|
Cameras
May 20, 2013 23:26:41 GMT -8
Post by Steve Rosenow on May 20, 2013 23:26:41 GMT -8
I have to say, I am more than welcoming the change at Flickr.
At first, I was startled to see the new look, but I've also been using Flickr since 2006, and have long thought that Flickr's interface was highly outdated in terms of photography-themed websites and I'm glad to see they're finally being proactive about it.
The only small issues I see with the site is that you cannot see the direct activity stream on your main page nor can you have a smaller tiled view of the uploaded-from-contacts news feed.
Other than that, I really don't see what all the fuss is about. All the options users had previously (upload/replace, etc) are still there, so...
|
|
|
Post by Cable Cassidy on May 21, 2013 12:51:00 GMT -8
I find the new look to be quite amazing. Let's face it, Flickr hadn't changed ANYTHING in a long, long time. It takes a few minutes to figure out where everything is, but once you know where to go, it's no big deal.
The front page of your photostream shows what people want to see, photos. Sure, some people want to browse through sets and collections but now you can easily scroll around and see what's new and fresh. When people go to my photostream, I want them to see what's the latest and greatest.
From what I've read, as long as you keep renewing your pro account you'll be grandfathered in and keep your unlimited storage/ad-free. If you didn't have Pro before, you'll have to use the new price setup.
If you don't like it, I've heard that Photobucket has a great new layout.
|
|
|
Cameras
May 21, 2013 13:31:26 GMT -8
Post by Mike C on May 21, 2013 13:31:26 GMT -8
Ugh, ProBoards just ate my post, so now I am even more frustrated...!
I have spent four hours reorganizing my Flickr sets to match the new layout. I prefered having my photos archived and accessed based on reference, rather than just appearing as a large, massed array on a single page. I have had to go back and review every single photo's placement, in order to get an organization that matches the new layout.
I am warming up to the homepage, but seeing other people's photos is not usually the reason I am on Flickr. I found the previous "Contacts' Photos" section near the bottom of the page to be a good summary, and there if I wanted it. However, that said, I will definitely be spending more time looking at other people's photos with this new layout...
I feel this was a move away from the professional paradigm. Fortunately, Flickr has a well-established community of professionals (many of which are on this forum). I also think that, despite this overwhelming change, Flickr is probably still the best photosharing service out there. It's just not as good as it was.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on May 21, 2013 20:31:30 GMT -8
I feel this was a move away from the professional paradigm. Not really true when you look at the design of roughly 65-70 percent of professional photographer's websites. Some of the themes for professional photographer websites that one can buy at Themeforest look almost identical to Flickr's new layout. A variant of my own Loowit Imaging theme is there and I'm going to be going to it, in about a month or so. Flickr has had, for all intents, the same fundamental layout since I began using the service in 2005 (back then, I was a free user and didn't buy my Pro membership until 2008), and I think it's been long overdue for an overhaul. When you look at the industry of photo sharing and photography in general, it's all about the photo now instead of thumbnailed galleries as it used to be, and that's where Flickr's emphasis has evolved.
|
|
|
Cameras
May 22, 2013 12:47:45 GMT -8
Post by WettCoast on May 22, 2013 12:47:45 GMT -8
Many of us Flickr users have been following the postings of 'BCFCapt' (aka Captain Alex Loy) on Flickr.
He is apparently no longer a Flickr member. His postings will be missed. Has he left because of the radical facelift at Flickr? I have no idea.
If anyone knows what's up, and where he's gone, please let us know.
Jim aka Wett Coast
|
|
|
Cameras
May 29, 2013 21:24:31 GMT -8
Post by compdude787 on May 29, 2013 21:24:31 GMT -8
Update: Have a read on this. I read some comments there and I'm amazed at how many people totally hated the new Flickr look. I don't think it's half-bad, since I definitely welcome the pictures being larger. I dislike the excessive use of the color black, though.
|
|
|
Post by Cable Cassidy on Jun 7, 2013 12:47:09 GMT -8
So I've gone and spent some money over the past week on camera lenses.
First off, my 55-200mm VR has been replaced with a Nikon 70-300mm VR. I wanted something with the extra bit of range, and compatibility with my growing collection of 35mm film SLRs.
Next, I added the well known Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 I can't wait to put it through it's paces this weekend!
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Cameras
Jul 16, 2013 23:48:01 GMT -8
Post by SolDuc on Jul 16, 2013 23:48:01 GMT -8
A question to all three D7000-series owners on the forum: Do the two command dials (the one under the shutter button, and one on the upper left of the back side of the camera) have the same function?
|
|
|
Post by Cable Cassidy on Jul 17, 2013 7:07:25 GMT -8
A question to all three D7000-series owners on the forum: Do the two command dials (the one under the shutter button, and one on the upper left of the back side of the camera) have the same function? No. For example, if you have the camera set to manual, one dial will set the aperture, and the other will set the shutter speed.
|
|
|
Cameras
Aug 11, 2013 12:28:08 GMT -8
Post by Elwha on the Rocks on Aug 11, 2013 12:28:08 GMT -8
OK, I'm in the market for a new camera bag-backpack, and I was looking at the Case Logic SLRC 206 camera backpack. I'm wondering what camera bag-backpack other forum members have and what they think about it. Thanks
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Cameras
Oct 8, 2013 20:02:15 GMT -8
Post by Neil on Oct 8, 2013 20:02:15 GMT -8
A bit of advice, if you please.
Today I dropped my little Canon PowerShot SX240, and broke the glass screen. Given that this camera was about $225, would I be better off getting a new one, or is such an injury reparable? I don't imagine the standard warranty covers abuse by owner.
|
|
|
Cameras
Oct 8, 2013 20:16:33 GMT -8
Post by WettCoast on Oct 8, 2013 20:16:33 GMT -8
A bit of advice, if you please. Today I dropped my little Canon PowerShot SX240, and broke the glass screen. Given that this camera was about $225, would I be better off getting a new one, or is such an injury reparable? I don't imagine the standard warranty covers abuse by owner. By 'glass screen' I assume you mean the LCD display (liquid crystal display) on the rear of the camera. Check with a specialty camera repair business such as Vancam Service or Victoria Camera Service. Explain the exact nature of the damage and ask their advice on fixing & what it might cost. What you describe sounds repairable. Nevertheless, you may find that cost to repair, plus the age of your camera, leads to replacement being the better option. Please also see this: www.victoriacameraservice.com/faq/
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Cameras
Oct 9, 2013 12:58:31 GMT -8
Post by Neil on Oct 9, 2013 12:58:31 GMT -8
Thanks for your input, Jim.
|
|
|
Post by Cable Cassidy on Oct 14, 2013 9:52:05 GMT -8
A few weeks ago I borrowed a Nikon 24-120mm AF from a friend. I've been looking at this lens for a few months as something to throw on my film bodies instead of the cheap 28-80 kit lens. Yesterday I returned the lens to my friend and casually mentioned "You should just sell me this lens, you never use it!" Well, long story short, I got it for a great price! It's not a lens that will see much use on my D7000, but it's perfect for my film bodies when I'm out shooting slides in the sun. Now I'm just waiting on a London Drugs store to carry the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. I've never been a big fan of Sigma lenses, but apparently they've turned a page and the new "Art Series" of lenses are absolutely phenomenal. I love using my Nikon 35mm f1.8 during the winter, and I've gotten some fantastic shots with it. But having the flexibility of a zoom, with the fixed aperture sounds amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Oct 16, 2013 17:20:33 GMT -8
Another Forum Member Joined the Tokina Club Today... Tokina 11-16 Pro DX II. by CS16 Photography, on Flickr Yes, my Tokina 11-16 Pro DX II arrived today!! It was pretty much a given that I was going to get this lens at some point based on the feedback from Forum Members who already have this lens. A soon as I gave one a try, I knew I had to get one. (and couldn't stop saying it ) Now I can hardly wait to take it for a Round-Trip now that I have it.
|
|
|
Cameras
Oct 16, 2013 21:40:27 GMT -8
Post by Cable Cassidy on Oct 16, 2013 21:40:27 GMT -8
So, who shall be next to join the Tokina club?
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Cameras
Oct 17, 2013 6:08:25 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by SolDuc on Oct 17, 2013 6:08:25 GMT -8
So, who shall be next to join the Tokina club? I shall be! (Unless someone has plans to get ut befoe next April, that is)
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 17, 2013 6:45:13 GMT -8
So, who shall be next to join the Tokina club? I shall be! (Unless someone has plans to get ut befoe next April, that is) In preparation for your Tokina acquisition, you will need to come up with a whole new set of adjectives with which to self-describe your photos. - Hopefully you've left yourself enough room for an upgrade in that area.
|
|
|
Cameras
Nov 14, 2013 9:02:14 GMT -8
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 14, 2013 9:02:14 GMT -8
I did some dusk & night shooting with my wife's camera, yesterday. - It was able to do things in low light that my Canon point&shoot can't do.
Her camera is: FujiFilm FinePix HS25EXR
A more modern point & shoot, with these specs: - Image sensor 1/2-inch EXR CMOS with primary color filter
Lens Fujinon 30x optical zoom lens focal length f=4.2–126.0 mm, equivalent to 24–720 mm on a 35 mm camera
full-aperture F2.8 (Wide)–F5.6 (Telephoto)
constitution 11 groups 15 lenses
Aperture F2.8–F11 (Wide) F5.6–F11 (Telephoto) 1/3EV step
----------- I'm not sure what all the above stuff means, but it appears to be similar to what WCK was posting about last year, re his European Vacation camera that is small and non-bulky.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 14, 2013 11:05:54 GMT -8
I did some dusk & night shooting with my wife's camera, yesterday. - It was able to do things in low light that my Canon point&shoot can't do. Her camera is: FujiFilm FinePix HS25EXR A more modern point & shoot, with these specs: - Image sensor 1/2-inch EXR CMOS with primary color filter Lens Fujinon 30x optical zoom lens focal length f=4.2–126.0 mm, equivalent to 24–720 mm on a 35 mm camera full-aperture F2.8 (Wide)–F5.6 (Telephoto) constitution 11 groups 15 lenses Aperture F2.8–F11 (Wide) F5.6–F11 (Telephoto) 1/3EV step ----------- I'm not sure what all the above stuff means, but it appears to be similar to what WCK was posting about last year, re his European Vacation camera that is small and non-bulky. Your camera, your wife's camera, and my Panasonic Lumix FZ-150 & FZ-200 are usually classified as 'point & shoot' cameras, but they are among the most sophisticated of that breed and are better classified as ultra-zoom DSLR 'bridge' cameras. Generally they look like and behave similar to DSLR cameras but they are a little smaller and they have a 'fixed' (i.e. non-interchangeable) lens. The lenses on these cameras feature incredible zoom ranges (20X up to 50X) that simply are not an option for owners of any brand of true DSLR. But like everything there is a 'down-side'. The down-side is these cameras have to employ sensors that are much smaller than those used in DSLR's. The sensor size in your Canon and my Lumix is 6.17x4.55 mm for a total surface area of 28.1 mm 2. Your wife's Fuji has a slightly larger sensor measuring 6.4 x 4.8 mm for a total surface area of 30.7 mm 2. Compare this to most DSLR's that have 'APS-C' sized sensors (e.g. the Nikon DX cameras such as Scott's 7000, my various Pentax cameras, & my Sony NEX 6). Their sensors measure just under 24 x 16 mm for a total surface area of 370 mm 2. Those sensors are more than 13 times larger than what we have in the super-zoom point & shoots. That does make a difference in IQ (image quality). Many high-end DSLR's actually have even larger sensors that are referred to as 'full-size' measuring 36 x 24 mm for a total surface area of 860 mm 2. Nikon 'FX' cameras have full size sensors, as do some Canon & Sony DSLR's. Generally, the larger the sensor, the better is the image quality, and this is particularly so in low-light situations. Super-zoom point & shoot cameras produce acceptable image quality in good light, but in low light with an ISO setting of 800, IQ is barely adequate. Resorting to an even higher ISO (1600+) to allow photography in challenging light means much reduced IQ. Cameras such as DSLR's with much larger sensors provide substantially better IQ in low-light situations. Now, we have also to consider that image sensor technology is advancing rapidly. The IQ produced by a current state of the art 1/2" CMOS sensor (such as that in your wife's Fuji) may be as good as that produced by an APS-C sized sensor in a ten-year-old DSLR such as my first Pentax DSLR (ist D) new in 2003. I suspect the main difference in low light performance between your camera & your wife's is simply that your wife's is newer & has an improved sensor. The size difference is not enough to explain the IQ difference. Back to 'down-sides'. To get the improved IQ that DSLR's provide, you have to accept muchly increased weight & bulk, and frequent changing of lenses to cover at least a portion of the zoom range that you get with super-zoom point & shoots. Having two or more camera bodies with different lenses attached is one way to go. Serious DSLR photographers often carry a backpack full of gear. If minimal size & weight are required, such as when travelling overseas, the advanced super-zoom point & shoot type camera is, I think, the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 14, 2013 11:58:00 GMT -8
|
|
|
Cameras
Nov 14, 2013 20:44:31 GMT -8
Post by Scott on Nov 14, 2013 20:44:31 GMT -8
Does anyone have any experience with "mirrorless" "compact cameras" that have interchangeable lenses but are quite a bit smaller than DSLRs? Fujifilm seems to have gone in that direction.. they don't even make a DSLR anymore I don't think. Just wondering how people find the quality and versatility of that type of camera compared to DSLRs.
- John H
|
|
|
Cameras
Nov 14, 2013 20:47:16 GMT -8
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 14, 2013 20:47:16 GMT -8
Does anyone have any experience with "mirrorless" "compact cameras" that have interchangeable lenses but are quite a bit smaller than DSLRs? Fujifilm seems to have gone in that direction.. they don't even make a DSLR anymore I don't think. Just wondering how people find the quality and versatility of that type of camera compared to DSLRs. I don't have experience with one, but I'm seriously considering a Canon Powershot G1 X, which is what you describe, but the lens is fixed (non interchangeable). HEREI'm mulling it over, and while I'd be sacrificing zoom that my current camera has, I'd be gaining clarity (especially lower light clarity).
|
|
|
Cameras
Nov 14, 2013 22:10:37 GMT -8
Post by WettCoast on Nov 14, 2013 22:10:37 GMT -8
Does anyone have any experience with "mirrorless" "compact cameras" that have interchangeable lenses but are quite a bit smaller than DSLRs? Fujifilm seems to have gone in that direction.. they don't even make a DSLR anymore I don't think. Just wondering how people find the quality and versatility of that type of camera compared to DSLRs. John, I have been using a Sony NEX 6 for about a year now. It is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera (MILC) with an APS-C sized sensor (see my piece on sensor size a few posts above this one). It has pretty much all the advantages of a DSLR (same sensor size) but in a smaller, easier to carry around package. I am generally very happy with the results. Apparently the NEX line has produced good results for Sony. Fuji & Canon are also now making MILC cameras with APS-C sized sensors. Panasonic & Olympus make very good MILC cameras having m4/3 (micro four-thirds) sensors that are a little smaller than APS-C. Generally, the smaller the sensor, the smaller the camera will be. Nikon's '1' series with 'CX' sized sensor is also similar but the sensor is smaller again and perhaps getting too small to produce good image quality. MILC cameras achieve most of their size/weight reduction by eliminating the pentaprism needed for the optical viewfinder that is the 'hallmark of a true SLR/DSLR. Many MILC cameras have no viewfinder, just a large LCD screen on the back of the camera like what is standard now-a-days on most cheap point & shoot cameras. I would not buy any camera without a usable viewfinder. Higher end MILC cameras replace the DSLR optical viewfinder with an EVF (electronic viewfinder). The NEX 6 & NEX 7 models from Sony both have EVF's and LCD screens, either of which can be used to compose your photos with. John, I would be happy to provide you with some samples from my camera.
|
|
|
Cameras
Nov 15, 2013 16:23:28 GMT -8
Post by paulvanb on Nov 15, 2013 16:23:28 GMT -8
Having used both - I prefer a dslr because I like being able to compose using a viewfinder when sunny. I have the Olympus E-PL1 with an attachable electronic viewfinder. I have used it on two tours of Europe. Going micro four thirds means having more available lenses to purchase. They have an adapter that will allow you to use full-size Olympus lenses. Stay away from the Nikon 1 camera!
|
|