Lee Jay

Lives in United States CO, United States
Works as a Electrical Engineer / Wind Energy Research
Joined on Oct 17, 2003

Comments

Total: 819, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

norman shearer: A tilty screen could have been added with negligable difference to the size..

That's not true. It would have made it thicker.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

DiegoRodriguez: So, the G9X 's major flaw was its lens, they make a Mark 2, and... they keep the same lens...

I have an f/5.8 (at the long end) 1/2.3" in my pocket right now, and it's mostly okay. f/4.9 and 1" is way, way faster than what I have now.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 14:38 UTC
In reply to:

DiegoRodriguez: So, the G9X 's major flaw was its lens, they make a Mark 2, and... they keep the same lens...

What was wrong with its lens other than the range?

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 14:28 UTC
In reply to:

DPRevievver: let's compare RX 100 (2012) vs G9x2 (2017)
28-100mm vs 28-84mm
F1.8 - 4.9 vs F2.0-4.9
10FPS vs 8FPS

31mm thick (Canon) versus 36mm thick (Sony).

31mm is borderline too thick for all-day pocketablity to me, which is why I've never even considered any of the Sony's. Heck, I didn't even buy an S110 or S120 because of their 27mm thickness over my current camera which is 25mm thick and has curved and beveled edges which make it much more comfortable.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 14:28 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Someone wake me when phone cameras have an optical range of at least 24-100 equivalent before cropping, optical stabilization that actually works, and ergonomics that don't completely suck.

Manual mode on a cell phone makes little sense to me. No focal length control, no aperture actuator so you're always shooting wide open (which is like f/15 or so on full-frame), no effective flash (LEDs are all but useless), ISO is just final image brightness so all you can really control is shutter speed, and with either missing or really lousy OIS and really lousy results at even modestly high ISO, there's not much control there either because you're usually boxed into a corner.

Most of my favorite shots taken with my pocket compact were taken either at 24mm equivalent or at 50-170mm equivalent. My three all-time favorites were taken at 45mm, 86mm and 112mm before cropping. I would have missed them all had I been using a cell phone camera.

Well, in four years of having a "good" smartphone camera, at least I'm up to double-digits on keepers. 12 at last count.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 01:20 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Someone wake me when phone cameras have an optical range of at least 24-100 equivalent before cropping, optical stabilization that actually works, and ergonomics that don't completely suck.

Actually, a couple of them are printed quite large (over 40" in the long dimension) and hanging on the walls where I work. A few others are hanging in my house or in the homes of family. And many of them couldn't be taken with a cell phone because the focal length wasn't near 28mm equivalent.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 15:20 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Someone wake me when phone cameras have an optical range of at least 24-100 equivalent before cropping, optical stabilization that actually works, and ergonomics that don't completely suck.

I use a pocket compact now. No current cell phone camera comes close to being sufficient for random, general use.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 14:08 UTC

Someone wake me when phone cameras have an optical range of at least 24-100 equivalent before cropping, optical stabilization that actually works, and ergonomics that don't completely suck.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 13:55 UTC as 16th comment | 6 replies

Everyone who owns an ILC should get a Rocket Blower. Simple, cheap, reliable, effective.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2016 at 14:58 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply

You've got to be kidding me.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 00:21 UTC as 229th comment
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I seriously considered this camera, and the S110 and S120 before it. I ultimately chose not to buy any of them and to keep my Elph 500 HS instead.

The G9x is nice, but the biggest drawback for me is its lack of reach. Frankly, I'd give up speed and sensor size for reach in an always-with-me camera. For this reason, I like the specs of the Panasonic TZ100. But it's too thick. A well-implemented LF1 is really what I'd like.

Ideally, I'd like a faster (frame rate) G9x with a smaller sensor (1/1.7") and a 24-200 range in the same body, even if it had to be f/2-f/5.8 or similar. My Elph 500 has produced solid images for me for years with an even smaller sensor because it has an excellent lens that's f/2 at the wide end. When I really need faster than that, I'll make sure I have my 7D Mark II + Sigma 18-35/1.8 with me.

The G7xII is nice, but there's no way that's ever going to be an always-in-my-pocket camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2016 at 00:49 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I seriously considered this camera, and the S110 and S120 before it. I ultimately chose not to buy any of them and to keep my Elph 500 HS instead.

The G9x is nice, but the biggest drawback for me is its lack of reach. Frankly, I'd give up speed and sensor size for reach in an always-with-me camera. For this reason, I like the specs of the Panasonic TZ100. But it's too thick. A well-implemented LF1 is really what I'd like.

Ideally, I'd like a faster (frame rate) G9x with a smaller sensor (1/1.7") and a 24-200 range in the same body, even if it had to be f/2-f/5.8 or similar. My Elph 500 has produced solid images for me for years with an even smaller sensor because it has an excellent lens that's f/2 at the wide end. When I really need faster than that, I'll make sure I have my 7D Mark II + Sigma 18-35/1.8 with me.

The TZ100 is nice, but it's just too thick to be pocketable for me. 44mm versus my current 25mm thick camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 18:26 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I seriously considered this camera, and the S110 and S120 before it. I ultimately chose not to buy any of them and to keep my Elph 500 HS instead.

The G9x is nice, but the biggest drawback for me is its lack of reach. Frankly, I'd give up speed and sensor size for reach in an always-with-me camera. For this reason, I like the specs of the Panasonic TZ100. But it's too thick. A well-implemented LF1 is really what I'd like.

Ideally, I'd like a faster (frame rate) G9x with a smaller sensor (1/1.7") and a 24-200 range in the same body, even if it had to be f/2-f/5.8 or similar. My Elph 500 has produced solid images for me for years with an even smaller sensor because it has an excellent lens that's f/2 at the wide end. When I really need faster than that, I'll make sure I have my 7D Mark II + Sigma 18-35/1.8 with me.

Yeah...I agree. The trend is toward larger "compact" cameras like the G7X or smaller cameras with less range like the G9X. That's why I haven't upgraded in 5 years.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 18:04 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I seriously considered this camera, and the S110 and S120 before it. I ultimately chose not to buy any of them and to keep my Elph 500 HS instead.

The G9x is nice, but the biggest drawback for me is its lack of reach. Frankly, I'd give up speed and sensor size for reach in an always-with-me camera. For this reason, I like the specs of the Panasonic TZ100. But it's too thick. A well-implemented LF1 is really what I'd like.

Ideally, I'd like a faster (frame rate) G9x with a smaller sensor (1/1.7") and a 24-200 range in the same body, even if it had to be f/2-f/5.8 or similar. My Elph 500 has produced solid images for me for years with an even smaller sensor because it has an excellent lens that's f/2 at the wide end. When I really need faster than that, I'll make sure I have my 7D Mark II + Sigma 18-35/1.8 with me.

For exactly the reason I said - to get more range (24-200 versus 28-84).

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 17:18 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Carey's choice - Canon PowerShot G9 X (212 comments in total)

I seriously considered this camera, and the S110 and S120 before it. I ultimately chose not to buy any of them and to keep my Elph 500 HS instead.

The G9x is nice, but the biggest drawback for me is its lack of reach. Frankly, I'd give up speed and sensor size for reach in an always-with-me camera. For this reason, I like the specs of the Panasonic TZ100. But it's too thick. A well-implemented LF1 is really what I'd like.

Ideally, I'd like a faster (frame rate) G9x with a smaller sensor (1/1.7") and a 24-200 range in the same body, even if it had to be f/2-f/5.8 or similar. My Elph 500 has produced solid images for me for years with an even smaller sensor because it has an excellent lens that's f/2 at the wide end. When I really need faster than that, I'll make sure I have my 7D Mark II + Sigma 18-35/1.8 with me.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 15:53 UTC as 40th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The math doesn't work.

“If they were to replace the batteries with these supercapacitors, you could charge your mobile phone in a few seconds and you wouldn’t need to charge it again for over a week,”

My cell phone battery holds 11Wh and lasts a day. I'd need 77Wh to last a week.

To charge a 77Wh capacity in "a few seconds" (I'll give them 5 seconds) would take 55.4kW of power, or 120V at 462 amps with 100% charge efficiency.

My main panel is 200A at 240V or 48kW so even all the power that can pass through my main breaker couldn't accomplish that charge rate.

I work at the end of a long distribution line and we have 10 megawatts of service. There's a wooden pole distribution line I drive next to everyday to work that carries 32 megawatts.

Fast charging multiple cars at half a megawatt each is way more doable than providing 50kW to home users to charge their phones in 5 seconds.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 04:27 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The math doesn't work.

“If they were to replace the batteries with these supercapacitors, you could charge your mobile phone in a few seconds and you wouldn’t need to charge it again for over a week,”

My cell phone battery holds 11Wh and lasts a day. I'd need 77Wh to last a week.

To charge a 77Wh capacity in "a few seconds" (I'll give them 5 seconds) would take 55.4kW of power, or 120V at 462 amps with 100% charge efficiency.

My main panel is 200A at 240V or 48kW so even all the power that can pass through my main breaker couldn't accomplish that charge rate.

Advancements in technology still have to follow conservation of energy, and my comment was about that, not about their device.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 01:04 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The math doesn't work.

“If they were to replace the batteries with these supercapacitors, you could charge your mobile phone in a few seconds and you wouldn’t need to charge it again for over a week,”

My cell phone battery holds 11Wh and lasts a day. I'd need 77Wh to last a week.

To charge a 77Wh capacity in "a few seconds" (I'll give them 5 seconds) would take 55.4kW of power, or 120V at 462 amps with 100% charge efficiency.

My main panel is 200A at 240V or 48kW so even all the power that can pass through my main breaker couldn't accomplish that charge rate.

D500 - you are missing the point.

Even if their device is every bit as good as they say it is, home power supplies couldn't possibly charge it "in a few seconds". 5 minutes would be possible, but not a few seconds.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 00:28 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The math doesn't work.

“If they were to replace the batteries with these supercapacitors, you could charge your mobile phone in a few seconds and you wouldn’t need to charge it again for over a week,”

My cell phone battery holds 11Wh and lasts a day. I'd need 77Wh to last a week.

To charge a 77Wh capacity in "a few seconds" (I'll give them 5 seconds) would take 55.4kW of power, or 120V at 462 amps with 100% charge efficiency.

My main panel is 200A at 240V or 48kW so even all the power that can pass through my main breaker couldn't accomplish that charge rate.

Old cameras - no, that's not quite right either.

Let's say you need 300Wh/mile. To get, say, 200 miles of range you'd need 60 kWh. I claim bathroom breaks take a maximum of 8 minutes. At 90% charge efficiency, that's half a megawatt. That's a lot, but it's less than 1% of the output of an ordinary power plant, and it's easily available at the medium voltage distribution grid. That's not as common as gas stations which are typically on the low voltage distribution grid, but it's not "half the output of the power plant" either.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 23:55 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: The math doesn't work.

“If they were to replace the batteries with these supercapacitors, you could charge your mobile phone in a few seconds and you wouldn’t need to charge it again for over a week,”

My cell phone battery holds 11Wh and lasts a day. I'd need 77Wh to last a week.

To charge a 77Wh capacity in "a few seconds" (I'll give them 5 seconds) would take 55.4kW of power, or 120V at 462 amps with 100% charge efficiency.

My main panel is 200A at 240V or 48kW so even all the power that can pass through my main breaker couldn't accomplish that charge rate.

D500 - check the math I did. Even if their device is exactly as they stated, you couldn't charge it that fast on any conventional residential or commercial plug-in power source. Yeah, I've got 480V 100A three-phase plugs at work for industrial purposes, I'm just saying that quote was highly misleading (essentially wrong).

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 23:52 UTC
Total: 819, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »