All Forum Comments
awesome!
Comment by Don posted on Putting my Benjikan hat on at 29/05/2011 - 16:03
I hope Pentax comes back with some more of the oddball specialty lenses. softs, shifts, pancakes etc.
I would love to see Pentax expand what they did with the 35 2.4, and bundle them as a box set...
that would be an awesome lineup.
a box set of econo primes, a set of pancakes and ltd's and a range of affordable wr zooms and a few wr tele's and * zooms.
something for every budget and need.
but above all else, bring us a 300-600 mm zoom.
I would love to see Pentax expand what they did with the 35 2.4, and bundle them as a box set...
that would be an awesome lineup.
a box set of econo primes, a set of pancakes and ltd's and a range of affordable wr zooms and a few wr tele's and * zooms.
something for every budget and need.
but above all else, bring us a 300-600 mm zoom.
Comment by Don posted on Changing Pattern of Lens Range at 29/05/2011 - 16:01
rparmar wrote:
True except the last statement.
How does one test this? Simply look at a scene. I think it is apparent our field of view is very wide, in fact generally stated as around 160 degrees. We'd need a fish-eye lens to get close to this, but then that wouldn't be rectilinear.
Of course how our eyes view a scene and how we are trained to view photographs are two different things.
actually you are correct that vision is wder than fifty mm lens fov.... however, you cannot see any detail with your peripheral vision, you really only see tones and movement, you have to turn your head to lock on and focus... so with your eyes straight forward, the amount of your world you can actually see in focus is similar to a 50 mm lens, on average... some people train themselves to use the peripheral vision better, but it is really noticing movement from the sides of your main fov...True except the last statement.
johnriley wrote:
Relating this to the real world, a "standard" lens is one that comes closest to showing a scene as our eyes see it.
The field of view of 43mm has nothing to do with how our eyes see. It is an accident of film size.Relating this to the real world, a "standard" lens is one that comes closest to showing a scene as our eyes see it.
How does one test this? Simply look at a scene. I think it is apparent our field of view is very wide, in fact generally stated as around 160 degrees. We'd need a fish-eye lens to get close to this, but then that wouldn't be rectilinear.
Of course how our eyes view a scene and how we are trained to view photographs are two different things.
need proof? stop at an intersection and read the plate off the car in your oncoming lane... without turning your head can you see the cars on your left and right? without turning your head, or moving your eyes to the side, try reading thier plates.
Comment by Don posted on Do we think there's any chance... at 29/05/2011 - 14:24
Algernon wrote:
Good idea Don.... doesn't need as much floorspace as a tripod light stand
Some old Hi-Fi speaker stands could also be used especially if they are the weighted type... just cut off the platform that the speaker rests on
It is sturdy enough for a portable flash or spring clamp light. Good idea Don.... doesn't need as much floorspace as a tripod light stand
Some old Hi-Fi speaker stands could also be used especially if they are the weighted type... just cut off the platform that the speaker rests on
Now that the studio is up and running, I will be doing more polished videos weekly on a wide gamut of subjects, but mostly photography... and videography.
I hope people wanting answers will post thier questions here, as I'll be using my friends in this forum for inspiration when thinking up projects for future episodes.
Comment by Don posted on My new studio at 27/05/2011 - 20:04
gartmore wrote:
Don, I'm about to shoot a commercial/promo for for a new range of American hair products. I've decided to use a K5 since everbody else uses Canon EOS.
I dont know yet what editing platform we'll use but do I need any Pentax codecs or are the files easily recognisable?
How did your shooting go? I'm excited about the prospect of another Pentax video shooter......Don, I'm about to shoot a commercial/promo for for a new range of American hair products. I've decided to use a K5 since everbody else uses Canon EOS.
I dont know yet what editing platform we'll use but do I need any Pentax codecs or are the files easily recognisable?
Comment by Don posted on My new studio at 27/05/2011 - 17:44
another list.......link... from digital photo pro.
Comment by Don posted on What microphone for video? at 27/05/2011 - 17:20
Well I hope no one is truly offended, I really am not. The technology changes so fast, you have to really do your homework to find out what is best for you. If I took every consumer review and sales clerks advice, I'd be a Canikion shooter, and much poorer.... but that does not mean I know everything.
Sometimes pushing the debate a bit really brings out the facts when two people with differing opinions defend thier positions. I cannot speak for rparmar, but I can admit, my opinion of the zoom is not based on firsthand testing, but on what other video shooters I respect have stated about thier firsthand use of the device is. Some of these guys, do have much higher end skills and gear, and none of them have anything negative to say about the oly nor the zoom h4n. They are on videomaker.com forums.
Sometimes pushing the debate a bit really brings out the facts when two people with differing opinions defend thier positions. I cannot speak for rparmar, but I can admit, my opinion of the zoom is not based on firsthand testing, but on what other video shooters I respect have stated about thier firsthand use of the device is. Some of these guys, do have much higher end skills and gear, and none of them have anything negative to say about the oly nor the zoom h4n. They are on videomaker.com forums.
Comment by Don posted on What microphone for video? at 26/05/2011 - 20:30
rparmar wrote:
Oh well, whatever. Go to consumer sites and take their advice if you wish. I am done with dispensing free advice based on dozens of years of experience.
I'm not discounting your credibility and actually appreciate this educational debate.Don wrote:
I cannot find any evidence of recalls or consume lawsuits over bad soldering...
Which obviously means it isn't true.I cannot find any evidence of recalls or consume lawsuits over bad soldering...
Oh well, whatever. Go to consumer sites and take their advice if you wish. I am done with dispensing free advice based on dozens of years of experience.
As I said, I WILL keep the oly in mind when I go shopping... oly on sale vs h4n at regular price would certianly clinch the deal.... but xlr inputs and lower cost vs an increase in audio quality 3/4's of the human population's hearing isn't trained/capable of discerning the difference...
well it is a tough choice..
Comment by Don posted on What microphone for video? at 26/05/2011 - 16:10
rparmar wrote:
Oh my, I just read that "review" you linked to. What a joke.
"the built-in speaker on the back that lets you listen back to recordings without having to plug in a pair of headphones, demonstrate that Zoom's designers really did their homework designing the H4n"
A speaker? First, every shoulder recorder since year dot has a speaker. Marantz, Sony, Olympus all have speakers. Second, no-one in their right mind would use it, except for journalists checking to be sure they got something -- anything -- on tape.
"Zoom's everything-but-the-kitchen-sink approach feels refreshingly generous, offering more features than recorders that cost twice as much."
Who cares about features if the unit fails after six months due to bad soldering? Or if everything you record has an extra 8dB of noise you cannot remove?
CNET is a gadget site for kidz who want to spend money on toyz. It is not to be taken seriously. I doubt you look to them for camera lens recommendations, so why would you for anything else?
linkOh my, I just read that "review" you linked to. What a joke.
"the built-in speaker on the back that lets you listen back to recordings without having to plug in a pair of headphones, demonstrate that Zoom's designers really did their homework designing the H4n"
A speaker? First, every shoulder recorder since year dot has a speaker. Marantz, Sony, Olympus all have speakers. Second, no-one in their right mind would use it, except for journalists checking to be sure they got something -- anything -- on tape.
"Zoom's everything-but-the-kitchen-sink approach feels refreshingly generous, offering more features than recorders that cost twice as much."
Who cares about features if the unit fails after six months due to bad soldering? Or if everything you record has an extra 8dB of noise you cannot remove?
CNET is a gadget site for kidz who want to spend money on toyz. It is not to be taken seriously. I doubt you look to them for camera lens recommendations, so why would you for anything else?
link
thier comments often do reflect the opinions of the masses of consumers, and thier reviews are often not too far off base....
here is videomakers assessment of the h1..link I will certianly keep the oly in mind when I go shopping for a recorder, but I'm not seeing any compelling reasons or evidence (as opposed to opinion) on the Zoom so I'm not ruling it out...yet.
I cannot find any evidence of recalls or consume lawsuits over bad soldering...
h2 review: link
and a chart: link comparing multiple brands.. which does, as you state rate the audio quality as less than the oly ls 10...
the h4n is still gonna blow away anything you can record on camera, and for video shooters the xlr inputs allow recording directly off the churches soundboards (which are seldom in the league you work in) so it boils down to needs vs cost vs value...
I won't rule out the oly ls11 or 5 but neither will I rule out the zoom h4n when I do buy one... right now I use a mixer board to record usb to a laptop, anything that comes in a pocket sized package with xlr inputs is worthy of consideration...
Comment by Don posted on What microphone for video? at 26/05/2011 - 15:43
I will keep an open mind, but I won't go so far as to concede I'm "Dead wrong".
I've done a fair amount of research into this, and the reviews up until this thread have been substantially favourable. eg: link you can try videomaker.com for more reviews and thier forums are full of nice people as well. I am wondering if at this point, the audio engineers are perhaps overestimating the needs of the average video shooter, and perhaps getting into a ff vs aps-c type debate over audio recorder needs?
I meann recommending a p&s to somebody that thinks they need a d-slr has been tried before...link
I've done a fair amount of research into this, and the reviews up until this thread have been substantially favourable. eg: link you can try videomaker.com for more reviews and thier forums are full of nice people as well. I am wondering if at this point, the audio engineers are perhaps overestimating the needs of the average video shooter, and perhaps getting into a ff vs aps-c type debate over audio recorder needs?
I meann recommending a p&s to somebody that thinks they need a d-slr has been tried before...link
Comment by Don posted on What microphone for video? at 26/05/2011 - 14:50
