strata83

Lives in Ukraine Kiev, Ukraine
Joined on Jan 9, 2010

Comments

Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2501 comments in total)
In reply to:

coldturkey66: Will older 16 MP models like my X-T10 also benefit from this improvement through a firmware update, or does this work only with the new 24 MP sensor?

X-Trans video processing is very resource-hungry; the faster the framerate, the lower the quality. The footage from my X-E2 is basically useless at 60p with softness and lots of moire, but it's surprisingly okay at 25p. Not great, not even good, but okay.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 20:44 UTC
On article 8 months with the Vanguard Up-Rise 33 camera bag (47 comments in total)

I have a smaller version of this bag, Up-Rise 28. It's advertised as big enough for 11" laptops, yet my 13" MacBook Pro fits in.

That bag has a big flaw, however — if it's tilted forward, smaller items may fall out of its front pockets. This happened to my phone and a charger — thankfully I noticed it before walking away!

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2013 at 00:15 UTC as 29th comment
On article The One-Light Studio (94 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maverick_: How disappointing. We normally associate this site with higher caliber work, even if the topic is single light source. These images are not interesting at all. I think having access to a studio, with a nice backdrop that you'd want to get more creative with your lighting. Budget has nothing to do with it, it's using your imagination, you are not shooting products for eBay. TERRIBLE.

I don't think the point of the article was to charm readers with beautiful imagery. Actually, the illustrations brilliantly show different lighting styles and patterns you can create with a single light source.

By the way, one of the best books about lighting ('Light: Science and Magic') also features many 'flat' and 'boring' illustrations that are perfectly adequate for their intended purpose.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2012 at 01:34 UTC
On article Mirrorless Roundup 2011 (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

sensibill: Another snubbing of Samsung.

No reason why the NX10/NX11 and NX100 wouldn't be listed here. They're certainly competitive at their price point, and my NX100 produces images that are easily a match for the 12MP m4/3 models.

The cameras you mentioned are all discontinued, so no reason to list them here.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2012 at 19:41 UTC
In reply to:

compositor20: Full area enlargement of AF area setting ---- is this the same as the PIP in panasonic g3 for manual focus?

the improvement in noise reduction is welcomed... if it is in raw it would be better (to get rid of the green tint at high iso) since grain is already acceptable...

No, I believe they mean it will be possible to move the focusing area to the edges of the frame.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2011 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

Cy Cheze: The GH2 already shoots video at 1920x1080 (60i, 24p) or 1280x720 60p.

This alters the editing software that accompanies the GH2, but does not add any new video mode to the camera. Since the GH2 sensor is 60hz, one might think there be firmware to allow 1080 60p video, but maybe that's being reserved for the GH3.

120 Hz is possible, but it's used for AF only

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2011 at 17:00 UTC
In reply to:

Cy Cheze: The GH2 already shoots video at 1920x1080 (60i, 24p) or 1280x720 60p.

This alters the editing software that accompanies the GH2, but does not add any new video mode to the camera. Since the GH2 sensor is 60hz, one might think there be firmware to allow 1080 60p video, but maybe that's being reserved for the GH3.

I believe they will introduce MP4 video recording mode, just like in the new GX1.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2011 at 15:07 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

jj74e: Definintely not as good as Sony 5N, but also better than M4/3 and NX100. If you compare the NX200 and NX100, I would say that the NX200 definitely needs more sharpening as well as better processing- at ISO 800, even the NX100 shows more detail just in nature of how the photo is processed.

I don't know why dpreview selected the Olympus E-PL3 for comparison - it still uses the same 4-years old 12MP sensor. Compare NX200 to the Panasonic G3 and you wil be amazed at how much worse Samsung is.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 08:56 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sosua: Interesting, can't seem to read the EXIF info on the NX200 files - no lens information or aperture information.

What is interesting in the whole exposure series, the NX200 exposures are consistently twice as long as the 5N:

ISO 100 1/25 vs 1/13
ISO 800 1/200 vs 1/100
ISO 3200 1/800 vs 1/400)

So assuming they were both shot at F8 (and I doubt the Samsung was shot at F11), the Samsung is overstating its ISO by a full stop.

Ouch.

According to DxOMark, NEX-5N's sensitivity is already overrated. Its ISO 800 is more like ISO 530. Does it mean that Samsung NX200 at ISO 800 is like ISO 265? Weird.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 01:13 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

danaceb: Wow, this is terrible. Looks like Samsung just had their 14mp sensor stretch to 20mp. When it comes to TVs, phones and well everything else, Samsung shames Sony with its superiority. However even with a strong start into EVIL with the NX10, this NX200 is a complete and utter joke in comparison to the NX5N. They didnt even bother to give it an EVF option, fricken OLED king samsung.

Oh and people from the wait'n'see tribe, sorry but the proof is right here before you this camera is a flop. Those JPEG results are sooo soo bad that there is no way RAW could be much of an improvement. I own an NX10, the jpeg engine is bad, but not this horrendous. Also I'm not seeing the low ISO detail others are.

I see you're pretty quick at calling others 'fanboys' for stating the obvious. Open your eyes, those JPEG samples are horrid. Even NX100 is better at ISO 400 and ISO 800.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 01:05 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

strata83: ISO 100 and 200 look very good. ISO 400 and higher are MUCH worse than just about everything else. Samsung needs to fire their JPEG engine engineers and hire somebody from Olympus to do the job.

I'm not interested in the E-P3 and its 4 years old sensor. At ISO 400 and higher, the NX200 seems to be noticeably worse than the Panasonic GH2 and the Panasonic G3. They both are older and have smaller sensors.

I also suspect Samsung is using that much noise reduction because their sensor is very noisy at higher ISOs. I will try to find a RAW converter that supports both the GH2 and the NX200 and compare them.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 01:00 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

CriticalI: Ouch - lots of high ISO smoothing even at 800!

I have Samsung NX200 in front of me as I type this reply. If you're familiar with the NX10/NX100/NX11 (and I'm pretty sure you are) then you know that their menu is extremely dumbed down compared to other interchangeable lens cameras. There is no control over noise reduction and other vital parameters. The NX200, unfortunately, is no different in this regard. I believe nobody can make NX200 JPEGs worse than they already are.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 00:56 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

CriticalI: Ouch - lots of high ISO smoothing even at 800!

Frankly speaking, even at ISO 400 there is no image quality to speak of.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 00:17 UTC
On article Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG (108 comments in total)

ISO 100 and 200 look very good. ISO 400 and higher are MUCH worse than just about everything else. Samsung needs to fire their JPEG engine engineers and hire somebody from Olympus to do the job.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 00:11 UTC as 35th comment | 4 replies
On article Pentax Q Hands-on Preview (281 comments in total)

Probably the ugliest and least useful camera ever.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2011 at 04:47 UTC as 194th comment
Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15