Lee Jay

Lee Jay

Lives in United States CO, United States
Works as a Electrical Engineer / Wind Energy Research
Joined on Oct 17, 2003

Comments

Total: 680, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Extreme made easy: GoPro HERO4 Session review (55 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: 1/3.2" 8MP sensor (with an F2.8 maximum aperture)

Kudos for actually posting that. Seems to be a state secret with most of these cameras. Now could you calculate the lens field of view?

Is it a requirement that an action cam have a fisheye lense? Something like a 22mm wide wouldn't make me as nauseous. Doesn't seem to be out there.

"No matter how much you correct or crop a fisheye, it's still junk. Sometimes you have no choice but when you do, you always want rectilinear."

100% of those words are false. And that's from someone who has taken tens of thousands of fisheye and ultra wide rectilinear shots and fished and defished with at least 8 different tools.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 04:10 UTC
On article Extreme made easy: GoPro HERO4 Session review (55 comments in total)

For $68 I can have a Mobius which looks to be a much smaller camera with user changeable lenses and a user replaceable battery.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 04:07 UTC as 18th comment
On article Design, looks and desire: Olympus does it again (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The trouble with this "attractive" camera is that it isn't. Although looks make zero difference to me, this one is definitely a two-bagger.

All the main-stream SLRs look better and I kind of like the look of the FZ1000.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 18:25 UTC
On article Design, looks and desire: Olympus does it again (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The trouble with this "attractive" camera is that it isn't. Although looks make zero difference to me, this one is definitely a two-bagger.

Have to put two bags over it, just in case one blows off.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 17:52 UTC
On article Design, looks and desire: Olympus does it again (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The trouble with this "attractive" camera is that it isn't. Although looks make zero difference to me, this one is definitely a two-bagger.

No camera is particularly attractive, but this one is far below average.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 16:53 UTC
On article Design, looks and desire: Olympus does it again (387 comments in total)

The trouble with this "attractive" camera is that it isn't. Although looks make zero difference to me, this one is definitely a two-bagger.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 15:54 UTC as 150th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Lee Jay: This is why I have SLRs. They do everything well. Great ergonomics, great viewfinder, great autofocus, great speed, great responsiveness, great flexibility, great image quality. Every other type of camera is a sacrifice. For example, picking on the first camera mentioned in the article, the A6000 has the worst ergonomics of any camera I've ever held and also has a terrible viewfinder.

Which is easier to handle, a 0x90 screw from a pair of glasses or a 3/8" bolt from a car?

Smaller is harder to handle, harder to transport and harder to manage. My hands aren't getting any smaller so my cameras aren't either. I use my SLRs around 10 times as much as my compacts.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: This is why I have SLRs. They do everything well. Great ergonomics, great viewfinder, great autofocus, great speed, great responsiveness, great flexibility, great image quality. Every other type of camera is a sacrifice. For example, picking on the first camera mentioned in the article, the A6000 has the worst ergonomics of any camera I've ever held and also has a terrible viewfinder.

Yeah, I even referenced it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 15:54 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: This is why I have SLRs. They do everything well. Great ergonomics, great viewfinder, great autofocus, great speed, great responsiveness, great flexibility, great image quality. Every other type of camera is a sacrifice. For example, picking on the first camera mentioned in the article, the A6000 has the worst ergonomics of any camera I've ever held and also has a terrible viewfinder.

In my opinion there are only two sizes of camera - one that fits in my pocket all the time, and one that doesn't. If it doesn't, it doesn't matter if it's in a small bag or a slightly larger bag.

I've owned cameras of every size from ultra-small compact, to full-frame SLR, and the SLRs are the only ones with no compromises other than they don't fit in my jeans pocket along side my cell phone. But none of the MILCs do either so their size difference is entirely irrelevant.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 15:41 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: This is why I have SLRs. They do everything well. Great ergonomics, great viewfinder, great autofocus, great speed, great responsiveness, great flexibility, great image quality. Every other type of camera is a sacrifice. For example, picking on the first camera mentioned in the article, the A6000 has the worst ergonomics of any camera I've ever held and also has a terrible viewfinder.

Great weight and great size is correct. Easy to handle, easy to hold, easy to transport.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 15:09 UTC

This is why I have SLRs. They do everything well. Great ergonomics, great viewfinder, great autofocus, great speed, great responsiveness, great flexibility, great image quality. Every other type of camera is a sacrifice. For example, picking on the first camera mentioned in the article, the A6000 has the worst ergonomics of any camera I've ever held and also has a terrible viewfinder.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 14:36 UTC as 171st comment | 18 replies
On article Vote now for Best Product of 2015! (130 comments in total)

Not one of my top 3 are on the list.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 02:13 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

BarnET: 21-30mm equiv?! (or something even less useful on Canon)

Sorry i have no clue for what i would possibly use this.
Especialy when they have a 11-20mm F2.8 in the current line-up

I wouldn't buy either lens, but both are really replacements for f/1.8 or f/2 24, 28 and 35mm primes. And the primes sell.

I have the Sigma 18-35/1.8, which was my replacement on crop for the 35mm prime on full-frame. That gives me like a 28,35 and 50mm prime, all in one lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2016 at 17:00 UTC

The full sized samples on Tokina's page are quite remarkably good.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2016 at 08:54 UTC as 39th comment
In reply to:

BarnET: 21-30mm equiv?! (or something even less useful on Canon)

Sorry i have no clue for what i would possibly use this.
Especialy when they have a 11-20mm F2.8 in the current line-up

Ask yourself the same question about the Sigma 24-35.

If it weren't useful, 24, 28 and 35mm primes would be even less useful. Having it 21 or 22 to 30 or 32 doesn't make a lot of difference, especially with the croppability of current sensors. More useful, actually.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2016 at 08:53 UTC
On article FAA officially launches drone registration system (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alpha Photo: Strange that what is so easy and obvious with drones (which could be used as weapons) is so utterly impossible with firearms in US, resulting in 20,000 dead Americans every year.

Automobiles kill tens of thousands every year making licensing and registration reasonable. Quad copters kill no one making licensing a registration idiotic. You're infinitely more likely to die from a baseball than an R/C aircraft.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 15:45 UTC
On article FAA officially launches drone registration system (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alpha Photo: Strange that what is so easy and obvious with drones (which could be used as weapons) is so utterly impossible with firearms in US, resulting in 20,000 dead Americans every year.

Automobiles require registration.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 02:41 UTC
On article FAA officially launches drone registration system (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

mikesco: Do you have to renew this registration? If not since it does not require a drone make model or serial number, what stops me from registering prior to Jan 20 so that I can do it for free in case I decide to buy one in the future?

It has to be renewed every three years.

Q35. Is there a registration renewal requirement for UAS, like there is for manned aircraft?

A. Yes. You will be required to renew every three years and you must pay a $5 renewal fee.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/faqs/

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 17:38 UTC
On article FAA officially launches drone registration system (173 comments in total)

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2015/12/17/hold-off-on-registering-model-aircraft/

DPREVIEW should read that and possibly add that information to the article.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 06:53 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article Behind the Shot: Prince of the Night (85 comments in total)

The shot he doesn't like is much better composed, in my opinion.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2015 at 01:47 UTC as 16th comment
Total: 680, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »