mpgxsvcd

mpgxsvcd

Lives in United States USA, NC, United States
Joined on May 17, 2004

Comments

Total: 1376, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On High-end pocketable compacts roundup (2014) article (7 comments in total)

Can you define pocket-able for this category?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 01:22 UTC as 6th comment
On Enthusiast compact camera roundup (2014) article (4 comments in total)

Was the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III left out of this comparo because you consider it to be pants pocket-able? Personally I don't think any of today's cameras are truly pants pocket-able. Most of them will fit into a jacket pocket though.

I would love to see a demonstration of someone putting one of these cameras in a pants pocket. That might make a really interesting video demonstration.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 01:19 UTC as 4th comment
On Mid-range Mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (4 comments in total)

The Sony A6000 is a very impressive camera.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2014 at 00:57 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I find it very interesting that Canon basically has a stranglehold on the Astrophotography world when their dynamic range is at such a HUGE disadvantage to other competitors. However, the fact that we stack multiple RAW images to remove the noise puts the Canon cameras on a more even playing field for Astronomy.

The stacking process relies on the fact that the noise is random and the signal(Light coming into the lens) is consistent. This means that we can easily isolate and remove the random read noise that plagues the Canon cameras in single exposure shots. We also use dark frames to further identify the noise that is present if there is no signal.

I hadn't heard that the Sony cameras had issues with RAW files before. Can Dpreview confirm that this is the case?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 23:10 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I find it very interesting that Canon basically has a stranglehold on the Astrophotography world when their dynamic range is at such a HUGE disadvantage to other competitors. However, the fact that we stack multiple RAW images to remove the noise puts the Canon cameras on a more even playing field for Astronomy.

The stacking process relies on the fact that the noise is random and the signal(Light coming into the lens) is consistent. This means that we can easily isolate and remove the random read noise that plagues the Canon cameras in single exposure shots. We also use dark frames to further identify the noise that is present if there is no signal.

Yes. That is correct. An A7s is about as good as it gets for AP.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 18:08 UTC
On Have your say: Best High-end Compact Camera of 2014 article (72 comments in total)

The only camera I don’t get is the Fuji X100T. I really don’t understand what the draw to it is. However, I have an open mind about it. So what makes it 3rd on this list?

Is it the optical/EVF hybrid viewfinder? It looks cool.

Are you really able to take all of the shots you want with 35mm only?

Then there is image quality. On paper the X100T looks like the one to beat in IQ terms. However, when I look at its RAW images across the entire ISO range I can’t help but notice the noise reduction that Fuji applies to their RAW images. If you want noise reduction in camera then that is what JPGs are for. If you want to edit the images afterwards then that is what “untouched” RAW images should be used for. You can’t shoot untouched RAW images with the X100T. All of them have NR applied.

So what am I missing? What do the owners of the Fuji X100T see that I can’t? Is it the nostalgic look and feel? If so then I get that. They really have recreated that look and feel of the old days.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 14:42 UTC as 15th comment
On Have your say: Best High-end Compact Camera of 2014 article (72 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: Should have separated this into pocket camera and fixed-lens compact.. e.g. LX100/X100 and RX100/G7x do not belong in the same category.

None of them are truly pants pocket-able.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 14:37 UTC
On Have your say: Best High-end Compact Camera of 2014 article (72 comments in total)

LX100 Rocks! Sony RX100 III is a great camera as well.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 04:19 UTC as 26th comment

Those are all fantastic shots. Really great work there. I loved them all.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 14, 2014 at 13:37 UTC as 31st comment
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)

I don't think Canon cameras are that bad. They work very well and produce great results.

I just happen to think that Nikon, Sony, Olympus, and Panasonic all produce cameras that take much better looking images and videos with less effort for less money.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 21:19 UTC as 96th comment
On ACDSee Ultimate 8 introduces layer-based editing article (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

More On: Discussion here on how to disable some of ACDSee's chronic spyware tendencies:

http://forum.acdsee.com/forum/acdsee-pro/5962-how-to-disable-acdsee-8-0-pro-spyware

I actually would let them spy on me if they would just support my cameras for RAW editing.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 20:50 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)

Is there even a Bronze award? Is there anything a camera company could do that would warrant Dpreview giving them the Bronze?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 19:49 UTC as 134th comment | 1 reply
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Is it fair to say that “you will not benefit from the extra dynamic range that the competitors offer” if you never shoot scenes that exceed the dynamic range of the sensor(ie: You never clip the highlights) and you never underexpose past the optimal point?

It would be interesting to see the dynamic range test at higher ISO values(ie: ISO 1600, 6400, 12,800) and for very long exposures(1+ minutes. Think Astrophotography).

“Just ask one thing: Is it so bad to clip the highlights every now and then?”

What a lot of people don’t realize is that you usually don’t just clip the highlights by a few stops or even 5 stops. It often can be many more stops than that if the Sun is involved. The sun is about 12.5 Trillion times as bright as the night sky. That is about 44 stops. If you have a very shaded area and the sun in your photograph nothing you can do will prevent the sun from clipping and still show you any shadow detail at all.

Even a setting sun is dramatically brighter than shaded areas. Even light bulbs can be significantly brighter than shaded areas. On top of that highlights are often limited to just a few pixels if the light source is very far off. Is it worth giving up the shadow detail for almost the entire image to save the highlights of a few pixels from clipping? You may not even be able to prevent those few pixels from clipping anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 16:23 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I find it very interesting that Canon basically has a stranglehold on the Astrophotography world when their dynamic range is at such a HUGE disadvantage to other competitors. However, the fact that we stack multiple RAW images to remove the noise puts the Canon cameras on a more even playing field for Astronomy.

The stacking process relies on the fact that the noise is random and the signal(Light coming into the lens) is consistent. This means that we can easily isolate and remove the random read noise that plagues the Canon cameras in single exposure shots. We also use dark frames to further identify the noise that is present if there is no signal.

“Or in other words use Multi Frame Noise Reduction available in the Sony line.”

Yes Sony and even Panasonic offer multi shot noise reduction methods. However, the stacking process and software that Astronomers use is very efficient when you include light, dark, flat, and bias frames. I doubt that it can be matched in camera.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 15:11 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)

It is remarkable that despite all of the valid issues that Dpreview and its readers have pointed out the owners of Canon cameras continue to produce impressive results.

Does this mean that Canon camera owners have to work harder to get great images? Does it mean they have to avoid difficult situations more than other camera owners would have to? Or does it simply mean that they don’t find themselves in situations that often where the disadvantages of their camera are relevant?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 15:08 UTC as 147th comment | 13 replies
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)

Is it fair to say that “you will not benefit from the extra dynamic range that the competitors offer” if you never shoot scenes that exceed the dynamic range of the sensor(ie: You never clip the highlights) and you never underexpose past the optimal point?

It would be interesting to see the dynamic range test at higher ISO values(ie: ISO 1600, 6400, 12,800) and for very long exposures(1+ minutes. Think Astrophotography).

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 15:03 UTC as 148th comment | 3 replies
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)

I find it very interesting that Canon basically has a stranglehold on the Astrophotography world when their dynamic range is at such a HUGE disadvantage to other competitors. However, the fact that we stack multiple RAW images to remove the noise puts the Canon cameras on a more even playing field for Astronomy.

The stacking process relies on the fact that the noise is random and the signal(Light coming into the lens) is consistent. This means that we can easily isolate and remove the random read noise that plagues the Canon cameras in single exposure shots. We also use dark frames to further identify the noise that is present if there is no signal.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 14:55 UTC as 149th comment | 10 replies
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)

The Auto ISO logic and customizability of this camera sounds perfect. I wish Panasonic would finally switch to doing it this way. Their current logic in the LX100 is really good for an Auto mode. However, they don’t offer any customization of the Auto mode like Canon does.

Auto ISO is a very underutilized option. That is probably because it has been so bad in the past. The current crop of cameras offer good Auto ISO logic and even if you chose to use different settings than Auto ISO starting with Auto ISO gives you a good estimate of what settings are optimal.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 14:30 UTC as 153rd comment | 1 reply
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zeisschen: When is Canon going to follow the signs of the times?

When people stop buying their products.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 14:17 UTC
On Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review preview (1163 comments in total)
In reply to:

RaghavBaijal: Hi DPR. Just a suggestion.

As video becomes more & more mainstream for DSLRs & Mirrorless, it would make a lot of sense if you could post video samples on Vimeo instead of YouTube due to compression. Its very difficult to judge Video quality online due to the excessive amount of compression YouTube applies to all videos.

That compression is very evident at 1080p on youtube. However, if the video is rendered to 1440p or 4K youtube allocates much more bandwidth. Vimeo on the other hand doesn’t support Ultra HD streaming at all.

So you are right. For cameras like this Canon camera that can only do 1080p Vimeo would offer better streaming results and the ability to download the original file. However, for cameras that offer 4K footage youtube is the best option for streaming.

I typically render my 1080p files to 1440p for youtube. It doesn’t improve the detail at all. However, it does drastically improve the compression artifacts.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 14:14 UTC
Total: 1376, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »