keeponkeepingon

keeponkeepingon

Lives in United States United States
Joined on May 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 285, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »

One word.... WANT!

Any chance this will cross the pond to the USA any time soon?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 27, 2012 at 21:06 UTC as 211th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Timbukto: No mention that Google+ stores unlimited images at 2048x for free? You get 1 gb of free storage at higher resolutions. Picasa also lets you sync photos very quickly.

Google + will display the image to you according to what it estimates your user-agent and screen real-estate to be, these tests are misleading and show misunderstanding of core web technology where the complete bottom line is what is the max resolution they allow you to store and download back and that is 2048x which far surpasses facebook. How they Display it is completely up to the user-agent and how Google feels it should be displayed at that point in time. In otherwords Google will still have your 2048x resolution copy of your picture, but if viewed on your smartphone, will only deliver to you the necessary resolution for your mobile display. If google decides to maximize or upscale images in the future if 4k monitors/tv's become standard, they have far more leverage to do so than facebook.

Thanks for pointing the free storage for small (but still greater than most screen res) pictures.

I've not been using piscasaweb etc for some time, mainly due to the lack of storage and horrible presentation of images (understand google+ looks nicer but picasaweb was embarasing).

I was unsure what 2048x meant but it's 2048x2048 according to google:

"Free storage limits

Photos up to 2048 x 2048 pixels and videos up to 15 minutes won't count towards your free storage."

What I don't get is how they can also have video up to 15 minutes as free? It seems like that will be a lot more mb than the pictures?

Ref:
http://support.google.com/picasa/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1224181

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2012 at 01:40 UTC
On Canon ventures back in the water with the rugged D20 article (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: F3.9?????

What the heck canon?

The D10 may have looked strange but at least it was F2.7 (I think?)

F3.9????

For an underwater camera????

Gosh I can't believe I waited for this. I think I'll be better off just getting a case for my S95.

"Why are you so bothered by F3.9??? This is a consumer camera."

So wasn't the D10. This is a downgrade from the D10. Of course I'm bothered. Instead of building something unique such as the D10 canon basicaly just copied the Nikon AW100 or just about any Olympus "tough" adding nothing to the market except the same thing everyone else is selling with the canon brand on it.

THey should be ashamed. We came to expect better with the D10. We waited and waited 3 years for an update and then they deliver this? Sigh of course we are bothered. Look at the thread on the canon forum. The only people happy with it are the folks that think all of these P&S cameras are trash so why bother making something decent....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 01:12 UTC
On Canon ventures back in the water with the rugged D20 article (48 comments in total)

F3.9?????

What the heck canon?

The D10 may have looked strange but at least it was F2.7 (I think?)

F3.9????

For an underwater camera????

Gosh I can't believe I waited for this. I think I'll be better off just getting a case for my S95.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 16:04 UTC as 16th comment | 7 replies

It's interesting to see these companies trying to protect their product lines at the cost of inovation.

P300 series with a 1" "1 system" sensor and the same AF UMF would certainly have been technically feasible.

But then they would risk cutting into "1 system" sales.

So instead we got a P300 with pretty much everything the same but an extra button or two and the latest sony sensor.

And no RAW? What's with that?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2012 at 05:19 UTC as 48th comment | 2 replies
On Panasonic makes DMC-TS20 semi-rugged compact camera article (14 comments in total)

F3.9??????

Kind of dim for UW???

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2012 at 15:30 UTC as 8th comment

Tx200V is up for pre-order on amazon

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006K552LG/

$499

!!!!!

Waterproof? Sony does not guarantee that so it's more like a "hope it does not leak" camera.

Also the TX10 touch screen does not work underwater really limiting the usefullness. Will the TX200 touchscreen work underwater?????

Direct link | Posted on Jan 30, 2012 at 04:55 UTC as 61st comment
On CES 2012: Casio stand report article (11 comments in total)

Caption on the EX-ZS150 reads EX-SZ150

Is their any difference with the ZR200 besides the CCD sensor?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2012 at 17:53 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Did they put the crop tool back into the library module?

That's one of my biggest gripes with LR3. I hit the R shortcut to crop then after cropping often forget now i"m in develop mode then I hit the E to go back to the loupe view. If you crop a lot it may sound like a silly gripe but it really slows me down.

Also it would be cool if the popular culling shortcuts such as pick were on the left hand. I find myself taking my hands off the mouse a lot just to hit the right hand shortcuts such as "P"

Wow thanks!

It also lets you leave the right hand on the mouse for cropping and use just the left hand for picks/rejects and module change back to library after cropping.

I downloaded LR 4 and was disappointed to find the crop is still embedded in the develop module. Very disappointed in this.

Also to view my videos properly it wants Quicktime installed. I've resisted quicktime so far and I'm disappointed LR now requires it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 06:48 UTC

Casio is the Rodney danger field of the computer world and they deserve it.

At one time they released fairly well made high end cameras, that had a premium price and were built like a tank with class leading inovative features.

These days they are a joke. Look at the ZR100 image samples here and compare against the similar Canon or Nikon. Incredibly bad. I was so disappointed in my ZR100 I returned it after a week.

If all you need is a few happy snaps for email or an occasional 4x6 for your great aunt Meg. OK fine you won't care how bad it is. But if you ever need to crop an image, even a little, youll be suprised at how quickly the images fall apart.

Now the dpreview and my ZR100 may have been bad copies (mine actually had a scary rattle) The IR samples were MUCH better. But that's another big issue with Casio..... QC. So good luck if you go with this camera.

And the FH100? Perhaps the last decent camera made by casio and that had it's share of issues.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 23:04 UTC as 11th comment

Did they put the crop tool back into the library module?

That's one of my biggest gripes with LR3. I hit the R shortcut to crop then after cropping often forget now i"m in develop mode then I hit the E to go back to the loupe view. If you crop a lot it may sound like a silly gripe but it really slows me down.

Also it would be cool if the popular culling shortcuts such as pick were on the left hand. I find myself taking my hands off the mouse a lot just to hit the right hand shortcuts such as "P"

Direct link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 02:51 UTC as 11th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

putomax: NOT INTEGRATING/OPENING PREVIOUS CATALOG!!! ... ha ha ha
they're just so funny

probably ADOBE people think it is okay for us to PROCESS OUR images in a new environment (read from scratch) with their latest piece-of-binary-jewlery-money-sucker-bigger-neatier-megabombastic-expensive-thinggie.
do you REALLY think that i don't have anything better to do with my time?!!!

you are NOT paying me, you are NOT giving me ANYTHING (useful/engaged with previous versions of LR) TO WORK WITH or for free... so why the frogging hair would i spent my precious time testing your product if

1 - there's no integration with work/workflows done in previous versions
2 - case i decide not to buy LR4, would have the same problem reading LR4 catalog TO LR3

as a professional, as LR user (since day 1) and as person i am truly mad at this way of fooling us around.

gashô

I would think it is a "good thing" to not let beta software muck around with your production catalog?

Can't you just export your edits/metadata to the jpeg/dng or sidecar file if you decide to go back to LR3?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 02:46 UTC
On CES 2012: Canon stand report article (42 comments in total)

Very nice update Lars!

Was there any sight of a D10 replacement? It's going on 3 years I think and we are all waiting for a D20 or D10x or whatever.

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 11, 2012 at 02:34 UTC as 20th comment
On Preview: Canon PowerShot G1 X large sensor zoom compact article (776 comments in total)

Love it!

Will of course wait for the dpreview and make sure the IQ delivers! If so I may be "in for 1" !

M4/3, NEX, NX, and Fujifilm X-PRO 1?

All of those are bigger and (much) more expensive when equipped the lense to cover the same zoom range.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 17:13 UTC as 50th comment

It's great to see that video support got some love!

What I really need is some help just going through all of my videos. My perfect video library module would allow "time compressed" video play back with pitch correction so you can still understand the voices. Just accelerating 1.25-1.5X or so would have a significant improvement in my workflow.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 14:16 UTC as 26th comment
On King Camera v2.5 - iOS App Review article (33 comments in total)

I really wish dpreview applied the high standard they have for camera reviews to app reviews.

This little product blurb leaves a lot unanswered:

We need to know how this app compares to the other apps, how is it better (or worse)? What is unique about king camera?

Performance! How quick is the camera etc?

Will this app run on older IOSes and how does it perform on older hardware such as the 3gs?

Why should use this app instead of the top camera/ photo apps, (camera+, camera plus, photosynth, adobe, snapseed etc)

Since apps appear to be a recurring subject, perhaps a template similar to the photo reviews would be useful to standardize these reviews and help us compare against this market.

note: edited to be a bit less..... critical...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2012 at 21:40 UTC as 6th comment | 4 replies
On Just Posted: Canon PowerShot S100 review article (134 comments in total)

" From this we can see that the S100's lens is in fact only about 1/3 stop slower than the S95's across the cameras' shared range "

Is there an error in your table?

Because the 1/3rd stop is true for every focal length except 50mm.

At 50mm you are reporting a 2/3rd stop advantage for the S95.

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 30, 2011 at 02:05 UTC as 4th comment
On Just Posted: Canon PowerShot S100 review article (134 comments in total)

DPreview missed a con:

ISO is fixed at ISO 80 for any exposure greater than 1 second.

This may not be an issue for many folks but if you are paying top $$ for manual controls, you would expect the S100 to have a wee bit more control of ISO.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 25, 2011 at 10:18 UTC as 17th comment | 2 replies
On Buyer's Guide: Enthusiast raw-shooting compact cameras article (286 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick Carrigan: Sorry DPReview but you haven't convinced me to shoot in RAW.

You've claimed that shooting in JPEG is a terrible experience. Could it also be a fact that certain companies just have a poor JPEG engine design?

Olympus has created a truly excellent JPEG engine. It isn't just in the XZ-1 but also the E-P/E-PL series as well. Why can't other manufacturer's do this?

Most P&S cameras have awful JPEG engines that can't even compete with an Apple iPhone image. If Apple can make this work, then certainly a *camera* company should be able to -- (a leer towards Canon/Nikon.)

If everyone would invest the time to create a good JPEG engine then RAW mode really wouldn't be necessary for the average user. Sure, RAW has some advantages but it shouldn't be a requirement to justify the camera's IQ.

Personally, I find it sad when I read a review that says "well, the JPEG engine sucks but RAW is great. So, we'll give it a Gold award."

I used to agree with this sentiment.

However, since converting to Lightroom my workflow does not care if it's RAW or JPEG so given that both formats require the same level of effort, I'll take the RAW any day for better post processing flexibility.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2011 at 21:33 UTC
On Buyer's Guide: Enthusiast raw-shooting compact cameras article (286 comments in total)

It is very disappointing that this popular segment gets a watered down buyers guide instead of a "group test" complete with conclusions, ratings and most importantly a winner.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2011 at 02:01 UTC as 85th comment | 5 replies
Total: 285, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »