Clear as Crystal

Clear as Crystal

Joined on Jul 22, 2012

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Nikon D5500 Review preview (361 comments in total)

Barney, can I suggest that one way to reduce the shouts of "foul" from people who haven't had their choice of brand reviewed may be to post something on dpreview which states when you asked for a camera from the manufacture, when it was received and a tag showing pending, making our first impressions, under review or completed review? that may show where the sticking points are rather than you lot needing to defend yourselves from the same accusations of ignoring brand x after each review.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 2, 2015 at 21:26 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies
On 3,200MP LSST camera gets construction approval article (257 comments in total)

Great sensor but the kit lens gives really poor flare performance.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2015 at 20:21 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

Clear as Crystal: Can't believe people are trying to turn this into a negative story about Nikon build quality. Was there ever a camera that received absolutely no negative comments and absolutely no reported issues? Nothing is perfect, Nikon seem to be really trying to change the image that they don't respond to build quality issues.

Also this is about Nikon addressing concerns, why the hell is anyone even mentioning Canon, Pentax or Sony? If you really need to justify your choice of system you desperately need:
a, a life
b, to actually take some photos
c, more confidence in your own ability to choose or
d, less of a Napoleon complex

Incidentally this is coming from and admittedly amateur Canon and Fuji user.

OK - And now deep breaths.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 22:38 UTC
In reply to:

Clear as Crystal: Can't believe people are trying to turn this into a negative story about Nikon build quality. Was there ever a camera that received absolutely no negative comments and absolutely no reported issues? Nothing is perfect, Nikon seem to be really trying to change the image that they don't respond to build quality issues.

Also this is about Nikon addressing concerns, why the hell is anyone even mentioning Canon, Pentax or Sony? If you really need to justify your choice of system you desperately need:
a, a life
b, to actually take some photos
c, more confidence in your own ability to choose or
d, less of a Napoleon complex

Incidentally this is coming from and admittedly amateur Canon and Fuji user.

@ Abrasive

Ok fair comment, scrap the negative comments part, that was badly worded - i still stand by the question - has there ever been a camera with absolutely no reported issues?

As I said my issue isn't that some stuff isn't up to par, its more that I really am getting sick of people slagging off either equipment or manufactures for what appears to be simply for the sake of it.

Camera these days are amazing in several ways. the tech is amazing, the quality of photo that even a low end DSLR can produce is superb and yet some people continue to complain that "nikon has build quality issues", "canon has a 4 year old sensor" "Pentax still hasn't made a full frame", "sony doesn't have the 93.25mm lens I want".

My point is if people buy into a system then they shouldn't feel so insecure that they need to complain about all other systems or overhype any issues.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 22:36 UTC
In reply to:

Clear as Crystal: Can't believe people are trying to turn this into a negative story about Nikon build quality. Was there ever a camera that received absolutely no negative comments and absolutely no reported issues? Nothing is perfect, Nikon seem to be really trying to change the image that they don't respond to build quality issues.

Also this is about Nikon addressing concerns, why the hell is anyone even mentioning Canon, Pentax or Sony? If you really need to justify your choice of system you desperately need:
a, a life
b, to actually take some photos
c, more confidence in your own ability to choose or
d, less of a Napoleon complex

Incidentally this is coming from and admittedly amateur Canon and Fuji user.

And that can only be a good thing.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 22:17 UTC
In reply to:

Clear as Crystal: Can't believe people are trying to turn this into a negative story about Nikon build quality. Was there ever a camera that received absolutely no negative comments and absolutely no reported issues? Nothing is perfect, Nikon seem to be really trying to change the image that they don't respond to build quality issues.

Also this is about Nikon addressing concerns, why the hell is anyone even mentioning Canon, Pentax or Sony? If you really need to justify your choice of system you desperately need:
a, a life
b, to actually take some photos
c, more confidence in your own ability to choose or
d, less of a Napoleon complex

Incidentally this is coming from and admittedly amateur Canon and Fuji user.

@ Conrad

Yes, my view is people need to stop the damn moaning when a company actually fixes a problem, stop the name dropping and one up man ship and actually give some credit where its due.

Time for the trolls to come up from under their bridges!

@ Redhed
I think one major problem is people need to realise anything mechanical can't be perfect, yes the flare will cause some problems for some people, thats not my point. My issue is people trying to spin the fact that nikon is doing something about it into a negative. From the outside (as someone who doesn't use Nikon) they messed up with the reaction to the 600 but they look like they are trying to fix that perception with newer camera problems.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 22:10 UTC

Can't believe people are trying to turn this into a negative story about Nikon build quality. Was there ever a camera that received absolutely no negative comments and absolutely no reported issues? Nothing is perfect, Nikon seem to be really trying to change the image that they don't respond to build quality issues.

Also this is about Nikon addressing concerns, why the hell is anyone even mentioning Canon, Pentax or Sony? If you really need to justify your choice of system you desperately need:
a, a life
b, to actually take some photos
c, more confidence in your own ability to choose or
d, less of a Napoleon complex

Incidentally this is coming from and admittedly amateur Canon and Fuji user.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 21:32 UTC as 34th comment | 8 replies
On Niki Feijen's haunting images of abandoned houses article (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saffron_Blaze: It is quite obvious things have been arranged in the rooms for artistic effect.

Yes, as far as I see it the HDR is just a choice, the viewer can like it or not, thats fine its their choice / opinion but the staging without being upfront about it to me is deceitful. I know its common but its still not something I like.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 22:00 UTC
On Niki Feijen's haunting images of abandoned houses article (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saffron_Blaze: It is quite obvious things have been arranged in the rooms for artistic effect.

Yup, Just look at #6. Rubble all over but the chair is clear. Don't have a problem with it as long as the guy is upfront about it not being real, or is that only me?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 14:22 UTC
In reply to:

Michel J: @ Clear Cristal:

Analogy between Apple and Adobe make sense.

> same about apps for W7 or android both of which now use similar distribution systems?
You right, same things. But we already knew where the "clouds computing" wants to bring us, no? Making consumers totally captives imho.
Adobe and Mac it's not quite different. since we know Adobe is an historic partner of Apple.
What's goes wrong with Adobe, and from now on with any app's stores, is you pay licences REPETITIVELY, for many things: PostScript printers, fonts, PS part of OS, softwares and so on, it's robbing us. But if you stop using it, you must buy a new licence the next you need it (embedded, no matter if you already paid many times: for that, if your peripherals are died hard by "built-in-obsolescence...") yeah it's robbing us! from the V1.0-1990 (Mac) 1982 for PostScript. It's also illegal imho

I mixing up distribution and licensing because it's the CORE of same buisness: MAKE MONEY based on customers asservissment

OK - I started out giving you the benefit of the doubt but now I am convinced you are simply trolling. You continue to not answer my questions and cannot give examples when challenged. You misrepresent facts and complain when things do what they were meant to do / don't do what they aren't meant to do. If you are using the ability to buy downloadable apps as an excuse to pirate and crack software then you have absolutely no sympathy from me.

If you cannot give justifications, fact and reasoned argument then I am not going to waste anymore of my time.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2013 at 12:53 UTC
In reply to:

Michel J: @ Clear Cristal:

Analogy between Apple and Adobe make sense.

> same about apps for W7 or android both of which now use similar distribution systems?
You right, same things. But we already knew where the "clouds computing" wants to bring us, no? Making consumers totally captives imho.
Adobe and Mac it's not quite different. since we know Adobe is an historic partner of Apple.
What's goes wrong with Adobe, and from now on with any app's stores, is you pay licences REPETITIVELY, for many things: PostScript printers, fonts, PS part of OS, softwares and so on, it's robbing us. But if you stop using it, you must buy a new licence the next you need it (embedded, no matter if you already paid many times: for that, if your peripherals are died hard by "built-in-obsolescence...") yeah it's robbing us! from the V1.0-1990 (Mac) 1982 for PostScript. It's also illegal imho

I mixing up distribution and licensing because it's the CORE of same buisness: MAKE MONEY based on customers asservissment

@ Michel J

No it still doesn't make sense. Please give me an example of an app from the app store which stops working after a month or tell me which features of my OS stopped working since I sure as hell haven't noticed it refusing to start up with the dialogue box about paying for next months use.

The only possible analogies I can see are
1, movies rented through ITunes, which we are clearly offered a temporary licence to view
2, things like itunes match, which is simply online storage / sync and the original files are still on your computer.

As I said below I have no problem with people complaining about companies but at least complain about things which are real and don't use outright inaccuracies to spread an opinion which clearly cannot be backed up by you.

Rant over, Im now going to go and work on the mac, which according to you should have stopped working a month after I bought it! Good job no one told the laptop that!

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2013 at 05:38 UTC

Just thought of a great conspiracy theory.

Adobe has just moved to CC and said (I believe) that CS6 non CC wont be updated for new cameras.

Cannon users are desperately waiting for 70D and 7DmkII with new sensors.

An Adobe - Canon deal?

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 16:19 UTC as 75th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Michel J: As Apple does, they use our money of licenced guys who paid for a friendly workflow environment to develop and promote something totally unfriendly for the rest of us, and what desserve our cause...! Then only for do more money.

(permanent-subscription-based model, net-boot apps downloadable only through the clouds and so on)

only for doing more money without any sens of ethic nor educational way of thinking.

@Michel J

Thats an absolutely nonsensical reply, even if I assume you translated it from French!

There is a saying, "if you have nothing worthwhile to say, don't say anything". I await your sensible reply to anything I said above but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

rdc13: All the creative directors, illustrators, designers, and photographers that I work with are discussing how to move away from Photoshop so they can protect their assets WITHOUT having to be tied to a service that they can't control.

More and more I hear this: Give me a product, not a service.

Found an alternative for you which may be better.

Highlight an event - got to file/reveal in finder/ original file then copy these and paste into an external folder named the same as your event. do this for each of your even folders.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 10:22 UTC
In reply to:

Michel J: As Apple does, they use our money of licenced guys who paid for a friendly workflow environment to develop and promote something totally unfriendly for the rest of us, and what desserve our cause...! Then only for do more money.

(permanent-subscription-based model, net-boot apps downloadable only through the clouds and so on)

only for doing more money without any sens of ethic nor educational way of thinking.

@Michel J

Sorry but this analogy with apple that you and seemingly quite a few other people are making is crazy (and incidentally why don't you say the same about apps for windows 7 or android both of which now use similar distribution systems?).

You are mixing up a method of distribution and a method of licensing. Changing a distribution method if fine for me - I can re-download the file whenever I wish without repaying as long as its with my apple ID, I pay once and I don't need to repay to use the same stuff again. Personally I haven't used my CD drive for years. The point of the Adobe model is that you effectively get a licence to use the software for one month after which you need effectively to buy it again.

I have no issue with people complaining about Apple / IBM / Microsoft / Adobe /insert any other company here but
if you wish to make analogies try comparing like with like and don't twist facts.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 09:52 UTC
In reply to:

rdc13: All the creative directors, illustrators, designers, and photographers that I work with are discussing how to move away from Photoshop so they can protect their assets WITHOUT having to be tied to a service that they can't control.

More and more I hear this: Give me a product, not a service.

Right click (or control click) on the IPhoto library and choose "show package contents". Navigate to masters and you should find them in folders ordered by date. If you want to have them in groups of event names thou will need to rename the files in IPhoto with an event name before you do this (from memory I thing you can give a group of files an event name and append them with a number fairly easily however I haven't used IPhoto for a while - I use aperture now. I will see if I can confirm the renaming for you.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 09:36 UTC

Really don’t like this. If the software simply “phoned home” each month to check it wasn’t pirated it wouldn’t be a problem for me but there are only a few reasons for a company introducing a monthly subscription system as far as I can see.
1, Keep the user base up to date for security (best will in the world I don’t think this is Adobes intention)
2, Tie in the user so its difficult for them to move away.
3, Tie in the user because you have run out of ideas which will get them to pay for an upgrade
4, Solve your own internal cash flow problems.
5, help create your own “ecosystem”
I don’t mind the whole software as a service trend but only when combined with open file standards, as soon as you add a proprietary file format into the mix you change to a system where you can’t easily go to other software and you can’t stay the same (by not upgrading).

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 11:32 UTC as 337th comment | 1 reply

Does no one else think this may be a minor upgrade just to get numbering system lined up for marketing? 700D, 70D, 7DII? Then the 600 gets removed leaving the 100 in its place (7000D being too like the Nikon D7000). From my point of view (an amateur) I always found it strange that the Nikon D7000 series had a numbering system which seems to suggest an earlier generation than the 3000 and 5000 series.

I know its not true but to a amateur who walks into a shop it could put them off buying the more expensive camera in favour of one which appears to be a newer generation if they lack the background knowledge to know better.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 16:54 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
On Just posted: Hands-on preview of the Canon EOS 100D/SL1 article (379 comments in total)

Does no one else think this may be a minor upgrade just to get numbering system lined up for marketing? 700D, 70D, 7DII? Then the 600 gets removed leaving the 100 in its place (7000D being too like the Nikon D7000). From my point of view (an amateur) I always found it strange that the Nikon D7000 series had a numbering system which seems to suggest an earlier generation than the 3000 and 5000 series.

I know its not true but to a amateur who walks into a shop it could put them off buying the more expensive camera in favour of one which appears to be a newer generation if they lack the background knowledge to know better.

SORRY, SHOULD HAVE POSTED THIS ON THE 700D COMMENTS

Direct link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 16:48 UTC as 78th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Clear as Crystal: Sounds a great idea. Only problem I can see is if the time to reset the pixel is significant compared to the exposure time. In that case the pixel wouldn't gain any extra charge during the reset and this would leave a plateau in the signal before increasing again, giving a lower value than it really should be.
Nothing says it needs to stop at one reset either. If this works consistently it could be a really impressive next step for sensors.

The way I see it resetting the pixel would work well as long as it has the chance to reset and start gathering more electrons. As you say in that case you just add a correction factor, the problem would be if the reset time was significant and the pixel was reset but hadn't started the new collection yet. In that case you cant add a correction since you don't know how many to add.

Perhaps an alternative is to record the time needed to reach full then use that to give an estimated value for the full exposure time. Rambus if your listening feel free to make me an offer for using that idea :)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 27, 2013 at 17:20 UTC
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »