CAcreeks

CAcreeks

Lives in United States United States
Has a website at http://cacreeks.com
Joined on Nov 5, 2009

Comments

Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

CAcreeks: I almost got a TS4 before an October kayaking trip, but the non-standard USB cable dissuaded me. This is idiotic engineering by Olympus.

Gasol, I took my Fuji 900EXR in a Pelican box. Missed two shots, but saved $350. Maybe I'll buy a TG4 next spring. It's not so much the 3 cubic inches, it's getting all the darn cables mixed up.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2015 at 16:48 UTC

I almost got a TS4 before an October kayaking trip, but the non-standard USB cable dissuaded me. This is idiotic engineering by Olympus.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2015 at 18:03 UTC as 19th comment | 3 replies
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gerard Hoffnung: I like the "freeze proof to -10C". Around my part of the world that's an average winter day and both my G16 and Ti3 function perfectly well at that temperature.

Notice how there is no claim for this camera's ability to handle hot temperatures.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2015 at 20:03 UTC
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leandros S: For anybody else wondering: the cat photo is ISO 800, the building fronts are ISO 100 (in the RAW vs JPEG comparison).

ACR conversion of the ISO 800 cat photo is horrendous, no matter what the review says about Raw workflow improving results.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2015 at 20:01 UTC
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mammolo02: I have been using it for a month now. If you limit your prints to A4 size the image quality is acceptable. I would not use it for A3 prints. If you never print anything ... then it's very good :-)

The article keeps going back to the issue of using a RAW editor, but does not mention any. I use RawTherapee, but TG-4 RAW support on major software packages is still lacking.

The key might be a noise reduction plug-in such as Neat Image or Topaz Denoise. I'll try the ISO 800 cat and post to Oly forum.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2015 at 16:13 UTC
On article Rough and ready: Olympus Tough TG-4 review (280 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mammolo02: I have been using it for a month now. If you limit your prints to A4 size the image quality is acceptable. I would not use it for A3 prints. If you never print anything ... then it's very good :-)

The article keeps going back to the issue of using a RAW editor, but does not mention any. I use RawTherapee, but TG-4 RAW support on major software packages is still lacking.

Although new to RawTherapee, I was able to match or exceed JPEG results at base ISO, without undue effort. It became increasingly difficult or impossible at higher ISO. Is the same true of Lightroom? Certainly seems so from the studio shots, and ISO 800 cat.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2015 at 15:30 UTC
On article Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 Review (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

CAcreeks: After using even a typical smartphone, the 3" LCD on most cameras seems totally pathetic.

If I don't like viewfinders, why would I buy a DSLR? The viewfinder I have is on a Fuji S200EXR. I also had an optical viewfinder in a Canon, which I gave to a homeless person because I hated it so much.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2015 at 04:42 UTC
On article Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 Review (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikonandmore: Huh????? This camera is news a year ago.. ridiculous..

You are correct, the Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 press release is dated January 2nd 2014. No wonder it doesn't run Lollipop! I would like to see a Camera 3 with 1" sensor and less zoom range (lower X).

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2015 at 04:40 UTC
On article Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 Review (88 comments in total)
In reply to:

CAcreeks: After using even a typical smartphone, the 3" LCD on most cameras seems totally pathetic.

Where did I mention the word compact? Usually even a huge DSLR has a pathetic 3" LCD. Some of us hate viewfinders! The Galaxy Camera 2 has a 4.8" LCD.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 23:50 UTC
On article Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 Review (88 comments in total)

After using even a typical smartphone, the 3" LCD on most cameras seems totally pathetic.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 20:18 UTC as 42nd comment | 5 replies
On article Samsung NX mini Review (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ashuaria Lee: Many parts of the Studio Scenes are impressive.
1. Wedge chart...On Low-ISO NX-mini goes until 34~35, while the others remain 30~32
2. Random dot chart...Looking on whatever ISO, mini is the clear winner.
3. Weeds,Grass...Low-ISO, mini has better details.
4. Sketch under the wedge...Looking at the ceeks and forehead, mini has more details on whatever ISO.
-> I cannot agree the phrase "In the default Jpeg mode at their respecive native ISOs, the cameras reproduce a very similar amount of detail"

Beyond the IQ the battery is almost twice longer than competatives. And with 9mm lens it grows even more. 630 shots CIPA AFAIK.

They mentioned about the poor corners(bragging nikon ;-)..thats the LENS not the camera. perhaps they should have used 9mm fix-focal lens for the test.

I AM a big fan or canon, nikon also, but I remember not being fair for sony few years ago, and I'm getting some similar feeling here again.
Am I imagining?

I don't think the 9mm lens is as good as the 17/1.8 they used. If you want 9mm, goto the imaging-resource.com samples. Geometric distortion in corners bothers me, but otherwise it's a fine lens.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2014 at 14:47 UTC
On article Samsung NX mini Review (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dohmnuill: Another slim camera..without a viewfinder. No thanks.

It seems very nice to hold at waist level with the LCD tilted up, and my thumb on the shutter.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 01:39 UTC
On article Samsung NX mini Review (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: That's a Silver Award winner. But Samsung NX owners enjoy great value.

Thanks, I feel with faster menus and higher screen resolution it would be a sure Silver.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 20:36 UTC
On article Samsung NX mini Review (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Enginel: I see this camera more like a 2X teleconverter for NX lenses...
Its native lenses are anyway little too large to be truly pocketable (9-27 is about the size of Sony's APS-C 16-50 collapsible zoom)

These lenses are about the same length, but the 9-27 about half the diameter and less than half the weight.
http://camerasize.com/compact/#545.413,535.360,ha,t

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 20:18 UTC
On article Samsung NX mini Review (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

vladimir vanek: OMG, now everyone's going to produce "selfie" cameras to support that ill idea to shoot oneselves. Human vanity must have gone a long way to reach today's levels.

On Facebook few people look at posts that don't have a face in them.There's nothing wrong with the selfie for this purpose.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 18:43 UTC
On article Samsung NX mini Review (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: That's a Silver Award winner. But Samsung NX owners enjoy great value.

I don't see the Silver award now. Did they remove it.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 18:42 UTC
On article Ricoh announces WG-30W and WG-30 rugged compacts (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: Why does the lens have to be so slow? I don't get it. The camer's huge relative to it's sensor. Why is the lens such a piece of crap?

I think you mean WG-4 GPS, which replaced the 3, and has sensor-shift optical stabilization. Ricoh is not far from leading the field with a hypothetical WG-5, but instead we get this.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2014 at 02:02 UTC
On article Ricoh announces WG-30W and WG-30 rugged compacts (77 comments in total)

Does it solve shortcomings of the WG-4? Based on specs, 2 of 5 yes: longer battery life, available WiFi. One probably not, the LCD still looks like stupid 16:9 and is only 2.7". Underwater metering and chromatic aberration, we can't tell from specs.

Oh! It does not have GPS and the WG-4 has 3" LCD, so this one is less competitive with segment leaders.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 23:50 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On article Canon PowerShot G1X Mark II real-world gallery (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

mcshan: I can't tell from just these samples but I curious if image quality will be that much better than the original G1X? Slightly worse?

I have the original and was always pleased with it as a simple carry around travel camera with some zoom. It will be fun to learn what Canon has changed.

Same, based on the I-R.com comparometer.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2014 at 23:28 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G1X Mark II real-world gallery (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: In my opinion no brand beats Canon when it comes to natural color. They only need a Foveon-like sensor to complete the perfectness.

Disagree. Canon ranks at best #3 for pleasing colors behind Fuji and Olympus. Canon might have industry worst highlight treatment. If you are using "natural" to avoid the word pleasing, you should look at the Imatest chart - the G1x is far from accurate.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2014 at 23:27 UTC
Total: 62, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »