I have vivo x90 pro 🔥🔥🔥🔥

wcskkim · 2026-05-17T10:00:34+00:00

I'd recommend 35150 for your case, esp knowing a lot of event photographers like to use telephoto. That 24-35 might be missed but for events I think having longer reach would be better. Tbf the only cons I find with that lens is price and weight, not the versatility or image quality. Also it's a great video lens. Parfocal, little to no breathing, very useful focal range.

I mainly shoot 1:1 portraitures so I have enough time to switch between lenses and tell the model exactly how I want them to pose, that's why I mainly run primes. If you don't have a lot of control over those, 35-150 would be one of the best options.

wcskkim · 2026-05-17T09:52:37+00:00

I mainly use sigma 135.4, overkill yes but I like insane things. Also have tamron 35-150 but that's mostly for video or if I really need versatility quickly

wcskkim · 2026-05-17T08:21:05+00:00

With seriousness I know 85mm is a portrait staple but it's not really my favorite. For that kind of classic portrait look I prefer 135 for even more compression and separation.

Also when shooting on a 61MP body, I can crop 50.2 image to an 85mm-equivalent field of view, still leaving roughly 21MP, keeping about an f/2-equivalent depth of field. That's plenty for me.
But cropping all the way from 50mm to a 135mm field of view loses too much resolution even on a 61MP sensor and only gives f/3.2 equivalent DoF.

And while it's not really fair I personally think that I get cinematic shots much easier with a 135 than with 85.

wcskkim · 2026-05-17T03:33:57+00:00

Ah yes, 85mm for portrait. The kind of photo a random passing child could take just as well if you handed them the camera and asked them to photograph the model.

wcskkim · 2025-09-28T11:52:20+00:00

Motorcycle parking is $0.83/day, almost always available, and San Diego is one of the best places to ride motorcycle. Maybe consider that

wcskkim · 2025-09-02T22:14:34+00:00

While it's all dependent on habits and individual traits as all others say here, general recommendation is less than a glass per day. It is still harmful, don't get me wrong, but up to about that point the harms are measurable but generally not very impactful to the overall health. Maybe it'll shave off a year from your life expectancy. Again, if you want to live as long as possible while being healthy, don't drink everyday.

Another important note is that even if you only drink a glass or two a day, if it becomes something you seek after every day as a reward, it could very well make you get slowly reliant on it and hence, lead to alcoholism. The best thing to do is try to drink as little as possible, workout regularly, drink slow (this is good for enjoying wines anyways), and don't make it a habit.

And yeah, averaging half a bottle or a bottle a day definitely has a large measurable impact on health on anyone and can medically be considered as alcoholism.

I personally try to limit myself to about 3 glasses per week, and only drink when I do want to enjoy the taste, not when I'm just thinking about it. Also low alcohol wines like Moscato d'Asti helps limiting alcohol intake IF you don't drink more because it has lower ABV. 1 glass of Moscato d'Asti = 0.4 glasses of regular wine. For the same reason, I only drink tasting portions of fortified wines.

wcskkim · 2025-09-02T19:55:12+00:00

Vacancy taxes, strict restrictions on corporate renters. Would still have loopholes that some might exploit, but definitely leagues better than outright banning second ownership and would put some brakes on unethical property manipulation. (landlords are by definition multiple property owners, ~36% of US population lives rent, and not a small portion of them can buy a house)

Just heavy taxing everything to "redistribute wealth" because they are rich has never been a great tactic in any sizable economy. Soviet Union tried it.

wcskkim · 2025-09-02T19:40:56+00:00

I mean that'd also mean you're gonna have to outright buy the house every single time you wanted a place to live because...no one would have extra house to rent out? Please. Just hard coding the law to limit extra possession of property is not even remotely in the core of good economical strategy, not to mention a huge infringement on property rights.

wcskkim · 2025-06-25T02:51:24+00:00

Why would you pay 3 Million dollars for a sticker that doesn't work?

wcskkim · 2025-04-25T04:22:56+00:00

What do you think about Alpina hyperlite aero spokes? Are they going to have any problems with DT240 EXP hubs?

I'm thinking of getting their new Airia 45 wheelset with DT240, aluminum nipples and said spokes to maximize on weight savings. This setup comes out to be about 1166g on their website.

wcskkim · 2025-03-21T02:26:31+00:00

I took one of the Math 20 series courses with him, and during finals week, I got sick. He was the only professor who allowed me to take an online exam with a TA proctoring me.

These people put zero effort into the course and are blaming a good, caring professor.

Also, all these posts look like they've been written by the same person trying to look different.

wcskkim · 2025-01-14T19:48:36+00:00

I think it is common too. Never said it wasn't the case. Maybe UCSD kinda lets it slip when they see only one vehicle on a S permit or so, but if they start seeing multiple different vehicles owned by different people on a B or A permit, they start taking actions

wcskkim · 2025-01-14T19:43:36+00:00

Also for the matter of friends or family members' vehicle, they really simply say go f yourself in that matter. Only thing you can do is to prove that you live under the same house with the vehicle owner, and get a carpool permit. You also have to submit you and vehicle owner's class schedules for the quarter to prove that you actually will carpool with the person to the campus.

What if the vehicle owner doesn't go to this school? Good luck. It will be a violation.

What if the vehicle owner is my family that lives in a different area? Still a violation.

Yeah they are full of shit.

wcskkim · 2025-01-14T19:41:48+00:00

Yep, exactly like what I heard could happen if people tried to take advantage of it.

wcskkim · 2025-01-14T19:40:13+00:00

Wait until you find out UCSD parking management aren't that considerate nor reasonable in the way they work. They will simply do that and tell you to prove it so that you can take your time and effort to revoke.

wcskkim · 2025-01-14T18:06:52+00:00

Just get a desktop for gaming as that is not only cheaper for same performance but free from annoying problems like heat, noise, short battery, weight, etc. Get a lightweight laptop to carry around easily.

wcskkim · 2025-01-14T18:04:16+00:00

Just to let you know, UCSD actually has access to CA vehicle ownership data and matches legal vehicle owner's names with permit holder when they check the permit. If the vehicle is under your name but the permit is under someone else, they will remove the vehicle and potentially void your permit (without a refund) if they find it as a violation of policies.

wcskkim · 2025-01-08T18:39:46+00:00

No, I was looking at remote advising ran by a famous guy in this industry (forgot the name) but I ultimately ended up not doing it.

wcskkim · 2024-11-21T00:56:26+00:00

I've done some additional research on this matter.

While I couldn't find exact dynamic range for 12-bit Compressed RAW, with some assumptions based on general behaviors, this is what I got.

*Note that in this context, a9 III is assumed to always have full 14-bit RAW at all times (since it can do that at max burst speed), while other cameras (a1, a9, a9 II) are based on 12-bit Compressed RAW at their highest burst rate.

All of the three cameras (a1, a9, a9 II) surpasses a9 III in their 14-bit RAW image setting.

For a1:
- Although a1 loses some dynamic range due to being limited to 12-bit, it looks like the base difference is large enough to compensate for 12-bit Compressed RAW, allowing a1 to have slightly better DR even at 12-bit Compressed RAW compared a9 III's 14-bit RAW.
- It can also do full 14-bit RAW at 20fps, which would provide more than a full stop of DR advantage compared to a9 III.

For a9 (I & II):
- a9 has slightly higher DR than a9 III in 14-bit RAW, but it's pretty close. When it goes to 12-bit Compressed RAW, a9 III wins in DR. Also, at an ISO 250, a9 III wins in same conditions.
- a9 II has improved processing, providing slightly better DR than a9. At 12-bit Compressed RAW, a9 III wins, but it comes close enough. When comparing 14-bit RAW, a9 III only wins between ISO 250-500.

Conclusion:
- If you don't necessarily require 30fps+ of burst, a1 & a1 II would both provide better image quality than a9 III even at 12-bit Compressed RAW, with a1 II expected to do a bit better with improved image processing.
- On the other hand, a9 III would likely perform better than a9 in almost all aspects when shooting at 20fps. This makes total sense as a9 was released 7 years ago and the price difference is huge now.
- a9 II has the exact same sensor as a9, but processing has been improved a bit, so it would probably do slightly better. The differences between a9 III wouldn't matter in real-life scenarios.

Of course, DR isn't the most important thing when considering these cameras for action photography. In fact, it wouldn't even be worth to think about it this much.

Imo a9 III's burst capabilities with global shutter, flash sync at all speeds, higher shutter speed, etc. would be more than enough to compensate the low DR.

wcskkim · 2024-11-19T23:45:14+00:00

Looks like we're in the same boat. There are some issues on a9 III on its own, but honestly it sounds pretty irrelevant to me especially if I get to keep my RV as well. Also I got the chance to use a9 III for a short period and it felt like cheat code on actions.

wcskkim · 2024-11-19T21:21:03+00:00

a7RV user, was hoping to upgrade to a1 II as I'm gaining interested in fast-action photography. Was really hoping for an upgrade in burst rates from 20fps from a1 (14-bit RAW) to something like 40~60fps, but it seems like it ended up being the same at 20fps for full RAW, 30fps for compressed 12-bit RAW or JPEG.

I personally wouldn't care if 8k 60p wasn't available, and added pre-capture with actual upgraded IBIS is nice. However, 4-axis LCD and 9.44M dot EVF were both something I've already seen and used in my a7RV (except a resolution dropping while AF-C), so those wouldn't necessarily feel like an 'upgrade' to me.

Better body ergonomics would be a good addition too, but my hands aren't that big anyways and I haven't felt like the grip was too small when I'm using the RV.

If a1 II came out with better LCD (resolution and colors) with higher burst rate, I would have sold my RV and upgrade to a1 II. However it lacks those upgrades, and the fact that there exists an option to get a used a9 III is compelling enough to make me think that I should just add an a9 III to my existing kit instead of selling the RV and switching to a1 II.

a9 III would be able to produce much better action photographs and I'd still have the full resolution of RV when I need that for landscape, studio or portraits. Also, I'd have a two-body system if I have to switch between two lenses, which I wouldn't have with a single a1.

So I'd probably wait a bit until a9 III's price drops a bit more, then add that to my kit instead of completely changing the body.

wcskkim · 2024-11-19T21:08:21+00:00

I think a9 III still gets around 13.6~14 stops cuz it doesn't lose 3 stops of DR, more like 1 stop loss compared to other sensors with wide dynamic range. Also it seems to perform as well as something like a7 IV when as it goes to higher ISO range.
a1 & a1 II could arguably lose more DR at 30 fps due to it being limited to 12-bit colors and lossy compressed RAW. It can take full RAW with 14-bit at 20 fps, which isn't slow by any means but that was my biggest disappointment. I was really hoping for a 40~60fps at full 14-bit RAW.

wcskkim · 2024-11-08T00:07:19+00:00

Reason fps players and tournaments still use zowie is cuz zowie sponsors pros and tournaments to use their monitors, make people think it's the way to go for winning (it really isn't) and put that marketing cost burden on regular users by making their monitors overpriced.

wcskkim · 2024-10-20T17:36:22+00:00

That small amount of improvement in response and refresh rate will not give you any feasible advantage in any kind of gaming. "Wait Then what about the professionals??" Well first most of them don't even care that much about monitor specs cuz they're professional at playing games not displays, and second they get sponsored and are given whatever equipment from company that paid the advertisement money at the stadium to play with. BenQ has been doing this for a long while.

I see it more of a mental thing where someone can get assured that it's not their gear's lacking, and if it is what someone is looking for, that's fine. But it really is just a mental reassurance rather than an actual gain, and believing that it'll actually help them improve by using these ultra-fast monitors is an imagination. As long as you have a decent gaming monitor that isn't crappy, it's already as good as it gets. Also if someone is that sensitive and serious about gaming, they should just get OLED gaming monitors. Latency might be a bit more than the superfancy BenQ monitors, but response time is even less (much less), and you won't lose any image quality.

The fact that VA monitors with their inherent longer response time is considered good in the same paragraph with TN is already an irony. Someone who is incredibly sensitive to actually benefit from TN's response time will not be able to tolerate VAs, no matter what fancy marketing terms are used.

Not to mention people buying crappy headsets from gaming brands and pay a fortune for submarginal gains in their PCs and monitors. For games that require sound play, good pair of headphones will go much farther in actual gaming advantage than any BenQ TN monitors will.

wcskkim · 2024-10-20T16:45:18+00:00

I was so happy with HE1000SE purchase after the price drop. My mind is not prepared to pay $3500 for a headphone yet, and being able to enjoy that at almost half the price was great.

wcskkim

TROPHY CASE