HiRez

Lives in United States Western US, United States
Joined on Oct 19, 2005

Comments

Total: 129, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Connect post Apple iPhone 6s Plus camera review (161 comments in total)

The noise reduction algorithm is just so awful, I can't stand it. The "paint by numbers" effect is pronounced even in good light and gets worse with the light level. This is most noticeable in skin (faces). And this is really difficult and time-consuming to fix in post-production.

What's sad is I actually like the photos I took with my old iPhone 4S better than those I take with my 6S Plus. The saturation, color accuracy, and detail were worse, but at least it had a much more natural noise (grain instead of smearing) and skin tones looked so much nicer.

I really wish Apple would let us turn off or dial back the noise reduction, but I doubt that's ever going to happen.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2015 at 00:52 UTC as 43rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: "At least for the first few years of its production, the older 24-70mm F2.8 was notorious for cracking rubber around the zoom ring, and for the zoom barrel jamming."

That's the first time I've ever heard of those issues. Sounds like hyperbole.

^^ I wrote above 24-80...that should be 24-70, obviously.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 06:26 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: going to 82mm filters now? Nikon obsession with constantly changing filter sizes is vexing...

I agree it's annoying, but I wouldn't want them to compromise a lens design based on the need to maintain a filter size either.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 06:22 UTC
In reply to:

Shangri La: The 24-70 VR is MASSIVE!

I'll be surprised if they let the bokeh take a step back, because it was pretty good (for a zoom) and for me, a major selling point of the lens. I shoot at 2.8 most of the time with it, with a fair amount of portraits, and it renders a pretty soft background with decently clean specular bokeh (again, for a zoom).

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 06:06 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: "At least for the first few years of its production, the older 24-70mm F2.8 was notorious for cracking rubber around the zoom ring, and for the zoom barrel jamming."

That's the first time I've ever heard of those issues. Sounds like hyperbole.

I guess I was lucky, never had any issues with my 24-80/2.8. I love that lens to death, I've got a bunch of lenses but that's the one that ends up on my camera at least 75% of the time.

The VR should be a nice addition for night/indoor photography. Only thing I wish this lens had is a bit more reach on the long end. Something like 24-85 would be great, although it's already pretty large and heavy.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 06:00 UTC
On article Nikon D5500 Review (392 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Creepily, Nikon bodies are beginning to resemble Canons more and more. Very soft curves, like a modern-day sedan...How about some more angularity Nikon? Differentiate yourself.

I agree, I'm not a fan of the looks, it really does look a lot like a Canon. I'm looking to upgrade a D700, and even that line is getting softened up as well, I don't like the trend.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2015 at 02:40 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100T Review (686 comments in total)
In reply to:

theprehistorian: Am I alone in finding the image quality on offer from this camera wholly inadequate, considering its price? I really don't understand it. I had the X100s for a while, and while I agree it looks funky and feels nice to use, it suffers from hideous lens flare and the files look weird and mushy, even without pixel peeping. It's just a fashion accessory, I'm afraid.

But, the original X100 did not have the funky X-Trans rendering issues or the plasticky skin tones. Also, while the X100 series lenses has a lot of flare, it can be a really lovely flare if used creatively, especially for sunlit portraits. For example:

https://www.webmatros.com/wp-content/uploads/fuji-x100/fuji-x100-lens-flare.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uatA_f-eRKA/Ui0C26iyGCI/AAAAAAAALfs/uTer9NtxOqs/s1600/DSCF8275.jpg

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2015 at 22:03 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR lens (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: - APS-C
- no IS
- 655 grams
- $1200

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...... ha.

So you like it?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 12:06 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR lens (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Angrymagpie: E-mount needs a lens like this! I need something like this to go with my a6000 (and hopefully, the next version of the a6000 with weather sealing)

"Afraid? What a silly assertion to make. In a compact ILC the tiny 16-70mm f4 makes more sense than this monster."

That's your opinion, but I don't share it. For me, I'd rather have f/2.8 with some extra weight and bulk. There's no substitute for a wider aperture.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 09:13 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR lens (295 comments in total)

Not sure why all the hate on this lens, it looks like a pretty good package to me for the price. 24mm-84mm equivalent is a good range, 84mm is in the range of a true portrait lens. With most high-end FF zooms you get 24-70. Plus weather sealing and < 1 foot minimum focus. Sure OIS would be nice but it's really not necessary in this focal range, again most comparable FF zooms will not have it either.

Big question for me is how is the performance wide open? It has to be exceptional at 2.8.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 09:07 UTC as 35th comment | 20 replies
On Connect post Amazon Fire Phone camera review (61 comments in total)

You're listing "No 4K" as a negative, for a camera phone? REALLY?

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2014 at 02:18 UTC as 18th comment | 7 replies
On article Fast and full-frame: Nikon announces 24MP Nikon D750 (406 comments in total)

People complaining about the lack of 1/8000th sec shutter, fair enough I guess, but I just scanned my D700 photos in Lightroom. Over 15K photos and not a single one of them was shot at 1/8000th. The 1/200 flash sync (vs. 1/250 for D700) is maybe a bigger problem, although I tend to not use flash unless I have to.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2014 at 07:23 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
On article Fast and full-frame: Nikon announces 24MP Nikon D750 (406 comments in total)

This looks like the true upgrade for my D700 that I've been waiting the better part of a decade for. Unfortunately, in the meantime I've fallen for Fuji's high-quality but much more compact (and less expensive) X system. I've been considering selling off all my Nikon gear and going all-in on Fuji X. But this camera will make that decision harder, since I already have some good Nikon lenses. Large, 100% optical VF is hard to beat and still can't get the FF DOF with APS-C.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2014 at 04:35 UTC as 17th comment | 9 replies
On article Fujifilm announces X30 enthusiast compact camera (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

RadPhoto: Also, I woudn't trust the first batch coming from Fuji! I got the X-T1 and had the the faulted keypad and Fuji is still in denial!

Let's not forget the dreaded sticky aperture on the X-100 lens. (I got an early one but fortunately, without the problem)

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 05:45 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces X30 enthusiast compact camera (43 comments in total)

Looks really nice (especially black) but that 2/3" sensor is just too small. Where is the X-E3, X-100T, and X-Pro2?

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 05:33 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply

It's slightly less ridiculous looking that the other 2 new Hasselblads. Which isn't saying much.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 02:29 UTC as 187th comment
On Connect post Apple's magnetic solution for adding lenses to iPhone camera (32 comments in total)

The periscopic lens is really interesting, but it would be a lot cooler if they built that *inside* the phone instead of as an awkward clip-on. Maybe if they make these rumored 5"+ iPhones, there would be more space for it.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2014 at 06:10 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with the retro Nikon Df (230 comments in total)

The rubber port flaps also stand out as out-of-place to me. Ahatever that big round thing is next to the Df logo ruins the top lines. And they should have just lost the top LCD and placed a bigger shutter buttony there. It's an interesting concept, but ultimately, not one that works for me. I'm still using my D700, I guess that is retro enough now.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2013 at 18:17 UTC as 21st comment
On article Adobe hack affects 38 million users, not 2.9 million (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lightime81: Maybe the best part of this is that I got a snail-mailed letter about this from Adobe offering me a free year's credit monitoring with... wait for it... Experian! I don't know if anyone's familiar, but I read a story last week about how Experian had been fooled into selling data to a credit theft organization! I admit freely I did not completely understand the article, nor was I that sure about the source (Krebs On Security), so this article could be all wrong, or old news, but there you go.

Sweet! A year of free Experian, which no doubt when the year expires and I forget about it, will start charging me a monthly fee.

Yeah, I got the same letter and had seen the same Experian article. What a joke.

My wife had her identity stolen once and was offered a similar free few months of credit monitoring services. They won't tell you when your free time runs out and will charge you like $15-$25 monthly forever, and it's really, really difficult to get them cancel it too...shocker.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 20:19 UTC
On article Adobe hack affects 38 million users, not 2.9 million (156 comments in total)

I just got my letter from them. Apparently credit cards numbers were stolen, which they say were encrypted (but who knows what that means). More disturbing is it says that some credit card numbers (maybe all of them?) were decrypted by the hackers inside the system, using Adobe's own tools. So it sounds very much to me like all your information including credit card numbers, was likely exposed and at risk.

Anyone can get hacked, but leaving the ability of the hackers to decrypt the card information using their owns software is inexcusable.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 20:17 UTC as 70th comment
Total: 129, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »