Timmbits

Timmbits

Lives in Canada Montreal, Canada
Works as a inventor
Joined on Oct 8, 2011
About me:

Deutscher, living in Montreal Canada.
Cycling, chess, design, inventions, nature, photography, are some of the things I like.

Comments

Total: 1489, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

jeffharris: With such small sensors, If manufacturers would keep the megapixels LOWER the image quality could be much better! 10MP or below is perfectly good for cameras like theses.

I have Olympus TG1 and an earlier Tough camera (TC130?)

I am ignoring BorisK's remark, and replying to the original post.
Yes, larger photosites would help, but going from 12 or 14, down to 10mp, you are still dealing with TINY photosites. I think that a 1" sensor is the absolute minimum size in these modern times - otherwise you may as well just settle for the Sony waterproof smartphone! why bother with this crappy IQ you get from these tiny sensors?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 01:37 UTC
On 2014 Waterproof Camera Roundup article (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: DO NOT BUY ANY OF THESE!!! is the best advice I can give you.

I purchased the best of the past years' roundups, the Panasonic, figuring that it should be a little bit better than the dismal tiny-sensor cameras out there.
Boy was I wrong, and it was wasted money. It became an expensive hand-me-down for my 8 year old girl - at least she can drop it, we can take it out on the inflatable kayak, and she is delighted with all she does with it (stop motion video, pictures of her dog...) and she's just too delighted to discover what she can do with a camera to worry about IQ.

If you are to get yourself a waterproof camera, get at least something with a 1" sensor or larger if any are available. I haven't researched this in the past months, but I do remember Nikon has the waterproof version of their Nikon-1. That is what you should get.

If you're going to have crappy image quality that these things deliver, you may as well just get the Sony waterproof smartphone and use that instead.

Some of you did not get the point I was making, in trying to help those who rely on these reviews to make their purchases. Ask yourself, what is the purpose of offering all this "advice" for free? It is the ultimate marketing newsletter that customers actually read, it is designed to stimulate sales. But these cameras are NOT worthy of your hard-earned dollars, offering LOUSY IQ, like ANY other 1/2"sensor camera, in water or out of water, regardless! And no, I do not have a Sony underwater phone - but before spending a couple or a few hundred, and accepting the dismal image quality, I totally would get that instead.
But if you want good IQ (or acceptable IQ if you prefer), get something with a bigger sensor or don't bother.
Vote with your money!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 01:20 UTC
On Samsung NX30 Review preview (418 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: Don't want a swivel-out screen (I prefer the vertical pivot type), don't want the larger size, don't want the nx300's buffer lockup.
I've waited a long time for this camera, and now I'm just learning to love my NX20 just the way it is.

I'm at the point where I am about to say "fnck this sh!t" and just get the new Canon G1Xii. Something practical, compact, almost APS, with a good lens, and I don't have to worry about buffer lock ups (although it is much slower) nor worry about switching lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 01:11 UTC
On Samsung announces NX3000 mirrorless camera article (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: As a "Me Too company" the good thing about Samsung is to keep the competitors' price down, so far.

@howaboutraw: I do not have the time to go through history, I merely remember past exchanges where mft supposedly was much better according to you and you were dissing samsung. I believe you were even enthused about pentax Q at one point. this is from a few years ago. I thought you would have remembered.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 01:02 UTC

This will provide for better sharpness and contrast in the corners, closer to what you are getting in the center of the image.

It will, however, require an entirely new line of lenses. Use lenses with elements designed to correct for the flat surface on the other side, where distance varies instead of being constant, and you would have the inverse problem.

So do not expect a new line of cameras to be made to be backwards compatible with any lenses out there. But that's OK. There are people changing systems all the time, especially in this day and age.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 00:49 UTC as 6th comment
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2021 comments in total)
In reply to:

LingoDingo: For the past 150+ years of photographic history, "equivalence" meant EXPOSURE equivalence, where the ONLY variables that mattered were F-Stop / Shutter Speed / ISO...

Now we have a new religion called DOF Equivalence, which photographers and film-makers of the past 150+ years did not give a sh*t about.

I've shot professionally for 30+ years now, using everything from a Minox "spy" camera to the Polaroid 20×24 inch studio camera, and while DOF was always important, I was never concerned about matching the DOF between camera formats.

This new DOF Equivalance religion is very misguided in my opinion, as it appears to be all about matching camera formats, and not about getting the best performance out of each unique camera.

Nobody cares if your Minox shots match the look of your 8x10 Sinar shots, if the shots your are producing are mediocre.

@GreatBustard posted "For Equivalent photos, the system with the larger sensor will necessarily have a lower density of light (exposure) since the same total amount of light is projected over a greater area."
That is incorrect, because the larger sensors have much larger lenses with larger lens openings, hence letting in more light to cover that larger sensor.
That is why a 30mm f2 lens on APS has a 15mm diameter opening, while a 45mm f2 on fullframe would have a 22.5mm diameter opening. both offering the same angle of view, both being f2, but both not allowing in the same amount of light, and not both having the same depth of field (because there are greater refraction challenges on the larger-diameter opening having to be focused on a larger back).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 00:19 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: "The RX10 doesn't shoot 4K, but it does have full sensor readout, which means that no lines are skipped."
Not at 1080i (60i) it doesn't!
At 1080p(60p) you have full sensor readout.
This is merely a characteristic of the chosen HD mode.
Interlaced (1080i) or non-interlaced (1080p).

ah ok, thanks Jeff.
but when considering the end result, who cares?
reading half or throwing away half? to me it seems that reading half would be more efficient than throwing away half.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 00:03 UTC
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: 'Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio'

Seems there is a total lack of real news at DPreview just now so they dig up whatever they can find in their wastebasket!

What about the noise, what about the studio's insurance, does it really cover models being sliced, cut, and minced by a drone?! Or models having gotten tinnitus from the infernal racket?!

I love drones, and RC planes in general, but one that is totally controlled by a computer is an insurer's nightmare! Are they even legal to use in a studio?! What does the EPA say?!

ROTFL
for God's sake people!
this is just a bunch of students doing their final robotics project for graduation.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:36 UTC
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tord S Eriksson: Why not make something simple, when it can be done very costly, and complex?!

A a voice-activated assistant, female, if you are a male, straight, photographer is much better in every way, as she can help carry your stuff, doesn't drone, and is great company!

A drone like these we see here are lousy conversationalists, and make a lot of noise, stressing, and distracting the model/child/dog/young couple in every possible way!

by far the best reply here ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:32 UTC
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

TWIZEEL: Oh! I will try it while Real Estate shooting in twilight to light down lawns and roof.

right... you will need an actual helicopter to carry the weight of the batteries required to power the lights required for that.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:31 UTC
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

cplunk: Sounds kinda cool, but ultimately, in a studio, I would think a CNC like motorizes positioning system, probably mounted from the ceiling would be much more practical than a drone.

Wouldn't catch as much attention, I guess?

how many own their premises?
many rent, many change locations.
think of all the shoots that are in old buildings, various locations, etc. no permanent mechanical setup is going to help you there.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:29 UTC
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (129 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: How surprising! I like to be surprised. Hmmmmm ... you learn something new now and then.

Maybe do something about the noise though. I can imagine that it is quite annoying for the model and the photographer.

nothing that some music can't resolve ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:27 UTC
On Did Amazon just patent the seamless background setup? article (133 comments in total)
In reply to:

SiliconVoid: ...and the irony of it all - the thing that questions the real 'eventual' reason for the patent?? Most of Amazon's product shots are taken in a light-box, because it provides even greater light equalization and shadow correction, as opposed to this 'technique' which is actually more purposeful for portraits than products..

Some where in the bowels of Amazon a greedy little bean counter will eventually suggest to upper management that 'even a measly licensing fee of $0.01 per published photo will make millions'...

This is not an invention or new idea to begin with, but even if classified as so the applicant and application do not even fulfill the requirements of declaration:
Section 1.63:a:3 clearly requires a statement/oath - 'that the person executing the oath or declaration believes the named inventor or joint inventor to be the original inventor or an original joint inventor.'

--The original inventor--

No one, not even Amazon, could believe they discovered this technique...

many patents do not stand up to litigation or challenge.
a patent is only a license to sue. success is another matter altogether.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:20 UTC
On Did Amazon just patent the seamless background setup? article (133 comments in total)
In reply to:

joepasky: John Seymour, who has a patent or two in his name, (John the Math Guy, in the printing industry), has written an insightful and humorous article about Amazon and the white background patent: 'Get out the Pitchforks".

Worth a read:

http://johnthemathguy.blogspot.com/2014/05/get-out-pitchforks.html

hehehe here is an exerpt:
"I'm sure the execs at Amazon had long debates about what color the background should be. I can picture one CFO arguing adamantly for "lilac", with the CTO holding out for "puce". Guys are like that. Somehow they managed to agree on white."

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 17:58 UTC
On Did Amazon just patent the seamless background setup? article (133 comments in total)

USPTO will grant a patent on just about anything, if the patent application is correctly written and assembled, and if there are no prior patents.

Whether the patent holds up in court, to challenges and litigation, is a completely different matter.

This patent is inconsequential, because it is indefendible.

Amazon's attorneys know this, and they are probably twiddling their thumbs most of the time, looking for ways to justify their salaries to those that hire them and don't know any better.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 17:37 UTC as 1st comment
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: I guess there is no HDR/Bracketing?

oh wait... on page 4 (controls) it says that in the Func menu bracketing is available. funky!

specs page needs to have that added.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 22:34 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Le Kilt: I've been waiting for Canon to include all the good features in a G series camera, and they won't. Why oh why not Canon? Each time the G series camera has one or two of these nice features put back and one or two removed. Arrrg!

- Fast and wide lens (eg 24mm and better than f/2.8)
- Full tilt and swival screen
- Optical viewfinder

Grrr...

I'm sorry. I didn't need the EVF as I hardly use it, and I hate the swing-out swivel screens. I should never have let my preferences be known.

It's all my fault.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 22:07 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)

Compact, good lens, sensor larger than mft... this can replace my APS camera!

Unfortunately, just no HDR or panorama (although we have software to piece that together on the computer instead of in-camera) - but I don't use those very often anyways. Seems like a reasonable compromise.

If I owned this, I think practicality would have me reaching for this far more often when I step out than any other camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 22:06 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)

I guess there is no HDR/Bracketing?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 21:51 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
On Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review preview (660 comments in total)

@DPR: in the comparison chart, why is the rx100iii not in there, instead of the outdated rx100ii, when the information is available elsewhere on the DPR website? perhaps you could correct that?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 21:42 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
Total: 1489, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »