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


Total: 249, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

James Pilcher: I'm a µ4/3 user and I'm glad to see the OMD E-M1 receving such recognition. The E-M5 received similar accolades last year. Having used 35mm film cameras since 1971 before switching to digital, I have to wonder why the giants Nikon and Canon are not better represented at the forefront of camera development right now. Are we awaiting an explosion of technology from Canikon, or is something amiss at those companies?

I am very happy with the innovations in Micro Four Thirds (and from Fujifilm X and Sony E), but since Canon and Nikon DSLRs still dominate system camera sales and profits, their apparent lack of innovation might simply mean that they will only have a profit motive to take mirrorless systems seriously when those newcomers bite deeper into DSLR sales.

In particular, Canon is probably in a good position to make EOS-M a more serious competitor, by adding an EVF, dual pixel PDAF, and a few more lenses. All of which might already exist in the R&D department.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2014 at 17:21 UTC
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

neo_nights: One more thing: did anyone actually read the WHOLE study?

Anyone who has done an academic research knows how frustrating/infuriating it is to spend months/years reading, reasearching and such, write pages and more pages about something and then the press just publish a couple of lines about it, about its conclusion, and then everyone starts b*tching about it.

Be careful with pre-judgements, people.

Some commenters here do not even seem to have read the whole of the DPReview article; maybe they scanned the headline and jumped straight to the comments.

The second quote from the research paper indicates that the effect is likely to be only when people just take a quick snapshot and move on without otherwise paying attention to the subject, whereas looking at the subject carefully enough to compose a good photograph has the opposite effect.

In other words, some commenters here looked at the article in the the same way that some sloppy snapshooters look at the objects they are photographing; in either case, little is learnt.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2013 at 16:10 UTC
On article Roger Cicala cynically re-defines photography (53 comments in total)

He overlooked the classic
"Circle of Confusion: a bunch of photographers sitting around a table arguing about depth of field".

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2013 at 00:06 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On article SD card labeling for 4K video announced (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

scrup: Will the compact flash card die now! all it takes is for canon and Nikon to stop using this format. SD cards are getting faster and faster. all laptops have sd card slots.

The battle to replace CF is now between SD on one side and the two new rival "post-CF" high end formats, CFast and XQD on the other. The latter two offer higher speeds and capacities than CF or SD, and so might win some of the high-end video camera market, but I suspect that SD will continue its path to overall market dominance by becoming "good enough, supported by far more computers and cameras, and a lot cheaper".

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2013 at 23:15 UTC
In reply to:

Archiver: Interesting how this is available only for the C100 at this time. If this can be implemented with the C300, it will show that dual pixel AF is a function of the CMOS sensor shared by the C100, C300 and C500, rather than the C100's hardware.

The C100 has four photodiodes for each output pixel: a 3840x2160 photosite array but maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 pixels, so it could easily have a single microlens over each 2x2 cluster of photodiodes, allowing it to use a pair of them for AF. Maybe
under each lens and feeding wach output pixel,
and using the GG pair for AF.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2013 at 02:29 UTC

The C100 uses four photo-sites to produce each output pixel (3840x2160 active pixels, but maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 HD). That is probably critical to its ability to do dual pixel AF, which uses multiple photo-diodes per output pixel. The other dual pixel PDAF seniors also have those pairs of photo-sites behind a single micro lens, so it is also likely that each four photo-site cluster feeding a single output pixel in the C100 is behind a single micro lens.

So do not expect any such upgrades to other cameras whose sensors do not have these special hardware features.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2013 at 15:01 UTC as 36th comment
On article Hands-on with the retro Nikon Df (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

hidden1: Its a shame the included kit lens doesn't have an aperture ring.

It kind of ruins the retro camera experience when you have to use an e dial to set the aperture.

Apparently you have to use the dial anyway with any CPU lens: the aperture ring only works with (very old) non-CPU lenses.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 18:56 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

3dreal: It will have a fixed prism and no AF, maybe removable screens. Dont dream too much. we dont need AF but the best focussing-system on all DSLRs.

It has both ann AF-on button and an AF kit lens.

What is entertaining about the Df teaser campaign is how it has lured some people to reveal their wishes and fantasies while ignoring any facts that contradict them. The Df is functionally a modern highly automated digital SLR, with the addition of half a dozen added dials and the pointless removal of video functionality.

Or is someone going to argue that adding one more video button along with the roughly 20 buttons it already has, or adding a fifth position on the MASP dial, would "ruin its photographic simplicity and purity"?

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2013 at 20:56 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: But is it SLR? Or is it mirrorless? And if it is SLR, do it have a split image screen?

And is the rumor that it has no LCD true? That could be compatible with "Good things take time. They are worth the wait". I mean, you have to wait until you get home to look at the result.

"And is the rumor that it has no LCD true?"
No: the edge of the screen is visible in the rear view shot above. That "rumor" is just one of the delusional retro minimalist fantasies that people are projecting onto this camera with no supporting evidence at all. Another example is dreams of a split-image manual focusing VF on this AF camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2013 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Kriekira: That any of these might be assumed to be paintings says more about the viewer's inexperience with paintings than it does about the images.

And there is the additional, never-addressed issue of reproduction: is a photograph an image or a print? It is worth always keeping in mind that you cannot ever "see" a painting on a computer (or in a book) -- all you can see is a (photo-mechanical) reproduction.

I saw a large print of "Thorn Trees" close up in a nature photography exhibition, and my first reaction was "why is that drawing here"? The illusion is partly due to the amazing contrast in lighting and color, which the eye/brain at first takes as an artist's unrealistic fantasy.

That one is in a different league from painting-like effects produced in post-processing.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2013 at 18:45 UTC
In reply to:

Renzokuken: I wonder how much of this technological improvement will translate to better stills??

Canon seems to have their hands full on video and their cine-line recently...

Typo: with a _sensor_ that big (36x24mm)

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2013 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

Renzokuken: I wonder how much of this technological improvement will translate to better stills??

Canon seems to have their hands full on video and their cine-line recently...

None: the only technological change here is having fewer, bigger photo sites; about 2MP, which is good enough for HD video, but too few for almost any still photography with a se SLR that big.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2013 at 22:23 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2082 comments in total)
In reply to:

dw2001: love these focus tracking test where you shoot at like F22 and absolutely everything in the frame is in focus...that really gives you an idea of how the focus tracking performs....

Look at the full resolution images by clicking on the small downsized ones displayed in the web page: the OOF effect is clear, and looking at the ground, the plane of focus is clearly at the front of the horse, very near the plane of its eyes whee it should be.

Of course tiny downsized "web thumbnail" images show lots of DOF.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2013 at 15:47 UTC
In reply to:

ManuelVilardeMacedo: Well, well... not bad for a dead medium!

Seriously, I chanced to try an FP4 125 Plus roll during the past two weeks. After seeing the results I must say I'm impressed with the sharpness and contrast this film is capable of. Grain is not as smooth as Kodak's T-Max, but somehow it adds expression to the pictures.

foto guy,
the demand is there partly because people like me have lost access to local labs that used to provide this service, and local darkroom rental options (and do not want to mess with photographic chemicals in our bathrooms). So good news, but not due to any increase in overall B&W film usage, I suspect.
I like the idea of getting scans too, since I suspect my bigger prints from B&W film will be inkjet or an online digital file printing service.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2013 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

Petka: Two polarizers: how much light loss there is?

Sounds like a good idea which is really not needed. And even less in the future with ever sharper sensors.

No polarizers: one layer that rotates polarization, different from a polarizing filter that blocks light of a certain polarization.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2013 at 02:40 UTC
In reply to:

G G: I'm not sure this is a truly useful exercise. One of its drawback is to reduce light transmission, as any polarizing filter does.
The future is probably something like this:
- increase the pixel density above the lens resolution (a low pass filter)
- filter digitally for lower resolution.

Low pass filters already have two filters: the innovation seems to be allowing rotation of light in between them, to turn the low-pass fitering effect on and off, rather than having the second physically rotated relative to the first by an appropriate angle. Like what happens if you swap between a D800 and D800E: they differ by having the two filters in different relative orientation.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2013 at 02:27 UTC
In reply to:

Frank_BR: In the beginning there was the D800 for $3000. So Nikon stripped the AA filter and tge D800E was born. Because less is more, Nikon charges $3300 for the D800E. The next logical step would be a D800F with a configurable AA filter for $5000. E la nave va.

Frank: you trust KR for technical information rather than the details provided by Nikon or at this site?! KR is simply wrong on this: surprised?

P. S. Lower volume specialty versions products can cost more due to economies of scale even when they cost no more to make.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2013 at 15:02 UTC
In reply to:

abolit: who is this camera for? nothing comes to mind so far....

@Entropus: "There are no standout features other than a viewfinder and sensor at the back and a lens mount at the front" How can you ignore that it also looks a lot more like an SLR than previous Sony E-mount cameras, including ones like the NEX 6 which has all the features you list? Even after I mentioned that SLR resemblance in the post you are replying to?

I would say that compared to previous Sony E-mount cameras, looking like a SLR is THE standout feature!

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 18:48 UTC
In reply to:

Maverick_: Sony just put the nails in the APS-C and Mirrorless cameras coffin. The future is only FF DSLRs and Phone cameras. Wanna know why Pana struggles with the GH3, it was priced 600 over where it should have been. Nice job Sony. Now the APS-C is going to go down in price and eventually move out completely and make way for low priced FF.

A new, well-priced entry-level APSC mirrorless camera does not put a nail in the coffin of either APSC or mirrorless cameras! It might be part of the downfall of entry-level DSLRs, with their unsatisfactory small VF images caused by the combination of a small format and a penta-mirror (instead of penta-prism) OVF. Sony is right in touting the advantages of the a3000‘s EVF over the OVFs of similarly priced DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 13:08 UTC
In reply to:

abolit: who is this camera for? nothing comes to mind so far....

Phone and compact camera users wanting their first "serious camera", and who still believe that such cameras must at least look like the SLRs that pros use. At the cost of a completely imobile rear-screen, greater bulk. It is the "suburbanite's SUV" of mirrorless cameras. It will probably sell frustratingly well, at least in the USA.

P.S. never mind: the second paragraph of the preview says it already!

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 12:49 UTC
Total: 249, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »