mostly sports

"Yes, anybody can have Prada bag, but I never heard someone calling it professional tool:)

"

 

Depends on what profession you're in. :cool:

Obviously, the lens is going to have an impact on the quality. As will technique (tripod, low ISO, etc.) and light levels. Here's an album I shot with a Sony RX10 M3. https://goo.gl/photos/VDq9barDkPqLBW4L9

On the web, you're not going to see a lot of difference between the formats. How shall we measure quality? The largest "sharp" print you can make? I think 11X14 will be great, 16X20, a stretch. I have cameras with four different formats (1", M43, ASP-C, FF). I think about the final use of the image, and light levels when taking the photo. The less the light, the better the larger format.

Here's another album, shot with Sony a6300 and RX10 M4. Can you tell the difference without looking at the info? https://photos.app.goo.gl/3HrEqboVVHNW4HWZ7

Here's Olympus' explanation of the upgrade for 2.0.

Olympus announces significant firmware updates for OM-D and PEN cameras

Now there is 2.1 to solve one of the problems created by 2.0. Without actually acknowledging the problem (unlike Leica's recent T2 recall) they did fix the software in a few months.

I bought a new Pen F last month, and promptly upgraded to firmware 2.0. Then I had a series of camera failures. It would just go dark, as if the battery had died. But taking the battery out and putting it right back in would reset the camera, and show plenty of charge on the battery. Every shooting session this would happen a few times. I thought I was the only one, but then I discovered this thread on DP Review:

Re: Olympus PEN-F lock-up / freeze / unresponsive after updating the firmware to version 2.0: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

There's a guy in Germany who has figured out how to downgrade to the prior firmware, and that solves the problem.

 

https://lightsnowdev.com/Olympus

 

There is the usual corporate failure to acknowledge the problem, although some say a corrective update is coming in June. Otherwise, I love the camera.

There are scams on Amazon. Anyone can become a seller, and post a listing. Here's one for a Canon 35mm 1.4 L II, like new for $400!

Three tip-offs are ridiculously low price, and "contact us before ordering," and "just launched seller." When you contact them, they will have you pay directly, not through Amazon. When you never get the goods, there is no recourse, because you didn't go through Amazon. Otherwise,I have purchased a lot of gear through Amazon with no problem. Frequently one of their legitimate sellers is the first to stock a new item, the shipping is quick, and returns are easy. I also use an Amazon Prime credit card that builds points for "cash back" discounts on Amazon purchases. Just don't bite on those sucker deals in the "used and new" listings on page two.

Phil Stiles

 

$400.00

& FREE Shipping + $0.00 estimated tax

 

Used - Like New

Bränd nëw itëm! Cöntäct us priör tö ördëring~* CRMIKE200 ""a-t"" ... » Read more

 

 

• Arrives between April 14-21.
  
• Want it delivered Thursday, April 13? Choose Expedited Shipping at checkout.
  
• Shipping rates and return policy.
  

Lagrue Pascal

Just Launched (Seller Profile)

<p>Sony RX10M3</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for posting. What is your camera?</p>

<p>I shoot a lot of soccer, and the only time I use a 70-200/2.8 is if it's a night game. Otherwise, you just need more reach. A 100-400 on FX sensor is adequate.<br>

On the other hand, a 50mm (effective 75mm) works very well for basketball, if you can get close, and is a decent portrait lens as well on FX.<br>

So I would spend on a great field sports lens, pick up a 50, and leave it at that for the present.</p>

<p>My actual and real experience is with an A7ii and adapters for some vintage Contax Zeiss lenses. I also have an extensive Olympus M43 kit, an Alpha 6300, and shoot a variety of sports, events, musicians, portraits, and so on. Not a lot of landscape, fashion or macro.<br>

While I have not used a Loxia, from all I've read it is a top performer and would be marginally better than the typical "nifty fifty." Of course "everything's great at f/8" so whether the extra cost of the Loxia would justify its slightly better performance is an open question. If you are shooting with a tripod, and making huge enlargements, you will see a difference. Otherwise, I would spend the thousand dollars (as I did) on a variety of focal lengths. My Carl Zeiss Contax 35/2.8, 50/1.7, and 85/28 came in at about the same cost for the whole set. Part of the charm of the Loxia is small size. Does that matter to you? I'd love to have the 21mm Loxia for exactly that reason. Meanwhile, the Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 is about the same price as the Loxia, and gives you an autofocus option and superb performance.<br>

My eyes don't get tired with EVF.<br>

Almost every iconic image of 20th century photojournalism was taken with manual focus.</p><div></div>

<p>I have observed many folks learning how to process black and white films, and the hardest part is loading the film reels. It's one of those manual dexterity things that takes a certain "knack." I don't like the ratchet gadgets. For one thing, they need to be scrupulously dry, so there's an issue if you're processing batch after batch. I settled on Hewes reels for both 120 and 35mm. Expensive, but now cheap on ebay. Sacrifice a few rolls to practice, and load the reels in the daylight where you can see what's going on. That will give you the proper feel for how to do it. Load in daylight until you get it right, then load in daylight with your eyes closed (you can open them if you get stuck), and when you can do it smoothly, you'll be ready for the darkroom. I am continually amazed that people think photography is a skill that requires no practice. I suggest stainless steel tanks, because they are easy to clean and are temperature conductive. Mix your chemicals, and have a water bath (a plastic dishpan works well) for your tank and chemistry. Let the whole thing sit for an hour and all the temps will be stabilized. Use the same thermometer all the time. Use a consistent agitation technique. Keep records of your ISO, time and temperature. Old cameras are great, but can have sticky shutters that play havoc with your exposures. Have it checked electronically. I could go on and on, but there are plenty of books with all the info. Enjoy!<br>

And by the way, those defects are classic "film not properly loaded on the reel" results.</p>

<p>I don't know if this is Japanese, Chinese, or something else. What does it say? Can anyone help? Thanks.</p><div></div>

<p>I don't think the leash is usual, and I find a dangling lens cap very distracting. I just have a filter and a lens hood on my lenses all the time, keeping the lens cap in the box that the lens came in. You probably don't care, but the leashed lens cap costs you serious style points in almost every arena.</p>

<p>One alignment is obvious, when it's in focus is there any vertical disparity in the focus patch? That may not impact the point of focus, but it's distracting.<br>

Another focus test is to place a yardstick on a table, perpendicular to your viewpont. Put a small object at the halfway point, focus on it, and it will be clear from the negative if the object, or some other point on the yardstick, is in focus. You could do the same with a vertical stick in a lawn. When you focus on the stick, it will either be in focus, or you'll see the grass behind or in front is actually in focus. Shoot wide open, of course, and use the same distance at which you intend to use the camera. Depending on condition, you may want to get a full CLA anyway. The slow shutter speeds are most revealing. Enjoy your classic!</p>

<p>In discussions about lenses, what does the term "organic" mean? As in "Lens X has a more organic rendering."</p>

<div></div>

<p>Tom, you don't say anything about sensor size, which some would make their initial specification. Your list adds up to a Sony RX100 ii in my quick review. I have the first model (no tilting screen) and find it the most quality one can put in a pocket. I've had one for years. Oddly, I don't have a lot of shots from it, probably because I'm usually happy to carry and use my larger Sonys and Fujis. I do hear a lot of good things about the Ricoh. I disagree with previous post that Fuji-X lens are pricey "for what you get." I shot with Leicas for twenty years, and find the Fujis to be an excellent value.</p>

<p>At the risk of "piling on" I'll confirm that I've dealt with KEH often, and never had a problem.</p>

<p>Deliberation has its rewards. Back in the day, I went to a concert with two cameras, a digital and a film camera. The film camera was strictly backup. The digital batteries went dead, and I was left with two rolls of film. I had to make every shot count, and later thought it one of the best jobs I'd done, because I was really focused on the shooting.<br>

With digital, the low cost of tripping the shutter lowers the ante, and can lead to carelessness. On the other hand, sometimes the spontaneity of a low threshold of concern for tripping the shutter can lead to an unexpected result. The "art is an accident" approach. Did Gary Winogrand shoot too much? Did Coltrane play too many notes?<br>

I think the mistake is to assume that you will necessarily find some quality just by shooting quantity.<br>

Here's a shot I thought was ruined by the official at the time I took it. Actually, he framed it. One of those happy "accidents."</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for all the responses.<br>

I have done the SMC reset. It fixes it for a while, although its been good for the last month.<br>

I am so into Aperture with archived libraries going back for years and years that switching to PC and Lightroom at this point is a little daunting. My workflow is smooth and second nature by now.<br>

My current machine is the 2.1 version Mac Pro, with 16GB RAM, 4 hard drives allocated as start drive, backup drive, and a RAID 1 array with the RAID drives for data storage. About every year, the raid fills up, and I archive the disks, although this year I went to 2TB drives, so I'm probably good for two years. When I remember to, I copy the start drive to the backup drive.<br>

iMac? I do run dual monitors on my home office Windows 7 machine, and find that setup very useful, but with a 30" Apple Cinema monitor on the Mac Pro for photography, I'm OK with one monitor.<br>

This may come down to whether or not I can find a later model Mac Pro that I can swap my drives into and upgrade, or a Mini with additional cost of external drive setups. I like the quiet minimalism of the Mini, but that's just me. My Mac Pro I got a good deal on used several years ago, and its always seemed a little overbuilt, given the limited lifespan of these devices. Thanks for the tip on dealmac.com.</p>

<p>My Mac Pro is from 2008 (2.1) and it won't upgrade past 10.6.8. And Aperture will only upgrade to 3.2.4. Just when I'm shooting more RAW with newer cameras, I can't deal with the files. And sometimes the machine boots up with fans roaring like an airplane getting ready to take off. (Turn off, unplug, plug in, turn on.) And then there's the random spontaneous reboot. Makes me think it's getting old. Sure, it would be nice to pick up one of the new Mac Pros, but that's beyond the budget. Since the new paradigm seems to be a size-reduced processor, attached to peripherals, should I be considering a recent model Mac Mini and some external hard drives? When I search Craigslist, I find a lot of models like the mac pro I have for sale, but not many of what I want as an upgrade. I already have a nice big monitor. Suggestions welcomed. Maybe the Mac Pro should live as file server for the new Mini?</p>

<p>I'm assuming that you want a nice zoom range, and realize that the smaller sensors in this class of camera means not very good low light performance.<br>

Here's one on Amazon that looks like a good deal (must be new model coming out.) Nice review on dpreveiw.<br>

I tried to give you a tiny url to amazon, but photo net won't let me. Google Lumix ZS20.</p>

 

<div></div>

<p>I shoot sports with an a77 and 70-400. To get really sharp results, I frequently shoot at high ISO even in bright daylight. The attached photo was ISO 1600, 1/1000 @ f/5.6. My problem is that I frequently want to switch to video. No problem with video in low light situations. But for sports, it inevitably looks a few stops overexposed. Is there a technique for readily shifting back and forth? Anyone else have this issue? Thanks, Phil.</p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>"You are doing infrared photography, so long exposure times will be needed, increasing the chance of motion blur (even trees move in the wind)." <br>

The ISO can be raised with no problem. I frequently shoot my converted Xti at 800, although the attached is 100.</p>

</blockquote><div></div>

<p>"A difference, to be a difference, has to make a difference." Over a number of years, I have photographed with a variety of equipment: Canon, Nikon, Contax, Leica, Minolta, Olympus and Rollei. No one seems to be able to identify the camera from the photo. I've also had other photographers guess whether I used a prime or a zoom for a particular shot, and they can't. So if your criteria is "characteristics in the images they produce" the Canon vs Nikon debate won't take you anywhere. Too many variables.</p>