David Hart

Lives in United States Boston, United States
Works as a NT Network Administrator
Joined on Nov 19, 2002

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Aura is a next generation digital picture frame (74 comments in total)
In reply to:

sibuzaru: The ideal solution would be with e-paper, but not only color e-paper is still a novelty even the B&W panels still lacks on gray scale to be able to reproduce anything with minimum IQ.

Using LCD for that price I would expect it to be at least 40"+ and that it worked with something better like the CAST technology from Google/Netflix.

Unfortunately color e-paper technology has not advanced to the point where the resolution and color presentation are good enough for photos. It's one of the reasons why Amazon hasn't upgraded the Kindle to color e-paper.

Now, I wouldn't mind having a large e-ink photo frame that made photos look like watercolor paintings. That would be kinda cool...

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2016 at 02:49 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wye Photography: I am surprised that Canon has not been sued by Leica for the M system. Years ago Olympus was threatened and was forced to change the name of their then new camera to OM.

Next time I am in my local camera shop I will have to try the M5 (the Leica M5 is really pretty ugly and looks like a Zorki), it looks very nice.

You mean in 1971... as in decades ago... According to the article, Olympus released a M-1 Camera when Leica already had trademarked M-1 for their camera. That's when Olympus changed the name to the OM-1. Since Canon is leaving out the dash, I'm guessing that they are okay....

http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/OlympusM1LarryShapiro/index.htm

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2016 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

mmcfine: One industry that doesn't give a sh!it about the environment. I would love to see a startup coming up with printers that will break this ageing technology. no ink print, reusable paper, degradable plastic (or no plastic at all)...

The EcoTank printers (ET-25xx, ET-45xx) are available at Amazon and Best Buy. So, I'm not sure where you got the information that they are not available in North America. Plus, Epson just announce the ET-3600 and the ET-16500 (wide-format) printers.

They seem to have good reviews but some of the more knowledgeable comments indicate that Epson used lower end printers for the ET-25xx series and just slapped on refill tanks. Most recommend go up to the ET-45xx series if you do a lot of printing and want it to last.

It looks like Epson recently released the ET-3600 and ET-16500 (wide format) printers. No reviews are up yet, though.

BTW, I'm not an Epson fan, but I do applaud them on moving in this direction because, if they do it right, it will help the environment and maybe other printer manufacturers will follow suit.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 18:35 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: You'll have to pry my 80D from my cold dead hands. Love it! Having said that, I'll say this. If I were looking to buy an EVF equipped ILC, my short list would include the M5, X-T2, or X-Pro2. No others. Not even one of the A7 series. :))

I agree. I too love my 80D, coming from a 40D it's a big step forward. My primary kit includes the EF 24-105mm f/4L and the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L lenses.

I bought a SL1 a couple of years ago for travel where a lighter camera would be needed. At the time, it was a choice between the SL1 and the M1. I really wanted to like the M series, simply because of the smaller form factor but the M1, and the later M3, were too crippled.

It appears, at least on paper, that the M5 is going to be a good camera and will likely end up replacing my SL1 as my travel camera. Having many of the same components of the 80D should result in similar photo characteristics as the 80D.

The big question is, with the release of the M5 and it's capability upgrades, will we see a SL2?

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 10:21 UTC
In reply to:

JandA NYC: As a pro photographer, who gets 'misty-eyed' and 'optimistic' about actually getting paid to take photographs, 'caring' about the general public knowing what Bokeh and Raw are, feels a bit self cannibalizing to me.

I'm not knocking the article. I get it. The world is changing, our tool belts are getting 'lighter' and the arsenal of tools we have to be creative with is ever expanding and many would argue that is a wonderful thing. However, empowering every person on the planet with the tools needed to replace me, is not something I welcome with open arms.

There will probably be someone who responds to this, reminding us all that it is 'not the tool that matters, but how you use it' or that the best tool in the hands of the unqualified, will never be a threat to the professional, or that the only ones who are threatened by this technology, are photographers who don't know how make money at photography any way etc.

The average person has had access much better cameras and more features than this in the form of P&S cameras. Why would you be concerned that the iPhone camera would in any way eat into the market for professional photographers?

I'm thinking that the marketplace is shrinking due to the lowering cost of DSLR cameras, not because of phones. But hey, that's my opinion.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:08 UTC
In reply to:

mmcfine: One industry that doesn't give a sh!it about the environment. I would love to see a startup coming up with printers that will break this ageing technology. no ink print, reusable paper, degradable plastic (or no plastic at all)...

The only options, to date, are ink, toner, or thermal. Thermal and toner tend to be relatively poor for detailed photography. Ink is pretty much what we are left with.

Epson has a EcoTank line of printers which has built-in refillable ink tanks. No need to buy new cartridges, just extra bottles of ink.

You can buy printer paper made out of recycled materials. But if you mean paper that can be printed on, somehow wiped, and printed again, then you just need a tablet, as it's obviously something that didn't need to be printed in the first place.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2016 at 17:48 UTC

I had the Stylus Epic. I used it for hiking, kayaking, etc. Primarily used Kodak Gold film in it. Loved it, except for the case color. Was never a fan of the gold color. I sold it on ebay about a year ago after finding it in a box.

If I remember right, I ended up replacing it with a Canon S45 which was a similar form factor, but digital. Today, my go-to pocket camera is the S95.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 13:48 UTC as 129th comment
In reply to:

CopCarSS: Now we just need to convince the pixel peepers of DPR to actually go out and take photos (and enjoy the experience) instead of arguing about ISO 51,200 noise comparisons and the dreaded "equivalency" discussions all day long.

One does not negate the other. Just make sure to take the photos first or they are liable to be out of focus... (grin)

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

ColdViking: Betteridge's law of headlines: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

So, no.

There are a few reasons, and a far, far, far better alternative. Reasons:

1/ It runs a mobile chip, the chip will never be able to do what a laptop or desktop chip can do. Want to do RAW? Forget about it. Never going to happen. There is no way the ARM chips are going to be able to power through that.

2/ It runs an operating system designed for a phone. It shows. It doesn't work.

3/ The apps are not there, and due to (mostly) hardware and software limitations of the device, they're never going to be there either.

The alternative, if you want to use a tablet, is a Microsoft Surface Pro. It's a real PC. It blows anything ever created by Apple out of the water for real work. It also isn't all that much more expensive than the iPad pro.

The iPad "Pro" is for those easily separated from their money.

rkumar You missed the point. The point was that system running a desktop OS and full desktop Apps will always blow the iPhone and iPad running iOS out of the water for productivity. iOS is just too sand-boxed. Not being able to do basic file management is just the tip of the iceberg.

As far as hardware goes, mobile CPUs are catching up but this can't make up for the limitations of the underlying OS.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2015 at 19:35 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: Looks unnatural at best

I agree that it may look unnatural. However, living in the Northeast, we get a lot of interesting lighting effects due to storms, breaks in the clouds, sunsets and sunrises, etc. Sun showers (when it rains while the sun is shining, i.e. a passing thunderstorm) are somewhat common during the summer.

The point is that it may look unnatural, as it's not something that you're used to seeing, but it doesn't mean that it is.

However, It is possible that the photographer over-compensated a bit in the dark areas to get a more dramatic effect of the clouds.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2015 at 14:09 UTC
On article Canon's Q4 earnings report shows camera sales are down (316 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: The results from other camera manufacturers will be even worse. As an example, Olympus' camera division has been losing money for years.

I started out using digital Canon cameras simply because they they were ahead of the curve for a time. When Olympus finally entered the DSLR market, I was very interested to see what they would do as I still have nostalgia over my old OM-PC film camera. But, for me, the smaller size of the four-thirds sensors is what turned me off.

I'm thinking that Olympus could be doing much better if they had gone with an APS-C size sensor. I would guess that they did this so that they wouldn't have to compete directly with Canon and Nikon, plus they could make their cameras a bit cheaper.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 22:06 UTC

I agree, EPIC FAIL...

Nothing like the promotion of hot air to get people to like your products...

It almost seems like Canon has reached the point where they are unwilling to try anything new. So, now they are just trying to sell an image.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 16:54 UTC as 379th comment
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

soundimageplus: "With good enough image quality, would you consider a built-in lens camera as your only camera?"

Of course. And size doesn't matter. FZ1000, RX10, RX1. X1. X2, X100s. X100T are all fine fixed lens cameras.

I agree. But... my definition of "good enough" would be approaching the quality of L lenses and have a zoom range that stretches from about 18mm to 400mm.

I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that there are too many trade-offs for such a lens to be able to maintain quality throughout the zoom range. That's why high end lenses have much shorter zoom ranges.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 04:44 UTC
On article Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think (198 comments in total)

My S95 1/1.7" has been my go-to camera for a night on the town. An APS-C camera is just too big. That being said, 1" cameras have shrunk to about the same size as the S95 and I plan on getting one in the near future. That's why I voted for 1"...

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 04:36 UTC as 82nd comment
On article Photokina 2014 Video: The Canon G7 X (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

robbinsbox: we are giving away a g7x to anyone who will comment.
Canon Inc

I'll take one, please... (grin)

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 15:16 UTC
On article Photokina 2014 Video: The Canon G7 X (143 comments in total)

I have the S95 and it looks like the G7X would be a nice upgrade. There are two things that slightly disappoint me:

- No 24fps in movie mode. Perhaps this can be added through a firmware update?

- No built-in GPS. Though, I get that this was not included due to battery life and, perhaps, to keep the camera small.

Still, I would love to have one of these. So, if the first comment below is valid, that Canon is giving one away... PICK ME!!! (grin)

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 15:15 UTC as 28th comment
On article Size matters: Hands-on with Canon PowerShot G7 X (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim: It's not much smaller than the G1X Mk II. Both appear not to be shirt pocket-able but both do appear to be jacket pocket-able. Given this and the fact that the G1X Mk II isn't much more money, why not buy a G1X Mk II instead of the G7 X?

The G7X is lighter than the G1X MKII but that is because the G1X MKII has a 1.5" sensor and bigger lens. There isn't that much difference in size.

Either way, neither are the type of camera that you would thrown in your pocket when going out to dinner or a night club. However, they would fit in a jacket pocket or cargo shorts so would be decent for hiking or walking around on vacation.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 06:15 UTC
On article Size matters: Hands-on with Canon PowerShot G7 X (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thsoft: No 4K. Canon now is follower.

I could do without 4K. What I hoped for was that they would at least have a 24fps movie option.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 06:06 UTC
On article Canon unveils PowerShot G7 X with 1"-type sensor (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: It will be popular with Canon shooters- no doubt. But how about calling it an S series camera Canon, which it is? Now you've muddied the G series water, which is sort of a pity.

On first glance, the lack of front grip of any kind is a bummer- they had it right with the S100 (or should say, more correct).

The era of the 1 1/7" sized sensors is coming to an end.

C

I agree. It's definitely an S replacement. It's about 100g heavier and .25" wider than the S series. Beyond that, it has a number of upgrades over the S series (at least over my S95), not the least of which is the 1" sensor.

The one thing that I wish it had was GPS. Granted, having GPS turned on lessens battery life, but it's nice having GPS coordinates embedded in the photo information.

The price, though, is a bit high. It's $700, about $250 more than the S120 and about $100 less than the G1 X mk II (1.5" sensor). I would have expected pricing to be in the $500 - $600 range, about mid way between the two. Personally, I think that it's priced too high. Anyone looking at this would likely look at the G1 X MK II as it's only $100 more for a larger sensor.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 16:34 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »