Timmbits

Timmbits

Lives in Canada Montreal, Canada
Works as a inventor
Joined on Oct 8, 2011
About me:

Deutscher, living in Montreal Canada.
Cycling, chess, design, inventions, nature, photography, are some of the things I like.

Comments

Total: 1636, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Biowizard: HEADLINE: Muppet packs fine optical gear in sh1tty unpadded bag. #FAIL

Brian

no way. even if that were the case, there is no way this sort of damage can occur. if you dropped your camera out of the bag onto cement, you wouldn't even get this kind of damage

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 03:53 UTC
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: Why would you take such expensive gear with you anyway?? You could use some less expensive gear, and save the great gear for less smashing events. Or just carry it on with you. Serious DUH!

a professional photographer does not leave his lenses at home, to go out on a job with toy lenses. DUH!

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 03:52 UTC

This is no ordinary situation of a dropped camera case!

Such damage requires a bullet, or an iron rod jabbed into it, or target practice with a javelin. No drop, no item dropped onto luggage, can cause this. The force and concentrated impact required for this, no case could have sustained either.

There is a case to be made, about "risks that are to be reasonably expected" by any normal person. This type of damage is beyond that, beyond what any waiver might protect the airline from.

One airline is going to be sued for obvious neglect beyond what is a reasonable risk.
Of course, their insurance company will cover it. And that is probably why it is in the shop - the insurance company requires an estimate - and they will declare it a total loss and buy him new equipment.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 03:50 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

corndog: How is that even possible? Did the crew take turns hitting it with a baseball bat? Seriously, these things aren't THAT fragile. This looks malicious to me.

certainly malicious - it looks like they stabbed it with an iron rod

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 03:49 UTC
On article Quick review: Nextbit Robin camera (45 comments in total)

I would have liked to see more on it's dynamic range, on a scale - in the bottom picture, there is some serious highlights clipping going on.
(and tiny sensors' weakness is usually more clipping in the shadows)

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2017 at 23:44 UTC as 1st comment
On article Nokia 808 PureView Review (27 comments in total)

omg! how much do you guys get paid to glaze-over facts. going on about zoom, for a whole paragraph, going through immense efforts to avoid using the term "digital zoom" and "no optical zoom". It does not have _any_ zoom from what you are saying - it's just a crop. Why don't you just call a spade a spade, instead of beating around the bush?

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 07:46 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Nokia 808 PureView Review (27 comments in total)

@DPR:
in your image comparing sensor sizes, you write "four thirds" instead of mft or "micro four thirds".

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 07:42 UTC as 3rd comment

Perhaps, sometimes, some cops are weighing the trouble they may be in, for preventing you from filming, versus the trouble they (or their colleagues) may be in for other actions.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 04:00 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Tristan Jones: Strange that "Windows photos" is more fluid "for me" than Lightroom for image review/browsing.

I get about 1/2 a sec browse lag on an image browser that comes free with my OS, which reads my D800|D610|D750 Raw files as well as my 3.9GB TIFF files.

Yet my paid-for "specialist" program judders through image previews in a way that would have you believe I'm working on a 20-year PC, not one of the best "single-core-performance" quad-core cpu's ever made (i7-4790k). So even taking single/multithreaded performance into account, this should not happen for me. And doesn't with other applications, just in Lightroom!

The simple fact is, the whole LR interface needs re-coding.
And that is before we take "using 4k screens" into consideration.
On a 4k screen, it judders, just opening or closing a tab in the develop module.
And once working on images, it slows down over time, even when you return to Library.

maybe we ought to revisit the roster of free software that is out there

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 03:56 UTC

That's what you get, when you use high-level languages to speed up development and save on competent programmers: bloatware.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 03:54 UTC as 2nd comment

To be quite frank, I don't want to drain my phone's battery on camera gear.
When I want something modular, I use something called a c.a.m.e.r.a.
Why would I want to hang a bunch of stuff on my phone anyways?
What do I do when I get a call? Tear it all off?
(if the battery isn't drained by then, that is)

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 03:43 UTC as 1st comment

Curved sensors? Big deal! That is the easy part.

But who is willing to redesign all their lenses and put in the marketing dollars to convince everyone to reequip themselves?

That, is is no small matter.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 03:14 UTC as 1st comment

This should be entertaining... more vaporware! lol

(more nice new cameras they won't release)

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 03:10 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

RingoMan: Regardless of shutter differences it seems to me that flash photography is still severely punished. I hope that a mirrorless camera in APS-C can help by building an auxiliary leaf shutter in the camera body right behind the lens. The APS-C size would certainly allow for this. This would be like the leaf shutter lenses that were available for focal plane cameras. There is a reason the new Hasselblad still uses leaf shutters!

and these two:

http://www.philcameras.be/collection/images/pubs_annees/pub1957/Konica-III-our-best-pub-1957-Us-850.jpg

http://www.philcameras.be/collection/images/pubs_annees/pub1956/Konica-III-pub--read-what-experts-1956-Us-850.jpg

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 17:53 UTC
In reply to:

Timmbits: In my camera, I can choose between no electronic curtain,
electronic first curtain, or
electronic second curtain.

The argument can me made that when you press the shutter, you create a little movement anyways. therefore removing the advantage of an electronic first curtain to keep the camera stable.

Would this be the reason for having the electronic second curtain option? Or would it be something else? (for example, keeping the camera stable once the curtain is open, and closing behind and following as data is read out)

(in case it makes any difference, it's a Samsung NX20)

I can't find it anymore either... not sure if it was in a previous firmware, or if it was in only one of the modes that I saw that. All I know, is it was cause for confusion for me.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: Straight lines, flat surfaces and right-angles are easy. Consistently accurate curves are something else entirely. That's why we pay so much for our lenses. The manufacture of circular lenses I more or less understand but it's mind boggling to me how they make asymmetric lenses. Hey, DPR, how about an article on the manufacture of asymmetric lenses?

That is way over even their heads.
In a case like this, google is your friend.

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2017 at 17:16 UTC

In my camera, I can choose between no electronic curtain,
electronic first curtain, or
electronic second curtain.

The argument can me made that when you press the shutter, you create a little movement anyways. therefore removing the advantage of an electronic first curtain to keep the camera stable.

Would this be the reason for having the electronic second curtain option? Or would it be something else? (for example, keeping the camera stable once the curtain is open, and closing behind and following as data is read out)

(in case it makes any difference, it's a Samsung NX20)

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 08:09 UTC as 6th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

tmy: Very informative and well written article, especially on a fairly complicated subject.

I was thinking though, should we not use the term "physical" shutter rather than "mechanical" shutter? In pre-digital days, mechanical shutters were ones that didn't need batteries to operate, like that of the FM2, OM-1, OM-3, MX etc as opposed to electronically controlled shutters such as those on the F3, AE-1, OM-4 etc which did need a battery.

bit of pedantry I guess, but it all gets a bit muddled....

BTW for me the silent shutter the most useful feature for me in the A7 series, which I've used professionally now for this feature alone for the last 2 years. I have the A7s and the A7RII with Sony, Leica M and Contax G lenses, but otherwise I use Nikon DSLRs.

The only part you can't touch, that isn't physical, is software.
Whether spring-operated or battery-operated, the piece is still a mechanical shutter. With or without static electrical help.
It's moot.
Electronic shutter refers to the absence of, or non-use of, the physical/mechanical piece, by electronics that are also physically present.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 08:02 UTC
In reply to:

AARonron: Great article. I would like to see a follow-up that summarized when each style of shutter is most beneficial and examples of applications each excels at.
For example, I've read more than one photog gush over how great silent shooting is for their portrait work, keeping subjects more at ease and candid.
Conversely, from the article it sounds like e-shutters might be terrible for sports, but is it really? How fast do things need to be moving to cause noticeable distortion? (not rhetorical, I really would like to know)
E-shutters seem like they'd be great for shooting with a fast lens on a sunny day without having to stop down or use an ND filter to avoid blow-out. But, is it that simple?

I think we too often forget that today's camera is a computer. And we all know how computers vary immensely in speed from one to another, especially a generation to another. And camera models don't always upgrade the processor or processing speed, the bus, etc. And they just don't talk about that because it would create more confusion than answers for most.
So when you describe problems of electronic shutter, you need to keep in mind that what is a challenge for one processor(camera), is easy for another.
BTW, it's not true that "reduced distance" in small sensors is responsible for faster readout. Electrons move at the speed of light - a few millimeters more or less isn't going to change a thing. It's sensor speed, processing speed, the speed of the RAM, and the bus that links them. If some smartphones read the info out faster, it's simply because they're designed with faster electronics - required by Android and managing massive amounts of apps & data - not MP in less space.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 07:49 UTC
On article Polaroid sold to new owner (94 comments in total)

PL RIP Holdings...
not a lucky name.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 06:47 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 1636, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »