Doug Pardee

Doug Pardee

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

Comments

Total: 335, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Doug Pardee: It'll be interesting to see how you put this in a protective case.

It's going to take more than "a slot". The entire top section, and a fair-sized bit of left and right edges, extends.

In the picture at the top of this article, you can see the gaps in the edges where the top has separated and moved up.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2018 at 14:53 UTC

It'll be interesting to see how you put this in a protective case.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2018 at 21:08 UTC as 17th comment | 5 replies

An entire 300mm wafer for one device. That's a lot of stitching.

Since 450mm wafers seem to no longer be on the horizon, that's probably going to be the maximum possible sensor size for a number of years.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2018 at 20:41 UTC as 119th comment | 3 replies
On article Video: Diving into the demise of Kodak (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick8: It was not impossible to make the transition to digital.
Fujifilm succeeded. Kodak did not.

dmanthree: I own one (and love it). But Fuji's digital camera line accounts for maybe 2% of their business. 90% of Fujifilm's income nowadays is from business-to-business sales, not consumer products. And most of their consumer products are still film, processing, and the Instax instant-print cameras and film (Instax alone outsells Fuji's digital gear by about 2-to-1).

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 22:08 UTC
On article Video: Diving into the demise of Kodak (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick8: It was not impossible to make the transition to digital.
Fujifilm succeeded. Kodak did not.

Fujifilm didn't "transition to digital." They transitioned to medical and office equipment and services.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 21:38 UTC
On article Video: Diving into the demise of Kodak (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Flyfisher48: One of the unexpected consequences of digital photography is that people can review and eliminate unwanted photos. What this means is people don't have to pay for as many prints. In the days of film you had to pay for developing and printing of the whole roll even if some shots were of the ceiling or your foot by mistake. Some photo shops had a buy back policy for bad photos. Now people do not even print their photos as everything is shared on social media. Kodak could have gone into the profitable business of printing of digital images like Shutterfly is now doing for those who still desire prints for an album.

Kodak did have an online printing business: Kodak Gallery, built off of Ofoto that they'd bought in 2001. But there's not nearly enough money in that to support a company the size of Kodak. It got sold off to Shutterfly in mid-2012 as part of the bankruptcy process.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 21:24 UTC
On article Video: Diving into the demise of Kodak (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

Doug Pardee: I'm unclear as to why photo enthusiasts get so worked up over Kodak. Kodak sold point-and-shoot cameras so that the average person could take pictures, a task that no longer involves cameras. Except for some early DSLRs, Kodak didn't sell enthusiast/pro level equipment. What the enthusiasts and pros bought from Kodak was film, processing, and photo paper, none of which are used for digital.

Any "Kodak" that survived today would be unrelated to the historical Kodak, and probably wouldn't be in the stills photography business at all.

Fujifilm is very definitely not the company it was. They make about 90% of their income on non-consumer stuff, mainly products and services for offices and health care, and some non-consumer optics. Most of their consumer products are still film-related: their classic film stocks, film processing, and the Instax instant-print cameras and film.

Kodak had bowed out in 2006, and in 2007 Fujifilm introduced its last DSLR and exited the enthusiast/pro market. They continued to make a number of FinePix point-and-shoot models in a variety of colors. In 2012 FujiFilm came back with an all-new enthusiast/pro line, which now accounts for pocket change.

[I'm a Fuji user and partisan. But I don't delude myself as to the financial import of Fuji's digital photography operations.]

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 21:15 UTC
On article Video: Diving into the demise of Kodak (218 comments in total)

I'm unclear as to why photo enthusiasts get so worked up over Kodak. Kodak sold point-and-shoot cameras so that the average person could take pictures, a task that no longer involves cameras. Except for some early DSLRs, Kodak didn't sell enthusiast/pro level equipment. What the enthusiasts and pros bought from Kodak was film, processing, and photo paper, none of which are used for digital.

Any "Kodak" that survived today would be unrelated to the historical Kodak, and probably wouldn't be in the stills photography business at all.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 20:18 UTC as 72nd comment | 4 replies
On article DPReview TV: A look back at APS film (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Bolton: Now I totally want to visit the old school camera store in this video. Where was it shot?

Chris and Jordan are based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2018 at 20:01 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-T100 Review (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

Doug Pardee: "Why did they take [Acros] off?" Because Acros requires an X-Processor Pro, and the budget-friendly X-A series (which the X-T100 is based on) doesn't use that processor.

Same answer for why only 15 fps at 4K. The X-Processor Pro can do it, but the low-cost processor in the X-T100 just doesn't have enough oomph for the job. It's a $600 (US) camera. Does anyone else offer usable 4K at that price point?

Deliverator: I don't know what you mean by "cripple." Fujifilm puts less-expensive sensors and processors in the X-A cameras so they can sell those models at a lower price. The X-T100 is essentially an X-A5 with a viewfinder.

Is it weird to say that if you want the more expensive hardware, you'll have to pay for it?

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 18:46 UTC

I'm unclear as to the intent. For over a decade I've been able to upload digital pictures to web sites for in-store printing. And with luck, the printing will be done before I get to the store. It seems that with GetPix DASH, the printing won't even start until I get to the store and put in my code.

Perhaps it's aimed toward small shops that aren't connected to a big photo printing network (PNI, for example), but still want to offer print services. But from the consumer's point of view, you have to wait while it cranks out your prints (about 4-5 per minute). And from the retailer's point of view, it doesn't seem to come with any billing system -- not that the big systems do, either.

It's also not clear to me if each kiosk needs a dedicated ASK-300 printer, or if one printer can be shared between multiple GetPix DASH kiosks. I suspect it's one printer per kiosk.

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2018 at 20:51 UTC as 4th comment
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-T100 Review (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpfan32: Wow it gets fast with the reviews. It's like reviews on the assembly line. One after another quick quick.
I hope the quality doesn't suffer in the long run.
I was used to watch reviews where a good amount of experience is involved.
Let's see...

I don't know, but I believe that the idea is that the video reviews cover basic operational impressions -- how does the camera feel, are the controls usable, how's the touchscreen, and do the important features seem to work well. The written review will be DPR's usual in-depth tech exploration with measurements and studio scene evaluations and such.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 16:00 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-T100 Review (359 comments in total)

"Why did they take [Acros] off?" Because Acros requires an X-Processor Pro, and the budget-friendly X-A series (which the X-T100 is based on) doesn't use that processor.

Same answer for why only 15 fps at 4K. The X-Processor Pro can do it, but the low-cost processor in the X-T100 just doesn't have enough oomph for the job. It's a $600 (US) camera. Does anyone else offer usable 4K at that price point?

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 15:50 UTC as 27th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

marc petzold: According to the Fuji Forum here, this new XC 15-45 Powerzoom Kitlens is sharper, and more contrasty than the XC 16-50 OIS II.

Here are many Samples from Fujifilm Ambassador Jonas Rask, so into this price class, show me something better... and Fujifilm does have a way excellent APS-C Lenses Lineup.

For the price, it's the best budget Mirrorless, both from Style and System (Lenses), the Question here is only how good is the AF...but it reads, the AF Algorithm is from Fujifilms flagship Cameras, means X-T2/X-H1...but i doubt the AF is that good....anyway, for a Still Picture Photographer like myself, and for Landscape Photography, perfect & small, with classical, retro style. ;-)

Check out the Sample Gallery
https://jonasraskphotography.com/2018/05/24/fujifilm-x-t100-review-quality-on-a-budget/

It may be the same sensor like the newly relased X-A5 Entry Level DSLM, but on the X-T100, it is without an AA-Filter, just like onto the Nikon D3300/D3400, D5600 and up...

Good Light !
Marc

Further to my comment immediately above: The Camera Store says, "I confirmed with Fujifilm that both X-A5 and X-T100 do not have AA filters." That information's at variance with most review sites, but there you are.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 17:04 UTC
In reply to:

maurobbianc: On this model is it possible to de-couple focusing from exposure/shutter release?

If you select manual focusing. Otherwise, there'd be no way to focus it. There is no "back button".

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 16:15 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: According to the Fuji Forum here, this new XC 15-45 Powerzoom Kitlens is sharper, and more contrasty than the XC 16-50 OIS II.

Here are many Samples from Fujifilm Ambassador Jonas Rask, so into this price class, show me something better... and Fujifilm does have a way excellent APS-C Lenses Lineup.

For the price, it's the best budget Mirrorless, both from Style and System (Lenses), the Question here is only how good is the AF...but it reads, the AF Algorithm is from Fujifilms flagship Cameras, means X-T2/X-H1...but i doubt the AF is that good....anyway, for a Still Picture Photographer like myself, and for Landscape Photography, perfect & small, with classical, retro style. ;-)

Check out the Sample Gallery
https://jonasraskphotography.com/2018/05/24/fujifilm-x-t100-review-quality-on-a-budget/

It may be the same sensor like the newly relased X-A5 Entry Level DSLM, but on the X-T100, it is without an AA-Filter, just like onto the Nikon D3300/D3400, D5600 and up...

Good Light !
Marc

I haven't found a reliable source that claims that the X-T100 sensor doesn't have a low-pass (antialiasing) filter. As far as I know, it has an AA filter, same as the X-A5.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: I find it very confusing to have a X-100T and a X-T100.

Being pathetically pedantic: it's not X-100T, it's X100T. The hyphen appears after the X only on interchangeable-lens camera model.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2018 at 15:56 UTC
In reply to:

JimSocks: i think the big problem here will be AF. i have the x-a5, it af ok with the kit zooms. but the other lenses i have, not so much. thats why i was hoping for xpro processor because you can at least improve cdaf af with a faster processor. use the kaizen thing they do, but it looks like they stuck the old processor from the xtrans 2 days.

The X-T100 is said to have improved AF compared with the X-A5. The X-A5 is scheduled to get a firmware update in June that will include that improved AF.

How improved is it? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Ref: http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n180524_02.html

Link | Posted on May 24, 2018 at 15:46 UTC
In reply to:

JT26: Amazing camera for the money... but feels like Fuji are weakening their brand a little with such a lot of cameras - What really is the difference between this and the XT20?

What's the SAME as the X-T20, other than the X lens mount? It's a different sensor, with a different processor, in a different body with different controls and different LCD screen.

There's almost nothing in common between the two cameras. What this IS like is (as others have noted) the X-A5. It's an X-A5 with an EVF and the side-swinging LCD.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2018 at 14:16 UTC

Comes with four built-in blowers for sensor dust.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 18:55 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
Total: 335, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »