ewitte12

Joined on Dec 14, 2016

Comments

Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (298 comments in total)

It should have been released as a D5700 and a few hundred $ over the 5600.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 19:19 UTC as 36th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Karroly: Today, we can control a remote telescope from our computer through the internet. What Cape offers here is a similar service which is a true revolution for all those who cannot travel abroad for many reasons : cost, lack of time, disability, illness, etc...
What would be great, is the possibility to download the video recording at the end of the flight, to enjoy a better image quality than "Google street view"...
In the future we will control a rover on Mars from our living room as well...

Hostile but less than we are led to believe and not always. Also we are already there for many decades along with survivors of past civilizations (mostly underground).

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 00:44 UTC
In reply to:

milkod2001: Very poor informations regarding specs even on their website.

What CPU, how many cores, frequencies, sizes and type of RAM used, read/write speeds?....nothing

Is this product sitting on drawing boards or actual product ready to ship?

All the specs in the world all it has is Ethernet you are not going to notice it. The 190-197MB/s is total bandwidth without a very specialized setup of device, switch and PC a single connection is going to max out closer to 100MB/s.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 13:45 UTC
In reply to:

Karroly: Today, we can control a remote telescope from our computer through the internet. What Cape offers here is a similar service which is a true revolution for all those who cannot travel abroad for many reasons : cost, lack of time, disability, illness, etc...
What would be great, is the possibility to download the video recording at the end of the flight, to enjoy a better image quality than "Google street view"...
In the future we will control a rover on Mars from our living room as well...

The way things are today no they only show very SELECT parts of Mars after the images are reviewed not to disclose anything.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2017 at 02:30 UTC

I'd be more impressed if they increased the efficiency of LOSSLESS compression.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 14:25 UTC as 27th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: Within a very short period of time there will be no more RED Cameras, no Alexas, no Phantoms, no nothing. There will only be cell phones. ALL the advancements in digital imaging moving the industry forward are ALL on mobile device technologies research. There is nothing cell phones will not do just as well, faster or better than other independent hardware that cost exponentially more. Photography, video, general & specialized image acquisition have nowhere else to go except all being cell phone based. We just started talking about 1000fps on cell phones & there are already news about 12000fps capable mobile sensors.. and we just started to scratch the surface of camera manufacturers releasing news on 8K video development & it will be just as fast as the first mainstream 8K cameras are out that phones will also be shooting 8K at the same time or earlier. Progress on all forms is on mobility and miniaturization only. Cell phones will eat everything and everyone in this business.

I would have mentioned physics but that is "as we know it" and there are plenty of tricks left to just get them as good as todays FF which will be good enough for some people. Even now they are going to be releasing RGBW sensors on DSLR with about a 3 stop advantage.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 10:15 UTC
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: Within a very short period of time there will be no more RED Cameras, no Alexas, no Phantoms, no nothing. There will only be cell phones. ALL the advancements in digital imaging moving the industry forward are ALL on mobile device technologies research. There is nothing cell phones will not do just as well, faster or better than other independent hardware that cost exponentially more. Photography, video, general & specialized image acquisition have nowhere else to go except all being cell phone based. We just started talking about 1000fps on cell phones & there are already news about 12000fps capable mobile sensors.. and we just started to scratch the surface of camera manufacturers releasing news on 8K video development & it will be just as fast as the first mainstream 8K cameras are out that phones will also be shooting 8K at the same time or earlier. Progress on all forms is on mobility and miniaturization only. Cell phones will eat everything and everyone in this business.

There would have to be a huge breakthrough some IQ aspects are a decade behind.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 02:17 UTC
In reply to:

Samuel Jessop: The Galaxy S7 is a beautifully made device. The S8 would be top of my wishlist if it had 1. the larger sensor that is used in the Pixel, and 2. the option to turn off TouchWiz.

both are 1/2.x I'd hardly call it "larger".

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 20:43 UTC

Absolutely necessary for image averaging with smart layers to remove noise and enhance DR because of the phones tiny sensor.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 20:39 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

dynaxx: The article above fails to mention the most important part of the Four Thirds standard ; the standardisation of a lens mount, sensor and lens-to-body communication that allowed lenses and bodies made by the Four Thirds members ( Fujifilm, Kodak, Leica, Lumix/Panasonic, Olympus, Sanyo and Sigma ) to be interchanged.

Only failed because, sadly, they chose an inadequate sensor size.

low light ISO #s were DXOMark everything else was based on the surface area of the sensors. IE 4 times the total light from m4/3 to FF is about 2 stops. Comparing ISO performances its pretty accurate. The m4/3 cameras I tested obviously were at least 1 stop behind my d7200.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 20:50 UTC
In reply to:

dynaxx: The article above fails to mention the most important part of the Four Thirds standard ; the standardisation of a lens mount, sensor and lens-to-body communication that allowed lenses and bodies made by the Four Thirds members ( Fujifilm, Kodak, Leica, Lumix/Panasonic, Olympus, Sanyo and Sigma ) to be interchanged.

Only failed because, sadly, they chose an inadequate sensor size.

F1.8 (easier number than 1.9) is also multiplied. In an extreme example F1.8 on a cell phone will look like F10 on FF. M43 isn't nearly as bad but it is still very noticeable. Some phones can fake it will dual lenses.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 10:33 UTC
In reply to:

dynaxx: The article above fails to mention the most important part of the Four Thirds standard ; the standardisation of a lens mount, sensor and lens-to-body communication that allowed lenses and bodies made by the Four Thirds members ( Fujifilm, Kodak, Leica, Lumix/Panasonic, Olympus, Sanyo and Sigma ) to be interchanged.

Only failed because, sadly, they chose an inadequate sensor size.

The best m43 has low lSO rating of 750, 1400 apsc and 2900FF. It's a huge difference in top of what your losing with the lens aperture differences.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

dynaxx: The article above fails to mention the most important part of the Four Thirds standard ; the standardisation of a lens mount, sensor and lens-to-body communication that allowed lenses and bodies made by the Four Thirds members ( Fujifilm, Kodak, Leica, Lumix/Panasonic, Olympus, Sanyo and Sigma ) to be interchanged.

Only failed because, sadly, they chose an inadequate sensor size.

Sony shows you can easily release a small(ish) APSC camera. Unfortunately lens selection is still a huge factor. Nikon and Canon do good with higher end cameras because of the sheer number of lenses available and even older ones at good prices. I found myself underwhelmed at m43 lens selection (at higher costs too).

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 19:25 UTC
On article Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder? (896 comments in total)

I hate lag 100 times over OVF. If I'm forced to turn the screen on its a much less satisfying experience. True EVF I've only used on mid range I may feel better if I tried something top of the line but they still eat way more battery.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 19:18 UTC as 267th comment
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: I hope Samsung buys Nikon and gives them this tech. It's a shame it's being wasted on cell phones.

TBH they are good for what they are in good light. I was about to get a secondary M43 for size and was less than impressed. If I had paid what I did for the DLSR I'm sure I would have had a better experience but for a cheap secondary camera??? I really love the performance on my D7200 with a good stabilized prime lens though.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

jwasturias: Can a small mobile phone sensor with even the best possible lens resolve 28mp?
I read somewhere that a 18mp dslr far outresolves that super high resolution Nokia phone (Nokia Lumia 41 Megapixel Camera Phone) in terms of real pictures.

The very "sharp" 1.8 prime I have on my 24MP APSC DXO rates at 15MP. The best I've seen for 24MP APSC is about 17MP. This lens gets about 19 on a D610 and 28 on an D810. If the optics can't support 24MP on APS-C it isn't going to on a phone! Probably not even 8-10 which is what cheaper lenses get on APS-C.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 22:18 UTC
In reply to:

Josh Leavitt: Here's where I'd start:

Kill Coolpix - Never going to compete with smartphones even though IQ is way superior with point-and-shoots, so just end it now and save some money.

Kill APS-C D3xxx - This model line can't hold a candle to mirrorless offerings from Olypus, Panasonic, Sony, or Fuji in or around the same price range.

Kill APS-C D5xxx - Just like the D3xxx, the D5xxx isn't really accomplishing anything compared to other mirrorless offerings in terms of price/size/weight/IQ/features

Kill FF D6xx - If you're going to make a full frame, make it right. The D600/610 are pretty minimalist designs when it comes to features that are available for just a few hundred dollars more with the D750

Things to keep:

APS-C: D7xxx for enthusiasts
APS-C: D5xx for pros
FF: D7xx for enthusiasts
FF: D8xx for pros
FF: D5 for pros/action

If Nikon consolidates their offerings to those 5 model lines, then they can increase output and shave off a couple hundred bucks from each of them.

I don't see a problem with at least one entry level DSLR but not two (ie merge 3xxx and 5xxx). And stop releasing new models that are pretty much the same as the last model!

What I would really like if they are using new models to just fix bugs. Give it to us in software updates!

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 14:58 UTC
On article Yongnuo YN 85mm F1.8 lens now available (238 comments in total)
In reply to:

mick232: It shows at what price lenses can be made available. Margins of other vendors must be huge.

Well since they are talking 85mm lets compare the Nikon 50mm vs 85mm. Yes its definitely better and they probably spent an extra 20% on materials, marketing, etc. BUT the price is 218% more. That is the market 3rd party can fill with quality lenses. It is definitely easy to produce a quality product on the high demand lenses that have price premiums. Sigma and Tamron are definitely doing it while they do have a mix of high quality and cheap quality products though.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

io_bg: Fail of the year. And 2017 has barely started.

Unless it was buggy and/or didn't do things right.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

rz350: Uhhh? Who is going to buy Sony sensors? This could be bad for Sony as who else besides Nikon buys the high profit full frame sensors in any quantity? Do you really think Ricoh-Pentax or Leica are going to pick up the slack? Or the medium format is suddenly going to blossom into a huge market?
Nikon needs to get mirrorless cameras out into the market. And ones which have some thought put into them. No more Nikon 1's. And bring their software into the 21st century. I bought a D300s and it was an awesome camera. Way better in so many respects then the Canon 50D that I had. But Nikon has not had the innovation that went into those cameras for a while. They seem rudderless. As they state in their report, they have the D500 and D5 and those are improvements on the cameras they replace, but whither the rest of line?

How about they join forces and we get some good video processing as well? It could be profitable for both. Nikon would be doing much better if their P&S and mirrorless had decent video.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 18:30 UTC
Total: 25, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »