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: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I don't understand how this would work for R/C aircraft which don't have a model number and serial number on them (which is all 20 or so of mine). How would they be uniquely identified?

I could build a drone from parts from Hobby King for a few hundred dollars. The parts would be from many different companies. It could be R/C controlled with GPS only for location hold.

Is that a drone, or an R/C helicopter?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2015 at 21:51 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I don't understand how this would work for R/C aircraft which don't have a model number and serial number on them (which is all 20 or so of mine). How would they be uniquely identified?

Yeah...great. So, if you build one yourself, and you're honest, you'll put your name in it like now. If you aren't, you won't.

Nice.

So, we get required registration for harmless flying machines but no such requirements for designed-to-kill firearms.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2015 at 21:28 UTC

I don't understand how this would work for R/C aircraft which don't have a model number and serial number on them (which is all 20 or so of mine). How would they be uniquely identified?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2015 at 19:24 UTC as 45th comment | 14 replies
In reply to:

Beckler8: What's the reason again for this NOT having interchangeable lenses?

Stupidity.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: If they want to sell more than a handful, it needs to be $299, not $3,299.

And EOS M + 22/2 is a good deal - at least you can remove the 22 and attach any lens you want. If this were an ILC with a 35/2 kit lens, that would make a whole lot more sense.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: If they want to sell more than a handful, it needs to be $299, not $3,299.

I think I paid about $200 for my Canon 35/2, when I had one. Pretty good lens.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 16:00 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: If they want to sell more than a handful, it needs to be $299, not $3,299.

But you can't change the lens, so the camera comes with it whether you want it or not.

Frankly, I probably wouldn't buy it for $299 since I would have a hard time finding a useful purpose for it. A fixed-focal-length fixed-lens camera is what a cell phone camera is - nearly useless to me. If I'm going to use a prime, I need to be able to use more than one (35/1.4 and 85/1.8 were my most-common ones before I just got rid of all of my primes but one). Don't get me wrong, I loved my 35/1.4 but I also loved that I could detach it and put on something else.

Just got my refurb $150 SX50 last night. 24-1200 equivalent range, and already had a good time with the long end, just in the hour or so I used it.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 15:46 UTC

If they want to sell more than a handful, it needs to be $299, not $3,299.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 15:33 UTC as 245th comment | 13 replies
On article Adobe issues Lightroom 6.2 apology and update (229 comments in total)
In reply to:

Havanai: When I read that Adobe was apologizing for for Lr 6.2 I thought it was because of the "improved import experience". Improved!?! It's awful. I've turned it off. At least I am glad they gave us that option.

Edit - Preferences - General tab - Import Options section - Show "Add Photos" screen - uncheck.

In Import, click the settings wheel in the top-right and the Advanced roll-up arrow in the panel.

That won't get you to the full import screen but it's closer.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2015 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: It's funny seeing DSLR fanboys talking shi* about mirrorless cameras. They think the huge flipping mirror DSLR is the future. Wrong, the DSLR is the buggy whip of cameras. I bet the top people at DPR know that but they depend on the aging DSLR sheep for view count. The A7r II, A7s II , NX1 etc are the future.

Because EVFs have exactly one advantage - manual focus. Everything else is a disadvantage. They are slower, poorer in low light, noisy, have lousy dynamic range, and use a ton of power.

Honestly, the gain-up thing makes no sense to me. If I can see in the room without the camera, I can see through the camera viewfinder just as well. I was shooting the eclipse the other night and seeing detailed focus of the fully-eclipsed moon through f/5.6 optics on a crop camera was no issue. The same goes for some of those horribly dark rides at Disney. Even though I could barely see them with my eyes, I could see them through the viewfinder of my camera just the same (think ISO 6400, f/1.4, 1/15th).

I have used EVFs since the 80s, and have had and used several cameras with EVFs. The best thing I can say about them is that they are usually better than LCDs. They are always worse than OVFs, and by a HUGE margin.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 22:35 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: It's funny seeing DSLR fanboys talking shi* about mirrorless cameras. They think the huge flipping mirror DSLR is the future. Wrong, the DSLR is the buggy whip of cameras. I bet the top people at DPR know that but they depend on the aging DSLR sheep for view count. The A7r II, A7s II , NX1 etc are the future.

The EVF doesn't show you what the photo will look like, it shows you what an out-of-camera JPEG will look like. I virtually always process my images to look the way my eye saw the scene which is often entirely different than an out-of-camera JPEG when the lighting is high-contrast. So, my final images almost always look much more like the OVF look than the out-of-camera JPEG.

I've shot crazy difficult subjects in horribly, crazy low light with a dSLR (try shooting a 9m long object traveling 17,000mph in low Earth orbit, 400km away, at night, at 4,200mm equivalent through f/21 optics hand-tracked with a low-end crop dSLR with pentamirror). I still managed to do it. The viewfinder is essentially never a problem in low light with a dSLR. EVFs, on the other hand, are a problem. They slow down in low-light, they get noisy, and they are way too bright thus ruining the dark adaptation of your eyes.

With fast subjects, you'll miss the shot if you stop to review.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 21:39 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Ditch an optical viewfinder for no viewfinder? I wouldn't ditch an optical viewfinder for the best EVF in the world, much less no viewfinder at all.

They don't have 0.003s delay. That would require an imaging pipeline with zero delay, an infinite shutter speed, a microdisplay with infinite refresh rate, and a frame rate of 333 frames per second. Nothing is close to that.

No, an EVF doesn't allow you to see what the image will look like when you press the shutter. It allows you to see what an out-of-camera JPEG will look like, if you aren't using a flash, and only the portion of the scene that fits into the EVF's tiny dynamic range.

I've looked through modern EVFs, and they stink just as bad as they always have.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Ditch an optical viewfinder for no viewfinder? I wouldn't ditch an optical viewfinder for the best EVF in the world, much less no viewfinder at all.

High speed subjects, sometimes in low light, sometimes in extremely low light. Subjects where I need to be able to change focal length (sometimes a lot), re-focus and reframe all in a fraction of a second.

The lag is a killer. The lack of DR is a killer (way too dark in sunlight, way too bright in darkness). The lack of battery life is a killer.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: It's funny seeing DSLR fanboys talking shi* about mirrorless cameras. They think the huge flipping mirror DSLR is the future. Wrong, the DSLR is the buggy whip of cameras. I bet the top people at DPR know that but they depend on the aging DSLR sheep for view count. The A7r II, A7s II , NX1 etc are the future.

Well, when you show me an EVF that's usable for all the things I do, I'll take a look. The best of today aren't even close.

It's tough to beat near-infinite dynamic range, full human-vision color gamut, zero lag in all light conditions, zero noise, zero sensor heating and zero power use. Let me know when an EVF can do those things.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 12:49 UTC

Ditch an optical viewfinder for no viewfinder? I wouldn't ditch an optical viewfinder for the best EVF in the world, much less no viewfinder at all.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 12:47 UTC as 30th comment | 5 replies
On article The new Canon 35mm F1.4L II will be a thing of beauty (230 comments in total)

I've had the original for a while, and it's so outstanding optically that I never stopped it down for anything but DOF. I could find the known optical issues (CA, flare), but in practical shooting it is just so remarkably good that there was really nothing I wanted for in terms of optics, build, or AF performance.

The new one looks to be a substantial step up, starting from near perfection. I don't know where that takes you. Perhaps from the 5D on which I used mine to the 5Ds.

That said, I'm selling mine but not for the new one. I've basically just moved from full-frame and half-and-half primes and zooms to crop and all zoom, strange as that might seem. And even stranger, my low-light capabilities will actually improve across the board!

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 19:18 UTC as 47th comment

I must be doing the math wrong.

75db/6 = 12.5 stops

2^12.5 = 5,793

5,793 * 100 = ISO 579,300

Where did I go wrong?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 15:02 UTC as 61st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Lee Jay: According to the specs, there are no slow motion modes beyond 120fps.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dscrx100m4/specifications

I know...my point was to encourage DPReview to put an important feature like this one in the specs.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2015 at 15:58 UTC

According to the specs, there are no slow motion modes beyond 120fps.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dscrx100m4/specifications

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2015 at 13:38 UTC as 7th comment | 3 replies
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (608 comments in total)

I think I might consider it if it were half the price of a used FZ1000 (which is about $650 or so). The FZ1000 is the only fixed-lens camera that's interesting to me right now. It's the right balance of focal length and aperture for me, and it has 4k (good for stabilizing video down to FHD) and a viewfinder. As much as I hate EVFs, they're okay for video and way better than an LCD.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 19:09 UTC as 25th comment
Total: 680, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »