency. When I watch a DVD, it looks great. When I watch Blu Ray, it looks better. (I've only seen 4k once a couple years ago, and found the compression too distracting, but in time, I'm sure it will be better still). I guess the big question is: does sufficiency have any relevance ?