Sam Bennett

Sam Bennett

Lives in United States Raleigh, United States
Works as a Product Manager
Joined on Jan 3, 2004

Comments

Total: 42, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Stephen Gillette: I may be wrong, but I don't think any US carriers support Huawei phones. (For a variety of reasons, just search.) This may apply to Australia, too. From a practical standpoint, then, the phone does not exist...for many potential users.

I think the Huawei's could do extraordinarily well in the US. The hardware is attractive, their version of Android is pretty clean without a lot of unnecessary fluff, etc.

As for "buyer beware" - yeah, you don't want to get stuck with a dead phone you can't do anything with. It's easy for me to be a little flippant about it because I haven't bought a new phone for about 6 years! 😂

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 19:29 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: I would speculate a black and white sensor ~25mm lens, a conventional sensor ~25mm lens, and a ~50mm conventional "telephoto" module.

The B&W sensor has the benefit of being more sensitive to light than the color sensor since there's no bayer array blocking light. The original P9 was even better since it pixel-binned the B&W sensor to reduce noise. So it ended up being the same "resolution" of the color sensor by trading off ultimate resolution for lower noise. For that reason, the P9 was a fantastic phone for shooting in very low light situations.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 19:02 UTC

Cannot wait to get my hands on this thing. The P9 was an extraordinarily satisfying phone to use from a photography standpoint with their novel dual-camera approach and well-designed camera software. If the P20 has a tele on it and an AMOLED screen, it will be my next phone!

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 19:00 UTC as 37th comment
In reply to:

Stephen Gillette: I may be wrong, but I don't think any US carriers support Huawei phones. (For a variety of reasons, just search.) This may apply to Australia, too. From a practical standpoint, then, the phone does not exist...for many potential users.

They don't "support" them, but they can be used with US carriers. I setup a Huawei P9 to work with AT&T and absolutely loved it.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 18:58 UTC
In reply to:

Sam Bennett: I think it's cool Canon is thinking outside the box here - constantly flipping your flash around switching orientations is annoying, I get it. But honestly a much more compelling "innovation" here would be to have these expensive flash units at least be able to do what most smartphones can do at this point - change their color temp to match the ambient light. That would make flash photography vastly easier for beginners and many pros.

This is likely because the camera's ambient settings are different in each case. It's not the color of the flash changing, but the mix of flash and ambient light. Test this by putting the camera in manual, and setting the ISO/Shutter Speed/Aperture so that the scene is completely dark, set WB to "Flash" and see if there's still a variation - there shouldn't be much of a difference.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 20:49 UTC
In reply to:

vFunct: Bounce flash is the worst.

It ruins your perfectly calibrated white flash color rendition by using a degraded white from the walls/ceilings.

The paint on the walls & ceiling isn't perfectly white. It's color rendition is much worse than a Xenon flash.

This is why clothing and skin tones look muddled when using bounce flash. You're forced to convert to black & white.

Nothing beats direct, on-camera flash. It's why fashion & beauty photographers use it.

Yeah I'm pretty used to using gels. Since I mainly shoot indoors, I'm pretty much shooting with gels 95% of the time (to varying degrees). But it can be awkward at events where you moving from indoors to outdoors, from fluorescent to tungsten, etc. Pros can work around it, but I think the lack of sophistication here leads to a lot of consumer frustration, resulting in most people thinking "Flash sucks". It's pretty dumbfounding that this a problem that's been solved on smartphones, but not in top-of-the-line Speedlights. Personally, I'd at least like the option of buying dedicated Tungsten-balanced Speedlights since I shoot fill, almost exclusively indoors.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 20:54 UTC
In reply to:

vFunct: Bounce flash is the worst.

It ruins your perfectly calibrated white flash color rendition by using a degraded white from the walls/ceilings.

The paint on the walls & ceiling isn't perfectly white. It's color rendition is much worse than a Xenon flash.

This is why clothing and skin tones look muddled when using bounce flash. You're forced to convert to black & white.

Nothing beats direct, on-camera flash. It's why fashion & beauty photographers use it.

Different strokes for different folks. Even for party kind of stuff, I like using a big diffusor (mini softbox), getting tight and having the ambient exposure a stop or two beneath the flash exposure with 2nd curtain sync. You get a bit of movement in the shot, but with a clean "pop" good colors and shadows. Again, only looks "right" if you're able to reasonably match the color temps - I aim for having the flash temp warmer than ambient, so the background "recedes" due to the temps emulating how colors for more distant objects get "cooler".

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 18:59 UTC
In reply to:

vFunct: Bounce flash is the worst.

It ruins your perfectly calibrated white flash color rendition by using a degraded white from the walls/ceilings.

The paint on the walls & ceiling isn't perfectly white. It's color rendition is much worse than a Xenon flash.

This is why clothing and skin tones look muddled when using bounce flash. You're forced to convert to black & white.

Nothing beats direct, on-camera flash. It's why fashion & beauty photographers use it.

Yeah, I get that. But in general, I don't like the look for event work. It kills the natural ambiance of the location you're in. Sometimes that's a good thing, but most of the time I'm trying to capture both. So, it's not necessarily about having "enough light", it's about having the "right light" on my subjects. It's also pretty inefficient from a battery-use standpoint, limiting your recycle time, resulting in changing batteries more often, etc.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 17:37 UTC

I think it's cool Canon is thinking outside the box here - constantly flipping your flash around switching orientations is annoying, I get it. But honestly a much more compelling "innovation" here would be to have these expensive flash units at least be able to do what most smartphones can do at this point - change their color temp to match the ambient light. That would make flash photography vastly easier for beginners and many pros.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 13:07 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

vFunct: Bounce flash is the worst.

It ruins your perfectly calibrated white flash color rendition by using a degraded white from the walls/ceilings.

The paint on the walls & ceiling isn't perfectly white. It's color rendition is much worse than a Xenon flash.

This is why clothing and skin tones look muddled when using bounce flash. You're forced to convert to black & white.

Nothing beats direct, on-camera flash. It's why fashion & beauty photographers use it.

The bigger problem with bouncing isn't the fact that you're bouncing, it's that you're shooting full and mixing color temps. Most indoor lighting is going to be very "warm", while flashes are very cool. Mix those two and they look like garbage. The REAL innovation here would be to have these expensive flash units at least be able to do what most smartphones can do at this point - change their color temp to match the ambient light.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 12:58 UTC
On article Cactus announces palm-sized RQ250 wireless monolight (84 comments in total)

Happy to see more options here, but the Godox AD200 is still a more compelling offering to me due to the size. It's a little less powerful, but good enough for my needs. Would be curious to see a color consistency comparison between the two.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 21:57 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
On a photo in the Panasonic Lumix GX9 sample gallery sample gallery (9 comments in total)

Am I crazy, or can you see vertical banding in this shot? Particularly on the right hand side.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 19:33 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
On article Buying Guide: Best cameras for people and events (73 comments in total)

How is the photographer in the banner actually shooting the photos she's reviewing?

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 14:24 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
On article iPhone X vs. Samsung Note 8 (362 comments in total)
In reply to:

J A C S: "The iPhone X's wide gamut OLED is the most color accurate device on the market."

Was that tested, if so how, or it is just a marketing claim?

Yeah, it's funny that the author is claiming that the iPhone X's use of a Samsung OLED display is somehow more superior to Samsung's use of a Samsung display. 🤔😂

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 13:31 UTC
On article iPhone X vs. Samsung Note 8 (362 comments in total)

The Note 8's screen, like the Note 7 is also a Wide Color Gamut screen, so not sure why you're giving the advantage to the iPhone here.

http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note8_ShootOut_100.htm

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 13:29 UTC as 94th comment | 2 replies

This will be great for photojournalists who are increasingly expected to bring a live element to their work, using things like Facebook Live to publish video real-time. Their options are pretty limited right now, so a modular system makes a lot of sense, giving them more control, stability, battery life with the phone able to play multiple roles as needed.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 22:12 UTC as 22nd comment
On article Google Pixel XL camera review (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sam Bennett: The Pixel may "show better dynamic range than most competitors in bright light" but that doesn't mean the photos look good. In my experience the photos generally look flat, phony, and really awful with skin tones in portraiture. This is an area Apple's processing, while it may technically yield less DR ultimately yields a more pleasant-looking photo. It's a shame, because due to Google's insistence on re-enabling HDR+ even after someone's turned it off means I ended up switching to a different camera app. That said, the Pixel is an excellent phone overall - the best Android phone I've ever used - but for now I prefer the iPhone 7 Plus as a photographer.

I typically do a bit of processing in SnapSeed to most of my photos, and even in that case I'm not really happy with them most of the time when HDR+ is figuring in heavily. It's not just the overall color balance, but the balance between restored highlights and the rest of the shot - sunsets are particularly rough. It's not that they're usable though, but given the choice between the two I lean towards the iPhone.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2016 at 15:12 UTC
On article Google Pixel XL camera review (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sam Bennett: The Pixel may "show better dynamic range than most competitors in bright light" but that doesn't mean the photos look good. In my experience the photos generally look flat, phony, and really awful with skin tones in portraiture. This is an area Apple's processing, while it may technically yield less DR ultimately yields a more pleasant-looking photo. It's a shame, because due to Google's insistence on re-enabling HDR+ even after someone's turned it off means I ended up switching to a different camera app. That said, the Pixel is an excellent phone overall - the best Android phone I've ever used - but for now I prefer the iPhone 7 Plus as a photographer.

Well, yeah... having more personal experience with cameras leads to a more informed opinion. I've used both extensively, traveled with both, used both in similar situations (and often in the exact same scene) and while there's certainly cases where I prefer the Pixel to the iPhone and vice versa, by and large I prefer the iPhone's rendering - particularly with HDR shots. Keep in mind, that's the Pixel using the default camera app and HDR+ in particular - I ended up replacing the default app with Camera FV-5, which eliminates the HDR+ issue, but unfortunately raises its own.

It's a shame, because I love the Pixel (just switched back to it today in fact) - great battery life for an Android phone, very peppy, I prefer Nougat to iOS 10, and OLED screens are the best. But, I love photography and for that the iPhone 7 Plus wins for me - particularly in cases where I can use Portrait Mode (ie, not all the time).

Ultimately it comes down to personal preference, so as usual YMMV.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 17:48 UTC
On article Google Pixel XL camera review (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sam Bennett: The Pixel may "show better dynamic range than most competitors in bright light" but that doesn't mean the photos look good. In my experience the photos generally look flat, phony, and really awful with skin tones in portraiture. This is an area Apple's processing, while it may technically yield less DR ultimately yields a more pleasant-looking photo. It's a shame, because due to Google's insistence on re-enabling HDR+ even after someone's turned it off means I ended up switching to a different camera app. That said, the Pixel is an excellent phone overall - the best Android phone I've ever used - but for now I prefer the iPhone 7 Plus as a photographer.

Have you used both phones extensively?

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 16:38 UTC
On article Google Pixel XL camera review (200 comments in total)

The Pixel may "show better dynamic range than most competitors in bright light" but that doesn't mean the photos look good. In my experience the photos generally look flat, phony, and really awful with skin tones in portraiture. This is an area Apple's processing, while it may technically yield less DR ultimately yields a more pleasant-looking photo. It's a shame, because due to Google's insistence on re-enabling HDR+ even after someone's turned it off means I ended up switching to a different camera app. That said, the Pixel is an excellent phone overall - the best Android phone I've ever used - but for now I prefer the iPhone 7 Plus as a photographer.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 13:24 UTC as 62nd comment | 7 replies
Total: 42, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »