samfan

Joined on Sep 20, 2012

Comments

Total: 424, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Narrative will stop selling its life-logging cameras (22 comments in total)

How many of the photos taken during the day are of the computer screen where the user sorts the photos from the previous day?

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 19:03 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article Throwback Thursday: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 (118 comments in total)
In reply to:

felix from the suburbs: I guess Sony's heart was really with EVF's all along. That might partially explain why its temporary foray into optical viewfinders, after buying Minolta's camera business, never really got much traction. In any event the R1 is one camera that I regret not buying when it came out - mostly because of unfounded concerns about the EVF. The irony is that EVF is now one of my favorite things about my new Sony camera.

EVFs at the time were pretty horrible however. I was thinking of getting this camera back in the day and also later, but thinking about that EVF, I'm glad I stuck with DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 19:00 UTC
On article Nikon 105mm F1.4E ED sample images (153 comments in total)

That's a nice lady.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 13:34 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

samfan: Compared to things like AF and IS, it's very easy to say that pretty much no company really innovates enough. As technology marches forward, we get diminishing returns from each innovation. Is DLSR -> MILC really as big a jump as SLR -> DSLR? Is HD -> 4k such a jump like VGA -> HD? Sure not.

I understand the frustration if some company seems to be backwards, but let's not be too hasty and write off some companies because their products are 'only' great and not super special. And while I don't want to defend the C/N duopoly, it's the nature of the beast.

That's why you have a choice: pick a product from them that's 'only great' or something new and more revolutionary from a smaller producer. If Canon had the most revolutionary cameras, nobody else could compete.

BTW I would say that Dual Pixel is a nice feature that's been introduced by Canon in the last 10 years.

Barney: Yea I did but I still got an overall too negative vibe from it soo.. Just iterated on that a bit.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 14:26 UTC
On article YI M1 Mirrorless ILC First Impressions Review (361 comments in total)

Interesting. Especially, it's nice to see more m43 products. Honestly I sort of doubt that YI will follow-up this camera with a complete line, but it being m43, it can drop-in nicely into any m43 products people already have.

I'm still confused why people put up with not having a viewfinder though. Smartphone use is not an excuse. Just, why? Ideally I would expect every camera to be available in versions with an without an EVF.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 15:26 UTC as 102nd comment

Compared to things like AF and IS, it's very easy to say that pretty much no company really innovates enough. As technology marches forward, we get diminishing returns from each innovation. Is DLSR -> MILC really as big a jump as SLR -> DSLR? Is HD -> 4k such a jump like VGA -> HD? Sure not.

I understand the frustration if some company seems to be backwards, but let's not be too hasty and write off some companies because their products are 'only' great and not super special. And while I don't want to defend the C/N duopoly, it's the nature of the beast.

That's why you have a choice: pick a product from them that's 'only great' or something new and more revolutionary from a smaller producer. If Canon had the most revolutionary cameras, nobody else could compete.

BTW I would say that Dual Pixel is a nice feature that's been introduced by Canon in the last 10 years.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 15:17 UTC as 64th comment | 3 replies

I'm missing the joke on the stock photos. The whole idea behind making stock is that it can be useful to someone no matter how silly or generic it may seem.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 09:22 UTC as 6th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon PowerShot Pro70 (110 comments in total)

Not bad, not bad. Canon knew how to make good compact cameras, unfortunately they dropped the ball after 2005 or so - that's when they removed RAW from the G-series in hope to sell more DSLRs, started using needlesly huge-MPx sensors, lens quality dropped, optical viewfinders disappeared... The whole compact camera sub-industry pretty much went to hell, no wonder smartphones picked up so easily. Fortunately we got the good compact cams back now.

Regarding RAW, I thought some of the early digital cameras actually offered ONLY raw? I don't know if that was some specific era or just certain models, it might have been before this Canon, since around 1998 when I started being interested everything already had JPEG.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2016 at 09:17 UTC as 20th comment

Looks gorgeous. While I'd like to see more MILCs with smaller sensors (for reasons of lens size) and overall I'm more of an Olympus fan when it comes to MILCs, yep, this looks like the current winner.

Let's be honest, Canon may not have better DSLRs than Nikon or Pentax, but even their DSLRs are better than whatever MILC were able to achieve so far. So if they transferred their DSLR knowledge into MILC, they have a winner on their hands.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 15:45 UTC as 34th comment
On article Petzval 58mm real-world samples (58 comments in total)

Nice samples. Seems like a fine toy lens but definitely more useful than the fad lens that was around a few years ago - what was the name, baby-something.

This one can be useful for actual artistic effect in the right hands. I probably wouldn't know how to use it well, although it can be used as a fairly regular lens with the bokeh dialed down. That's always nice when speciality lenses like this allow it.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 14:32 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

cosinaphile: its sad that the tiniest, worst performing sensor in existence has come to dominate what passes for a camera in 2016 .. its popularity is , for me , the result of laziness and lack of sophistication and knowledge and fear of the tech side of cameras in these times where the average person lack intellectual depth and broadness of knowledge and a desire to understand technology, nature science & the human condition .. superficiality has replaced the polymath, as the phone has replaced the camera

ameraphone are not dominating cause they are good but because they serve the cult of the selfie and the pathetic culture of facebook and twitter and other pseudoconnected nonsense that has replaced genuine human culture ... and they are easy ... and you dont have to think it.. there is no commitment or work or effort ... perfect for our souless , stupid superficial times we live in ... i find that pathetic and profoundly disheartening .
buy a decent compact ... youll be better for it

The only convenience in the phone camera is that you always have your phone with you. And sure, that's valid. Multiply that fact with all the other devices (GPS, music player, PDA, whatever) and yea, smartphones are useful things for everything together.

You don't even need to care about image quality beyond what smartphones offer or the extra options.

What I do take exception in is the usage, Thin, flat, large, slippery, featurless, they are absolutely abysmal image-taking devices. The battery life severely restricts the amount of pics that can be taken. And people who have never held any other camera besides a smartphones don't know the possibilities of different focal lengths.

So much for convenience.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: its sad that the tiniest, worst performing sensor in existence has come to dominate what passes for a camera in 2016 .. its popularity is , for me , the result of laziness and lack of sophistication and knowledge and fear of the tech side of cameras in these times where the average person lack intellectual depth and broadness of knowledge and a desire to understand technology, nature science & the human condition .. superficiality has replaced the polymath, as the phone has replaced the camera

ameraphone are not dominating cause they are good but because they serve the cult of the selfie and the pathetic culture of facebook and twitter and other pseudoconnected nonsense that has replaced genuine human culture ... and they are easy ... and you dont have to think it.. there is no commitment or work or effort ... perfect for our souless , stupid superficial times we live in ... i find that pathetic and profoundly disheartening .
buy a decent compact ... youll be better for it

Most people use these phones to take 640*640 intentionally ugly Instagrams and videos with vertical orientation. You think users like that know anything about quality?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 20:20 UTC

All this nice great photographic technology and it's all bundled in something that's so cumbersome to use as a camera.

I'd happily buy a pocket camera that has all these features but also a grip to hold onto, a proper shutter button and a battery that I don't need to charge every couple of hours. No to mention controls in the form of buttons and dials (if applicable) so the damn thing can be used with gloves.

How much would it cost to repackage just the camera tech into a separate product and how big would it be? Tiny and cheap, that's how.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 20:16 UTC as 168th comment | 5 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: the Samsung NV10 (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

JT26: Illustrates how quickly things change when 'throwback' results in an article on a Samsung camera

Well Samsung have been selling cameras for ages, back into film compacts. Not sure if they were actually made by them or OEM but it's more than Panasonic or Sony can say.

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2016 at 18:23 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: the Samsung NV10 (77 comments in total)

A sympathetic but not very interesting camera. Fortunately it evolved into EX1 where Samsung almost perfected the concept.

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2016 at 17:25 UTC as 39th comment

The list seems like a random selection of programs that can manipulate color and add some enhancements and effects, with some able to do various kinds of more. Okay, those are things that photographers generally use, I just don't know why these should be PS alternatives then.

Anyway, does anyone know what happened to Pixel? It was a multiplatform program quite on par with PS (during the CS2 era - at least better than GIMP at the time) made by one person. He sold it to someone and I lost track.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 21:59 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Maoby: Me, I probably hold the world record of First DSLR :)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157627624479529

Probably not, but I find those old digicams fascinating. The ingenuity of cobbling complete film cameras and bits of computers together... Fun times.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 17:14 UTC
In reply to:

Shiranai: Why didn't they put it in, in the first place? Its not like this is some kind of latest technology that wasn't available before.
First, saving a buck in production cost and now probably a lot of people complained about it, so they release that lame fix.

Well at least they did fix it.

Also, considering how lame some of the wireless implementations in cameras are, if this doesn't turn out well, they can make a mark II adapter, unlike with built-in chips.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

Glen Barrington: Seems an odd and kludgy way to go about it. I mean it's not like the camera body is so small that they couldn't fit that amount of circuitry in there somehow without taking away a DIFFERENT resource! And It's not like this is a new technology that snuck up on them overnight. WiFi in cameras has been real for 2 or 3 years, at least, and has been asked for by users for a good 5 years at least.

What is going on at Canon? All I can do is shake my head in wonderment.

Actually I think it's a rather smart solution because the Wi-Fi is upgradeable (in theory at least) and if you don't want to use it, you just remove the card and you're completely off-line.

Tho I think they should make a CF version as well for people who prefer to use SD cards for storage.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 13:40 UTC

I bought 2 of these about 10 years ago, a gold and a black one... Then sold them about 3 years ago for several times as much.

I used to dream about this cam when I was a kid, but when I finally got it, I wasn't a fan to be honest. Really slick-looking cameras, but the automatic flash was an incredible annoyance - it was always on by default, which completely negated the advantage of the clamshell (speedy startup) since I always had to double click a teeny rubber button to turn it off.

The lens was good, but just 35mm, so... Meh.

I much rather used Canon Ixus II - an APS (!) compact camera: even smaller, better build, 28mm lens, and memory for the flash setting. If someone you know had one, you could probably get it for free or for like $5 off ebay. And tons of film almost for free. The IQ was the same as 35mm film and Kodak BW400CN (not sure about the name) was the best C41 BW film.

In short, I never looked back at the Mju II. You really should do a throwback about APS!

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 02:49 UTC as 8th comment
Total: 424, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »