Impulses

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

Comments

Total: 2404, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

vadims: > Let the smartphone camera wars begin.

What would be really nice is camera manufacturers waking up from their slumber and starting to address huge gap in connectivity and workflow convenience they have to smartphone manufacturers...

I'm pretty happy with hr WiFi implementation of my Oly and Panasonic cameras... NFC is the one thing Panasonic could've implemented better on the cameras that had it, like by skipping the step to open the app first.

Being at home is ironically the one thing that trips Oly's implementation up the most (phone keeps wanting to stick to the home network it sees the internet on, Panasonic actually allows you to work it across the home network), but it's pseudo guest mode that doesn't require an app is a nice perk.

I use both pretty frequently and don't find them frustrating or too slow, but I'm pretty well versed in that kinda thing.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2017 at 01:23 UTC
In reply to:

BokehFanatic: I remember when Sony released the S700 phone with 1.3 megapixels and I was thinking "oh my god, this will replace my compact camera". Then Nokia had a "smartphone" N90 with a Zeiss lens with 2 megapixels and Sony had a "dumb" K750i. Then the K850i came with 5 megapixels... And the "battle" is still going on (although practically without Nokia).

For me the hype after that K850i was over. I settled on the opinion that phones take awful photos compared to "normal" cameras from the same generation. Yes, it's nice that, to remind me of something, my phone can take a photo that is not blurry compared to that 2007 K850i. Or that I can distinguish my friends on a group picture at night. But really, what's the difference between the newest phone and the previous one?

Is there any "photographer" that will say "Wow, this photo is great, is it the newest Pixel? Because it surely can't be an iPhone 7!" I don't think so. If so, where do these photos end up that a pixel-level difference matters?

Eh, the clever on the fly HDR Google has been doing often achieves way more than pixel level differences, IMO, I've been pleasantly surprised by it even tho I didn't buy my Pixel for the camera.

That being said, I would agree that anyone that wants a substantial camera upgrade is much better off spending those $700+ on a 1" compact or ILC than a phone upgrade. Generational gains are blown way out of proportion in the smartphone world and it seems a lot of people upgrade for little else but hopes of a vastly better camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2017 at 01:16 UTC
In reply to:

Sranang Boi: I have one of their 4TB USB drives, and it can take a lot of stuff. 12TB would be a video editor's dream. Two if those in a RAID configuration would be an IT manager's final solution.

Someone said this about every big drive ever, including most of my techy friends when I bought an (ill fated) 75GB 75GXP back in 2000, never mind that Deskstar model line came to be known as the Deathstar... I wouldn't even buy a phone today with 75GB or less. :p True drive reliability will always be an unknown until it's out in the real world getting hammered by real usage cases tho, and even then issues can take months to manifest.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 19:04 UTC
In reply to:

BaldCol: and in other news Apple are making a mobile phone the size of a house brick and cassette tapes are making a comeback.

It's the past... leave it there.

Big phones are hardly news, Apple has been behind the trend on that from the very start (around 4+ years ago), and vinyl has been making a comeback for way longer than that... I'm not sure how big phones is any sort of comeback tho since current large phones are large for different reasons and still shaped quite different than an old Moto Startac. Just to give you fits: I bought a headphone tube amp for a grand last year and it's the best my music has ever sounded.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 12:20 UTC
In reply to:

absquatulate: About that whole "film is dead" thing....

" I'm genuinely curious to know if young people will learn to work with photography that has a significant cost per image. "

I think you underestimate young people, and/or are generalizing far too much. This probably differs in either direction from generation to generation... I think the youngest generations out there (who have no clue what came before) might actually grapple with it the easiest, we bought an Instax camera for my pre teen nephew and she hardly blew thru all her film in one afternoon, as I might've (I'm 35 for the record).

I'm pretty sure 40+ nostalgic foggies *aren't* Instax's prime demographic and they seem to be doing fine despite the tiny print size. I think my own generation is probably somewhere in the middle, I shot film when I was younger but I don't have any particular attachment to it and was quick to adopt digital. This is still interesting news to me but I'm not rushing to get one.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2017 at 12:16 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: Z4 sounds like a great value. Apple equivalent might be $4K?

The move to Intel hardware caught up to Apple, they like their profit margins high and selling the same box with the same internals as others for a premium doesn't fly quite as easily with pros or when there isn't much else to differentiate it (like displays, keyboards, overall build, etc). OS X was a trump card for a while but more and more software went platform agnostic so...

The old Pro desktops had some beautiful designs and some intelligent airflow choices but Intel doubled down on efficiency for over a decade which made all of that less relevant. Overall it's lamentable for those in their ecosystem but I can see why Apple kept chasing mobile and consumers over pros for the last decade, it's just more profitable for them (kind of the opposite of have companies!).

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

AllanW: .... and Lightroom will still run slow on this beast! ;)

Lr processing tasks don't scale well, if at all, beyond quad core systems, Pudget Systems (a custom system builder) has a number of interesting articles on this.

Reading about it actually made me turn away from a hex core the last time I upgraded around 2 years ago (before AMD was relevant again and started bringing core cost down), ended up preferring a cooler and more modern quad core plataform (socket/mobo/chipset) than a hex for about the same money.

A really fast SSD storage subsystem will still make a difference in general LR use/navigation tho, there's tangible gains going from a bog standard SATA drive to a faster M.2/PCI-E (and in having the library and/or OS in one and media elsewhere).

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 21:07 UTC
In reply to:

ojos azules: Today's king is AMD not Intel

If core count for the money is the paramount concern (and it should be for anyone doing video editing and/or possibly considering one of these), maybe, Intel still has an IPC edge tho and things like Lightroom aren't super well threaded... So at the low to mid end of the market I'd still make a case for Intel.

Certified WS from big OEM with multiple multi core sockets will probably remain largely Intel despite AMD's recent wins, at least for a couple years until AMD's new stuff proves itself and Intel reacts. If I were building a DIY rig for enthusiast video work I'd absolutely go AMD right now tho.

I'm glad they're back in the game, lack of competition breeds contempt and a lack of focus. Intel started obsessing over mobile and efficiency a bit too much, and it still didn't get them very far beyond the laptop space they already dominated half a decade ago (at least in consumer devices where their SoCs didn't end up making huge inroads).

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 21:01 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Yes! Small printer with a sh*t camera attached. Next sell us the small printer on it's own, same capabilities, and let us bluetooth things over to it. I still really want to carry a big camera and be able to print snapshots for people. If they like it you sell the file. Inexpensive, belt wearable color printers don't need to be spectacular in quality to be valuable.

People are so used to cell phone esque quality too. Let us quickly and cheaply (40 cents for a 2x3" wallet seems close) show off what a better camera can do.

Yeah, a Canon Selphy for $99 stomps all over all these 2x3 format printers/cameras (I've tinkered enough with both), but in use it's a decidedly different and less instant experience... I can see the attraction in both but it's a very different one. The charm of the smaller prints like Instax and ZINK definitely isn't their IQ but the immediacy, the cameras achieve that better than the printers tho the latter are more flexible (also more overpriced IMO).

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 11:11 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Yes! Small printer with a sh*t camera attached. Next sell us the small printer on it's own, same capabilities, and let us bluetooth things over to it. I still really want to carry a big camera and be able to print snapshots for people. If they like it you sell the file. Inexpensive, belt wearable color printers don't need to be spectacular in quality to be valuable.

People are so used to cell phone esque quality too. Let us quickly and cheaply (40 cents for a 2x3" wallet seems close) show off what a better camera can do.

It sort of does that, tho -BT +a camera... Thing is, it's still cheap enough it might be worth fiddling with card readers to use exclusively as a printer. Then again, if you're really gonna use it a lot then what you want already exists, you'll just pay $120-200 for it instead, they're kinda overpriced IMO but I guess the convenience factor is worth the extra outlay... Film will cost way more in the long run anyway.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 21:37 UTC

$70 is really cheap, kinda interested in whether it can print any file from the memory card and/or how it's print quality compares to other small ZINK printers. For comparison, the cheapest small ZINK printers on Amazom right now (from HP, Polaroid, etc) seen to start at $125-130... That's nearly 2x the price.

As another point of comparison, Fuji's Instax printer is pricier still and a Canon Selphy that can do really decent quality 4x6s is $99 (or $150 with the battery to make it transportable, it's not something you can print with handheld in the middle of a street but it's a big jump in quality & print size).

The small 2x3 printers always seemed kinda overpriced, ignoring the fact that print costs will overshadow any of these differences in the long run, but for $70 with a camera as a bonus? Tempting!

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:17 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: I always think "This is going to be the end of Hasselblad" after reading their press releases and somehow they always keep on chugging along.

I have never personally met someone who could afford one of their cameras and actually wanted to buy one. However, there must be some of those people put there somewhere.

Keep on, keeping on, I guess.

And so do rental houses where other pros will rent them from.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: I came here for the sarcastic comments but then I looked up the KODAK ZINK Photo Paper and found 1,500 mostly positive reviews on Amazon. The price is from $0.25 to $0.50 per print. People are having fun with such products and $70 is not a bad price for such a camera. On the other hand, 2x3 is too small...

$70 kinda seriously undercuts what Fuji has been doing with Instax, they need to release a non digital square Instax and/or cheaper digital hybrids in the mini format... They tried to do both with the latest model and it kinda lost the appeal and pushed the price point beyond impulse purchase territory.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

zzzxtreme: Can it print jpegs from sdcard? To use it like dedicated printer? Seriously $70 is cheaper than other zink or instax printer

Yeah I'm curious for the same reason, $70 is mighty cheap, if it can I'd grab one and probably use it mostly to print and rarely to shoot.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:02 UTC
In reply to:

Woodyz: Eh. Instax is still better from a creative/artistic angle since it's authentic instant film.

This is just a cellphone camera with a mini-printer attached.

This is priced a lot better than Instax's own digital attempt tho, granted the square format on the latter is probably larger than what this prints.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:00 UTC
In reply to:

Woodyz: Eh. Instax is still better from a creative/artistic angle since it's authentic instant film.

This is just a cellphone camera with a mini-printer attached.

This is priced a lot better than Instax's own digital attempt tho, granted the square format on the latter is probably larger than what this prints.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:00 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: I can't understand these newer Olympus camera models, their numbering nor what they mean. Is their PEN camera line still available? But not the PEN-F, because I absolutely hate how PEN-F looks — notoriously ugly and boxy 1950s retro.
I like the smarter look of PEN P5 — is that camera line still around?

Yeah they're both very subjective things (looks and tilt vs FAS), no real wrong/right nor something that I think should influence a final review score.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2017 at 01:43 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

Impulses: Does this use the EFC implementation of the E-M10 II and older bodies (physical curtain - delay - electronic first curtain) OR that of the E-M5 II, PEN-F, and E-M1 II? Might not make a practical difference in a lot of cases but it does have an impact on burst modes and stuff like the 75-300 ($300 something at their refurb outlet) is also equally impacted and not a pairing that's unheard of.

Around a 1.5yrs ago, I almost opted for an E-M10 II instead of an E-M5 II (the tilt screen on the former was more appealing) but the EFC thing was one of the former's turn offs, so I ended up just finding a good deal on the E-M5 II... Weather sealing and a few other things were also a factor mind you.

To be clearer, in case you're not fully versed in the subject, Olympus has two very different EFC implementations of EFC across their bodies depending on age and price. Most newer or pricier bodies (as alluded to above) have a straightforward EFC where you have an electronic curtain followed by a mechanical

The E-M10 II has the older EFC implementation (despite being a more recent body) where a physical curtain is still triggered (because it uses an older shutter design where they can't get rid of it), followed by a short delay, followed by an electronic curtain which is the actual first curtain, and finally the second physical curtain.

That works fine in many situations, but not all (again as alluded to above), just like the entirely electronic shutter works in some situations but not all. A true/straightforward EFC has no major downside.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2017 at 01:20 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

Impulses: Does this use the EFC implementation of the E-M10 II and older bodies (physical curtain - delay - electronic first curtain) OR that of the E-M5 II, PEN-F, and E-M1 II? Might not make a practical difference in a lot of cases but it does have an impact on burst modes and stuff like the 75-300 ($300 something at their refurb outlet) is also equally impacted and not a pairing that's unheard of.

Around a 1.5yrs ago, I almost opted for an E-M10 II instead of an E-M5 II (the tilt screen on the former was more appealing) but the EFC thing was one of the former's turn offs, so I ended up just finding a good deal on the E-M5 II... Weather sealing and a few other things were also a factor mind you.

It looks like YOU didn't read my comment carefully enough, none of what you're stating contradicts any of what I said, and I was inquiring about the specific nature of the electronic first curtain (EFC) shutter used. Perhaps read a bit more carefully before choosing the condescending route of telling people to RTFM.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2017 at 01:15 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)

Does this use the EFC implementation of the E-M10 II and older bodies (physical curtain - delay - electronic first curtain) OR that of the E-M5 II, PEN-F, and E-M1 II? Might not make a practical difference in a lot of cases but it does have an impact on burst modes and stuff like the 75-300 ($300 something at their refurb outlet) is also equally impacted and not a pairing that's unheard of.

Around a 1.5yrs ago, I almost opted for an E-M10 II instead of an E-M5 II (the tilt screen on the former was more appealing) but the EFC thing was one of the former's turn offs, so I ended up just finding a good deal on the E-M5 II... Weather sealing and a few other things were also a factor mind you.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 06:49 UTC as 27th comment | 3 replies
Total: 2404, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »