HowaboutRAW

HowaboutRAW

Joined on Sep 1, 2011

Comments

Total: 6283, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

iAPX: So, to fix Typ 240, Leica created a new 240-typ camera, with enough RAM and maybe a firmware that don't bug when you shoot fast?

I wonder why it's not available as a free fix for actual owner of typ-240 that have a buggy camera?
I also ask myself why it costs $1000 to remove a Leica logo and add a little RAM?

Is it a joke?

iAPX:

No, I'm denying your capacity to use search engine.

I accept that the problem is real, that the problem doesn't really turn up in web searches tells me it's limited. See the difference?

Search "2006 Honda Civic engine failure" and you'll find evidence of real, and repeated, cracked engine blocks for that model Civic.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

Nordstjernen: What about a 'Sony inside' sticker instead of the red 'Leica' logo - if the sensor is from Sony. :-D

No.

And I try not to familiarize myself with every textmessage shorthand code/symbol.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:35 UTC
In reply to:

EthanP99: Weather sealed body for their non weather sealed lenses? Sweet...

I don't think the Nikon F was weather sealed, but it, and Nikon lenses, did pretty well in the Vietnam war.

So seal the modern computer (the M body) and lenses can work in challenging conditions--particularly since the lenses are manual focus.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:34 UTC
In reply to:

Nordstjernen: What about a 'Sony inside' sticker instead of the red 'Leica' logo - if the sensor is from Sony. :-D

It's not a Sony sensor.

What about doing a bit of research?

And the Nikon D4s doesn't use a Sony sensor either.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:33 UTC
On Samsung NX3000 real-world samples article (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: At least in the US, Samsung has a brand problem. Why buy a Samsung, when you can buy a camera from a Real Camera Company?

BarnET:

I shot my raw files, there was air in the room, but they're not "mythical", so like other photos yes they came out of thin air.

I have my own raws from the RX100III, and they're problematic above ISO 3200. Whereas I've seen raws, not shot, from the Nikon 1 v3 that are excellent at ISO 6400--avoid the Nikon kitzoom and use one of the fixed focal length lenses in determining things.

I stand by my point about the Samsung NX-mini being a better high ISO camera than the Sony RX100III.

Why would I accept DPR's conclusion if it differs from mine and I've looked raws from the Nikon?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:27 UTC
In reply to:

Diopter: Another laughable event in the long parade of imitations.
Whoever shows a serious, creative shape for the new technologies will win, as the Leica did seventy years ago.
(-)

Diopter:

Well I agree that there are many irrelevant "refreshments", but then you get things like the Nikon D3 to Nikon D3s.

Still have no idea what this security thing is with normal, non-wifi, non-smartphone, cameras. Does "security" mean something other than computer security here? Say: Security from obsolescence?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:21 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: So, to fix Typ 240, Leica created a new 240-typ camera, with enough RAM and maybe a firmware that don't bug when you shoot fast?

I wonder why it's not available as a free fix for actual owner of typ-240 that have a buggy camera?
I also ask myself why it costs $1000 to remove a Leica logo and add a little RAM?

Is it a joke?

iAPX,

I don't deny the problem.

However, and warning: personal attack coming, I don't think you know how to use Google, or other websearch portals.

I did a bit more than a shop tryout of the M-240. So you need to stop assuming I have no idea of what I write.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: So, to fix Typ 240, Leica created a new 240-typ camera, with enough RAM and maybe a firmware that don't bug when you shoot fast?

I wonder why it's not available as a free fix for actual owner of typ-240 that have a buggy camera?
I also ask myself why it costs $1000 to remove a Leica logo and add a little RAM?

Is it a joke?

iAPX:

I'm not attacking you personally.

I'm saying try an M-240.

You don't have to buy one if it's not for you.

No, I don't use this camera daily.

Your search results aren't correct, you may want to recheck.

(Google yields nothing, zero, when those terms are searched--that's with the quotation marks, which is the only way to search that kind of thing.)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: And the M9-P turned the red dot into a black dot, so as not to attract attention.

DutchmanP:

The entire comment is about the M9-P.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:48 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: So, to fix Typ 240, Leica created a new 240-typ camera, with enough RAM and maybe a firmware that don't bug when you shoot fast?

I wonder why it's not available as a free fix for actual owner of typ-240 that have a buggy camera?
I also ask myself why it costs $1000 to remove a Leica logo and add a little RAM?

Is it a joke?

iAPX,

You can comment, but if you've not experienced the problem nor even tried the camera you won't get taken real seriously.

Interweb searches of the terms "Leica m 240 jpeg corruption" really don't turn up much.

So that leads me to think: It may be a real problem but not real common.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:39 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: And the M9-P turned the red dot into a black dot, so as not to attract attention.

DutchmanPieter2003:

Look at my comment, which is the original post here, then look at the correction (perhaps incorrect) JDThomas made immediately below, then look at your correction of JDThomas' comment.

See the point now?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:36 UTC
In reply to:

Diopter: Another laughable event in the long parade of imitations.
Whoever shows a serious, creative shape for the new technologies will win, as the Leica did seventy years ago.
(-)

Diopter:

You haven't answered my question: How is say the Canon 5DIII more secure than a Leica M-240?

If you mean smart phones aren't secure, well right, if you mean wifi can be hacked, well right, if you mean photographers get killed, well yes that's also true. Not anything to do with the Leica M240 though.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:32 UTC
In reply to:

Fogsprig: No dot - no buy!

HussH:

Are there many regular users of the M-240 commenting here about this new RAM and removal of the red dot?

Using StartPage for the words "leica m240 sensor dust" the results are basically nil, note that the search engine forced the removal of the quotation marks from the search term to get any results, therefore dust on the sensor isn't real likely to be the most serious issue with the M-240. I use StartPage for obvious reasons but it certainly includes the Google.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: And the M9-P turned the red dot into a black dot, so as not to attract attention.

DutchmanP:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M9

Scroll down the M9-P, toward the bottom.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:18 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: So, to fix Typ 240, Leica created a new 240-typ camera, with enough RAM and maybe a firmware that don't bug when you shoot fast?

I wonder why it's not available as a free fix for actual owner of typ-240 that have a buggy camera?
I also ask myself why it costs $1000 to remove a Leica logo and add a little RAM?

Is it a joke?

iAPX:

No, didn't say daily use.

However if you're going to comment it's best to have tried it.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:16 UTC
In reply to:

fastlass: how are they able to source the parts for a product that's 11 years old? must have great supply chain management.

Where are you getting "11 years old"?

The camera released late 2012 or early 2013.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

Diopter: Another laughable event in the long parade of imitations.
Whoever shows a serious, creative shape for the new technologies will win, as the Leica did seventy years ago.
(-)

Diopter:

What is insecure about the M240?

What does the RAM update to the M240 have to do with system security?

Is say the Canon 5DIII not "secure" in some way?

Google may be reasonably secure, but it aint private.

In the real world M-240s are secure, particularly since they don't have wifi. If you don't want someone to view the files you shoot move them from the SD card to a computer and encrypt the file or disc on the computer, and deeply format the camera card.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: And the M9-P turned the red dot into a black dot, so as not to attract attention.

JDThom:

I was going by what Wikipedia had. (Edit: I just re-checked and that's what Wikipedia says.)

I started out with one variation of the M-8--then edited the comment.

I guess Wiki be wrong, until someone fixes it.

The point is the black dot has already been done in the M digital series.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 20:03 UTC
On Niko announces service advisory for D810 'bright spots' article (375 comments in total)
In reply to:

Charlie boots: I have a D300, D700 - purchased 1 year after release and just purchased a D800e at a discounted price. All have no problems. D700 has 50k actuations. Usually doesn't pay to purchase a brand new release camera right away. Early adopters always pay top dollar and have all the teething issues to contend with.

Best to be a little patient and wait a few months.

JDThomas:

It's not about nervousness (that would be the case with a new Windows OS--I suffered Win ME), it's about minor bugs, to serious things like Fuji X body AF problems.

Also the price drops a bit and things like extra batteries are easy to find.

And no, one shouldn't buy a new reworking of car model, the first year it's out. (So no new Honda Fits in the year 2014.)

Usually with cameras there aren't serious problems but every so once in a while there will be something that will get a lot better with a firmware fix 6 or 12 months later.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: So, to fix Typ 240, Leica created a new 240-typ camera, with enough RAM and maybe a firmware that don't bug when you shoot fast?

I wonder why it's not available as a free fix for actual owner of typ-240 that have a buggy camera?
I also ask myself why it costs $1000 to remove a Leica logo and add a little RAM?

Is it a joke?

iAPX,

Nobody was claiming the M-240 perfect.

I'll believe some people reported real problems jpegs, and I have no idea at what the buffer would would lock or fail with the current model.

Now: When I tried out the M-240, I was using what was then the fastest SD card one could buy--with a write speed of 90MB per second. (No I didn't try video.)

Computers get faster+more RAM, and faster CPUs, after first release, faster video cards too, also better sound cards.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 19:08 UTC
Total: 6283, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »