breschdlingsgsaelz

Joined on Sep 22, 2016

Comments

Total: 343, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

I have a dream: "No microSD card slot"
Samsung already tried this a few years ago
People told them 'Only Apple can sell such an expensive smartphone without a microSD card slot'.
So they reintroduced it the following year.
It looks like they are trying again. :(

I must admit that I was also in the "no sd card slot - no buy" camp but given the current size of internal memory which for all note 10 models already was at 256GB I no longer feel the need to have one. I never even owned an SD Card of this size for any device.

There are a number of limitations that the "normal" Note 10 and 20 models have that I consider to many for a device of this price.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2020 at 07:57 UTC
In reply to:

breschdlingsgsaelz: Wow. So we have a phone with a power hungry and slow cpu in most markets, pathetic resolution, a too big (at least to tall) screen, a tiny battery that cannot run this behemoth, no "telephoto" (i.e. normal) lens and all that for an insane price.

Congratulations, Samsung, well done. Have you fired your product manager or saved on that market research? I am sure that is not what people want. If the Ultra comes down to $500 then maybe...

Hey I got a note 10 plus now and it was under $500 so this would be a fair price for note 20 ultra

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 20:23 UTC
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: The tall phone trend is such crap. Most video is in 16:9, so why deviate from that? To give us less screen area for a given diagonal. Such a ripoff.

I agree completely. The tall screens are useless but most phones are just not wide enough. Of course this gives better numbers in the "screen diameter" race. I had a 5.3" phone previously that had the same usable screen size as the current 6.5"+ models - it just makes the spec sheet look better and sucks the battery empty faster but is of no value for the customer (actually of negative value).

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 20:05 UTC

Wow. So we have a phone with a power hungry and slow cpu in most markets, pathetic resolution, a too big (at least to tall) screen, a tiny battery that cannot run this behemoth, no "telephoto" (i.e. normal) lens and all that for an insane price.

Congratulations, Samsung, well done. Have you fired your product manager or saved on that market research? I am sure that is not what people want. If the Ultra comes down to $500 then maybe...

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 20:02 UTC as 30th comment | 3 replies

Given the size increase that smartphones currently suffer I wonder when the time comes that I carry a DSLM with a pancake lens because my smartphone and the 5 powerbanks needed to keep it running are getting too large and heavy to lug around all day :D

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 19:36 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: Interesting that iPhones are used more than other smartphones. This is possibly less due to photographic superiority and more due to the popularity of iPhones and the several year lead that the iphone had over other smartphones in the early years of smartphone technology, but which has now narrowed. The iphone cameras still do comparatively well but can’t compete with the best Android phones except for video.

@Boss of Sony: if your main subject are brick walls then maybe DXO Ratings are the most important thing to look at - but if you care for the last bit of technical image quality you will not be using a smartphone camera anyway. I found that especially the Huawei P30 Pro did not live up to his promise of good IQ in practice.

You may have made different experience maybe because you shoot differently. But saying the iphone "cannot compete" with the best android phones is simply not true.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 07:02 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (601 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: This is really the perfect type of camera for the vast majority of amateur photographers. The ability to adapt old lenses with full stabilization is a huge advantage to a photographer on a budget, especially for a lens that might only be used occasionally. I don't know why this isn't discussed more in reviews of thus type.

Tedolph

There are two problems with this Approach
1. there are very few old (i.e. 35mm) lenses that make sense to attach to a m43 system. Basically everything below 50mm Focal length is not interesting, because the image quality is much worse than for even very cheap current lenses. Above 85mm or so the Camera ist hard to handle handheld and old designs do not resolve good enough for this tiny sensor. And if so you need to stop down quote a bit and could as well go for that $150 telezoom that basically can do the same but with AF, with more flexibility and less weight.

2. most of the competitors offerings now also have IBIS. Hell, even Canon has it now and I thought that would never happen.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 14:54 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (601 comments in total)
In reply to:

Parshua: No PDAF?! Who is making these stupid decisions at Olympus? Just fire them already and get profitable overnight.
What mad idiot thinks that taking in-focus photos easily should be a differentiating factor in the line up of CAMERAS?! Olympus was the first to market with mirrorless PDAF ffs.

Haha, this myth about the accuracy and speed of CDAF is told by Olympus Fanboys ever since the E-M5 came out. I had an E-M5 and all of my DSLRs, even the older ones have outperformed it not only with moving subjects but when light went low - the slow m43 Lenses (e.g. the 20 1.7 Panny) didn't make things any better.

It is true, that the DSLR sometimes had a focus shift but in reality it produced a lot more tack sharp images then the Oly, which is why I eventually sold it.

And all of this is 10 years ago. Nowadays PD/Hybrid AF is extremely accurate and even my Compact camera has it. It is also much smaller and produces at least as good image quality as this new facelift of the E-M10 - for approximately the same price. I think Olympus found a niche that wasn't attractive to many: too big for a take anywhere camera, not versatile enough for a "big iron". For some if fits good, but it does not seem to have enough followers to make a business out of it. Panny did well to go the video way

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 14:35 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV initial review (601 comments in total)
In reply to:

Parshua: No PDAF?! Who is making these stupid decisions at Olympus? Just fire them already and get profitable overnight.
What mad idiot thinks that taking in-focus photos easily should be a differentiating factor in the line up of CAMERAS?! Olympus was the first to market with mirrorless PDAF ffs.

I think olympus just does not want to spend any more money on the camera part of the company which they want to get rid of anyway.

I wonder who buys an entry level camera of a company whose future is unknown. People already invested in m43 gear are much more likely to still buy Olympus, but for newcomers this does not seem so interesting.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 11:09 UTC
In reply to:

Boss of Sony: Interesting that iPhones are used more than other smartphones. This is possibly less due to photographic superiority and more due to the popularity of iPhones and the several year lead that the iphone had over other smartphones in the early years of smartphone technology, but which has now narrowed. The iphone cameras still do comparatively well but can’t compete with the best Android phones except for video.

My impression is that the iphones still set the standard for smartphone cameras and I wonder which Android phones are much better. For me a 50mm ("tele") lens is mandatory and there are only a handful of android phones that have one.

Two of tho most hyped android camera phones I tried (huawei P30 Pro and Samsung Galaxy Note 10+) and while the Samsung seems on par at least with the iphone 7 plus my wife has the P30 Pro was a disappointment. Though of course it has much more reach should you need an actual telephoto lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 07:57 UTC
In reply to:

Gray Photography: f/11? Been shooting wildlife for years and I can't imagine I'd ever want a lens with a maximum aperture of f/11. High ISO not being an issue for this market? Wrong. It's not an issue for people who don't care about the quality of their photo perhaps. I sell a ton of bird photos and don't know that any of them are shot at f/11 or above ISO 3200.

Still scratching my head over these two lenses.

If you are selling your photos you want a better lens, of course - and there is plenty of choice.

But the hobbyist that just wants to shoot a few pictures of birds for his own pleasure probably won't buy a 500 f/4 L IS for the price of a used car. Even the "standard" choice 100-400 + 1,4 TC will cost 2-3x as much as one of these lenses do. And if you crop to 800mm you are not getting any better quality as with this f/11 lens.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 10:26 UTC

I am curious if this will work out. There was a time when I was into shooting small animals - but I wouldn't spend 5-10.000€ for a lens that will deliver top notch quality. The options were buying an ancient 300 f/4, put a 1,4x TC on it and crop heavily. Later you could use a 100-400 with 1,4 and still have AF which sort of works but you only have f/8.

Now with this lens you only have f/11 - but if you do not need to crop then it might be quite usable. If you crop half the pixels away from a picture shot with f/8 you have effectively the same quality. Stopping down also does not make sense.

Makes a nice amateur bird shooting lens that costs you much less than a 100-400 with 1,4 TC. The question is: will it be usable at f/11?

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2020 at 10:21 UTC as 2nd comment

I owned a mju back in film days when I was tired of lugging around my praktica and three lenses (zoom lenses for M42 were not really an option back then). I do not remember if it was a mju II or a mju zoom but think it was the zoom sibling.

I remember a lot of misfocused pictures and the mechanics failed pretty soon. I would not even spend $40 for a new one - who actually pays 5x as much?

An old GF3 (or any other small m43 body) with the 20mm Pancake is the same size and has a much higher picture quality, will even cost less - not taking into account the cost of film and development.

It is not waterproof but neither is the mju. The amount of splashs that the mju can take will probably not kill the GF3 either.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2020 at 13:17 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

108: these 1" cameras ... just leave you wondering about getting one , sell m4/3 or apsc stuff, and invest rest of money in FF ...

you won't regret it. I barely touched my m4/3 Gear (3 bodies incl. E-M5 which is quite nice and a collection of lenses) ever since I bought the RX100 (mk1) . The FF DLSR still gets some use in rare occations.

Now I just bought the RX100 VI and will get rid of all my m4/3 stuff. will probably even pay for it. So I think 1" and FF is a good combination.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2019 at 11:07 UTC

Now that one looks real interesting. Gotta sell my canon gear now that their 50 MP model finally has been made look like old tech. If anybody still wants it...

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2019 at 19:22 UTC as 185th comment
In reply to:

brycesteiner: The reason Apple dropped Aperture might be as simple as Adobe threatening to pull all of their apps from the OS if Apple didn't stop competing with them on at least video or photography. Apple chose to keep video.

I have absolutely no evidence for such a statement but it's the only good reason I can think of for dropping such a fantastic program that made them money.

@brycesteiner: I also paid a lot of money for aperture - but it was available for free in the App Store for quite some time. Ironically those who did not pay money for Aperture got the update that made it work on El Capitan without problems, I had to waste a few hours and phone calls to get this update :(

Link | Posted on May 7, 2019 at 16:54 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: The reason Apple dropped Aperture might be as simple as Adobe threatening to pull all of their apps from the OS if Apple didn't stop competing with them on at least video or photography. Apple chose to keep video.

I have absolutely no evidence for such a statement but it's the only good reason I can think of for dropping such a fantastic program that made them money.

Did they really make money by giving away Aperture? Yes, it did cost money at one time, I myself paid a few hundred bucks for it. But after that it was downloadable for free from the app store for quite some time.

Don't know why they gave it away for free, though.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2019 at 21:40 UTC

A lot of things will break with 10.15 - but the more interesting part for me ist that there are no positive aspects with the upgrade - no new features worth the hassle. So not updating ist very easy for me.

I am still using Aperture. Tried migrating to photos, but photos is extremely crippled and far from what aperture was. I will need to look into what linux has to offer, my days with Apple are counted.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2019 at 21:33 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
On article OPPO launches Reno smartphone with periscope tele lens (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

madeinlisboa: And smartphanboys say a dslr is expensive. What a waste of money buying these toys every year...

For the amount of money I spent on DSLR Gear I could have bought 30 highend smartphones - more than I am likely to buy for the rest of my life. And the cameras all look dated by now since the Camera Industry invents new gimmicks every year.

But with none of my cameras I can read email and calendars, navigate me trough unknown regions, buy subway tickets, monitor my blood glucose and control my insulin pump - neglecting the other 200 daily tasks that the smartphone can do but a camera does not.

So yes, I would say the smartphone guy is correct - the DSLR ist quite expensive in comparison. But DSLRs still make better photos, so I am going to keep mine...

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2019 at 09:14 UTC

Everybody is talking as if these lenses were already available. The article, however, suggests that they are just planned, not even in active development.

Let's see how they perform and at what price tag first and then we'll see.

I personally would not consider an EOS R until the promised IBIS will be available - and at 50-100MP. But since I will need new lenses or an adapter solution then anyway, I might just switch to sony...

The short 70-200 looks nice, I would not mind if it extends while zooming - the 70-200 F2.8 IS L II is always too big in my bag...

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2019 at 12:30 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
Total: 343, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »