Revenant

Revenant

Joined on Jul 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 1195, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Pentax XG-1 real-world sample gallery posted article (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

zos xavius: This sensor looks like a decent improvement on recent 16mp BSI sensors of late. Less watercolor. Noise doesn't look horrible at 400 like the older sensors either. Its not fantastic or anything and I think a Pentax QS-1 would crush this on IQ, but hey for $175 its not bad at all.

I'm not so sure the sensor is different. It could just as well be improved noise reduction.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2015 at 20:51 UTC
In reply to:

Photoman: "Sigma UK has said that the company's latest compact camera "

DP0 161.4mm/6.4” (W) × 67mm/2.6” (H) × 126mm/4.9”(D)
X100T 127mm x 74mm x 52 mm (5 x 2.91 x 2.05″)

Not what I call a compact camera...

I wouldn't personally call it a compact camera either, but that wasn't really my point. My point was that camera manufacturers and review sites use the term 'compact camera' in a specific sense, that most of us are familiar with, so there's really no point in quibbling about semantics in this case.

Direct link | Posted on May 24, 2015 at 11:21 UTC
In reply to:

Chronis: I've counted the word "disappointing"/"disappointed" five times....

Well done Canon.... replacing the 450 will have to wait...

What other shocking news have I learned?

that expensive L glass doesn't focus as well as crappy STM plastic .... WTF ?!?!!? I've been investing in L glass for a reason... to outlive any body for a couple of decades AND to make the so much awaited move to FF without having to change lens...

something is seriously wrong with Canon...

If you refer to the need for AF microadjustment with the L lens, it doesn't mean that it's anything wrong with the lens. It's the specific combination of a certain lens with a certain body that makes adjustment necessary.
The same lens might work just fine on another body, and the same body might work just fine with another copy of the same lens.

All lenses and bodies are manufactured within specific tolerances, and if both lens and body are 'off' by a small amount (but within tolerances), then it sometimes adds up to the body/lens-combination being off by a noticeable amount. Hence the need for microadjustment.

Direct link | Posted on May 24, 2015 at 11:11 UTC
In reply to:

Photoman: "Sigma UK has said that the company's latest compact camera "

DP0 161.4mm/6.4” (W) × 67mm/2.6” (H) × 126mm/4.9”(D)
X100T 127mm x 74mm x 52 mm (5 x 2.91 x 2.05″)

Not what I call a compact camera...

As I'm sure you're aware, in the camera industry 'compact camera' is a synonym for 'fixed-lens camera'. If it's not a system camera, then it's a compact camera, regardless of size. Even large superzooms are sometimes marketed as compact cameras. It's just a convenient label, not to be read literally.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 08:23 UTC
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: If Sony make the bulk of sensors, why does DP Review bother testing so many different cameras.

When the same Sony sensor is used in Camera A, B, and C, wouldn't it be more efficient to just test Camera A and extrapolate to the others?

Plus that would free up staff time to review the more interesting and off-beat cameras out there (branch out into medium format cameras or finally review the many Pentaxes that are gathering dust in the equipment closet).

Well, the E-M5 II may indeed use a different sensor, but then it has the same number of pixels as the original one, which is different from the E-M1 Panasonic sensor. Perhaps it's the 2nd generation 16 MP sensor recently announced by Sony?

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2015 at 02:41 UTC
In reply to:

BigOne: Two things seriously amuse me with this little foeble. One, people saying they pay for "German quality" when they pay $7,500 for a camera that barely has more features than a 1970's washing machine. And second, Leica KNOW about this problem, but instead of delaying the sales to solve the problem for their very rich customers, they issue this crutch of a bulletin to wave it in the faces of those who didn't read it and bought a Leica in a store that didn't get this memo. Good job, Leica! Keep it up.

1. Build quality has nothing to do with the number of features. And besides, most Leica enthusiasts only care about the essentials of photography: composition, focus and exposure. Everything else is fluff.

2. As stated by Leica, they will include a warning notice in all product boxes, so it doesn't matter if the store didn't get the memo. Also, the camera is bundled with a copy of Lightroom, so delaying the product launch is completely unnecessary.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2015 at 02:33 UTC
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: If Sony make the bulk of sensors, why does DP Review bother testing so many different cameras.

When the same Sony sensor is used in Camera A, B, and C, wouldn't it be more efficient to just test Camera A and extrapolate to the others?

Plus that would free up staff time to review the more interesting and off-beat cameras out there (branch out into medium format cameras or finally review the many Pentaxes that are gathering dust in the equipment closet).

"Mostly I do trust the retailer websites.
I suggest you read those websites, since there are 16.1, 16.3, and 16.8 sensors listed--all of which would be called 16MP in your parlance."

Retailers are just as infamous for getting facts wrong as the manufacturers are, if not more so.

Anyway, AFAIK, Olympus has used two 16 MP sensors: the one in the E-M1 has 16.8 MP, of which 16.3 MP are used for image capture (effective MP count). The other, which is (or was) used in E-M5 II, E-M5, E-M10, E-P5, E-PL5/6/7 and E-PM2, has 17.2 MP, of which 16.1 MP are used for image capture.

All of the regional Olympus sites I checked give the same numbers, and there's no reason to believe that retailers give more accurate information.
Especially since three sensors are listed by the retailer; 16.1 and 16.3 are in fact the effective MP counts for the two sensors, while 16.8 is the total MP count for the Panasonic (the Sony having 17.2). It seems that the retailer is confusing total and effective MP counts.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2015 at 07:38 UTC
In reply to:

Just a Photographer: Its a large marketshare but it is actually less then I had expected it to be.

Keep in mind that this is not just about sensors for regular cameras, but for all digital imaging products, including smartphones, security cameras, industrial cameras, medical equipment, etc.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 21:36 UTC
In reply to:

Mssimo: How much money could canon be saving by making own CMOS chip? Im sure with the volume canon has they could get a exclusive custom built sensor from sony and still call it a canon sensor. Olympus turned around when the OMD line used a sony sensor for the first time. Before that sensor technology very weak.

I think the market shares are about sensor design, not manufacturing. The #2 company, OmniVision, doesn't, as far as I know, own any fabs, so they outsource the actual chip production.

I have seen other reports about market shares in the sensor business, where both Aptina and Nikon were mentioned, none of which own any fabs either.

Direct link | Posted on May 4, 2015 at 21:29 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: The issue is being taken seriously by the mfg? And here I thought a chronic 60% defect rate would be taken lightly.

I stand corrected, but then this sentence needs to be rewritten:

"Out of about 10 copies of each model, 6 contained sensors with noticeable defects in their sensor stacks."

As it stands, it says that 6 out of 10 of each model was affected, not 6 out of the total of 20.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 12:40 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: The issue is being taken seriously by the mfg? And here I thought a chronic 60% defect rate would be taken lightly.

Yeah, it clearly says 6 out of 10 of each model, i.e. 12 out of 20.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 09:11 UTC
In reply to:

RomanP: Is this a joke? $7.5k for a high end B&W point and shoot? How does this company remain in business?

How is it a point-and-shoot? It's a fully manual interchangeable lens camera. Leica's rangefinders are basically the opposite of point-and-shoot.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 21:56 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I think the biggest problem I have is that Dpreview doesn’t understand its own audience. We simply don’t want to hear about this camera. It isn’t something that we would ever consider buying. We accept that you don’t EVER talk about products from RED or the high end Panasonic video cameras because we know that not many people here would ever buy those.

So why is this camera so special? What makes Dpreview think that their readers want to have this camera shoved in our face every couple of days. For once and for all. Stop pimping this camera to us. We get it that you think it is revolutionary. However, we simply don’t see it that way.

You should replace the word 'we' with 'I', and 'us' with 'me'. Even if yours is the majority view, you're not the spokesman of the entire DPR readership.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 21:12 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mohamed Rizwan: $2500 for this camera where as Gh4, FZ1000, LX100 are available for less price. Canon made this camera for foolish peoples who thinks canon is god. SONY coming with rx10 mark2 and rx100 m4 with 4k. Come on canon stop preparing useless cameras. Learn from panasonic and sony.

Try comparing the price to other camcorders targeted at the ENG market.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 21:06 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

nunatak: "It’s easy enough to create a jpeg, but creating raw files would have required some different programming on the processor, which we decided was not a cost effective option. "

too bad. how long before the XC10 Mark II will address this deal breaker?

"You need a Raw file before creating a JPEG file."

Not really. A JPEG is created in-camera from the raw sensor data, just like a raw file is. Both file types involve some image processing, I don't think any manufacturer give us untouched raw data in their raw files.

Anyway, the camera doesn't need to create a raw file first to be able to create a JPEG.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 20:49 UTC
On Interview: Canon's Chuck Westfall on the new XC10 article (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

Papi61: $2,500 for a fixed lens camera with a 1" sensor? At 1/3 of the price, the Panasonic FZ1000 looks like a much better deal. You also get 120fps @1080p, which I don't believe this Canon has.

There are camcorders with even smaller sensors that cost even more, and they can't shoot stills at all. Considered in a video camera context rather than a stills camera context, the price is not extreme at all.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 20:42 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (513 comments in total)

"The other benefits over the Olympus system is that it could be faster [...]"

The word 'other' in that sentence makes it seem like the increased colour resolution and moiré reduction are also benefits over the Olympus system. This is not correct, since the first four exposures in Olympus' implementation serve the very same purpose. The last four exposures, off-set by a half pixel vertically and horizontally from the first four, serve to capture more detail and thereby increase linear resolution.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 08:31 UTC as 72nd comment
In reply to:

zakaria: I assume there will be a mark2s including built in flash and Wi Fi.this is what ricoh did with k5 series.there were 3 k5s at the market at the same time.

The K-5 was replaced by the K-5 II and K-5 IIs, the difference being that the latter didn't have an AA filter. No need for two different versions of the K-3 II, since it has the AA filter simulation feature.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 08:14 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: Best sports camera just got better.

"Take the sensor out. Do you have a camera? "

Yes, it's still a camera, although not a camera you can actually use, just like you couldn't use a film camera without a roll of film. It was still a camera without the film, though.

In fact, it was possible to review a film camera without mentioning the properties of any specific film. Likewise, it's possible to assess other properties and features of a digital camera, without even mentioning the sensor. There are many things about a camera that are important, such as ergonomics, user interface, operational speed, AF speed and accuracy, metering, connectivity options, battery life, etc.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 07:17 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Hardly self-powered. Just more photovoltaic applications. Could be used to monitor wildlife for long periods, that kind of thing.

Self-powered in the sense that it neither needs to be connected to an external power source, nor runs on batteries that need to be charged using an external power source.
But of course it receives energy from the outside, since it's not a perpetuum mobile.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 09:19 UTC
Total: 1195, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »