Jostian

Jostian

Lives in South Africa Pretoria, South Africa
Works as a Development Specialist
Has a website at http://jostian.wordpress.com
Joined on Jun 30, 2010

Comments

Total: 216, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marcus Antonius: Ok, so where is this camera compared to the Lumia 1020 and 1520? I still do not see any improvement over those fairly 'old' camera phones.

e.g. Lumia 1020 iq:
http://lumiaconversationsuk.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/nokia-lumia-1020-pro-highres-18.jpg

Lumia 1520 iq:
http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/reviews/146542-image/Nokia-Lumia-1520-Review-109-samples.jpg
http://www.letsgomobile.org/images/reviews/0207/nokia-lumia-1520.jpg

Just sayin...

Hi Sergio the links dont show so I cant check it out, if you are on the DPR forums send me a pm with the links I like to check them out.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 10:44 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

BattleBrat: "Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution." I have a Sony Z3V, and the camera on this thing blows me away, I can print 8 by 10 or larger, something I've never been able to do before from a phone, and my note 4 and IPhone 6S Plus are no slouchs. The resolution and sensor size simply make a big difference, Sony really did cram a point and shoot in there. However I found quickly that if you shot an intelligent auto or at higher ISO's it was a noise reduction mess. You have to shoot in Manual, you have to drop ISO. Action shots are off the table. On PhoneArena when they did the camera comparisons the Sony fans were shouting that, and it is true.

its frustrating cos the Sony sensors are good, but the processing is arrgghh!!!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 07:13 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marcus Antonius: Ok, so where is this camera compared to the Lumia 1020 and 1520? I still do not see any improvement over those fairly 'old' camera phones.

e.g. Lumia 1020 iq:
http://lumiaconversationsuk.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/nokia-lumia-1020-pro-highres-18.jpg

Lumia 1520 iq:
http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/reviews/146542-image/Nokia-Lumia-1520-Review-109-samples.jpg
http://www.letsgomobile.org/images/reviews/0207/nokia-lumia-1520.jpg

Just sayin...

and the Nokia 808 is even better, I think the Z5 photos look disgusting, check at 100%, a smeary, processed mess, the Lumias of old blow this and others of its ilk away!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 05:13 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

h2k: Still wishing For a weatherproof AND stabilized mobile. The AF inconstencies here sound worrisome.

more worrisome is the horrid IQ!!!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 05:10 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

zigi_S: How can the phone get such a high score, when the photos look just awful?

the old Nokia 808 still blows all these away for detail, and that natural DSLR look, pity the module didnt find its way into a phone with a OS that wasn't 'killed' off. But the Z5 pics look horrid, what was DPR thinking in this review???

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 05:09 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

LWanTeD: Honest question:

How important is aperture on such a small sensor? (Smartphone cameras om general).

For example, on FF or APS-C, f/2.0 vs f/2.8: There is a noticeable difference if the final image (Noise, bokeh etc..,) based on that 1 stop difference. Does the same apply to such tiny sensors?

Aperture helps for speed and in low er light but the IQ from the Z5 (look at 100%) is a smeary mess even at low iso's I cannot believe the DPR think the IQ is remotely good, so much processing, so unnatural in look, no, DPR got it very wrong!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 05:07 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

BattleBrat: "Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution." I have a Sony Z3V, and the camera on this thing blows me away, I can print 8 by 10 or larger, something I've never been able to do before from a phone, and my note 4 and IPhone 6S Plus are no slouchs. The resolution and sensor size simply make a big difference, Sony really did cram a point and shoot in there. However I found quickly that if you shot an intelligent auto or at higher ISO's it was a noise reduction mess. You have to shoot in Manual, you have to drop ISO. Action shots are off the table. On PhoneArena when they did the camera comparisons the Sony fans were shouting that, and it is true.

and yet at 100% the photos are a smeary mess, did you look? as long as you are happy I guess, but I for one am definitely not, the photos look unnatural with masses of processing evident.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 05:04 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheDarmok74: Maybe I am blind but this is the umteenth Sony smartphone camera that gets high praises yet to me it looks like a crazy noisy image that had a lot NR done resulting in subpar IQ.
Compared to the S6, G4, Nexus 6 or OnePlus 2 this just seems blotchy and oversharpened.
Maybe Sony just doesn't hit my taste but to me it seems as though this sensor should have a lot less MP. Downsampling helps but is this the goal?
Well, to each his own.

Exactly! photos look like a fuzzy mess at 100% nothing natural at all about the look, certainly not how I want my photos to look. DPReview, this is not what we expect from you!!! your credibility took a hit here.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 05:02 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5 camera review (82 comments in total)

DPReview gotta be mad, I click on the photos and at 100% there is a fuzzy haze (smeariness) to ALL the photos, no detail (very unnatural looking) no matter what the iso...if this is the best that phone camera's have to offer I shudder! What is DPR smokin'?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 13:32 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (265 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter Mathews: The a6000 was popular for one major reason. It was cheap for what you got, almost a giveaway. Will the new a6300 be as popular at it's introductory price? Time will tell but, my speculation is that it will face head winds of resistance.

Th RX100 justified a premium price based on the fact that it had no real competition. At the a6300 price point, one has to consider many more options such as the Nikon D5300 and Canon 760D DSLRs which are smaller and more feature rich than their predecessors, not to mention recent offerings from Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic that have more sensible lens lines.

The lack of a competitive kit lens in the Sony line will hurt sales dramatically. Buying an a6300 with the 16-50 kit lens is like buying a new Jaguar with bias ply tires.

yes had the A6000 with the 16 50 kit lens, and it was poor, as a package nice an convenient size wise, but have a great camera and a crappy lens paired with it ain't worth the compromise (for me) in terms of IQ.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 19:02 UTC
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (265 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jostian: so the lenses are weather sealed but not the camera... pity!

mmm did you read the footnotes? not water proof or splash proof... thus not weather sealed...just weather resistant, definitely not the same thing as weather sealed!!!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 12:42 UTC
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (265 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter Mathews: The a6000 was popular for one major reason. It was cheap for what you got, almost a giveaway. Will the new a6300 be as popular at it's introductory price? Time will tell but, my speculation is that it will face head winds of resistance.

Th RX100 justified a premium price based on the fact that it had no real competition. At the a6300 price point, one has to consider many more options such as the Nikon D5300 and Canon 760D DSLRs which are smaller and more feature rich than their predecessors, not to mention recent offerings from Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic that have more sensible lens lines.

The lack of a competitive kit lens in the Sony line will hurt sales dramatically. Buying an a6300 with the 16-50 kit lens is like buying a new Jaguar with bias ply tires.

yes that 16-50mm has always been optically 'challenged', and now you have a new fancy sensor but still pair it with a crappy kit lens... definitely a Jaguar with bias ply tires (or no tires at all).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 08:04 UTC
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (265 comments in total)

so the lenses are weather sealed but not the camera... pity!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2016 at 08:01 UTC as 19th comment | 10 replies
On article Video: A quick look at the Sony a6300 (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jostian: no weather sealing, pity! not a must I guess but it does just add to the overall package... the new AF looks promising though.

Ok so it is weather sealed... sort of??

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 14:40 UTC
On article Video: A quick look at the Sony a6300 (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jostian: no weather sealing, pity! not a must I guess but it does just add to the overall package... the new AF looks promising though.

Thanks for the clarification Revenant, appreciated.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 13:35 UTC
On article Video: A quick look at the Sony a6300 (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jostian: no weather sealing, pity! not a must I guess but it does just add to the overall package... the new AF looks promising though.

Thanks ZeneticX, missed it.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 09:24 UTC
On article Video: A quick look at the Sony a6300 (211 comments in total)

no weather sealing, pity! not a must I guess but it does just add to the overall package... the new AF looks promising though.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 07:12 UTC as 33rd comment | 7 replies

Great to see, just hope they sort out the 'crappy' rubber pieces (so many reports of people with X-T1s where the rubber body covering has come loose within first year...) if a camera is meant to be weather sealed then QC issues like the rubber pieces need to be sorted!!!! Hope they are sorted on the XP2...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 07:20 UTC as 17th comment
On Connect post Apple iPhone 6s Plus camera review (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jenny Jonson: Iphone 6s plus is the awesome phone with the perfect price range best than all other iPhones in all the categories. Truly awesome!

definitely not in terms of camera or IQ!!!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 24, 2015 at 06:30 UTC
On Connect post Apple iPhone 6s Plus camera review (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photato: To whom much is given, much is expected.
Things should be way better at this point for the price iPhones are selling for.
It really bothers me that Apple hasn't:
1. Enable Raw mode.
2. Put a brighter lens.
3. Use a 3:2 Sensor.
4. Use a bigger sensor.

apparently they have 800 people working on the Camera as per the latest "60 Min" CBS interview !

yes NR is horrific, even at low iso's... really disappointed in the 6s' camera!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 24, 2015 at 06:28 UTC
Total: 216, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »