BorisK1

BorisK1

Lives in United States West Bloomfield, MI, United States
Works as a Software engineer
Joined on May 7, 2004
About me:

Equipment:
Bodies: Olympus E-3, E300
Lenses: 11-22mm / 50mm / 14-45mm / 40-150mm (rev. I)
FL-36 flash
4:3/OM adapter
OM bodies: OM 4Ti, OM 4
OM lenses: 28mm 3.5 / 50mm 1.8 / 135mm 3.5
T32 flash
Pentax Optio 43wr (pretty much dead now)

Comments

Total: 149, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

jaygeephoto: No hot shoe. Nope. VLF or ULF radio slave sync pulse perhaps? Think outside the bathtub!

And no dishwashing attachment, either! What kind of a vacation camera could it be, if it can't even do the dishes?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2013 at 00:34 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: There is no even point to compare anything but TG-2 and WG-3 now. Get out of the bright sun and it crystal clear why - others cannot even do what a phone can do.

To be fair, If you take a lot of shots near the far end of the zoom, or shoot a lot of video, their advantages become a lot less clearcut.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2013 at 23:56 UTC
In reply to:

Hachu21: hello DPR,

I noticed that many frames have been taken with small apertures around f/8 or f/9.
I know that such small apertures noticeably reduce picture's sharpness with my S95.
Is this the case with the D20 and his different lens system? Maybe there's no diaphragm and only an ND filter?

Thanks in advance for giving additional details.

Regards from France,
Harold.

Your S95 has a larger sensor and a faster lens, so an iris aperture makes sense. The D20's widest aperture is f:3.9, but because of the smaller sensor, it is equivalent to setting your S95 to f/8 or so.
In other words, wide-open D20 is similar to S95 closed all the way down. If you tried closing it down any further, you'd get way too much diffraction.
So the camera has an ND filter, but no iris.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2013 at 19:58 UTC
In reply to:

Hachu21: hello DPR,

I noticed that many frames have been taken with small apertures around f/8 or f/9.
I know that such small apertures noticeably reduce picture's sharpness with my S95.
Is this the case with the D20 and his different lens system? Maybe there's no diaphragm and only an ND filter?

Thanks in advance for giving additional details.

Regards from France,
Harold.

If this was a true iris-type diaphragm, the images would've looked like F/64 - F/128 on 35mm. That's pinhole photography. F/8 means ND filter was enabled.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2013 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: About this camera: It seems the manufacturers think only divers enter the ocean. Don't they know that surfing, kiteboarders, fishing, and other water activities that demand high speed? For sports we need a dedicated shutter value at the very least.

Yes, yes, I realize there are "sports" modes, but the camera really doesn't have a clue as to when you're supposed to take a picture of a surfer in a certain position.

A good photographer can work around shutter lag by predicting and such. But without the ability to use shutter priority, it's all a gamble.

Why do manufacturers leave out manual modes?

I understand that with many point and shoots, manufacturers want customers to step up to the next level (enthusiast compacts, dslrs, etc.), but would it kill them to either add manual features to their waterproof cameras or at least make an enthusiast waterproof camera?

Water housings are fine, but how about something that is pocketable AND waterproof with manual controls?

Most of these cameras have small sensors, and the lenses are at or near diffraction limits. So instead of an iris type aperture, they have an ND filter.
This means you pretty much control the aperture by zooming, and the exposure by setting the ISO.
The only time this doesn't work, is when the camera prefers enabling the ND filter over reducing exposure, like my Olympus TG-1 does. They added an "A" mode in TG--2 - probably as a workaround :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2013 at 03:33 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I do not follow the review priorities of this site. You spend time reviewing a camera like D20 and skip reviewing other much more important ones. This looks bad... almost "dodgy". Shape up a bit, please.

Doing a comparison review of the latest crop of the rugged waterproof cameras in the beginning of the summer? That's insane! What were they thinking!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2013 at 03:18 UTC
On New CompactFlash card to allow RAID-style 'mirroring' article (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

CyberAngel: So...if I have a Nikon D3, or D3X, or D3S, or a Canon EOS-1D X, 1D C
then I could have 2xCFx2
that is...both a back-up CF and a "RAID" CF
with quad pictures simultaneously
and
naturally two cameras to be REALLY safe with octa system setup
They could be on a same tripod side-by-side...
Maybe a duplicate tripod system and...
(but no back-up photographers with a similar setup, please {WTD} )

I wonder if this new CF will work on the old Nikon D3 series
or if it requires the latest and the greatest like Canon EOS-1D
(trolling)

Hey look, "Pay $5, protect yourself from fraud!" Let's pay $10, we'd be double protected! :D

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2013 at 21:05 UTC
On New CompactFlash card to allow RAID-style 'mirroring' article (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

franzel: Well, the whole point of Raid 1 is to write all data to two seperate harddrives at the same time - in case one failes, you have all data still availble on the second drive in the array .

Seperate is the key here, physically seperate with their own interface and controller .

RAID 1 is intended for systems that require zero downtime, like a financial transaction server in a major bank that has to be always up and running. A camera does not need zero downtime.

Oh, and RAID arrays still have to be backed up.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2013 at 15:50 UTC
On New CompactFlash card to allow RAID-style 'mirroring' article (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

dylanbarnhart: This is not a gimmic.

You have to remember this is not a magnetic device like hard drives, where the whole drive fails when the disk stops spinning. This is random access memory. If one partition fails, the other side still works.

Background: CF cards of all brands use NAND chips from companies like Samsung or Micron. For example, a 32GB card can use 8 chips, each of which is 4GB. These chips are separate and only connect to the ATA memory controller. If one dies the rest don't die with it.

There are some kinds of failures that could render the entire thing uselsess, like when RAID itself fails, or if the card is damaged physically. Far more common is the problem where some memory cells are corrupted, or that a single NAND chip fails. That's what this card can deal with.

"Perhaps you could explain why then when there is a problem with a card, some files are good on it (photos intact) and some files are corrupted"
No way to tell for certain, but a single bad sector would've corrupted a single file. And in all likelihood the controller would've known about three wire error, and reported it to the camera.
More likely, the filesystem got corrupted, and chunks of files got overwritten by the latter writes. RAID 1 is not aware of individual files, so you would've gotten two exact copies of each file, complete with corrupted chunks.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2013 at 15:21 UTC
On New CompactFlash card to allow RAID-style 'mirroring' article (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adrian Van: As the article says, if an image corrupts while writing on one side, it may not be corrupt on the other partition (in case of bad sectors on one side). As most cameras (still cameras mainly) have only one CF slot (or only one SD slot), except for the Canon XF100/300 pro video camera which has 2 CFs, this could be useful to some people. Many older cameras do not have both SD and CF slots, or 2 SD slots, and many mainstream APS-C cameras have only one card slot (except for the higher end ones).

The general consumer taking personal photos, may not care at all for this, but some event and journalist photographers and video guys, may want one if their camera does not have backup slots. How expensive is this card?

I wonder if they could put it into a mirrored SD or that too small to do so.
I think Sony is working on a dual mirror pro memory card like this as well on their line (mainly for video backup for pros) I have read.

Bad flash sectors are not the only cause of corrupted files, and not even a likely cause. Chances are, if an image is corrupted, its mirrored copy will be corrupted as well.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2013 at 02:56 UTC
On New CompactFlash card to allow RAID-style 'mirroring' article (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digitall: Gimmick for sure.

RAID certainly can be a gimmick if not used for its intended purposes. RAID 0 (striping) can double the data rate. RAID 1 (mirroring) guards against failures of individual drives drives. Sometimes RAID 1 redundancy causes lax backup practices - which is bad, because RAIDed data is still vulnerable to things like controller faults, accidental deletion, filesystem corruption, etc.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2013 at 02:27 UTC
On New CompactFlash card to allow RAID-style 'mirroring' article (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

dylanbarnhart: This is not a gimmic.

You have to remember this is not a magnetic device like hard drives, where the whole drive fails when the disk stops spinning. This is random access memory. If one partition fails, the other side still works.

Background: CF cards of all brands use NAND chips from companies like Samsung or Micron. For example, a 32GB card can use 8 chips, each of which is 4GB. These chips are separate and only connect to the ATA memory controller. If one dies the rest don't die with it.

There are some kinds of failures that could render the entire thing uselsess, like when RAID itself fails, or if the card is damaged physically. Far more common is the problem where some memory cells are corrupted, or that a single NAND chip fails. That's what this card can deal with.

Unless, of course, the the on-card controller dies - doesn't matter if it's the RAID part, the USB or filesystem - related fault, the whole card still dies. I've never heard of a bad sector on a flash card.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2013 at 02:01 UTC
On Nokia rumors bring hope for new camera hardware post (26 comments in total)
In reply to:

BorisK1: Pelican Imaging's camera array is nothing like Lythro. If this technology is scalable (that is, if it's possible to build large camera arrays that cheaper than large sensors of comparable light-sensing area), it could lead to a completely new breed of cameras.

About the patent - why would a cellphone camera need an aperture? Closing it down will just lead to diffraction, smearing the image.

You might want to lookup diffraction limits for typical cellphone sensor sizes (1/3"), and typical lens apertures (f:3.5).
Nokia's Pureview is a *massive* exception.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2013 at 02:39 UTC
On More pictures leak of purported Olympus PEN 'E-P5' article (237 comments in total)
In reply to:

Micromegas777: I have 2 VF2 for my EP-3 cameras, but I rarely use them. The touch screen is enough for me, and I'm suspicious about tiltable screens as they easily break off.

"Can you find me ONE thread on this whole forum of complainers that describes a user who actually broke a flip screen from their camera"
- Just search Olympus SLR forum for "split LCD" or "split screen". It was a known problem with E-3, mine had to go for service to fix it.

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2013 at 20:53 UTC
On Nokia rumors bring hope for new camera hardware post (26 comments in total)

Pelican Imaging's camera array is nothing like Lythro. If this technology is scalable (that is, if it's possible to build large camera arrays that cheaper than large sensors of comparable light-sensing area), it could lead to a completely new breed of cameras.

About the patent - why would a cellphone camera need an aperture? Closing it down will just lead to diffraction, smearing the image.

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2013 at 20:47 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

PowerG9atBlackForest: I understand that the optical design (apart from the mount) will be identical for both APS-C and m4/3rd, for obvious reasons. Given that and regarding the larger picture circle APS-C and the desire for a telecentrical design for m4/3rd, I doubt wether the design can be optimal for m4/3rd. Not to mention that there already exists an excellent dedicated m4/3rd 60 mm lense (or two).

The (near) telecentricity requirement was purely a 4/3 thing, It's dropped from m4/3rd.

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2013 at 14:36 UTC
In reply to:

Stacey_K: I find it comical when a camera system has a slew of amazing zooms, people complain "where are the primes? All I want are prime lenses." So them a camera system comes out with a bunch of nice primes and people bitch "We want zooms" lol

Some people will complain about a bicycle without a seat. Others will whine about one that's missing pedals.

Go figure!

Direct link | Posted on May 2, 2013 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

sosmix: There is something wrong with people who enjoy killing animals. If you want to shoot animals, do it with a camera.

I for one will not be buying Nikon in the future and any wildlife photographer should consider Nikon's position on this issue very seriously.

Some primates are omnivorous, some vegetarians. I happened to belong to the former kind, and don't mind at all. To all you wishihg to join your leaf-eating bretheren, I say this:
Oook! Ook ook OOK!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2013 at 14:48 UTC
In reply to:

sosmix: There is something wrong with people who enjoy killing animals. If you want to shoot animals, do it with a camera.

I for one will not be buying Nikon in the future and any wildlife photographer should consider Nikon's position on this issue very seriously.

Some primates are omnivorous, some vegetarians. I happened to belong to the former kind, and don't mind at all. To all you wishihg to join your leaf-eating bretheren, I say this:
Oook! Ook ook OOK!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2013 at 14:48 UTC
In reply to:

bobbarber: To all the people justifying hunters as saving wild animals in Africa:

Legal hunting justifies poaching. The reason is that animal products are marketed (as are hunting trips), and as long as legal hunting exists, poached products can be sold as legal.

"Instead, allowing many tonnes of ivory to enter the marketplace with CITES’s blessing has served only to boost the illegal trade, confusing consumers as to whether ivory is legal or illegal."

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/1669938/legal_ivory_trading_severely_undermines_elephant_conservation.html

So while the local view may be that "elephants are overpopulated in such and such an area; it's OK to hunt them", that will actually serve to INCREASE poaching, not decrease it. People will just forge paperwork for illegally killed elephants.

It's the same with lions or any other animal. If you can hunt them legally somewhere, then hunts are being sold illegally elsewhere, and the paperwork forged afterwards.

Not "justifies". Enables, or makes easier.
Than again, pretty much anything you do legally, enables an illegal activity. It's like saying that home ownership justifies burglaries.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2013 at 14:41 UTC
Total: 149, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »