teddoman

teddoman

Lives in United States New York, NY, United States
Joined on Nov 20, 2012
About me:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tedchang/

Comments

Total: 52, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Marty4650: Those are the best quality photos I have ever seen coming from a smartphone.

Of course, the real question is.... how many smartphone users want, need, or are willing to pay for better quality photos? Over one billion smartphones were sold last year, and very few of them were purchased to take high quality photos.

You really don't need image quality this good for facebook posts or email attachments. So will these users pay a very high premium price to get better photos?

My guess is.... no.

Nice exercise in proving it can be done, but I think Apple and Samsung are safe.

What's the street price going to be when this hits the US market? People pay $750 for a phone and $1000+ phone for their cameras already. This is a twofer.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 01:28 UTC

I saw a press release that it's scheduled to get Android Lollipop in May. Exciting, as Lollipop is a great upgrade in many ways.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2015 at 21:23 UTC as 25th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

samfan: Just my personal opinion: I don't see the point. If you like photography, you most likely want to use other lenses than just 28mm.

Okay there's the advantage of being able to post photos instantly, but where do you need to post pics instandly? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram? Why do you need any kind of quality for that? When I look at reviews of this phone on typical phone/gadget sites, they just post small snaps of the typical stuff: food, blown out sun shots and details unsuitable for a 28mm lens.

And the price: it costs one grand. You can buy a RX100III and a comparable phone for that or less. The RX100 will definitely last longer, while phones get switched every year or two.

So the only use for such a device is a backup camera for cases where you don't have the regular camera... But with 2 cm thickness and 200 grams in this phone, it's definitely not 'going light'.

Since and weight don't matter at all to photographers. That's why there aren't photogs who sold their DSLRs and switched to mirrorless. Clearly there is no appeal to small pocketable offerings.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 16:15 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

mugupo: Wait till Sony A7000 which just around the corner, it will likely put this camera to shame. with EVF and better video function.

LOL. True on that, though at least when Sony convalesces and gives us its version, it'll be a rangefinder with an EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 17:24 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

1080 could be done w/o line skipping on today's sensors by simply cropping to the 16:9 aspect ratio and then sampling, eg a 10mp sensor could crop to 3840x2160 (8mp) and then take 2:1 sample to get to 1920x1080. Nothing about sensor size inherently demands line skipping.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 17:22 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

If you think no one is going to line skip at 4K, then I have a bridge to sell you. Just look at all the line skipping 1080 cameras. They could crop and do 1:1 readout, but many don't.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 16:30 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

I stand corrected. (I haven't followed the LX100 much since its initial release.) The video stills from the LX100's 4K do look quite nice and clean. LX100 does look like a great value for fixed lens video. For ILC body, there's NX500 etc.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 15:44 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

NX500 uses a cropped portion of the sensor to do full 4K. The resolution of that part of the sensor is exactly 4K. No downsampling.

LX100 is a great camera, but it's no GH4 on the video side. The dpr review doesn't speculate on whether it is line skipping or what, but it says 4K doesn't look like the best (downsampled full sensor or 1:1 from a cropped portion of the sensor), which leaves line skipping and other possibilities. For someone who is primarily a photographer, though, the LX100 is the better value.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 14:44 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: What happens when you stick a Ferrari engine in a Skoda body.

Whatever you may do in a camera forum, DON'T diss the Skoda. ;)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 11:56 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

LX100, as great a camera as it is, doesn't appear to have the 1:1 sensor readout for video. There doesn't appear to be anyone doing high resolution 4K for $800. Of course you can buy a smartphone that does "4K" but it's not true 4K like the NX500.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 11:53 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

Put it this way. Full 1:1 readout (of the cropped portion of the sensor) 4K is not offered by *anyone* for $800 right now. Even a bit crippled, the NX500 specs are impressive.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2015 at 21:13 UTC
On Aloha! We go shooting with Samsung's new NX500 article (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: I'm a Nikon shooter, but I recently bought an NX1 for its amazing 4K video capabilities (and I'm extremely satisfied with the results. Incidentally, it's also a great still camera. And the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 + 50-150 f/2.8 zooms are top-notch.)

It would have been totally awesome if Samsung had released the NX500 with the same 4K video capabilities as the NX1 (not to mention it would have saved me $750...), but unfortunately 4K video on the NX500 works only if the sensor is cropped by a factor of 1.6. What the hell were they thinking? If this camera had the same 4K video as the NX1 for a mere $800, it would fly off the shelves.

Even if we all had our hopes up, they were actually thinking like every other manufacturer in the market today. Why would we hold them to a higher standard? Sony only has full sensor readout 4K in a $2500 body, and it doesn't even record it internally. Anything in the NX500 price range doesn't come with full sensor readout as far as I know.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2015 at 20:22 UTC
In reply to:

D1N0: So I can just buy a bag instead of a mirror less.

Well mirrorless is all about reducing size and weight :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 22:32 UTC
On Flasher smartphone flash launched on Kickstarter post (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeyLNG: The one with the Flasher looks pretty bad...

Maybe I'm expecting too much. This would be useful in a pinch.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2015 at 20:15 UTC
On Flasher smartphone flash launched on Kickstarter post (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeyLNG: The one with the Flasher looks pretty bad...

Not even a bounce design? You can tell they are non-photographers from that "amazing" photo.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2015 at 20:06 UTC
On CP+ 2015 Sigma Interview article (197 comments in total)

Fascinating piece. Makes one want to root for their success.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 22:35 UTC as 77th comment
In reply to:

ChrisH37: $1600 for the 35 is 'intimidating' to say the least. Nearly double the launch price of the Sigma 35 ART (which works brilliantly via the LA-EA4)

I was weighing up going for a Sony a99 or an A7ii, as somebody who shoots at 35mm extensively I think the a99 has just gained a sale.

I think the misalignment comes from having an AF sensor array that is separate from the sensor. CDAF is sensor based so there is no misalignment. But the EA adapters have an AF sensor array inside them to make them like the A mount bodies.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 16:47 UTC

Looking forward to hearing how direct drive SSM on the new 35mm improves C-AF performance with A6000's hybrid AF.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 16:17 UTC as 40th comment
In reply to:

ChrisH37: $1600 for the 35 is 'intimidating' to say the least. Nearly double the launch price of the Sigma 35 ART (which works brilliantly via the LA-EA4)

I was weighing up going for a Sony a99 or an A7ii, as somebody who shoots at 35mm extensively I think the a99 has just gained a sale.

The Sigma and EA4 create the potential for focus misalignment that requires fine tuning, test charts, and other excruciating boredom. I loved the 35 Art when I had it, but avoiding that hassle alone is worth the price difference :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

Beat Traveller: The 28mm seems like a good deal.

Interesting to see a fly by wire aperture ring on the 35mm. This trend really seems to be catching on!

I wonder what we would find if we actually tested mechanical aperture adjustment mechanisms. They strike me as rather approximate. They look as if a nudge results in a not particularly precise movement in the aperture. What if it goes out of alignment over time? I'd guess a fly by wire is more accurate.

Regardless, manufacturers all have an incentive to make all aspects of lenses electrical. That way the lenses are useless on other mounts.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 15:52 UTC
Total: 52, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »