Simon97

Simon97

Lives in United States OH, United States
Joined on Oct 16, 2006

Comments

Total: 198, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »

How are the newer EVFs in bright sunlight for eyeglass wearers? My only experience is with an old 4mp camera from 2004. The EVF becomes too hard to see unless I cup my hand around the eyepiece. OVF, of course doesn't have this issue.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2013 at 20:50 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Simon97: I use RawTherepee. I'm not converting raw files in any large volume, but when I do have a few to process, this program does everything I ask of it. I'm very happy with the results I get. Makes me wonder why I even fool around with JPEGs anymore.

I'm running RT4 on Windows 7 64 bit. Works fine.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2013 at 20:39 UTC

I use RawTherepee. I'm not converting raw files in any large volume, but when I do have a few to process, this program does everything I ask of it. I'm very happy with the results I get. Makes me wonder why I even fool around with JPEGs anymore.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2013 at 15:43 UTC as 99th comment | 6 replies
On Just Posted: Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Review article (167 comments in total)

This 12mp camera makes images that are sharper and cleaner than the ones with more photo detectors. It goes to show you how pointless it is stuffing more pixels on these pin head sized sensors. Yet, there will be more P&S models released with 16+ MP sensors. Bummer.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2013 at 18:38 UTC as 32nd comment

Canon, how about some lenses for the M?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2013 at 20:26 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Simon97: The rectangular aperture looks too small for a 1" sensor. Looks more like a 1/1.7" sensor would fit there. Compare to Nikon 1 camera. The inner circle of contacts would be in the way. Why so many contacts for the lens anyway? This almost seems to be some kind of joke.

I understand that there is no sensor that is why I said "the aperture" and "sensor would fit there". Now look at the inner contact rings. No way will a 1" sensor fit. In the plastic mock up, there is only room for a 1/1.7 sized sensor (or less). Look at a Nikon 1 body. The sensor and recess are much larger. If you tried to set a Nikon 1 senor in that mock-up, it would touch the pins of the inner circle at the corners (or nearly so). Just no room for it and that seems odd to me.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2013 at 21:43 UTC

The rectangular aperture looks too small for a 1" sensor. Looks more like a 1/1.7" sensor would fit there. Compare to Nikon 1 camera. The inner circle of contacts would be in the way. Why so many contacts for the lens anyway? This almost seems to be some kind of joke.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2013 at 15:42 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
On Just Posted: Nikon 1 V2 Preview Samples article (226 comments in total)

Not crazy about the soft jpegs that Nikon, Canon and some others seem to like. Panasonic got the message with the LX7. While you do get some noise with the raws, the difference in sharpness is night and day.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 2, 2013 at 19:48 UTC as 66th comment | 6 replies

Measurebaters rejoice!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2012 at 15:28 UTC as 29th comment | 1 reply
On Fujifilm X-E1 preview extended article (113 comments in total)
In reply to:

plasnu: Why RAW mages are so blurry?

This camera uses a different color array pattern on the sensor. The RAW converters need updating to handle the conversion properly. This was covered in the preview.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2012 at 16:02 UTC
On Fujifilm X-E1 preview extended article (113 comments in total)

Very little to complain about the images from this camera. High ISO colors are a little muted, other than that, this camera does a great job.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2012 at 15:58 UTC as 32nd comment

Something amiss with this lens. Lens looks decentered at wide angle at wider apertures settings in the corners. Look at the window shot 9250. Also has some weird busy double image bokeh near the edges (tree branches in some shots).

The center is pin sharp and contrasty so my fingers are crossed that the edge issue is not the way it was designed.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2012 at 01:45 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
On Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G15 review article (340 comments in total)

I don't care for Canon's fat sharpening halos at low ISOs. The Nikon jpegs are better. At high ISOs, the tables turn and the Canon does better. If you shoot raw, select the camera with the features you like.

The RX100 is a bit of a disappointment to me. Better resolution and a bit better noise performance but the lens is a let down as you move away from the center of the image.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2012 at 23:09 UTC as 96th comment

Looks sharp and contrasty. No annoying color fringing (maybe just a hint in some shots). Bokeh looks somewhat busy at some settings, good in others. I can't judge edge performance due to the limited DOF but overall I'd say it is a promising lens. You can't ask too much more from a zoom.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2012 at 14:10 UTC as 49th comment | 1 reply

I think it is neat that they can do all these filters based on the depth information.

I still think they should also make an ordinary camera based on the light field camera shape because it is very discreet.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 16, 2012 at 15:46 UTC as 23rd comment
On Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review article (499 comments in total)

So the D600 looks to have slightly less noise than the D800 sampled down to 24mp, although the D800 has better detail? This would seem to indicate, at least for high ISO shooting, the MP race has ran its course.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 14, 2012 at 18:44 UTC as 57th comment

If this has the 1/2.3" sensor that is in all the current cheap P&S cameras that produce horrid looking pix even in bight outdoor light, this thing is overpriced even if it has the "smart" functions.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2012 at 22:24 UTC as 17th comment
In reply to:

neo_nights: Wow! The K5-IIs is the new High ISO king for APS-C cameras! Impressive, indeed!

Looking at the raw images, the X-Pro 1 is applying a heavy NR. At ISO 3200 it has a water color painting effect (look at the feathers). Some details are lost. I've heard that Pentax uses a light amount of NR too. I think the raw output should be left alone so that the potentially more sophisticated converting/editing software can be left to handle the NR to the desire of the user.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2012 at 03:00 UTC

It is quite normal for a product to have parts sourced from many different companies. Thank about the different types of plastics, glass, metals, motors, microphones and other electronic components that make up a camera.

In some cases the only thing a company will do is to put their name on it (and it was probably stamped on in a factory somewhere else.

I do small scale manufacturing. I design and do a lot of my own manufacturing to get my final product, but I still had to source parts and materials from other companies. It is how this stuff works.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2012 at 21:06 UTC as 27th comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Canon PowerShot G15 studio sample images article (144 comments in total)

The Nikon P7700 looks better with low ISO jpegs, but Canon looks better at 1600 (not sure why DPR uses 3200 to show default high ISO with these smaller sensor cameras). Raws are more even. I'd say look at the camera's other features and decide that way.

The RX100 doesn't really distance itself from these smaller sensor cameras here. It does have the resolution advantage but it makes softer images (especially off axis) and noise performance isn't much better. Of course resizing the RX100 image to 12mp will show its clear advantage but you pay the price in the wallet and zoom range.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2012 at 15:59 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
Total: 198, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »