Impulses

Lives in Puerto Rico Puerto Rico
Works as a student
Joined on Apr 7, 2013

Comments

Total: 1510, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

cSalmon: imho mobile devices are still about what type of computer you have on your desk. Why have an iPad if you have an HP tower? Until Apple either builds a new computer or announces it's out of the desktop business, why even bother?

I'm no Apple fan, but that makes no sense... Tons of people have a PC and an iPad, or an iPhone and a Surface, or an Android phone and a MacBook... The way web services work these days it's really not a big deal. Not like HP or MS make any decent phones, nor does Google make a high powered laptop/desktop. The only one with a real semblance of vertical integration in their lineup is Apple.

Again, j personally couldn't care less... DIY desktop here and Android phone.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 23:12 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: There's however a big snag that explains its low cost: It has only got the old 8MP camera. This is 2010 technology, and even then the Nokia N8 , also 8 megapixel, was using a much bigger sensor. When it is that price with the new 12MP camera it will match the iPhone &, which has the newish 12MP sensor. Dont waste your money!

Because using tablets for taking photos rocks! Wait no...

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 23:10 UTC
In reply to:

webber15: Still not sure what "tracking" actually is?? I mean...I see a bif...follow it with the shutter half pressed - that's tracking in my book...(using zone focus btw)

Tracking is very often used sans tripod.

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

lunic: From my experience, Olympus ' C-AF+TR is rarely robust, except for the glorious flagship E-M1 series. And I'm afraid that most of E-M1 series users won't need this article to find out capabilities of their camera. It was Olympus that made subject tracking an issue in the mirrorless world, and.... see what they have done in their midrange and entry bodies.

Olympus has taken way wayyy too long in implementing OSPDAF on any midrange body. All the tracking in the world isn't good for anything if the camera can't focus fast enough on what it's tracking, meanwhile over the course of one and a half generations Panasonic managed to slap DFD on their entire line, grrr. I use both FWIW.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 07:26 UTC
In reply to:

webber15: Still not sure what "tracking" actually is?? I mean...I see a bif...follow it with the shutter half pressed - that's tracking in my book...(using zone focus btw)

Why would panning make it useless? Camera movement doesn't kill the actual tracking...

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 07:22 UTC
In reply to:

fedway: Ironic: the title pompously states, "it should matter to you." Yet, subject tracking only really matters depending on what subjects matter to you. Some of us couldn't care less about shooting weddings, hyperactive children moving around, BIF or sports. All the bandwidth spent on the topic is because of the technical geekiness factor not necessarily due to it's over-all relevance to many people.

Uhh, that's kinda the point... Really good tracking doesn't get in the way, it makes it way easier to capture active subjects like kids without worrying about the AF... Just let it track and focus on framing etc.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 07:21 UTC
On article Erez Marom: On causality in landscape photography (104 comments in total)
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: "maybe you're telling a story about the threat of global warming."

Sure, you can use photography as a propaganda tool. It's been used for decades for that purpose. A picture doesn't tell the story, and a picture is not worth 1000 words -- it requires a 1000 words to tell the actual story.

It can spark the conversation tho, just like music and other media.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 05:06 UTC

Excellent AF analysis, I like how you've fleshed out those sections over the last year or so... The varied real world tests are also very insightful. That being said, it would be nice to see at least a cursory remark about how it compares versus the likes of the E-M1 II, X-T2, and a6500.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 15:11 UTC as 9th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

HB1969: I really need to read the headline more carefully. For a minute I thought it said that Olympus were ending MICRO Four Thirds system...and after announcing they're working on 8K

They're not making Zuiko lenses anymore, they're making m.Zuiko lenses... ;)

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 06:44 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: I never understand if anyone is slightly interested in real photography
a dirt cheap RX100 first generation get u a 1 inch sensor and 4 times zoom
weight 240 gram

use a tiny sensor phone?
Those are the majority and don't really care photography

It is correct that camera companies are targeting real photographer
but with the sad reality of increasing price to compensate for much lower volume
after all maybe 90-99% of people are not photographer

Those said they got a new phone because of how good the camera is
I don't know if they are real stupid or just joking

That may be true in daylight, low light phone photos are another story... As to why, in the midst of a big photography boon, more people don't buy actual cameras? Two main factors IMO, the first one is sheer convenience, phones are just easier to use and quicker to get photos out of. It took wayyy too long for decent Wi-Fi implementations to show up on cameras.

Second, sheer ignorance. It ALSO took wayyy too long for 1" compacts to show up in numbers outside of the RX100, and the still haven't come down in price much. Meanwhile this pervasive (and true, to an extent) notion that smartphones could do everything a camera could do but zoom took root, P&S became passe because people thought (rightly so) there wasn't much of a point to them.

The whole camera market sat on their laurels for way too long. Had the RX shown up a couple years later, and had its competition shown up sooner, and had prices come down quicker, there might still be an actual P&S market. Camera makers were happy to rehash the same old models and maybe pump out a few travel zooms year after year tho.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 09:18 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: A comparison of profit based on sales revenue would make much more sense.
Second to Apple was Samsung with Chinese makers known to have a low margin.
With Samsung recent issues it is clear that most profits 2016 have gone Apple. Also, Apple isn't buying other companies like crazy. Maybe, their attitude to keep their profits is a reflex left over from the days Apply went bankrupt, or almost so.

It just doesn't mean though that Apple's per unit margin is unusually high.

BTW, believe it ot not,in 3rd quarter 2016, the iPhone even had 104% of worldwide smartphone profits ;)

Umm, Samsung doesn't pay Google anything for Android.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 05:41 UTC
In reply to:

Fizzunk: Does that profit include accessories and apps?

If so I guess that might explain things.

But if it's just for the phones itself that is an absurd profit margin. Especially considering the price point for an iphone isn't that far from its competitors.

It shouldn't, unless the report and article are blowing smoke... Apple reports those earnings under separate divisions. Apps and accessories are still a drop in the bucket compared to phone profits tho, if you've ever looked at their earnings reports.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 05:40 UTC
In reply to:

graybalanced: As usual many are saying this proves iPhones are "overpriced." That is not proven by the data.

All it proves is that the iPhone is set to a price that the market will bear. That's how markets work. If the iPhone was overpriced, it would not be as profitable or not profitable at all. People have many, many less expensive phone choices. No one forces them to buy an iPhone. That many choose an iPhone means they freely decided the iPhone contains value that justifies the price.

In fact, because of the sheer margin of profit, on a free market basis some could argue that the iPhone might be underpriced.

No, I don't even own an iPhone 7 or 6. My free market choice was to choose a less expensive phone.

It also proves Apple's marketing dollars have as much of a ROI as their R&D does... :P

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 05:38 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Poor Microsoft. Not even a cursory mention of Windows Phone in this whole thread about phone competition.

If WP was actually competing they'd be worth a mention... And I say that with regret, there was totally space in the market for a third mayor player but they squandered their window of opportunity.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 05:37 UTC
In reply to:

LO Rivera: A flagship Samsung costs the same as an iPhone. One problem is that all the other manufacturers have 10 different models to choose from, Apple not so much. Also-and I'm sure someone mentioned this already-Android based phones have to dish out royalties to Google. Apple, all in house. I love how Apple haters ignore these significant facts and then blame Apple for evading taxes. Much like most American Corporations do, and our "illustrious" President has bragged on many occasions that he too, has evaded taxes.

Umm, Android phone makers don't pay Google anything for use of the OS, it's open source. Hell a few Android OEM actually pay Apple royalties due to patent licensing issues. Three out of control lineup is an issue for some, even Samsung, but Samsung actually makes more components in house than even Apple does... They really ought to be doing better marginswhose. The weird dichotomy where they use Qualcomm SoCs on US models probably doesn't help.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 05:35 UTC
In reply to:

Halina123: Much of apple's profits come from people buying the apps for the iPhone. Apple takes a big slice from the cost.

If they're reporting this right that shouldn't have anything to do with these numbers, as both are disclosed under the earnings of separate divisions. In truth, what they earn off iTunes is still a pittance compared to what they earn directly off phone sales, but the former still helps drive sales of the latter.

At this point Apple makes several times more money off phones than anything else, including apps, media, MacBooks, and anything else. In a way it's kinda impressive, tho also worrisome to have so much of the company riding on the one product.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2017 at 05:32 UTC
On article Lightroom Mobile update brings Raw HDR capture mode (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick Payne: Well, the Google camera app on the Pixel phone also does HDR, though it can only shoot JPG images. Here's a comparison of the Google HDR jpg with the Adobe HDR dng, both straight out of the respective apps (click on either linked image for the full size version).

Google: https://goo.gl/photos/w79TZ4bKTyyaM9gU9
Adobe: https://goo.gl/photos/zP1xNbbdczyR1Tr46

Is it me or does Google's HDR processed in all of 2s right in the camera app not look better? I would've thought Adobe had profiled the phones for better performance or something given the shortlist.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 06:26 UTC
In reply to:

rz350: It is unfortunate that Popular Photography is to cease publication. Obviously, loss of advertising revenue due to the internet contributed to it's demise. The good thing about photo magazines and magazines in general was that you were not bombarded with "cookies" whose sole purpose is track your every move. Don't you get tired of going thru your emails to find advertisements for things you searched for 6 months ago? You could read whatever advertisements in a magazine that you wanted to and the world didn't know.
Fortunately, there are still many good photo magazines out there if you care to search. They are expensive, but are still good sources of information. Fortunately for us, not all of the world is so ready to discard books and magazines. With the fall in the sale of cameras, how long will Amazon continue to support DPR? Rishi and Barney will be looking for employment elsewhere.

Should probably ask Borders that... Never actually had a B&N in Puerto Rico, had a Borders for a few years then they went kaput and the huge location they held at the Plaza Las Americas mall (biggest at the island and 2nd the biggest in Latin America) is still vacant.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 06:22 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: They lasted longer than other publications that you would think would've been relevant for much longer... PC Magazine stopped printing a while ago. What's sad is that online outfits didn't fully take over the chore of some of these institutions...

I don't know how well staffed/funded DPR's actual reviewers are but at least there's some alternatives (no offense either way). I don't really know of a site doing mundane tasks that do require some manpower and plenty of hours, like reviewing laser printers, or comparing antivirus suites, etc.

Sure there's probably hobbyists and/or special interest sites dedicated to some of those niches, but the internet has in an odd way made it harder for that info to surface. It's like a double edged sword in that sense...

I actually never sub'd to Pop Photo, judging by some of the other comments it seems a lot less was actually lost in this one case.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 06:17 UTC
In reply to:

krassphoto: Two of my favorite bathroom reading - Popular Photography and B&H printed catalog... :(

B&H still sends out that thing like candy, I think they even sent me one in Spanish at one point (being in Puerto Rico).

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 06:16 UTC
Total: 1510, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »