ET2

ET2

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 760, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1300 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: "Sony defined a category . . ." - really? What was the Canon G series, which existed long before these Sony RX100 cameras then?

I'm not saying the RX100 is not a good step up, but it's not a category-defining camera!

No, they did maje RX100 competitors with the same 1" sensor . G7X

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g7-x

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:55 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV First Impressions Review preview (1300 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: "Sony defined a category . . ." - really? What was the Canon G series, which existed long before these Sony RX100 cameras then?

I'm not saying the RX100 is not a good step up, but it's not a category-defining camera!

G series had 4 times smaller sensor but yet they were not pocketable. No even close. The closet thing was S series but the sensor was 4 times smaller still

Rx100 started the whole large sensor pocketable zoom camera trend.

RX100 was Time Magazine's invention of the year for 2012

http://techland.time.com/2012/11/01/best-inventions-of-the-year-2012/slide/sony-rx100-digital-camera/

so yes a new category was defined by Rx100

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 03:17 UTC
In reply to:

ET2: DPR puts a note under the image: " Copyright NASA"

NASA images can't be copyrighted. They are public domain as everything else produced by the govt

https://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/MP_Photo_Guidelines.html

"NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted."

Please remove that false claim the image is copyrighted. It's not

John's Hopkins Applied research center isn't academic institute. It's Department of Defense contractor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_Physics_Laboratory

" Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) is primarily a defense contractor. It serves as a technical resource for the Department of Defense, NASA, and other government agencies. The Lab is an engineering research and development organization rather than an academic division of Johns Hopkins University."

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

AndroC: It's worth giving credit to Johns Hopkins University for this wonderful mission. According to NASA:

"The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) in Laurel, Maryland, designed, built, and operates the New Horizons spacecraft and manages the mission for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate"

The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laborarory is where the mission is run from, not NASA.

A useful website:

http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_Physics_Laboratory

" Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) is primarily a defense contractor. It serves as a technical resource for the Department of Defense, NASA, and other government agencies. The Lab is an engineering research and development organization rather than an academic division of Johns Hopkins University."

In any case, mission to pluto and all data and images are in public domain as this is NASA/ US Govt project.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2015 at 00:16 UTC
In reply to:

AndroC: It's worth giving credit to Johns Hopkins University for this wonderful mission. According to NASA:

"The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) in Laurel, Maryland, designed, built, and operates the New Horizons spacecraft and manages the mission for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate"

The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laborarory is where the mission is run from, not NASA.

A useful website:

http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/

Even the website you link says "Nasa's mission to Pluto" The money comes from Nasa, so it's US govt project, regardless how many other people and agencies worked on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Horizons

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

ET2: DPR puts a note under the image: " Copyright NASA"

NASA images can't be copyrighted. They are public domain as everything else produced by the govt

https://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/MP_Photo_Guidelines.html

"NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted."

Please remove that false claim the image is copyrighted. It's not

No, this is a picture by NASA, which is a US government agency. No books, articles, pictures produced by the US government are copyrighted. They are in public domain.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 22:19 UTC

DPR still has false "copyright NASA" in the article, even though they are told anything produced by the US government (articles, bookss, images) are in public domain and can't be copyrighted.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2015 at 19:12 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply

DPR puts a note under the image: " Copyright NASA"

NASA images can't be copyrighted. They are public domain as everything else produced by the govt

https://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/MP_Photo_Guidelines.html

"NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted."

Please remove that false claim the image is copyrighted. It's not

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2015 at 13:28 UTC as 18th comment | 8 replies
On Pentax K-3 II added to studio test scene comparison article (177 comments in total)
In reply to:

Frankinidaho: The Sony a7 II sure looks good.

A7II is a real useful camera the pentax pixelshift requires a tripod and can only shoot still subjects. Stop comparing apples and oranges, fanboys.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2015 at 17:43 UTC
On Pentax K-3 II added to studio test scene comparison article (177 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pandimonium: It's obvious this is as good and sometimes better than the Nikon D810. It is clearly better than the Olympus pixel shift implementation. When pentax can use the 4th image shot in to fill in movement gaps (were you see pixelated artefacts) at the normal K-3 resolving power, the setting would become more useful for landscape and other situations with limited movements. Maybe they can even make a hand held mode, aligning the layers in camera. This would require some processing power, so maybe in a new generation imaging engine.

Pentax also applies raw NR to files so you can't just compare grain as one brand is using raw NR

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2015 at 17:39 UTC
In reply to:

ogl: List of changes
Wireless connectivity
Wireless flash support
Raw file burst depth
White Balance
Autofocus during movie capture
Exposure compensation during movie capture
Creative effects during movie capture
Top shutter speed wide-open
More effects modes
Interval Composite shooting
In-camera raw processing
Better image review for raw files
Playback startup
Pixel mapping
Improved battery life: The Ricoh GR II's battery life is CIPA-rated to 320 shots on a charge, up from 290 shots from its predecessor with the same DB-65 lithium-ion battery pack. That's about a 10% improvement, though we suspect that's without Wi-Fi enabled.

That's just software changes. Thanks for confirming it wasn't really a new camera

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2015 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

Androole: I'm interested to see the 120fps footage, since it'll be much better quality.

The 960 fps is super impressive, but the quality is not really usable for larger than a phone screen (or Youtube videos, I guess). Maybe for scientific applications on a low budget, where the aesthetic quality isn't as important. Or heavily filtered, perhaps?

"Maybe for scientific applications on a low budget, where the aesthetic quality isn't as important. "

Or for 99.999% actual buyers of the cameras who aren't making Hollywood videos but showing clips to friends and family

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2015 at 15:03 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: Uncompressed 14 bit raw ???
No thanks...no need for 100 MB files for something won't even notice in 90% of the cases..

Sony A580 a very old camera had 12 bit raw and scored 13.3 DR on dxomark, so your claim that 12 bit means exact 12 EV DR is plain false, along with rest of your arguments.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2015 at 21:18 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: Uncompressed 14 bit raw ???
No thanks...no need for 100 MB files for something won't even notice in 90% of the cases..

Rishi, yu are assuming that drop in AR7 DR is due to the camera going from 14 to 12 bit. That's pure assumption. You don't know what else is apping to read mechanism that is causing the DR drop.

Please stop speculating. Your friend Barney Britton claimed that you get 2EV with 14 bit, even though there is no proof that claim is true for even the best sensors.

As for medium format cameras, those sensors have so bad DR that even 11 bits is enough for those cameras, let alone 16 as someone assumed based on you guys claims.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2015 at 20:10 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: Uncompressed 14 bit raw ???
No thanks...no need for 100 MB files for something won't even notice in 90% of the cases..

steelhead3 , wrong. Most MF cameras have low DR (check Dxomark) and don't need more than 12 bits. 16 bits is pure marketing nonsense.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2015 at 19:08 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: Uncompressed 14 bit raw ???
No thanks...no need for 100 MB files for something won't even notice in 90% of the cases..

Barney Britton, no he doesn't. There is absolutely no evidence that going from 12 bit to 14 bit gives you 2EV more DR. That's a claim you made up with no proof. If we follow your logic, then going from 14 to to 21 bits will give you 7 more EV, and obviously that's a ridiculous claim.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2015 at 19:07 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (3412 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bervilat: Now, Canon, please make this sensor deliver 16 bit raw (just like the ones in medium format do) and stuck it into something a bit bigger than the EOS M (just enough to fit the larger sensor) and sell for 1000 dollars.

One can always dream, right?

Increasing bit depth doesn't increase image quality if the sensor is not up to task. It's actually waste of resources, slows down camera and achieves absolutely nothing

See https://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 15:30 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)
In reply to:

Operator: At least dpreview is honest enough to mark the article as "Featured Story". Sony must pay a lot for this advertisement.

But, makes perfect sense - in the moment they lose money with the mirrorless cameras. Let's see if A7r II will be a success (personally don't think so) ...

Thom Hgan is not a credible source. A few years ago he was claiming Soy is quitting with FF camera. The guy is just hot air.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 03:42 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)
In reply to:

ET2: Rishi doesn't know what he is talking about. Read this scientific paper. 14 bit is waste of disk space with no benefit.

http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html#bitdepth

Yes bur Rishi seem to claim 2EV difference for 14 bit raw which is complete nonense

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 17:36 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1077 comments in total)

Rishi doesn't know what he is talking about. Read this scientific paper. 14 bit is waste of disk space with no benefit.

http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html#bitdepth

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 11:34 UTC as 121st comment | 5 replies
Total: 760, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »