Everlast66

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Apr 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 857, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Have Your Say: Best Gear of 2016 (100 comments in total)

I am surprised so many people are into these Fuji retro fallacies. I would be interested in their cameras if they had a bit more "modern" design.

And I do appreciate the original designs from the 70s and 80s and own several Pentax, Olympus cameras (MX, ME, OM1, OM2 and more) just because they are beautifully designed and made.

But in 2016 I would expect something new and a bit more experimental, not only with the internal technology, but also the design and ergonomics.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 13:09 UTC as 32nd comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

J A C S: The stolen data includes [...] phone numbers [...]

Who would give his real birthdate to any such site?

Yes, I also don't give my real date usually, sometimes I pick the earliest possible year so that it shows me 100 years old or something, just for fun :)

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2016 at 00:25 UTC
On article Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro Sample Gallery (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petroglyph: DPR thanks for posting this sample gallery. I was wondering about this lens for a walk around model since it has a closer MFD than the 55 f/1.8. Like most macros it seems to render a bit flat but could still be a very useful lens.

He probably means that it lacks this "3D pop" effect that many people are after.

http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/41562/what-is-exactly-the-3d-pop-in-photography

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2016 at 00:20 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: The stolen data includes [...] phone numbers [...]

Who would give his real birthdate to any such site?

JACS, I am not sure if you are implying that people give them their birth-dates instead of phone numbers?

But you actually activate your account with a code you receive from them on your phone so they require a real working phone number.

And this is the biggest irony, they insist to verify each person via their phone to prove they are not fake & security, but then they themselves prove that their service is worthless many times, one of which is this leak of all their accounts data.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 10:35 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: "Verizon considers changing Yahoo deal after latest breach"

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-yahoo-cyber-idUSKBN14420S

They are considering changing their offer to $1.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 00:16 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: I am so happy that I stopped using them years ago when they started insisting to give them my phone number ... for security purposes :)

I just tried to make a "test" account and it is still impossible to make one without giving them your phone number.

How arrogant is that, just after they've leaked the phone numbers and names of all their customers (1 billion people)?

So if any of you above have an active account with Yahoo, don't comfort/delude yourself that your account has not been leaked. It's all of them. Take action, change passwords, etc. Not only there, but other places where you have the same account, security questions, etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 22:24 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: I am so happy that I stopped using them years ago when they started insisting to give them my phone number ... for security purposes :)

I just tried to make a "test" account and it is still impossible to make one without giving them your phone number.

How arrogant is that, just after they've leaked the phone numbers and names of all their customers (1 billion people)?

How many billions of accounts do you people think are there on Yahoo in 2016 ?!?

All people that have access to the internet in the world are 3 billion. Nobody I know uses Yahoo any more. They can't have more than 1-2 hundred million REAL accounts. The remaining, say 800 000 000 accounts, up to 1 billion are the fake and spam accounts!

Keep in mind that you can't have too many fake accounts with them because they require an active phone number for you to make one! Then inactive accounts are purged if unused for 6 months or a year. So that's all they've got 1 billion, including the fake and spam. Google it.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 22:19 UTC

I am so happy that I stopped using them years ago when they started insisting to give them my phone number ... for security purposes :)

I just tried to make a "test" account and it is still impossible to make one without giving them your phone number.

How arrogant is that, just after they've leaked the phone numbers and names of all their customers (1 billion people)?

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2016 at 20:48 UTC as 32nd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Kris Sky: Sigma Quattro SD H will crush this.

Come on, we are trying to be serious here ...

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 22:18 UTC
On article Have your say: Best high-end compact of 2016 (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: These elections are rigged. What you don't know I mean in my favor. I'll deny it afterwards and grab 'em by the lens mount people!

Canon and Nikon represent the establishment that will be brought down by the People.

Drain the DSLR swamp!

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 00:46 UTC
On article Have your say: Best high-end compact of 2016 (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rajeshb: Nikon DL

Yep, I'm waiting for Nikon to announce Mk 2 any minute now :)

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 19:21 UTC
On article Have your say: Best high-end compact of 2016 (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rajeshb: Nikon DL

I'm voting for Nikon DL 24-85 mark II ...

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2016 at 18:32 UTC
In reply to:

EwanMC: People get a grip, this is breakthrough in super capacitor tech is from the University of Central Florida in the US of A, not some Borat University of Kazakhstan ... this might be why DPreview takes it seriously ... seriously people. 🤦

Ewan, before you get too far ahead of yourself praising US universities, did you actually look at the team that published the paper:

Nitin Choudhary
Chao Li
Hee-Suk Chung
Julian Moore
Jayan Thomas
Yeonwoong Jung
University of Central Florida AND
Korea Basic Science Institute, South Korea

Hmm, this sounds to me a bit more like a South Korean paper than an American one, hmm ...

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

Greg VdB: Hey friends, I found a revolutionary way to charge all of my batteries to 1000% of their normal capacity in under 4 seconds! There's no need to upgrade your power grid connections or anything like that - just wire me 500$ and I'll send you a piece of unicorn horn with instruction of how to proceed. Happy days!

I know a way to charge your phone in under 4 seconds with 1000 times more energy that the battery capacity - it's called C4 - sticks very nicely to the back of the phone.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 16:33 UTC
In reply to:

EwanMC: People get a grip, this is breakthrough in super capacitor tech is from the University of Central Florida in the US of A, not some Borat University of Kazakhstan ... this might be why DPreview takes it seriously ... seriously people. 🤦

Keeping in mind that US universities invented Safe Spaces, where these bright students go to hug therapy dogs and cry when they feel overwhelmed by overhearing some politically incorrect conversation, and still can't get over the election results, I'm not holding my breath for this technology yet.
And Ewan is laughing at the only country on the planet that currently can send humans into space?!?

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: So they claim they've solved the biggest problem in electronics industry right now, but fail to mention what energy density they managed to achieve - the key parameter when it comes to battery technology - how much electric charge can be stored in a unit of volume.

Existing super/ultra capacitors have always been an alternative to Li-polymer / Li-ion to use as batteries but they can only pack 1/10th of the energy, so for example a mirror-less camera battery would allow only 30 shots instead of 300.

So they are basically claiming that they increased capacitor energy density close to 100 times compared to current technologies, 10 times to match Li-po batteries and 10 times to last more than a week as they say. That's not impossible with nano technologies, but at least they should have given a number for energy density.

@Lexxie
1. Who are you talking to?
2. The title of the article is "New supercapacitor technology could bring an end to our battery charging woes" so yes I am totally going to talk about capacitors.
3. Thinner or not, the actual capacitor/battery requires structural integrity, which takes space even if the technology is very efficient and there are still no energy density figures stated, so No, I still don't accept the theory that these capacitors will have unlimited capacity to store energy!

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 14:52 UTC
In reply to:

alexzn: Dpreview should be weary of publishing posts based on press releases. As correctly mentioned here there is no energy density data in the article. It's a nice with but not as revolutionary as it sounds.

Henrik is missing the actual claim.
Firstly, it's not a normal phone battery, but large capacity one that will last "for over a week" so people assume 8x capacity, because a modern smartphone lasts for a day, so his calculated

- 1kW for 30 sec for a normal phone battery, now looks more like
- 8kW for 30 sec and is becoming a bit worrying

But then it is also claimed that the device would charge "in a few seconds" which is more like 3 sec and not 30 sec. So we end up with

- 80 kW for 3 sec (347 amps at 230 volts !!!)

And this is the ridiculous claim that the inventor made, and that's why people that have a clue flagged him straight away.

Someone will say that we shouldn't look at that claim literally, but I don't agree as the inventor deliberately overstates it to gain publicity and creates a false impression - people not familiar with the maths around it would envision plugging their phone, counting to three, and then having it charged for a week.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 12:53 UTC
In reply to:

alexzn: Dpreview should be weary of publishing posts based on press releases. As correctly mentioned here there is no energy density data in the article. It's a nice with but not as revolutionary as it sounds.

And imagine you happen to plug in your phone for charge, while one or more people in your house plug their devices to charge as well. This would certainly fry your home cabling.

I understand charging is supposed to be for several seconds only, but it's not impossible with families often going out/coming back together and so many devices to charge - phones, cameras, tablets, etc.

Also this will cause insane problems for energy suppliers, since tens of people on each street will happen to plug in devices for charging simultaneously every morning when people get up for work/school.

I understand, that the "inventor" is exaggerating a bit to make it sound revolutionary, but such ridiculous claims undermine their entire announcement and makes me wonder if they are exaggerating some other parameters as well.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 03:00 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: So they claim they've solved the biggest problem in electronics industry right now, but fail to mention what energy density they managed to achieve - the key parameter when it comes to battery technology - how much electric charge can be stored in a unit of volume.

Existing super/ultra capacitors have always been an alternative to Li-polymer / Li-ion to use as batteries but they can only pack 1/10th of the energy, so for example a mirror-less camera battery would allow only 30 shots instead of 300.

So they are basically claiming that they increased capacitor energy density close to 100 times compared to current technologies, 10 times to match Li-po batteries and 10 times to last more than a week as they say. That's not impossible with nano technologies, but at least they should have given a number for energy density.

Cliff, all that you're saying is correct. I just don't agree with "it stores energy in a sense". Should be FUNDAMENTALLY capacitors store energy.

Especially, when we are talking about capacitors as a replacement for batteries.

Of course, you have their capacitance in Farads written on the side, but you also have the rated voltage as well, and neither of them gives the complete picture on its own.

And the two give you the energy stored, you just don't calculate it explicitly and have not looked at capacitors from this wider perspective.

Energy = 1/2 * Capacitance * V * V

I also had a narrower view of capacitors before, but a rail-gun project I was planning opened my eyes and then some more interesting applications as well. People even replaced their car batteries with capacitor banks like this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPJao1xLe7w

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 01:37 UTC
In reply to:

Everlast66: So they claim they've solved the biggest problem in electronics industry right now, but fail to mention what energy density they managed to achieve - the key parameter when it comes to battery technology - how much electric charge can be stored in a unit of volume.

Existing super/ultra capacitors have always been an alternative to Li-polymer / Li-ion to use as batteries but they can only pack 1/10th of the energy, so for example a mirror-less camera battery would allow only 30 shots instead of 300.

So they are basically claiming that they increased capacitor energy density close to 100 times compared to current technologies, 10 times to match Li-po batteries and 10 times to last more than a week as they say. That's not impossible with nano technologies, but at least they should have given a number for energy density.

Cliff, a battery/capacitor actually does store energy.

Energy is the potential/capacity of a system to perform work. Energy can be in many forms, electric, chemical, kinetic, etc and be converted from one form to another.

In our specific case we store electric energy in the form of electric charge differential because we want to power an electric circuit, but this is energy because it has the potential to do work and power our cameras.

Batteries or capacitors are sometimes even rated in Joules. For example Sony's standard mirror-less camera battery the NP-FW50 was about 27 kilo Joules.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 19:14 UTC
Total: 857, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »