BJL

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Dec 17, 2002

Comments

Total: 315, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

brycesteiner: I take it the National Geographic Society no longer exists or at least is no longer non-profit? Disney wouldn't own it if they didn't see a path to profit. Though they probably have a massive library of video, photos and stories that can be reused for many different things.

It seems that the National Geographic Society still exists, but it reorganized its media properties and publications into an entity called "National Geographic Partners", and this part is what is now passing from Fox to Disney.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2017 at 20:26 UTC
In reply to:

Herp Photos: I for one am very tired of google and apple and others making software and hardware decisions based on the lifestyle and internet availability that the employees enjoy in silicon valley.
Not everyone is always connected to the cloud and often if you are it might be with bandwidth which makes cloud storage useless for things like searching for photos, browsing through them at full resolution and especially trying to watch a 4k video at full resolution. Also as phone cameras improve, the file sizes will only increase. Micro sd cards are much easier to transfer between phones also. Can you imagine having to copy 500gb of data from internal storage to another phone or from the cloud to another phone (for those who want offline access)
Of course not having your photos in the cloud limits their ability to study them for AI training and limits their ability to charge for cloud storage options once free limits are reached.

Whoops: “ISPs”, not “ISOs”

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 15:25 UTC
In reply to:

Herp Photos: I for one am very tired of google and apple and others making software and hardware decisions based on the lifestyle and internet availability that the employees enjoy in silicon valley.
Not everyone is always connected to the cloud and often if you are it might be with bandwidth which makes cloud storage useless for things like searching for photos, browsing through them at full resolution and especially trying to watch a 4k video at full resolution. Also as phone cameras improve, the file sizes will only increase. Micro sd cards are much easier to transfer between phones also. Can you imagine having to copy 500gb of data from internal storage to another phone or from the cloud to another phone (for those who want offline access)
Of course not having your photos in the cloud limits their ability to study them for AI training and limits their ability to charge for cloud storage options once free limits are reached.

The cloud and ISOs need have nothing to do with it; backups to a home computer via WiFi or USB cable are all that is needed.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 15:23 UTC
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: So when my phone suddenly dies, I will have up to 512GB of data locked and inaccessible on the phone. No thanks. The beauty of a microSD card is that I can remove it and put it into another phone, or even into my computer.

Personally, I will NOT buy any phone that does not support microSD cards, nor will I use or rely on someone's "cloud".

You do not back up the data on your phone? Apart from manual backups, mine is set to do so automatically when I am on my home WiFi network. (Going to a cloud service.)

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 03:48 UTC
In reply to:

TMHKR: I just can't fathom why mirrorless lenses are still outrageously expensive. And by lenses I mean kit lenses, for non-pros who want to start fresh with a mirrorless system.

Those EF-S lenses are generally older, higher volume products, so no surprise that Canon sells them at lower margins and lower prices. Compared to that, lenses for newer mirrorless systems still have a bit of an "early adopter premium". If and when Canon or Nikon decides to make a big push for mirrorless market share rather than protecting their SLR assets, pricing might get interesting.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

ClassicPhotoLearner: At least the small firm is gangbusters when it comes to innovative product introduction (Voigtlander is another example).

I cant afford this even if it were 50% cheaper, but hey, it is a premium and unique product, and there are many people who can buy $26k lens with their pocket change and don't even have to worry about resale value. It's none of my business and I don't have to make snide remarks about Leica or people who can afford it. So people should get over it.

The only case where criticism is warranted is when ther is a lens with the same specification, equally well made, in the same mount, with superior image qualities, with OIS, AF, shorter minimum focus, smaller and lighter that sell for substantially less, which is not the case here.

" (Voigtlander is another example)."
But Voigtlander has not been a company since 1982 or earlier; since 1999 that name has been used by Cosina under license.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 02:35 UTC
In reply to:

Nikoncanonfan: It's VERY big I'm trying to imagine holding it on a M body...

How about the usual big lens method of holding the lens from below with the left hand and letting it support the body? (Or does that work poorly with the Leica M control layout?)

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 02:29 UTC
In reply to:

borax: A Canon f/1.2 lens roughly costs 2000$ for a 35mm sensor. These Leicas f/1.25 for APSh cost 6 times Canon's. Are they that good ?

It is for Leica M cameras, in Leica's own 36x24mm format (while also usable on some cameras with smaller sensors). What is this about "APSh"?

Whether they are worth the price I do not know, and have no interest in paying to find out.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 02:24 UTC
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1120 comments in total)
In reply to:

Belphegor: Sony A7R: 465 g
Sony A7R II: 625 g
Sony A7R III: 660 g
...
Sony A7R IV: 770 g ? (= my Canon 6D)
Mirrorless but not weightless… :-(

Weight with battery I take it—an extra 35g over the MkII in exchange for the larger battery with over twice the capacity is a good trade-off. In the past, Sony has gone too light on battery size in its 35mm format cameras.

P. S. And still about 300g lighter than its DSLR peers.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2017 at 01:18 UTC
In reply to:

davev8: if 8K is hear soon then it may be a problem for the video orientated m43 cameras to stay relevant ...i hear no rumor for a 33MP m43 sensor

Current phone-camera pixel sizes would scale to about 16K in 4/3" format, so if and when there is a demand for 8K in MFT, it would be easy as far as sensors go. If anything, smaller sensor sizes can handle high data rates more easily, due to shorter signal paths.
But realistically, so far 8K video is offered in a few professional models costing about US$80,000, aimed at broadcasting the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, while even the latest Sony A7R III with 42MP (8K frame width) sensor only delivers 4K video; why would you expect MFT to be on it already?

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 21:38 UTC
On article Sharp's new 8K camera is $77,000 (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

FLruckas: Hmm....
SSDs....
It's about time....
Blackmagic finally gave us back SSDs about a month ago...
This CFast stuff is a quirk that needs to end...
:=)

The standard is "newly arrived"; the first cards and readers have been announced for Q4 delivery. External SSD's like Blackmagic's HyperDeck Shuttle are great where their bulk can be handled, but hand-held cameras can sometimes benefit from a smaller form factor; for example, even Blackmagic's biggest camera, the URSA Mini Pro, also has CFast for internal storage of full res. raw output; their smaller cameras do not fir with the bus of an SSD. (And anyway, CFExress is essentially a small format version of SSD!)

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 19:06 UTC
On article Sharp's new 8K camera is $77,000 (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

FLruckas: Hmm....
SSDs....
It's about time....
Blackmagic finally gave us back SSDs about a month ago...
This CFast stuff is a quirk that needs to end...
:=)

The newly arrived CFExpress format will eventually replace both CFast and XQD, and it is essentially a removable media form of SSD: it uses the same protocols as the bestsellers SSD's (multiple lanes of PCIe etc.) and will eventually offer multiple media sizes. The initial card size is the same as XQD, and in a way it is just a major upgrade of XQD; the Compact Flash Association has effectively acknowledged that CFast was a wrong bet, by using SATA instead of the newer, better PCEe.

One would hardly want hand-held video cameras to always be dependent on bulky SSD units.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

BJL: Does the viewfinder have good manual focusing aids, as in even inexpensive models like my Pentax K-1000? If so, it could be interesting to the numerous B&W film hobbyists and art students that I see around; if not, it is retro snobbery.

Did you read my whole post or just the last line? it _might_ be a well-designed tool, but only if it has a good viewfinder, and the PR says nothing about that rather important component, which is why I asked.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 00:31 UTC

Does the viewfinder have good manual focusing aids, as in even inexpensive models like my Pentax K-1000? If so, it could be interesting to the numerous B&W film hobbyists and art students that I see around; if not, it is retro snobbery.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 00:22 UTC as 82nd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Biowizard: Along with using ancient Videocon tubes to measure sensor sizes, and applying crop factors to all sensors smaller than 135, but never for sensors bigger, one more thing perplexes me about the world of photography: "GREY Imports"?!!

We live in a global economy; I can by my laptop from the USA, my wine from France, my show posters from Italy. It's up to me. So why do CAMERA manufacturers, almost uniquely, try to punish those who buy a camera in one country, for use in another? What is GREY about me picking up a new camera body while on vacation in Japan and bringing it back to the UK? Why should my warranty cease to apply?

It's high time the concepts of "GREY" imports and a "GREY" market were banned.

Brian

Official imports come with warranty coverage, which can vary in cost from country to country: for example some countries mandate higher levels of warranty coverage than are offered in others. So gray market often means buying in a country with low warranty coverage costs and reselling in one like the USA where those costs are higher.

Why more common for cameras? Maybe because cameras are "value dense", so re-shipping them to a third country is easier and more cost-effective.

But the issue here might be outright black market: avoiding import taxes, by sneaking cameras in from a country with lower taxes. I have read that this is a big factor in Brazil due to high, protectionist import taxes.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

walker2000: I know every companies want their own proprietor lens mounts. Besides that, what's the technical advantages of this DL mount that other existing mounts cannot do?

"I know M43 is open standard. Any APSC mount is open?"

Putting aside the hot topic of what counts as an "open standard", the relevant facts seem to be:

- The MFT group has allowed several camera makers to join, including DJI and Blackmagic, but it seems that DJI now wants to also offer larger formats; Super35 and beyond.

- AFAIK, all modern lens mounts that are big enough for Super35 format are proprietary. Some camera makers seem to have licensing deals to allow third party lenses (I have read that Tamron and Tokina license their use of Canon etc. lens mounts), but no camera maker is allowing "third part bodies" outside of the MFT club.

- For DJI's needs, Sony E mount is probably the only interesting one, since it also covers 36x24mm, but Sony is a also a major video- and digital cine-camera maker, so it is unlikely to share with its new competitor DJI.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 18:55 UTC
In reply to:

walker2000: I know every companies want their own proprietor lens mounts. Besides that, what's the technical advantages of this DL mount that other existing mounts cannot do?

@Mistral75: thanks; good news!
And surprising, given that a 24mm lens covering 36x24mm is a more difficult wider-angle design that one covering only the so-called Super-35mm frame (in this case, 23.5×15.7 mm). This suggests that larger formats like 36x24mm are in DJI's plans.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

walker2000: I know every companies want their own proprietor lens mounts. Besides that, what's the technical advantages of this DL mount that other existing mounts cannot do?

@mistral75: I’ve read that twice in forums, but do you have a link about the coverage of the longer lenses?

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 22:56 UTC
In reply to:

walker2000: I know every companies want their own proprietor lens mounts. Besides that, what's the technical advantages of this DL mount that other existing mounts cannot do?

One argument for DL is that the still dominant lens mount for 35mm cine-cameras is PL, which is a huge 52mm deep; huge given that the cinema 35mm formats are only about 24mm wide(*). So a new far shallow one for digital super-35mm format makes sense in general, and for drones in particular, where reducing size and weight are very desirable.
It might be nice if they could have used one of the existing "APS-C" digital mirrorless system mounts instead (Sony E, Fujifilm X, Canon M, etc.) but maybe those proprietary formats were not available to them—and DL is even shallower.

(*) The depth of PL mount made sense in the day of movie cameras using film and with a bulky spinning mirror system for the viewfinder.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Who is this fool (sorry, person) to suggest what we should do with our money? I can do whatever I want with my hard-earned bucks, no need for his advice.

ZeBebito, your criticism applies equally to _any_ unfavorable review: are you saying that highly unfavorable reviews should never be published? Or doe that only apply with products that you like more than the reviewer does?

And to answer your follow-up question "... how come can I know what that guy is saying without reading the article?"
That is easy: by reading the subject line, which reveals clearly the this article is highly critical of the product.

By the way, you follow up by advertising your opinion that we should not spend our hard-earned money on a Leica M10: I happen to agree, but there you go, doing exactly what you criticize the article for doing.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 20:32 UTC
Total: 315, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »