forpetessake

forpetessake

Lives in United States Transylvania, United States
Works as a exorcist
Joined on Oct 3, 2011
About me:

I don't reply to private messages.

Comments

Total: 566, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

forpetessake: When will DPR stop publishing misleading numbers? It's NOT "a mind-blowing F2.8-6.5 24-2000mm equivalent zoom".

You either provide conversion for both f-stop and focal length, which are mind-blowing F14.6-33.8 24-2000mm FF equivalent. Or provide the physical parameters, which are F2.8-6.5 4.6-385mm.

It's hard to believe DPR continues making honest mistakes -- writing a F14.6-33.8 4.6-385mm would have been an honest mistake, and I've never seen that.

For Pete's sake, read at least DPR article before arguing: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care
So many ignorant people, who are eager to offer their opinion -- it's mind-boggling.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 23:38 UTC
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Permit: The FZ1000 can go up to 1600mm using its digital zoom. I wonder if the image quality would be comparable to the P900 at 2000mm. Take into account that the the FZ1000 sensor is roughly four times the size of the P900.

You do get more megapixels from the p900, but i doubt youre getting 16mp worth of resolution at 2000mm

.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 23:35 UTC
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Just for testing, compare it to a 24mp APS DSLR with a 300mm lens. Uprez the DSLR image to match the Coolpix at 2000mm. See what it compares like. If you can see more detail with the Coolpix, then it has a place.

"If you can see more detail with the Coolpix, then it has a place" -- I don't think so. Even if it's less ugly than the other, it's still ugly.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 07:54 UTC
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

forpetessake: When will DPR stop publishing misleading numbers? It's NOT "a mind-blowing F2.8-6.5 24-2000mm equivalent zoom".

You either provide conversion for both f-stop and focal length, which are mind-blowing F14.6-33.8 24-2000mm FF equivalent. Or provide the physical parameters, which are F2.8-6.5 4.6-385mm.

It's hard to believe DPR continues making honest mistakes -- writing a F14.6-33.8 4.6-385mm would have been an honest mistake, and I've never seen that.

Please refrain from the silly f2.8 is f2.8 comments. It's good to know the subject before commenting and embarrassing oneself.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 06:45 UTC
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alex Permit: The FZ1000 can go up to 1600mm using its digital zoom. I wonder if the image quality would be comparable to the P900 at 2000mm. Take into account that the the FZ1000 sensor is roughly four times the size of the P900.

You do get more megapixels from the p900, but i doubt youre getting 16mp worth of resolution at 2000mm

Everything longer than 200mm eq. looks terrible even in those small 1MP samples. Simple cropping from the bigger sensor cameras would likely look better.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 04:29 UTC
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (115 comments in total)

When will DPR stop publishing misleading numbers? It's NOT "a mind-blowing F2.8-6.5 24-2000mm equivalent zoom".

You either provide conversion for both f-stop and focal length, which are mind-blowing F14.6-33.8 24-2000mm FF equivalent. Or provide the physical parameters, which are F2.8-6.5 4.6-385mm.

It's hard to believe DPR continues making honest mistakes -- writing a F14.6-33.8 4.6-385mm would have been an honest mistake, and I've never seen that.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 03:15 UTC as 38th comment | 10 replies
On Samsung NX1 Review preview (1200 comments in total)

Pretty good results. But everybody asking the question, where are the lenses?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 17:50 UTC as 126th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

lacikuss: Finally, I've been able to look at the pictures with a decent sized monitor and without any pixel peeping I would say the images look soft with a lack of contrast. I can understand this lens only as an all around travel lens, but otherwise a super zoom cam will do just the same from the IQ point of view for much less money.

@theprehistorian -- yes, they were shot side by side, search the forum. Despite the fact the experiments were sloppy, it can be clearly seen that 18-200 generally fared better. Though neither of those lenses is good for a demanding user.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 01:49 UTC
In reply to:

lacikuss: Finally, I've been able to look at the pictures with a decent sized monitor and without any pixel peeping I would say the images look soft with a lack of contrast. I can understand this lens only as an all around travel lens, but otherwise a super zoom cam will do just the same from the IQ point of view for much less money.

The funny thing, it compares poorly even with 18-200mm Sony lens, which isn't sharp lens to begin with. Sony will have hard time selling this puppy.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2015 at 06:12 UTC
In reply to:

straylightrun: Not bad for a FF superzoom that starts at 24mm, but the RRP is crazy.

It used to be called MAP (minimum advertised price).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 05:54 UTC
In reply to:

Juck: That slow zoom had better be a hell of a performer for $1000.

@ljmac
I would ask flat-earthers and equally dim individuals restrain from embarrassing themselves posting such comments. It's always a good idea to educate yourself before exposing your ignorance to the world.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 08:07 UTC

"Sony brings big zoom power to FE-mount with 24-240mm F3.5-5.6 lens"

No, the lens is 24-240mm F3.5-6.3.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 07:31 UTC as 22nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Juck: That slow zoom had better be a hell of a performer for $1000.

Really? If that lens has a good optical quality the price would be a bargain.
This lens is fully equivalent to a M43 12-120mm f/1.75-3.15. Now compare it to more than 3 times slower Olympus 14-140mm f/4-5.6 which is sold for $600.
Or look at APS-C. This lens is equivalent to 16-160mm f/2.3-4.2. Compare it to a more limited and much slower Fujifilm 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, which cost $900.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 07:29 UTC

"In theory, the X-Trans sensor should be well-suited to native monochrome capture."

That's an embarrassing statement. "X-Trans sensor" is a Sony sensor with a Fuji non-bayer CFA, and as you can guess, the monochrome cameras have no need for CFA.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2015 at 04:02 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
On Lytro sheds jobs as it shifts focus to video article (506 comments in total)

A distinctive feature of all successful startups -- once they reach the market they grow very quickly. The only thing Lytro is doing quickly is burning through the investments. It's not a startup, it's a start-down company. But I admire their CEO being able to sell another $50m whopper to the investors.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 20:16 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies
On Lytro sheds jobs as it shifts focus to video article (506 comments in total)
In reply to:

AZPhotog86: I've used the Illum and it's a disaster with a terrible workflow--with eventual poor results. The inventors of this technology should have licensed it to Apple/Samsung as other have said. Would've saved them a lot of grief...

It's a lot of wasted investors' money, but their patents won't disappear, they will be sold to the highest bidder when the company will be liquidated. It's not long to wait.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 20:07 UTC
On Lytro sheds jobs as it shifts focus to video article (506 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: This move makes sense to me and laying people off is frequently a sign that a company is moving into the big time.

You sound completely clueless.

Reducing the footprint was likely the demand of the investors. In most startups, expenses = people and decreasing expenses = firing people. You should lean more toward firing people if the source of your trouble is overhiring. If you went out and hired 15 people before you even knew what you were building, you've created a broken company. So the solution may be to shrink and then figure out what direction to grow in. Massive firing is always a sign company is dangerously close to going out of business and desperately trying to avoid an imminent death.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 20:03 UTC
On Lytro sheds jobs as it shifts focus to video article (506 comments in total)

"The potential of light-field is hard to explain to traditional stills-oriented photographers ..." -- that's a non-starter.

The only interesting thing about that company is where they found such clueless investors. The company is reading as a failure for at least two years now, and there is still somebody adding $50m more to the future losses.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 19:50 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply

"cheaper than Photoshop," -- misplaced concern, Photoshop is already cheap enough so users care more about functionality than about price.

"comes with the added benefit of silky-smooth operation, at least according to its maker" -- solving the problem that doesn't exist? Photoshop is silky smooth, whatever it means.

"because it is newly created for the latest hardware, Serif says Affinity Photo offers performance that Photoshop struggles to match" -- very dubious claim, it's actually a red flag when companies choose such language.

In other words, they want to compete with Adobe but couldn't come up with any serious points why customers would want to switch.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 23:51 UTC as 48th comment | 9 replies

That thing spawned a 100 threads, chewed for a minute and produced a perfectly good panorama from a video. Amazing. Kudos, Microsoft.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 04:38 UTC as 29th comment
Total: 566, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »