dnebdal

dnebdal

Joined on Oct 28, 2010

Comments

Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4
On Nokia Lumia 920 Camera Review post (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

gl2k: Another perfect proof that phones deliver absolutely unusable images. I mean let's be honest what are those crappy images good for, except an awful FB post supplement.

Oh, I'd guess about the same things as a huge amount of snapshots taken through history with all sorts of more or less crap cameras - looking at them again later to reminisce about the time and place where they were taken.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2013 at 16:58 UTC
On Just Posted: Hands-on Nikon D600 preview article (376 comments in total)
In reply to:

losackmd1: i own D300s i want the D 18-300
i am told i cant use this wide range lens on an FX camera
or can i
i sold one D300 because i used it extensively in INDIA
i want the upgrade to this camera.
WHY did they make a D18-300 lens if they are not making new DX cameras

Eh, the D7000 isn't in any immediate need of replacement. The D90->D7000 gap was about two years, so if they keep that up we should expect a D7000 replacement now. However, the tech has matured a bit since then, so it seems likely the replacement rate will slow down a bit ... if I had to guess, we might see a D7100 in the middle of next year.

And, really - The D300s is still a good camera. Be happy with it until there's a replacement out, and enjoy the extra money you didn't spend on buying it right now.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 14:58 UTC
On Lytro camera overview and discussion with CEO Ren Ng article (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

Yuri P: My naiveté theory that the camera might capturing everything sharp along with the distance information per pixel (or a picture zone), using some kind or rangefinder algorithm.Then the viewer selectively BLURS parts of the picture based on the selected sharp distance - the further pixels are from the selected sharpness point, the more they blurred.

To me, this is the simplest explanation.

Cy: Regarding point 2, what are you trying to say?

Stanford university has experimented with photography for a while, using e.g. their multi-camera array ( http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/array/ ). Lightfield techniques are on the list of things they've done with it - so it's not like this is a theoretical-only thing.

Obviously, if you want to accuse them of faking the entire thing, go ahead - but that runs into your "extraordinary claims"-hurdle.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2011 at 11:39 UTC
On Lytro camera overview and discussion with CEO Ren Ng article (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

mike051051: Helicon focus type software built into an image capture and display "system". Please note that there are no more than 5 zones of focus in any of the demo pics on the Lytro site. 5 shots taken very rapidly at different distance settings to be observed by using the Light Engine Player.
Clever use of existing technology applied in a way that is arguably attractive and quite well marketed at this point.
It will be interesting to see how well it does in the marketplace.
Just my two cents, I'm sure many will disagree and that's AOK.

That's not actually how it works. It's more interesting than that - it trades Mpix for focus, so to speak.

Basically, it puts an array of tiny lenses in front of the sensor, creating groups of pixels that get light from different directions. This is enough information to later on create differently-focused 2D shots out of a single capture - at a significantly lower resolution than the physical sensor.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2011 at 11:32 UTC
Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4