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: 81, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Canon warns about dangers of counterfeit camera gear article (147 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 17th comment | 2 replies
On Mono a mono: Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) hands-on article (622 comments in total)

Is the LCD also monochrome, i.e. no color filter? If so, is the resolution 921,600 of B&W pixels?

I'm suspecting no (which is quite a shame for a monochrome camera).
921,600 translates to 640 x 480 x 3 (RGB) for color screens which I suspect this is too.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 1, 2015 at 15:39 UTC as 72nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Lapkonium: The only soft product by Microsoft that ACTUALLY WORX GOOWD

Yes, you're right. It doesn't at all run on this rarely used OS called... what was it? Doors? Blinds? Ah, yes, Windows :-)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 00:13 UTC
On sands of time in the Macro - Grain(s) challenge (5 comments in total)

So artistic! Great concept and well executed!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 03:29 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Amnon G: More of the same, with the smell of segmentation all over (hey, it's what customers buy so I can't fault them). It's time for new technologies to show up in the rugged world. folded lenses and tiny crappy sensors can only go so far.
NFC/Wifi/etc. is nice, but having a rugged camera is still a big compromise in picture quality which is a shame.

I agree, a very different camera.
I have a TS4, and really can't see a reason to upgrade.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 07:20 UTC

More of the same, with the smell of segmentation all over (hey, it's what customers buy so I can't fault them). It's time for new technologies to show up in the rugged world. folded lenses and tiny crappy sensors can only go so far.
NFC/Wifi/etc. is nice, but having a rugged camera is still a big compromise in picture quality which is a shame.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2015 at 21:17 UTC as 13th comment | 3 replies

Almost all mounts but Fuji X...

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 19:45 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Amnon G: Still happy to get the X-E2 upgrade, but look carefully and face the truth - X-T1 is getting a ton of updates, X-E2 a few and X-E1 even fewer.
This means that either Fuji is still (albeit less than others) doing market segmentation, i.e. artificially limiting products according to their market segment band (top, mid, bottom), or development is structured as verticals like other camera makers, where unlike PCs where the same binaries work on an Intel i3, i5 or i7 (or even the Q6600 of 9 years ago), here the firmware is very much married to the camera, making updates to 3 cameras cost 3 times more than to 1 camera.
It's probably something in-between.
Again, I got more updates to my X-E2 than 4 years of my Nikon D90, and it's not because there was nothing to improve on the D90.

I am actually not blaming Fuji of marketing tactics and artificial segmentation by software, I would really like to understand the process. If you take 2 computers they can be vastly different, have different hardware capabilities and yet except for device driver which provide hardware abstraction the software is identical. If cameras, especially close siblings such as X-E2 and X-T1 (and X-100S/T?) have their software layered like that, there should be no reason why X-T1 gets (for example) Q-menu customization but X-E2 doesn't. Take another set of devices - iPhones - The 4s, 5, 5s, 5c, 6, 6+ all have arguably bigger differences in their hardware than the X-E2 to X-T1 guts (not talking about the external dials), and yet all of them, i.e. 4 iterations of the iPhone runs the same software, probably on top of a hardware abstraction layer of some sort. Fuji is the closest to continue improving released cameras than anything I've seen, but still nothing close to an iPhone or Windows.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 21:33 UTC

Still happy to get the X-E2 upgrade, but look carefully and face the truth - X-T1 is getting a ton of updates, X-E2 a few and X-E1 even fewer.
This means that either Fuji is still (albeit less than others) doing market segmentation, i.e. artificially limiting products according to their market segment band (top, mid, bottom), or development is structured as verticals like other camera makers, where unlike PCs where the same binaries work on an Intel i3, i5 or i7 (or even the Q6600 of 9 years ago), here the firmware is very much married to the camera, making updates to 3 cameras cost 3 times more than to 1 camera.
It's probably something in-between.
Again, I got more updates to my X-E2 than 4 years of my Nikon D90, and it's not because there was nothing to improve on the D90.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 08:21 UTC as 43rd comment | 8 replies
On Amazon Fire Phone camera review post (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: lol reviewing a product 2 months later that absolutely no one bought.

With technology advancing beyond the good-enough stage (which arguably cell-phones, compact cameras, etc. have for many different uses), sensor size (and the resulting physics of DoF, for example) will gradually become a tool rather than a topic for an argument. The numbers - dynamic range, megapixels, RAW-bits, will become moot argument points just like which computer is better for games - a beefy desktop, laptop or an iPad or even what is a better medium for art - oil paint, crayons or chalk.
At the end of the day, it is possible to make art with a cellphone as much as it is possible (and usual) to make photos no one will look at with the best, most expensive camera, or not make photos at all because the darn thing weighs 10lbs and is at home most of the time.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 30, 2014 at 17:31 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (340 comments in total)

It's all about compromises in photography. Fuji also has the 50-230 and 55-200 lenses that are lighter and cheaper, with the sacrifice being the variable and slower aperture.
I realize the lenses here are of constant aperture so they are different lenses.
Also, it would be important to note that APSC at F2.8 has DoF comparable to FF at F4, which adds some food for thought in these comparison. Considering FF chips have double the surface area of APSC chips and it becomes clearer that if size and weight are out of the picture (no pun intended), FF trumps APSC.
The bottom line is that the best camera is the one you have with you and doesn't get in the way of photography (i.e. you are so familiar with the controls that you can use your brain to take the photo rather than think about the controls), so the best newest camera at home that you are not intimate in operating is in many cases worth far less than the compact (OK, make it an APSC mirrorless :-)) that you carry with you.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2014 at 21:35 UTC as 44th comment

Is carrying an unsightly item like that really better than taking pictures with your phone and sharing?
Not for me, looks as awkward as taking pictures with a tablet.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 17:02 UTC as 10th comment

Is the 440 photos battery life with a phone serving as a screen, i.e. constantly using wireless communications to show stuff on the phone LCD?
Interesting design, which of course sacrifices physical controls.
Heck, maybe this is the dawn of the build-your-own-camera age - get a screen size of your choice (a phone), get the camera core (like the QX1) and then a bunch of physical controls that will work with the app. This could be seen as an extension to vertical grippers which connect to a camera and add features like physical controls, battery life, etc. Sony itself or third party companies could be making several bodies for this camera with fewer or more physical controls or other features.
Of course, that depends on the size of the market as a chicken-and-egg problem.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2014 at 18:02 UTC as 64th comment | 1 reply
On Behind the Shot: Flames of the North article (68 comments in total)

I've seen more pictures similar to this with ice and a background (yes, I'm grossly over-generalizing), and the ice looks flat and not really connected in these cases. It's almost like two pictures in one and I don't know where to look - there is no line or focal point, in other words I don't know what is the subject of the photo - a lot of stuff is in the middle - the ice piece, the horizon - it's indecisive for me.
A lot of technical parts to the image, but the lines in the photo (which are visible without any focus stacking or improvements) don't entice me, so the final product (beyond the beauty of its parts) doesn't either.
Yes, it's easy to be a critic, I should produce something better and then talk, etc. :-)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 11, 2014 at 16:38 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1267 comments in total)

8MP frames from a video creates a whole new capability of extracting the best photo out of a video instead of continuous shooting. This could be very handy for many things, from sports to kids to animals.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 01:17 UTC as 55th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Amnon G: Fun doesn't have to be practical and art doesn't have to make sense to everyone. I'm personally the engineer type and don't do such things but it looks like they had fun. And the results are great, and I personally don't care whether Photoshop was involved or not.
Kuddos!

OK, then I guess I am not the type that does these things, regardless of being an engineer. better? :-)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 14:41 UTC
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1604 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: Perfect. Such a relief. I have no need to upgrade my D800.

Now back to the 1980s when I only had to upgrade a camera every 10 years because I wore it out. That's worth spending $3k for.

Disruptive should come in the form of better "film" - imagine a 10-stop (~1000X) improvement in signal to noise ratio, enabling ISO to be essentially a thing of the past in terms of being a major decision point in less than ideal light - already that's one of my favorite aspects of my Fuji X-E2 - you're right it's not the resolution but the consistency over a broad range of ISO - when high ISO doesn't compromise shots anymore and as a photographer you can think of the two creative parameters shutter speed and F-stop and not care whether the result requires ISO 100, 1600, 6,400 or even 102,400. Noise will become an artistic tool that's completely orthogonal to other parameters, like it is today at the ~1,600 range compared to film days.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 22:25 UTC
On Nikon D810 Preview preview (1604 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: Perfect. Such a relief. I have no need to upgrade my D800.

Now back to the 1980s when I only had to upgrade a camera every 10 years because I wore it out. That's worth spending $3k for.

So if the camera had 2X resolution, 4K video, etc. you'd need to upgrade? Regardless of what Nikon or any company releases, your camera is still as good and your photography skills are the same, so what difference would it make?
Makes it sound like making improvements is a bad thing, which seems strange. After all, the same progress is what produced your camera of choice.
Personally this "tapering off" of progress rate just means that it's time for another disruptive technology advancement.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 16:15 UTC
Total: 81, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »