Doug Pardee

Doug Pardee

Lives in United States Wilmington, NC, United States
Joined on May 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 441, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article DPReview TV: Five best Fujifilm Film Simulation modes (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

caver101: Any chance you could post transcripts for TV reports like this? I am on a relatively slow and expensive data contract and I'd really like to get the gist of a report before deciding to watch the video itself.

Try this:
1. Click on the "Watch on YouTube" button in the lower left of the video.
2. Stop the auto-play.
3. Below the right edge of the video window is a "..." item. Click that.
4. Click "Open transcript".
5. If you don't want the timestamps, open the hamburger menu on the transcript and click "Toggle timestamps".

What you get is auto-generated by Google using speech-to-text technology, so it's devoid of capitalization and punctuation, and occasionally gets some words wrong. But you can probably figure it out.

This works on most YouTube videos (in English, anyway).

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2021 at 21:04 UTC
In reply to:

Zdman: OMG this again. One of the biggest cons of management that people still believe this. Kodak was one of the biggest players in digital cameras and at one point had the top sales in the market. They had already made the transition to digital and were not reliant on film. They could easily have kept it up but they had literally the worst CEO (as voted by several publications), who bull headedly wanted the company to become like HP where he used to work. The guy burnt through cash and made many suspect acquisitions. If he had been running Apple we'd all be using Nokia's now. The worlds transition to digital had nothing to do with it.

There's no shortage of problems to point at with Kodak, but if today they owned 100% of the digital photography market, they'd still be bankrupt. There simply isn't enough money in digital photography to support a company as large as Kodak was.

In 2006, Kodak had achieved the #1 position in US sales of digital cameras. Yet they were making a fraction of what they needed to make. At the time, Kodak's withdrawal from the digital photography market was stunning, but when you look at the numbers, you see that no matter what they did, there was no way to come out ahead.

When the iPhone later started crushing the digicam market (which was Kodak's market) a few years later, it was clear that Kodak made the right decision to bail out. Alas, there was really no profitable place for them to run to.

Kodak wasn't an enthusiast/pro camera-maker. They did film, processing, and papers for pros, but their cameras were strictly family-snapper stuff.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2020 at 17:55 UTC
On article Ins and outs of ISO: where ISO gets complex (153 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheGrammarFairy: Nice work and I want to make sure I understand: you're saying the camera adds different levels of analog amplification depending on the ISO? That seems to to be at odds with the idea that a raw file is unprocessed sensor data.

Also, those tone curves you talk about, is that what some people call "digital gain" or something else entirely?

"Analog amplification" occurs inside the sensor, prior to the conversion of the analog signal to the digital data that will appear in the Raw file. Traditionally, this has been how sensors implement ISO selection, and cameras have traditionally implemented ISO via their sensors, but there are numerous variations. This article looks at some of those variations.

The analog amplification gives a stronger signal level to the ADC circuitry. The amplified signal reduces the amount of noise coming out of the ADC, which is currently more important for Canon sensors than for Sony sensors. It also improves the resolution of the data levels (able to discern smaller brightness differences). On the down side, "highlight headroom" is reduced because the amplified signal can more easily exceed the maximum input value for the ADC. (That's a somewhat simplified explanation, but it should be satisfactory for the photographer's purposes.)

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2020 at 19:19 UTC
On article How HDR display could change your photography forever (230 comments in total)

I suspect the article is speaking more about HDR monitors than HDR television sets. Your photos (and videos) are rarely going to be viewed on a TV set.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2020 at 14:03 UTC as 54th comment | 8 replies
On article Fujifilm X-A7 review (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

Toni Salmonelli: Sorry, but I have real trouble understanding the logic behind the silver / gold ranking of DPR.

"Our early impressions of the X-A7 were overwhelmingly positive and now that we’ve spent time shooting with a production model of the camera we are happy to say that this is in fact the best entry-level mirrorless ILC that Fujifilm has released. This is enough to make it one of the stand-out cameras in its class."

This sounds like gold, doesn't it?

No, that doesn't sound like gold. A gold camera is typically one that brings something important that no other cameras (at the time it was released) have. It is THE top of the class. Being "ONE of the stand-out cameras in its class" is what a silver award is.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2020 at 14:23 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces affordable XC 35mm F2 prime lens (283 comments in total)
In reply to:

geopapa: So XC means extra cheap? Hope it's optically decent too. That plastic mount puts me off though..

Optically it's identical to the XF 35mm f/2, so it should be more than "decent."

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2020 at 15:16 UTC
In reply to:

Nate Kong: Very strang decision for Fuji to release 2 entry level cameras so close to each other. Poor XA7 becomes obsolete so fast.

The X-T200 is an X-A7 with an EVF. The same as the X-T100 was an X-A5 with an EVF. Video shooters tend not to care about the EVF. Stills shooters tend to want one. The X-A7 isn't obsolete -- it's a less expensive model aimed at a somewhat different market.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2020 at 15:11 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Microphone Port Yes
Headphone Port Yes
Is this accurate? DPR have been wrong about this more than once.

The headphone port is via USB. The X-T200 actually comes with the adapter for that. And the microphone jack is the standard 3.5mm instead of Fuji's usual 2.5mm.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2020 at 15:06 UTC

My guess is that it's mainly a technical issue. All of the older Fujifilm X-mount cameras used a dual-core chip. The software for one was probably pretty close to the software for another, so it wasn't a big deal to provide updates to older cameras.

The X Processor 4 used in the X-T3, X-Pro3, and X-T30 is a quad-core chip. The software for that thing is probably quite different, and retrofitting it to the older cameras might not be so easy. Probably more of a factor is that Fujifilm's firmware developers probably all want to work on the new quad-core code, not be stuck on the old dual-core code.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2020 at 01:56 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

DongaMogudu: Is it possible to try this with i7 + integrated graphics.

It works on mine (Lenovo Yoga 2 laptop)... but slowly, even on standard-definition video. There are a number of things you can do to try to speed up the process, but in the end, it's still slow.

I switched back to CyberSource PowerDirector.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2020 at 13:29 UTC

Missed what I consider the big tech story of the decade: around 2012, sensor technology stabilized. Prior to that, each year's sensors were noticeably better, in both resolution and noise levels, than the ones from the prior year. Today's sensors are a bit better than 2013's, but not so much as to push people to buy new bodies.

The poster child for this may be the Nikon D750, which was introduced in 2014 and is still being sold new, and is still quite popular.

Since then, the advances have been (almost) all about AF and video -- which not coincidentally is what this article talks about. But for many stills photographers, older models still deliver the goods.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2019 at 15:30 UTC as 48th comment | 8 replies
On article DPReview TV: 2019 New Year's Resolutions (254 comments in total)
In reply to:

Harold66: Pretty nice video .it would have been nice to include Pentax . After all you have sigma which is not a very prolific camera maker

Pentax hasn't announced a new DSLR model in almost two years. Three years, if you don't count the K-1 mark II as a "new" DSLR model.

I suppose it's possible that Pentax has its engineering team hard at work developing some radically new concept. But it's more likely that no significant changes are forthcoming in the near future. Either way, I doubt they'd pay any attention to suggestions.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2019 at 18:17 UTC

Medical pickiness: the article says she was "taken to the hospital to be checked for an orbital fracture and a concussion." You can't be knocked unconscious without sustaining a concussion, so that part was pretty much a foregone conclusion. I'm sure she was treated for concussion, though.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2019 at 13:47 UTC as 53rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Autriche78: This camera is not for me. I'm old enough to have done the whole 'tuck the film box flap into the holder' thing, but really, this is a pointless gimmick. Could just as well have given us a full LCD with the option of switching between the small, retro, square bit and the full modern LCD view.

I'm a Fuji fan, but this does nothing for me. I'm concerned it's going to be a sales dud, and nowadays a dud can have far reaching impacts on a camera maker's prospects and bottom line.

No need to worry about bottom line. Fujifilm's digital camera business is somewhere around 2% of their total income. They make more than twice as much on their Instax instant-print cameras and film. Fuji makes digital cameras because they feel like it, not to make money.

That gives them the freedom to make -- or not make -- whatever they want. One of the things they do differently is that for their high-end cameras, they listen to working professional photographers, not to the mass market or, as many here would wish, to the DPReview forums.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2019 at 14:46 UTC

Typo? Page 11 refers to "a 2.5mm remote / headphone jack." Should that not be "remote/microphone" jack? The headphones are via the USB-C port.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2019 at 12:56 UTC as 77th comment | 1 reply
On article DPReview TV: Olympus OM-D E-M5 III hands-on preview (194 comments in total)

Just pointing out that it's not just phase-detect AF, it's CROSS-TYPE phase-detect AF, which no other mirrorless cameras except the E-M1 II and E-M1X currently offer.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2019 at 14:18 UTC as 35th comment | 12 replies
On article The new Olympus E-M5 Mark III is a mini E-M1 II (155 comments in total)

I find it interesting that in the DSLR world, people obsess over how many cross-type AF points the camera has, while in the mirrorless world, nobody notices when Olympus produces only the third (current) mirrorless camera model with any cross-type AF points.

The other two current mirrorless models with cross-type AF points are the E-M1 II and the E-M1X. The Samsung NX1 also had cross-type AF points.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2019 at 20:01 UTC as 4th comment
On article Fujifilm X-A7 pre-production sample gallery (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: Anyone knows why all the Fuji crop sensor cameras have the base ISO higher than 100?

Fujifilm states (as required) that their ISO ratings are SOS, which is the 18% gray target value that dates back to the days of B&W film. It's Canon, Nikon, and Sony who've gone for "not-a-standard" ISO ratings that don't agree with classic film ISO ratings, and they state (as required) that their ISO ratings are REI, the "makes good-looking color photos" approach.

Nobody's cheating. Nobody's lying. I do think it's arguable that it's past time for Fuji, Oly, Panny, and Pentax to forget about trying to match the old film sensitivities, and to forget about B&W, and to realize that people just want nice-looking color pictures even when not using multi-zone metering. Nikon made that change somewhere around 10 years ago... their early DSLRs used the 18% gray target value.

For your car analogy, the Europeans are obviously cheating with cars that say they're doing 100 when really they're only going about 62 mph. Even if they do say 100 KPH.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2019 at 19:55 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-A7 pre-production sample gallery (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: Anyone knows why all the Fuji crop sensor cameras have the base ISO higher than 100?

To be clear, measuring ISO is absolutely standardized when using the 18% gray standard that Fujifilm, Olympus, Panasonic, and Ricoh/Pentax use. If you spot-meter something at a given ISO and expose accordingly, that spot should come out at 18% gray (plus or minus 1/6 stop) in the in-camera sRGB JPEG.

Canon, Nikon, and Sony (and really, everyone else besides the four mentioned above) use the "looks good" approach, which obviously isn't standardized but still tends to fall somewhere around 35% gray. Confusing note: multi-zone metering always aims for "looks good" on all cameras, so will tend to expose about a stop brighter than spot/average metering will on Fuji/Oly/Panny/Pentax will. But the ISO numbering is standardized using spot/average metering.

There are no standards of any kind for Raw data. The ISO numbering and exposure are based on the in-camera JPEG, and Raw just comes along for the ride.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2019 at 15:07 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-A7 pre-production sample gallery (185 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tieu Ngao: Anyone knows why all the Fuji crop sensor cameras have the base ISO higher than 100?

Slightly over-simplified: Fujifilm -- like Olympus, Panasonic, and Ricoh/Pentax -- uses the "18% gray" standard for exposure that dates back almost a century. Using that standard, the sensor's base ISO comes out around 200.

The big three brands -- Canon, Nikon, and Sony -- use the "whatever we think looks good" standard for exposure. Most people find that color photography looks too dark at the 18% standard, and prefer images that are about a stop brighter than 18% gray. So those brands derate their sensor ISO by about one stop, causing the metering and auto-exposure systems to go one stop brighter, which in turn gives the desired brighter pictures.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2019 at 19:29 UTC
Total: 441, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »