Neoasphalt

Neoasphalt

Joined on Feb 25, 2011

Comments

Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Preview:canong1x (1032 comments in total)

Hihg ISO noise is eceptional, but colours are not very nice, unreal. F should be 2.0 for this price tag.

Posted on Jan 17, 2012 at 13:04 UTC as 184th comment
In reply to:

Neoasphalt: Mr. Fossum,
I would like to get answer from expert as you on the following question - if the given size sensor pixel density would be reduced, lets say four times, from common 16 to 4 MP (enough for people who don't print their images) and made with the same latest CMOS technology, will this result to significantly:
1. Lower noise
2. Higher dynamic range
3. Better tonal range
4. Higher color depth
5. Cheaper production costs
6. Or other possible improvements?

Thank You

As I understood if pixel size will be 4 times bigger on same sensor size you think that SNR will be better while other parametrs staying the same.
I compared 3.1 and 3.9 MP old generation (2005) sensors with same optics & body and noise levels of 3.1 MP one is really much lower, although pixel density is only 1.2 times less. So I tought that with new technologies and 4 times lower density (e.g. 16->4) noise levels should be hugely lower which may attract many customers, cause most of the latest high megapixel P&S (and some higher class) cameras have visible/excessive noise even at base ISO in good light.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 04:03 UTC
In reply to:

Neoasphalt: Mr. Fossum,
I would like to get answer from expert as you on the following question - if the given size sensor pixel density would be reduced, lets say four times, from common 16 to 4 MP (enough for people who don't print their images) and made with the same latest CMOS technology, will this result to significantly:
1. Lower noise
2. Higher dynamic range
3. Better tonal range
4. Higher color depth
5. Cheaper production costs
6. Or other possible improvements?

Thank You

*I am not expert in sensor technology, but I assume if density becomes 4 times less and technology is similar then it is possible to make pixel size roughly 4 times bigger.
*Same optics.
* We are optimizing pixel to such possible extent that production cost left the same or less and those 5 (or more) parametrs becomes as good as possible, although making priority on lower noise.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2011 at 22:54 UTC

Mr. Fossum,
I would like to get answer from expert as you on the following question - if the given size sensor pixel density would be reduced, lets say four times, from common 16 to 4 MP (enough for people who don't print their images) and made with the same latest CMOS technology, will this result to significantly:
1. Lower noise
2. Higher dynamic range
3. Better tonal range
4. Higher color depth
5. Cheaper production costs
6. Or other possible improvements?

Thank You

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 23:19 UTC as 3rd comment | 8 replies
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)

I was considering NX200, but now I am in big doubt. As I understood NX200 menu system is also not improved much - 8 clicks (plus adjustment with wheel) to compensate flash level on NX100 is a nightmare.
Dumb megapixel race degraded potentially nice camera - if Samsung would stick with 14-16 MP much less noise reduction would be necessary.
Only hope that they will release more models and some of them will be with much less megapixels and extremely low noise, as they stated that "Samsung is “determined” to be #1 in the mirrorless camera market by 2012 and be “the best selling camera brand” by 2015". If even Olympus has three sister PEN models, then Samsung have to have at least five parallel NX models to achieve their aimed heights.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 05:55 UTC as 24th comment

When there will be the first HD resulotion (2MP) sensor (1/2.3 or bigger size) made with modern technologies for social network users who don't want to print their pictures, but instead of that want better quality in low light conditions, use smaller capacity memory cards, faster processing, post processing & upload times and simply watch them on the high definition screen and pay less for such a sensor (camera)?
Or that never will be made cause it is dangerous to worldwide megapixel race and megapixel myth?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2011 at 16:14 UTC as 26th comment | 2 replies
On Olympus shares suffer as former CEO goes on the attack article (193 comments in total)

The one way for Olympus to get out of this stagnancy is to make new 2-6 MPix P&S camera line (on 1/2.3'' sensor size) with very low noise and break down the megapixel myth.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 20, 2011 at 11:12 UTC as 16th comment

There is too much noise in sample 28 on her hands for ISO 220, although in high ISOs noise is controlled quite well.
Some samples shows unnatural colours, in some saturation is too much, in some not enough...
For this quality, sensor size and such a slow & heavy lenses its 2-3 times overpriced.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2011 at 03:20 UTC as 24th comment

Where is the built-in flash Samsung???

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2011 at 21:48 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On Site updates: Gear List, forum articles and more article (25 comments in total)

I hope DPR will expand gallery tags in near future as they promised, so everyone can see photos of any particular camera model. Now there is just few most popular models and search seems to be not working. It will be very useful!

P.S. Probably you should ask members to add more tags to their photos so it will be easier to find images from particular countries, cities, conditions, camera settings, lenses, filters, photoshop plugins used. And one more thing - there could be also a tag that denotes that image is out of camera with no post processing applied - untouched.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 15, 2011 at 07:40 UTC as 10th comment

I hope Fuji will not follow megapixel race, but instead of that really will cut down noise levels with fewer MP. At least give the choice to customers to those whose main objective is cropping and to those which want smaller file size (faster capture, faster post-processing, faster file transfer, saving memory space) and less noise instead.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2011 at 01:53 UTC as 37th comment
On Nikon J1 real-world samples gallery article (336 comments in total)

ISO 6400 is not bad at all, but on sample 3 is a bit too much noise for ISO 100. But photgrapher is not the best for shure.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 17:17 UTC as 73rd comment | 1 reply

Sample image quality and sharpness from Nikon site looks quite good, but 913g (V1 + 10-100mm 4.5-5.6) they call an uprade from P&S...???
Even bigger sensor GF3 + 14-140mm is 724g.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 01:55 UTC as 152nd comment | 1 reply

The only way Nikon can compete in IQ with m43 and compact APS cams is keep megapixels no more than announced 10 MP or go even less. If they wiil make 6 MP (absolutely enough for many users) sensor pixel density will be less (less noise) than any current m43 cam, except GH1.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 19:10 UTC as 190th comment | 1 reply

I am surprised that on front panel there is big Nikon 1 label but designers did not find place for some rubber surface, even the small one, for better grip.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 14:20 UTC as 30th comment

After I tried F2.0 I hate F3.5 and slower lenses. Better to make 1 fast than 4 very slow.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 14:13 UTC as 17th comment

Too much noise for ISO 100 in the skytones - obviously there is too much megapixels squeezed in the NEX7 sensor, but overall quality is OK.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2011 at 15:40 UTC as 18th comment
On Pentax unveils Optio RZ18 compact superzoom article (33 comments in total)

Sad, that I never will consider this a great zoom in small cam - dividing megapixels with 2 would be another story...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2011 at 00:54 UTC as 10th comment | 4 replies
On Just Posted: Panasonic DMC-FH7 compact camera review article (38 comments in total)

I wonder to know why DPReview withdraw all sensor pixel density values from specifications, cause it's the main number to determine low light performance (and overall output quality as well). I have some suspicion that its been done as a result of pressure from some manufacturers.
Those where main numbers when I started to compare different cameras!
It is clear, if people get more knowledge about these values, unnecessary (but profitable) megapixel race would be under the risk.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2011 at 22:41 UTC as 11th comment | 4 replies
On Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS preview (181 comments in total)

It's fantastic addition to G series, but I hope Panasonic's GF5 will be in two versions - simplified, like GF3 and something like GF5X with proper controls and extended features for serious photographers, but still easy pocketable.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2011 at 06:22 UTC as 86th comment
Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »