Amnon G

Amnon G

Lives in United States Bellevue, WA, United States
Works as a Program Manager
Has a website at www.spacepirations.com
Joined on May 19, 2005
About me:

Family man, space enthusiast, technologist and photography buff seeking simplicity.

Comments

Total: 94, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Amnon G: Interestingly FW4 didn't bring all features of X-E2s. The missing ones are shutter-speed IS features and auto-mode with scene selection.

Been engaging with FujiRumors and I don't know yet why the FW of the X-E2s is not identical to X-E2 now and if there's any hardware differences between the two except for cosmetic button labeling.

No, BarnET. I mean IS. Find the IS options in the X-E2s user manual and compare with the X-E2 FW4 user manual. X-E2s has more options.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 00:19 UTC

Interestingly FW4 didn't bring all features of X-E2s. The missing ones are shutter-speed IS features and auto-mode with scene selection.

Been engaging with FujiRumors and I don't know yet why the FW of the X-E2s is not identical to X-E2 now and if there's any hardware differences between the two except for cosmetic button labeling.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 21:20 UTC as 32nd comment | 4 replies
On article Fujifilm announces development of EF-X500 flash (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

Amnon G: Dumb question risk: Why does anyone release something like this with AA batteries and not a modern Litium Ion (or Polymer) battery? Most Fuji X cameras use the WP-126 battery, why not use that instead?

It's been a while since I've seen any digital camera use AA batteries, why do flashes still cling to those?

All of the above makes sense and I use eneloop in my tiny EF-X20 flash as well. However as a flash coming from Fuji for the X system that unlike other vendors largely shares a battery (X-Pro1, X-Pro2, X-T10, X-T1, X-E1, X-E2, X-E2s all share the same battery). Are you saying that it wouldn't make a smaller flash unit if that battery would be used?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 18:34 UTC

What's that flash location? Is "red-eyes" a premium feature now?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 05:51 UTC as 44th comment | 3 replies
On article Fujifilm announces development of EF-X500 flash (84 comments in total)

Dumb question risk: Why does anyone release something like this with AA batteries and not a modern Litium Ion (or Polymer) battery? Most Fuji X cameras use the WP-126 battery, why not use that instead?

It's been a while since I've seen any digital camera use AA batteries, why do flashes still cling to those?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2016 at 01:06 UTC as 15th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

ozturert: I had to look at the price again, just to make sure. I think Fuji feels the pressure of competition on their neck. 999 with lit lens is really good, but then second hand XE2's prices will drop even further.

Look at the last photo (or the Fujifilm website) - electronic shutter is coming to XE2.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

Nick8: X-E3 will come as soon as enough X-Pro2 cameras will be sold. It is quite obvious.
The new sensor in Fujifilm X-Pro2 will be probably used in the future X-E3 as well.
Although X-E2s looks like a very minor step-up, Fujifilm seems to have a consistent strategy, IMO.

No hardware tweak needed, X-E2 is getting the electronic shutter of up to 1/32000 exactly like X-T10, X-T1 etc.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 21:00 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: So you can turn the X-E2 into an X-E2s with firmware? Better snatch up those clearance X-E2 while you can. I didn't have to look very hard to find new X-E2 for around $500.

Looks like you can, electronic shutter included.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 20:58 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Giuseppe Milo (32 comments in total)

I like the dark focal point in the photos - the silhouettes make me wanting more as it is like the subject of the photo has no details and leaves enough for the imagination.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2015 at 17:54 UTC as 24th comment
On challenge In Seconds - Long exposures (4 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael L NYC 99: I predict a milky way shot will win. :-)

Please no (unless it has more merit than just technique). Art transcends technique.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 17:31 UTC
On photo new star in the In Seconds - Long exposures challenge (1 comment in total)

Nice! What is this?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 17:21 UTC as 1st comment

Awesome, no import!
I'm a LR/PS subscriber and failed 3 times to get into LR because of the library management.
Been a happy Photo Gallery Live user for years, using PS heavily.
Will definitely check this out.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2015 at 06:18 UTC as 3rd comment

Won't the gold color ring have the potential to be reflected off and create image artifacts?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 21:34 UTC as 49th comment | 4 replies
On article A lot to Leica? Hands-on with the Leica SL (Typ 601) (1500 comments in total)

This camera is so professional it comes with an assistant to carry it and an entourage that keeps telling you "it's so big!".

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 03:32 UTC as 301st comment
In reply to:

happypoppeye: Compressed RAW is not RAW. Its compressed.

It all depends on lossy vs lossless. Sony is currently doing lossy compression.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 17:18 UTC
On article And the winners are: DPReview Awards 2015 (392 comments in total)

Not that everything DPReview (or anyone else) says is to live and die for... but Fujifilm, as much as I love my X-E2 it is starting to look long in the tooth - time for a real replacement, not another camera with the same engine inside (like X-M1, X-T1, X-T10, X-100T, ...)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 05:33 UTC as 70th comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1595 comments in total)
In reply to:

Skipper494: For a lot less, you can get an APS-C mirrorless and two kit zooms, also dpreview wrongly attributes an uncompressed file capability again, RAW is heavily 'lossy' compressed.

Yes, but it's a very different want/need. An APS-C with 2 kit zooms (which I happen to have) is several times the volume and weight of this camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 01:24 UTC
On article Canon warns about dangers of counterfeit camera gear (154 comments in total)
In reply to:

zhaltees: You know what grinds my gears?

It's how major manufacturers rip customers on accessories and creates limitations to avoid competition. 30 years ago there were dozens of different manufacturers making lenses and flashes for any kind of camera. There was actual competition. These days Canon, Nikon, Sony use their own "standards" and protocols that make it near impossible to build well working competing accessories. The only major competitors in lens market for Canon, Nikon and Sony are Tamron and Sigma. And even then you may expect issues with some lenses on some cameras.

As for flashes I am a big fan of Yongnuo. As enthusiast I would not spend £200 on 430EX, but I can have a YN568 which cost one third of that and outperforms the 430EX in every way. Not to mention the strobist favorite YN 460 series, which can be had for as little as £30-50 and the only major downside is lack of ETTL, yet the later versions can be controlled remotely in groups which is amazing for such budget flashes.

1. Tokina, Tamron, Sigma, etc. make lenses for Nikon, Canon and others.
2. Lenses 30 years ago were manual - no auto anything.
3. You can actually use old lenses in many cases on new bodies (full manual of course).

I do agree camera manufacturers do many things I don't like (for example run different software on different cameras so unlike computers older models don't get new features), but lenses is not one of them.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 4, 2015 at 05:56 UTC
In reply to:

Amnon G: I appreciate the effort but the result is stitched poorly. For example, look at the cable car and the entire area behind it. It is full of artifacts such as different shading and simply broken lines.
I'm sorry to say that this image has nothing going for it but an arbitrary gigapixel number and the rest is simply bad.

If the goal is to optimize on the number of pixels, then this is a success. However if it is to create an interesting, well-stitched seamless photograph that like any good photo leaves the viewer with just a bit of wonder, then this is failure.
Optimizing on the number of pixels alone can yield a 375GP+1 of a flat wall. I think most people will agree that working months on that is not a great endeavor.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2015 at 06:07 UTC

I appreciate the effort but the result is stitched poorly. For example, look at the cable car and the entire area behind it. It is full of artifacts such as different shading and simply broken lines.
I'm sorry to say that this image has nothing going for it but an arbitrary gigapixel number and the rest is simply bad.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2015 at 04:57 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
Total: 94, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »