Joined on Aug 12, 2011


Total: 199, showing: 181 – 199
« First‹ Previous78910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

whyamihere: I may not have been doing digital photography for long, but I have been doing digital art and video editing since the early 90's, so I'm aware of the implications of pixel density and perceived resolution clarity. Keep that in mind as I say the following:

Anyone who thinks this Retina Display will help them with their digital photography work is either ignorant - as in, "You don't know how the human eye works," - or doing something wrong - as in, "You're face is way too close to your screen."

The ignorant will think the screen is awesome because they think it'll somehow translate into clarity. I'll bet the differences won't be noticeable until you're too close to the screen, at which point you're doing something wrong because nobody holds their laptop that close to their face while working.

The "Retina" trick only works for devices that need to be that close to your eye, such as a phone or a tablet. That sort of pixel density is wasted on a laptop.

It isn't just about seeing pixels. When I have 3DS Max, REVIT, or AutoCAD open with all the pallets I need to work screen real estate is valuable. When the res is higher all the little icons are much clearer. That is not ignorant. That is a fact. Oh ya, and obviously you don't know how the human eye works either. Ever think about why higher res screens have less moire? It isn't just about whether you can see the pixels.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 00:52 UTC
In reply to:

Twebain: okay fine i won't have problems with tiny buttons and unreadable UI text but browsing the web will be permanently upscaled and any other fixed pixelsize based content (like photos) will be extremely tiny, will it not?

I would assume that you can lower the video card output resolution to make everything bigger. The resolution of the actual screen is fixed so it should display the lower res output very very clear.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 00:38 UTC

About 8 years ago 1200 line 15.4 inch screens were common. Back when they were used more for work than play. Then the market decided that everyone on the planet only used their laptop for watching movies and gaming so a couple years ago 1080 was about the most you could find besides the macbook pro. Last year I was looking desperatly for a higher res laptop PC and was told that the big three screen makers had stopping making screens for laptops over 1080. There is no laptop PC on the market with a 2nd gen quad core i7 and 1200 line screen other than the Mac book pro.
It is really nice to see this shift to higher res again. I use other programs with lots of tool pallets and I don't want to lug a second screen around.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 00:32 UTC as 40th comment | 4 replies
On article Samsung NX20: First Impressions (82 comments in total)

Tried this in the store this week. Camera seems awesome but the zoom on the lens was crap. So stiff and rough that you torque the entire camera when you start to zoom in or out. That won't work when you want to zoom in or out during video. And what of the lens choices? Not much if you still want IS during video. The camera is clearly far ahead of the lens department for this series.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2012 at 02:33 UTC as 10th comment | 3 replies

Just tried the NX20 in the store. Very disappointed with the feel of the zoom on the lens. Even more disappointed when I found that there were very few alternative lenses available with the IS for video. Sucks because otherwise this is a very nice camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 23:37 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

Cailean Gallimore: Samsung are catching up slowly but surely with the usual suspects. Samsung are not the best of the best, but they are getting better all the time. I picked up a used NX10 for a song a few weeks ago, and for casual out and about shooting, it's perfectly adequate. If someone threw any Samsung camera at me I wouldn't dodge it.

"catching up" and "best of the best" is very subjective. I love Canon but they still don't have focus tracking during video on their DSLRs. The reason? Likely because they are at the top and don't really care. I would prefer to buy from a company that is at least trying. I was going to buy the Canon G1x but I think the NX20 is a fair bit better. ("better" being subjective to my personal needs and wishes of course).

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2012 at 17:48 UTC

People keep complaining that the image quality is getting worse as sensors get smaller. Well... YA! You also get what you pay for. People used to be willing to pay more for qaulity too. Stop complaining that you can't get $1,000 quality from a $400 camera. Most people are not photogs and don't really care about the dynamic range of the image they just tweeted of a friend sitting on the photocopier at the party. I am sure that Canon would add 'L' lenses to their Powershots again, like the Pro1, if they thought people were willing to pay for it. I don't think most people are.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2012 at 19:16 UTC as 15th comment | 3 replies
On article Lightroom 4 Review (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

Paul Szilard: This review is the best I have come across on LR 4. A big THANKS to the author!

I had been forced to upgrade to LR 4, as my camera (D4) is not supported in LR 3. This is a shame as I was actually quite happy with LR 3. However I wouldn't have any issues with LR 4, except I can't get a smooth operation and decent speed. I am happy to upgrade h/w, however I am not sure what more I can do.

Windows 7 64bit Professional; i7 920 cpu 12 GB of triple channel Corsair Extreme RAM; 2x1TB drives in RAID 0 with measured access speed of over 200MB/sec; 2GB video card.

I have even disconnected the internet and then turned off all anti virus (temporarily), but I still get jerky processing from moving the LR sliders, such as Exposure. I am on 4.1 RC. I tried putting LR cache on an SSD, but still no real benefits.

Interestingly, my MacBook Pro 13" i7 Dual Core laptop performs smoother for the same thing! So there must be something that I am missing on the Windows settings, but what?

Could be a GPU issue since Adobe is offloading much of the high needs video processing in other softwate to the GPU since it can do it much better. Try different hardware acceleration setings and make sure you have the latest GPU driver.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2012 at 17:36 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review (374 comments in total)

Cameras like this are for people who simply want them and have the money. Technology is leapfrogging over old fashioned image acquisition paradigms like sensor size and high quality glass with new interpolation methods, algorithms, smart filters, light folding lens technology, and 41 megapixel camera phones like the Nokia 808. Spending thousands of dollars and lugging massive equipment like this around is starting to be a pure status symbol and an attempt to impose some perception of competence and authority. Of course I am going to get a better image with my 8x10 Linhof. But how many shots am I going to miss because it wasn’t in my shirt pocket at “that” moment? Buy it if you want but stop pretending that it won’t be surpassed by some sort of P&S camera in a couple of years.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 16:52 UTC as 30th comment | 7 replies
On article Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples (423 comments in total)

I have been reading the comments here for years but it looks like all the smart people have left the building or have stopped offering valuable opinions for frree to idiot trolls. No point wasting any more time here. I just hope DPreviews keeps up the quality of their reviews otherwise this site is really headed down the tiolette.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2012 at 18:14 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Kenneth Svedlund: Yes indeed Joe, where is the thunderbolt version??

You realize that this is a single 5400rpm HDD? There is no way that you are going to get within the same Universe of either USB3 or Thunderbolt theoretical maximum trasfer rates with a single HDD so why spend another $50 for a Thunderbolt cable?

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 17:11 UTC

They keep mentioning "zoom" but judjing by the lack of specifics on the optics or the actual word "optical" I suspect that they are using the full res data to digitally zoom in and out. This wouldn't be a big deal for most occasions but it does imply that you would NOT be able to actually take a 41MP image WITH zoom. It would also mean the it would have less data to downsample and create the TruView image while zooming. Hence the more you zoom in the more the image quality would drop, IF it actually does not have any "optical" zoom capability.
Just saying... Its good to know what you are actually getting.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2012 at 02:31 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony posts firmware updates for SLT-A77 and SLT-A65 (16 comments in total)

I guess this means that there is/was nothing that they can do about the noise....? What a shame.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2011 at 18:08 UTC as 10th comment
On article Reviewed: Sony NEX-5N 16MP mirrorless camera (195 comments in total)
In reply to:

rurikw: Looks nice but not quite finished. I want a properly articulated screen and I didn't see any live histogram or grids or horizon. Strange, as these are the main advantages of live view. And troublefree live view functionality is the point of MILC. Smallness and lightness are secondary benefits.

The SLT A77 has the screen you are looking for and a bit more. The SLT 65 is basically the same for less money if you don't need weather seals.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2011 at 18:30 UTC

Can somone please tell me why the 100 percent crop from each camera with various resolutions and various sensor sizes is the same scale in the comparison? Even when you download the full size original files they are the same size. So are we up-sampling some and down-sampling others? Or not shooting the Sony at full res? I want to know why the Sony A77 has so much noise and poor quality image compared to even the Canon T3i. Shouldn't a 24MP camera show more detail than a 12MP Camera even if there is more noise?

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2011 at 23:29 UTC as 4th comment
On article Sony SLT-A77 studio comparison samples (226 comments in total)

I thought this was finally the perfect camera and just about per-ordered one, but then I compared the A77 with other cameras I have been looking at and compared them at an ISO that I would most likely shoot - 800. I was surprised to see that the even the Canon T3i at ISO 800 RAW out performed the Sony for noise. What the heck? So much for the "more pixels with more noise equals less pixels with less noise" argument. Or there is something very flawed with this test setup that does not allow the higher res to work to it's advantage in this comparison.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2011 at 03:06 UTC as 5th comment
On article Sony unveils SLT-A77 flagship APS-C DSLR-rival (122 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vitruvius: Nice specs put it says a lot about the potential looks of the camera when they feel the need to place a gigantic yet gorgeous Zeiss Planar 1,4/85mm lens in front of the only picture of it. Why not the kit lens? Even the finish of what you can see looks pretty bad. Such a shame.

Obviosly you aren't in marteting either since you missed that fact that people are paying thousands of dollars for retro looking cameras with much weaker specs. Sorry, but if I have mony for that lens then I have money for a full frame camera too. It also means that they don't have much faith in their own lenses. And in fact the images with the kit lens look pretty pathetic. Obviosly making up for something.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2011 at 17:45 UTC
On article Sony unveils SLT-A77 flagship APS-C DSLR-rival (122 comments in total)

Nice specs put it says a lot about the potential looks of the camera when they feel the need to place a gigantic yet gorgeous Zeiss Planar 1,4/85mm lens in front of the only picture of it. Why not the kit lens? Even the finish of what you can see looks pretty bad. Such a shame.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2011 at 04:23 UTC as 15th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon introduces CoolPix AW100 rugged compact camera (39 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: "AW100 helps to create blur free images with the use of Nikon's Vibration Reduction (VR) to minimize camera shake "

This mean no optical image stabilization? $380 just cracy

Yup, No Image Stabilization - meaning that Nikon's "VR" is a software algorithm which "interprets" pixels and adjusts as best it can (which often is not very good since you can't get blodd from a rock either) and it uses a LOT of processing power AND take a LONG time AND doesn't work with video. Huge delays between shots. Who wants that when you can get the Lumix TS3 for less money and IS for stills AND video.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2011 at 16:31 UTC
Total: 199, showing: 181 – 199
« First‹ Previous78910Next ›Last »