Silvarum

Lives in Russian Federation Russian Federation
Joined on Jul 2, 2011

Comments

Total: 151, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Silvarum: It shoots RAW, it shoots 4K videos... but can it shoot 4K RAW? Didn't think so. Where is the innovation here? Even my three year old Lumia 1520 can shoot RAW photos and 4K videos. Oh, and it's also optically stabilized.
What bitrate at 4K does iPhone use? YouTube also has "4K" videos but with such low bitrate that there is barely any difference compared to 1080p or even 720p, especially in high dynamic scenes. Just a waste of space and traffic.
Almost none of those 10 reasons are no better than "it comes in black".

How could I've seen it since Apple hasn't released any 4K footage from iPhone 7. There is no proof right now, that's why I'm sceptical. I've seen 4k footage from 6S, and I must say, I'm not impressed. If you look at something like water ripples or illuminated concert stage with smoke and rays then image appears to be blocky.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 21:12 UTC
In reply to:

Silvarum: It shoots RAW, it shoots 4K videos... but can it shoot 4K RAW? Didn't think so. Where is the innovation here? Even my three year old Lumia 1520 can shoot RAW photos and 4K videos. Oh, and it's also optically stabilized.
What bitrate at 4K does iPhone use? YouTube also has "4K" videos but with such low bitrate that there is barely any difference compared to 1080p or even 720p, especially in high dynamic scenes. Just a waste of space and traffic.
Almost none of those 10 reasons are no better than "it comes in black".

Exactly. But Apple claims that they are not like those "lots of very powerful cameras", that they are better, they are different. I simply ask how much better?
It's difficult not being snarky, when big company such as Apple claims they made something big, when they did not. We need more innovative stuff like Retina display (which was a big deal indeed back then IMO).

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2016 at 15:59 UTC
In reply to:

Silvarum: It shoots RAW, it shoots 4K videos... but can it shoot 4K RAW? Didn't think so. Where is the innovation here? Even my three year old Lumia 1520 can shoot RAW photos and 4K videos. Oh, and it's also optically stabilized.
What bitrate at 4K does iPhone use? YouTube also has "4K" videos but with such low bitrate that there is barely any difference compared to 1080p or even 720p, especially in high dynamic scenes. Just a waste of space and traffic.
Almost none of those 10 reasons are no better than "it comes in black".

I was talking about video RAW, not photo. Videos can be shoot in RAW too. I bet "the most powerful smartphone"™ is not even using 4:4:4 chroma subsampling.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 20:33 UTC

It shoots RAW, it shoots 4K videos... but can it shoot 4K RAW? Didn't think so. Where is the innovation here? Even my three year old Lumia 1520 can shoot RAW photos and 4K videos. Oh, and it's also optically stabilized.
What bitrate at 4K does iPhone use? YouTube also has "4K" videos but with such low bitrate that there is barely any difference compared to 1080p or even 720p, especially in high dynamic scenes. Just a waste of space and traffic.
Almost none of those 10 reasons are no better than "it comes in black".

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 12:06 UTC as 128th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

zakk9: So the reason why I should "care about" the iPhone 7 is that it can do more or less the same as other current smartphones?

Dear dpreview,
When you insert an advertorial, please label it as such. This is just an attempt to boost sales for Apple and Amazon. The iPhone 7 looks like a good phone, but there's no rational reason whatsoever anybody should buy it except for increasing Apple's profits. Oh... and those who recently dropped their phones in the sea.

Yeah, it just sells a ton of accessories.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 11:36 UTC
On article iPhone SE is a compact-sized iPhone 6s (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

JoviFan: so if I buy an unlocked one - it will work with Verizon and my iphone 5 sim card?

Does anyone know how much Ram this will have yet?
Disappointed it only has a 1.3mp front camera.

Selfies probably.
Maybe Apple hates them too and wants to destroy whole selfie idea with crappy 1.3mp front camera?

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 07:09 UTC
In reply to:

WordsOfFarewell: If this gets a full frame version, I'm in!

If this gets a full frame version, it would weight 6 kg and cost $10 000+.
There are plenty of 70-200 F2.8 lenses already for full frame.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

bernardf12: Nice adapter but why can't camera manufacturers decide on a standard lens mount for mirrorless lenses? Something like what Pan and Oly did with the m4/3 mount but for APS-C and FF lenses. That would be great for consumers.

SLRs/DSLRs do or rather did have kinda standard mount - K-mount. It was intended to be a common lens mount, but companies couldn't agree on specifics. Reason is more like greed, than companies "uniqueness" (most SLRs are more or less the same).

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2016 at 05:39 UTC
On article Western Digital announces plan to acquire SanDisk (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everlast66: Sandisk is my favourite brand of SD cards. It would be sad if WD ruins them.

There are statistics on HDDs published by Backblaze. While WD hard drives are not reliable as Hitachi (HGST now), they are much better than Seagate. Basically, if WD survived for the first 3 months, then it will last a long time.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2015 at 19:47 UTC
In reply to:

RolliPoli: This thing makes me want a new button for: "I Don't Want It"
in the 'Gear In This Story' panel!

@Stollen1234: Really ;)
@Just a Photographer: I do not get your point. I certantly do not envy people that have money and spend them on "luxury" cameras. I'd rather have my current more or less average income than be rich and stupid.
Camera is just a tool. Luxury cameras are just as stupid as luxury screwdrivers.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2015 at 19:37 UTC
In reply to:

RolliPoli: This thing makes me want a new button for: "I Don't Want It"
in the 'Gear In This Story' panel!

@Just a Photographer: It seems you need that button more that he does.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2015 at 17:25 UTC
In reply to:

ShoppingBoy: Thanks for this exciting news. Apple are probably the top innovators in photography today. I'm looking forward to growing with them in the coming years.

Now that is trolling :)

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

ShoppingBoy: Thanks for this exciting news. Apple are probably the top innovators in photography today. I'm looking forward to growing with them in the coming years.

It's not trolling, it's sarcasm.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2015 at 08:28 UTC
On article Mono a mono: Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) hands-on (717 comments in total)
In reply to:

Felix11: I don't follow the logic of this:

"The lack of colored filters increases the amount of light that reaches the photodiodes compared to a filtered sensor,"

..makes sense so far, but then ...

"and thus the lowest ISO setting the camera offers is ISO 320"

Firstly, to avoid confusion, does 'lowest' ISO setting mean small value, less sensitive, closer to 100? Yes? Good!

In that case shouldn't the lowest setting be less than competitor cameras?
e.g. 200 ISO is a common lowest value on APS-C models, and 100 ISO on full frame models.

If more light is able to get to the sensor due to the benefit of not having a CFA then a less sensitive setting (i.e. lower) should be required to avoid over exposure.

Please explain :-)

ISO is just a number which ADC uses to amplify the signal by. Lowest ISO setting usually corresponds to the amplification factor of 1. You can go lower than 1, but I see no point in that.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2015 at 17:36 UTC
On article Mono a mono: Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246) hands-on (717 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vitor hugo: EDIT: Nevermind, someone had the same idea as me in the comments.
///What would happen if one: 1) get this camera on a tripod 2) get 3 color filters (Red Green and Blue) 3) takes one photo with each of those filters 4) stacks the resulting pictures as RGB channels in PS?///

I'd prefer sensor shifting like pentax k-3 and hasselblad have. Much less hassle with vibrations and time between shots.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2015 at 17:29 UTC
In reply to:

Tom 13: A stitch in time saves three thousand three hundred and ninety nine.

You are right about me not being intended buyer for this - I want UWA only rarely. But you are not going to compromise quality by using APS-C this way. You can probably get even better results because you will use several cameras, which means not only more resolution, but also more sensor area used.
Personally, I find stitching acceptable on some occasions. It doesn't take much time on a good computer.
But I agree, if UWA is someones favorite style then this lens is a nice addition.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 19:10 UTC
In reply to:

Tom 13: A stitch in time saves three thousand three hundred and ninety nine.

Why do you need 6D for that? APS-C will do just nicely. And pretty much every professional already has some backup camera(s).
Sure it is inconvenient way of taking pictures, but if you do not take very wide FOV pictures very often it is better than paying $3000 in my opinion.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2015 at 08:41 UTC
Total: 151, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »