Sephirotic

Sephirotic

Joined on Apr 3, 2012

Comments

Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS40 Real-world Samples Gallery article (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

nikon power: For all the cameras with zoom power that I've owned, my first shots with them was the moon. God had placed the moon up there in synchronous orbit for a reason. It's easier to compare the same moon's face as seen by all eyes and all cameras.

First of All, the moon is not on (geo)synchronous orbit, it's on a high orbit. You are confusing with TIDAL LOCKING, which doesn´t mean it's always perfectly aligned to the earth, google "libration", Second, God didn´t place anything in the sky, The moon was formed after a collision of a large Kuiper Belt Object with earth roughly 4 billions years ago. Google: "giant impact".

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2014 at 15:21 UTC
On HDR for the Rest of Us article (199 comments in total)
In reply to:

gLOWx: There is a common confusion between HDR needing TONE MAPPING
And EXPOSURE FUSION.
I don't even speak about FAKE HDR with a single picture...

True HDR create an HDR image (usually 32bits) witch is not visible on any media (screen, print...).
Then apply "Tone Mapping" to "compress" the "over"dynamic to visible image format like a JPEG, TIFF...

Exposure Fusion is NOT True HDR.Because it don't create any HDR (32bits) intermediary image.It just "pick" the bests pixels on each picture and create directly the final one.And it is faster.

So i can tell you one thing : there is NO camera doing True HDR nowadays ;)
-They do fake HDR with a single picture by raising the contrast/saturation/etc...
-They do Exposure Fusion with multiple bracketed pictures.

But they DON'T do True HDR.

True HDR, for now, is limited to more powerful devices like computers and may be tablets, phones.

Use any Exposure Fusion for natural result.
And you can try SNS-HDR (my fav) if you want True HDR natural result.

Technically, any consumer monitor can only display 8 bit of colors, so anything above that, like a 14bit raw, already is a "HDR".

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2012 at 00:50 UTC
On Fujifilm releases X-S1 premium EXR 26X superzoom article (383 comments in total)

I allways tought this was possible, never belivied the excuse " a larger sensor would make the lens of a superzoom unpratical", and in fact, fujifilm proved those that argued that, completely wrong.

I was imagining a 1/1.6 10mpx sensor like those of the S90, but they did it even better with a 2/3.
maybe this kinda of quality for a superzoom would canibalize on sales of bulky expensive zoom lens thenselves and some photographers would rather had a second camera just for zoom and as backup instead of a bulky lens for that matter. ANyway, price is a little killer tough.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2012 at 00:40 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Pavel Sokolov: Who need an unscratchable lens when you should buy new iphone every year? ;)

Let me gess pumeco, you live in Korea.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2012 at 06:51 UTC

Sony allways have some interesting products. But their almost allways have a ridiculous price range. I'm out of this one too.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 23:36 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply

Is it even possible for such a tiny lens to resolve 8 megapixels of detail to the sensor? Yes i know this question is old and was asked when the 4s came out, but never read a response to it

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 16:38 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

LiSkynden: Just watched a video where Phil Schiller guy bragged about their new product and i dont know ... is it kind of sad that the main thing seems to be that "we made the thinest smartphone ever" and wow, its 18% thinner. I mean that is something. ... or is it?

That is lie. There is about 2 or 3 phones out there that are thinnest. So what?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 16:36 UTC
On iPhone 5 vs. iPhone 4S: Image comparison article (94 comments in total)

Apple stated is the same sensor. Same specs. Lower iso is just software/firmware updates.

Especulating things that go against official statements from a mere EXIF sounds very unprofessional inmho. But that is now the basis with all the blind hype surrouding apple. The differences could easily be explained by revised processing software.

If indeed there is a new sensor with the same mpx, it's probably the worst gain in a revised sensor in history.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 16:31 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies

Omg 16mpx? Im disapointed. FZ40 was a total fiasco in IQ thanks to the increase from the previous FZ35, from 12 to 14mpx. I can´t see this having better IQ than the FZ47.

C'mon panasonic, you're better than sony. Now if i want a superzoon i will have to spend more on the FZ200.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 21:25 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic DMC FZ200 preview (155 comments in total)

If only they made such a camera with a revised 1.63 LX5 sensor. That would be just damn perfect.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 21:11 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic DMC FZ200 preview (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

flyintheointment: MANUAL ZOOM!!!!!!!!!!!

I hate the electronic zooms. Not fast enough or precise enough for framing pics.

I have an FZ35 that I still use.

I have been looking at getting something new with a new sensor in it. This would be a contender, except for not having a manual zoom.

Manual zoon is awfull for video. What i wanted tough, is a multi-speed zoom lever. The more i press the lever, the faster the zoom would go. That would be perfect for video.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 21:10 UTC
On Panasonic DMC FZ200 preview (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: What is the max aperture at wide angle? f/2.8 as well?

C

Yes, that is all about this camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 21:08 UTC
On Panasonic DMC FZ200 preview (155 comments in total)
In reply to:

coastcontact: Even granting that there are some improvements in this model compared to the FZ150, the total weight of the camera is an issue! Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX200V weighs 1.29 lb and now so does this camera. It becomes no fun when the camera gets heavier. I have the FZ150 (1.16 lb) and also the FZ28 that weighs 14.71 oz. You think I can feel the difference?

Sony fanboy detected. Comment invalidated.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 21:08 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC HX20V Review article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael_13: Image quality is very limited - size and zoom range cause this. One of the few "superzoomers" with decent iq is (or better was) Panasonics FZ38.

SX260 for small superzoon will beat this crappy 18mpx any day.

yet, i miss my FZ35 quality. Even FZ150 hardly beats it with a much higher price point.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 09:53 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC HX20V Review article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: well, they gotta have to continue to supply the consumers-led-by-the-megapixel-race market, right? i will not spend much time here saying how stupid is an 18mp camera with such a tiny sensor. i would never buy it (unless it had 10mp) and think rx100 is THE compact now.

but being positive about it, i liked the effectiveness of its image stabilisation system at full tele... and for not stopping here, i also liked dpreview using some dcr data to complete this review. and i didn't know dcr was the first review website. interesting to know that.

Even the RX100 has too much megapixel.

They should stop already at 10mpx at 1/2.3 Ant 12~16mpx on larger1/1.7~1 sensor.

Instead of phisically increasing sensor size, why don´t they cread some kind of marketing gimmick like "super sample 20mpx", with software sharpening + super sampling process like oldschool cheappo chinese interpolated cameras used to do? Would catch some ignorante casual costumers, and appeal to more enthusiast who when read that the camera is not really 20mpx, but only 10mpx, would be pleased.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 09:51 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC HX20V Review article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

G Davidson: Ouch, why the 18mp?! Keeping things in perspective might have made for a good camera, are consumers really so fooled into thinking this really measures resolution with such a minuscule sensor? Apparently so!

+1

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 09:48 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC HX20V Review article (61 comments in total)

18mpx, ouch. Sony will NEVER learn.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 09:47 UTC as 6th comment

Lame. Won´t buy. Next?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 09:46 UTC as 303rd comment
In reply to:

ericsan: What a boring new camera...such a long wait for a very basic product !!
Will not wait for the upcoming & upgraded models...bye bye Canon, hello Panasonic/Olympus you will get my money for my needed backup mirrorless camera, your models are much more exciting,innovative...
Cheers !!

Who needs APS-C, anyway? GF-5/PEN + pancake all the way.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2012 at 09:43 UTC
On Sony DSC-RX100 preview (544 comments in total)
In reply to:

Am Cam Guy: These comments are interesting but does anyone realize we are talking about a P&S pocket camera? If they built is with a viewfinder, a huge ccd, a hot shoe etc it would be an SLR and you would carry it in a case with a strap around your neck. I do a lot of traveling and carry my P&S in a small pouch on my belt. This makes it convenient to take it anywhere, even formal dinners. What I like is the low light performance because the places I visit rarely allow flash. While I'm not a professional I do want sharp, clear pictures in a pocket camera. This camera isn't for everyone but it is just fine for me.

Problem is, this is a P&S already in range of DSLR in PRICE. we expect more for such price level.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2012 at 18:19 UTC
Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »