skytripper

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Sep 22, 2011

Comments

Total: 207, showing: 201 – 207
« First‹ Previous891011Next ›Last »
On a photo in the Nikon V1 + VR 10-100mm f/4.5-6.5 PD-ZOOM Preview Samples sample gallery (3 comments in total)

To me, the withering criticism of the V1's image quality is entirely misplaced. The Nikon V1 is not a replacement for a DSLR! It's a small camera with a smallish sensor that easily outperforms the best high-end compacts at high iso (to judge by the few high-iso samples we've seen). The one criticism I do agree with is the price. For what it costs, its hard to imagine large numbers of "enthusiasts" choosing the V1 over an M43 alternative. The V1's built-in viewfinder is really its only real advantage over the M43 competition.

Nevertheless, Nikon is squeezing alot out of a fairly small sensor, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some of their technology make its way into other cameras for the betterment of all.

I don't know why some you here in these forums find it necessary to dish out such brutal condemnation of things you don't like. Please give it a rest.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2011 at 18:40 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

skytripper: Judging the iPhone solely on the basis of its camera is like judging a new car by its radio: completely nonsensical.

As for the Apple haters out there: You only make yourself look ignorant when you trash a device that is so far ahead of the competition in the ways that actually matter. Anyone who thinks the competition is better should by all means rush right out and buy something else.

Photography website or not, it makes no sense to judge a smartphone by its camera. But the real point is that those who enjoy dissing the iPhone do so without regard for its strengths or its weaknesses. They simply enjoy putting down Apple, which makes them look pretty dumb if you ask me. I could care less what phone other people buy, but loud-mouthed put-downs of the iPhone are uncalled for. Live with it.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2011 at 02:38 UTC

Judging the iPhone solely on the basis of its camera is like judging a new car by its radio: completely nonsensical.

As for the Apple haters out there: You only make yourself look ignorant when you trash a device that is so far ahead of the competition in the ways that actually matter. Anyone who thinks the competition is better should by all means rush right out and buy something else.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2011 at 19:48 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
On article How the iPhone changed my photography (104 comments in total)

It would be fair to say that iPhone, in conjunction with the many image editing apps available for this device, is certainly helping to popularize what might be called the photo illustration genre. The writer of this article is very talented, and it shows in his images. But it is also undeniably true that this kind of photography represents a big step down in image quality even compared to garden-variety pocket cameras. It's a very interesting development, but it's hard to say what its impact will be on digital photography in general. Personally, I would hate to see the industry move too far in the direction of gimmicky, special effects photography at the expense of sharpness and clarity.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2011 at 20:05 UTC as 57th comment | 1 reply
On article Nikon J1 real-world samples gallery (336 comments in total)
In reply to:

bentheoandrews: Everyone keeps saying "wow, those high ISO photos are excellent for a camera with a small sensor". The thing is, you can get cameras like the Nex 5N with a bigger sensor, that is cheaper and gives much better results at much higher ISO levels.
Also, everyone is talking about ISO and DOF - what about the colour? Am I the only one who thinks the colours, especially the reds (and in particular on the ketchup bottle) look really washed out? And the WB! All the shots look like they were taken through a blue filter!
On its own this might stand up, but next to m4/3 and NEX, this brings too little too late. All the magic tricks it does might be great, but unless the IQ is there it's a bit "fur coat and no knickers".

If putting the largest possible sensor in the smallest possible body was the only objective, the Sony NEX cameras would be big winners. But it's the size of the package, not the size of the body, that buyers are interested in. When you put a big honking lens on a tiny body, you end up with a big honking package.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2011 at 19:21 UTC
In reply to:

Charles Lau: As a long time NIKON fan for more than 30 years, I must say I am deeply disappointed. Nikon reallyndropped the ball on this one. They have the perfect opportunity to lead the mirror less market with an APSC sensor camera to compliment their existing SLR line...and I emphasize compliment, not compete, as Sony did with their NEX line and the E mount. Going to all that trouble to create another sensor format does nothing for the consumer except create more confusion and additional hardware that will be difficult for 3rd party suppliers and lens manufacturers to support. Wouldn't it be great if the new Nikons are APSC, sharing the E mount? ....Just think of all the nice Zeiss glass that may be available. Don't get me wrong, I think both Nikon V models are beautifully designed, but they will be no match against the new Sony NEX5 and NEX7....
Sony listened, and gave consumers what they want..I bet the waiting list will be long. Nikon, are you listening?

On the other hand, the big downside of compact APSC-format cameras like the Sony NEX is that the lenses are the same size as the ones we're already using on our DX DSLR's. Much of the benefit of the smaller body is lost the minute you put a zoom lens on these cameras. The smaller the sensor, the smaller the system lenses can be. Panasonic and Olympus have already proved the point. When you buy an m43 body, the whole package (including the lens) is considerably smaller and lighter than any DSLR.

What is disappointing to me (in addition to the explicit focus on the point-and-shoot crowd) is that Nikon chose to add yet another format to the mix rather than come out with their own m43 offering. The V1's integrated, low-profile EVF makes it a very attractive physical package, and sets it apart from the Panasonic and Olympus offerings, which can only add a bulky and expensive clip-on EVF.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

jsandjs: Well, now we've got 1/2.5", 1/2.33", 1/1.8", 1/1.7", 1/1.63", 1/1.5", and the newest 1/1". Will canon give us something between the 1" and the u4/3?
One thing I don't really get is its highest iso. Is 3200 a limit of an 1" sensor? I looked at the samples under iso 3200 and was not too impressive about the cleanness on my screen. I was wondering if the pixels reduced to 5M will help.

To be fair, you'd have to make a direct comparison between the high-iso output of Nikon's CX sensor the the m43 sensors used by Panasonic and Olympus before you can say "impressed" or "not impressed". No one should expect the Nikon J1/V1 to perform as well as the DX sensor used in the D3100. None of the m43 cameras can do that either.

Personally, I was surprised by the quality (relatively speaking) of the Nikon's iso 3200 shots. Even the iso 6400 shots were usable, which is well beyond the capabilities of even the best enthusiast's pocket camera.

What's disappointing to me is that the Nikon CX cameras are explicitly aimed at point-and-shooters rather than enthusiasts looking for better IQ in a more compact package. My guess is that the appeal of the Nikon CX cameras will fade a little once Panasonic and Olympus upgrade the aging 12MP sensor used in most of their cameras. It may not be long either, as Panasonic has already put a much better sensor on the well-priced Lumix G3.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 21:17 UTC
Total: 207, showing: 201 – 207
« First‹ Previous891011Next ›Last »