Najinsky

Joined on Feb 21, 2006

Comments

Total: 411, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Sean65: I don't understand the pricing of the latest batch of mirrorless cameras. Sony 6300, Canon M5, Olympus PEN F etc.

These are selling at (nearly) double or 30% more than the price of cameras like the Nikon D7200/Canon 80D.

The weight saving advantages are diminishing and the lens lineup seems a bit handicapped, especially for the M5.

Nice cameras but the price seems way too high considering what else is on offer.

Yes, you're right. Pricing has started going a bit crazy but there are complex and valid reasons too.

If they don't have all the latest features, they are widely criticised, yet it is still a niche market (outside of a few thousand 'enthusiasts'). The economies of scale are not there.

Big features x Low market share = High price.

The Sony is a miniature marvel, like most Sonys'

The Pen-F is an ergonomic disaster; the front control knob intrudes into grip space causing shooting discomfort, there is no real grip making it a less than ideal partner for the larger nicer lenses. It should be double or half the price.

I don't see anything in the M5 to make it a $1k camera. It isn't particularly big on features, it's just new. I imagine initial volumes will be limited and so those who have to have it for Christmas will pay. In the new year I think street price will almost certainly drop to around $750 and it will sell well.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 09:58 UTC

Typo. 29-140 should probably be closer to 29-240

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 09:16 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

Melchiorum: >Electronic video stabilization

I wish manufacturers/reviewers stopped using this term. What does it even mean? Both optical and digital stabilization is "electronic" as it is controlled by the electronic components. It's like saying "optical camera" or "sonic headphones".

There's optical stabilization (in-lens): that's good.
There are stabilized sensors: they're good too.
Then there's digital stabilization: it's typically crap and it can be done better in post-production.

Not quite. The benefit of doing digital stabilisation in camera is it has access to pixels outside the frame from which to produce a stabilised frame. You end up with 1080p of stabilised video.

If you start with 1080p of shaky video and stabilise it in post, you may only end up with say 720p of stabilised video.

And even if the in camera stabilisation isn't perfect, it can still be improved in post while retaining more of the resolution. I don't see any downsides at all to having the option (other than it not being as good as sensor or optical.

As it's described as 5-axis, I'm guessing there are orientation/motion sensors and has the potential to be pretty good.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 09:05 UTC

A couple of weeks back I spent about 4 hours walking around a large mall in Thailand, about 15 camera shops I guess, some dedicated camera shops, some electronic device shops, and some brand outlets (Sony/Panasonic).

It really smacks you in the face just how far ahead of the game Canon's retail operations are. They have the biggest presence, the most space, the best displays, the best coordination and the best draw.

It's hard to expose yourself to it and not want to walk away with a Canon, and this from a guy who reads review sites everyday, knows the weaknesses, and switched from full frame Canon 5 years back to experiment with M43, Fujifilm and Sony. A regular consumer has no chance. Resistance is futile.

The M5 will almost certainly sell in significant numbers just on the strength of this presence. It will have special appeal to those with cash and an interest in trying something different yet trusted and familiar.

The lens may not inspire, but are light, compact and they work.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 08:47 UTC as 165th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Najinsky: You will never quiet the haters, best not even to try. The mistake this article makes is it to set its sights on changing a perceived opinions. First, this invites argument. Second, there is not a singular perceived 'opinion set'.

For some, they don't like that Apple is successful. Others don't like that Apple is proud of it's success, they see it as boastful or arrogant. This especially colours the way they see Apple announcements. When Apple says, hey look at this great new feature we added, in their head, they hear it as taking credit for someone elses work, rather than simply including a feature they think their users want, which is all it really is. The Bokeh feature is a good example of this. They didn't claim to invent bokeh, they simply acknowledge it as a feature users want then put a team to work on finding a better way to make it happen. They're obviously happy and proud with the feature they ended up with so wanted to showcase it. I don't have any problem with that.

@cosinaphile:

Precisely, not one opinion set.

That's why's there is little point in discussing, because the hating is a choice.

For example, the Foxconn situation is a disgrace. But it is a global disgrace and we are (nearly) all to blame.

By 2012, it was estimated that 40% of all consumer electronics were produced from foxconn. It has likely grown larger than that since then with the acquisition of automotive, TV (Sharp) and Telecoms companies.

The chances of you or anyone reading this forum not handling a foxconn product at some point is quite slim.

The bottom line is that it is a global issue. Putting it all on Apple, is simply a personal choice.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 08:43 UTC
In reply to:

FastGlassLover: I wouldn't touch an Apple product with someone else's 10 foot pole. The stuff their users have to agree to in order to use their software/os is appalling. I'm waiting for the Apple-Approved haircuts and wardrobes that are allowed when using an Apple product

How many different personalities have you identified yourself as speaking for? Can I talk to Norman now?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 07:44 UTC
In reply to:

Hiroshi 8: BS article! Ridiculous editor choice.

I won't spend time on this website anymore. You think your readers are stupid?
Farewell dude.

So so sorry, don't go dude, together we can help them change. Why don't you start by listing all the things you want them to cover, then they can crosscheck with your preferences before posting.

Dude, stay!

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 07:31 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: You will never quiet the haters, best not even to try. The mistake this article makes is it to set its sights on changing a perceived opinions. First, this invites argument. Second, there is not a singular perceived 'opinion set'.

For some, they don't like that Apple is successful. Others don't like that Apple is proud of it's success, they see it as boastful or arrogant. This especially colours the way they see Apple announcements. When Apple says, hey look at this great new feature we added, in their head, they hear it as taking credit for someone elses work, rather than simply including a feature they think their users want, which is all it really is. The Bokeh feature is a good example of this. They didn't claim to invent bokeh, they simply acknowledge it as a feature users want then put a team to work on finding a better way to make it happen. They're obviously happy and proud with the feature they ended up with so wanted to showcase it. I don't have any problem with that.

Maybe not for you, but it is for some, like I say there isn't one 'opinion set' for all haters.

Isn't all sales about hype so some degree?

The next time Canon introduce an upgrade to a camera with improved auto-focus, they'll highlight this as a new/improved feature for the new camera. They are not claiming the feature itself is new, or that they are the first to market with that feature, they are simply responding to a perceived customer requirement and so highlight the added features they think will help the product sell.

Your primary criticism seems to be that Apple are good at identifying which features it is important for their product to implement well if they want that product to sell, and are then good at explaining those features in order to help the product sell. What specifically is your issue with that?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 07:24 UTC
In reply to:

beavertown: Apple marketing is the best, they deserve their success. Nothing new there, but they are able to convince people those are brand new features.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqujo_oaDrE

They don't try to convince people of anything. It is you that is convincing yourself Apple are trying to do this.

When a Canon camera is criticised by DPR for having slow auto-focus, the next time Canon introduce an upgrade to that camera with improved auto-focus, they highlight this as a new/improved feature for the new camera. They are not claiming the feature itself is new, or that they are the first to market with that feature, they are simply responding to a perceived customer requirement and so highlight the features they think will help the product sell..

Apple are no different in this respect, they are just a lot more slick at it than most companies.

And they take risks. iMac was the first computer to come as standard with USB ports and no floppy disk drive. How many computers today come with USB ports and no floppy? Pretty much all of them.

People may lament the loss of the audio jack, but the 'shower selfie' craze it will bring in will soon have them distracted ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 07:14 UTC

You will never quiet the haters, best not even to try. The mistake this article makes is it to set its sights on changing a perceived opinions. First, this invites argument. Second, there is not a singular perceived 'opinion set'.

For some, they don't like that Apple is successful. Others don't like that Apple is proud of it's success, they see it as boastful or arrogant. This especially colours the way they see Apple announcements. When Apple says, hey look at this great new feature we added, in their head, they hear it as taking credit for someone elses work, rather than simply including a feature they think their users want, which is all it really is. The Bokeh feature is a good example of this. They didn't claim to invent bokeh, they simply acknowledge it as a feature users want then put a team to work on finding a better way to make it happen. They're obviously happy and proud with the feature they ended up with so wanted to showcase it. I don't have any problem with that.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 06:21 UTC as 293rd comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

FastGlassLover: I wouldn't touch an Apple product with someone else's 10 foot pole. The stuff their users have to agree to in order to use their software/os is appalling. I'm waiting for the Apple-Approved haircuts and wardrobes that are allowed when using an Apple product

Seriously?

The use of any google service requires you give them a worldwide license to the content you use in that service. And that license persists after you stop using the service.

When both Apple and Google were called to Washington to answer allegations on privacy concerns, Apple took a technician to explain how data was anonymised and encrypted and that privacy was being respected. Google took a team of lawyers to defend their right to use your data.

I know which one I trust.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 05:56 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (946 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dylthedog: The camera looks interesting (for a phone) but losing the headphone jack is crazy.

How do I now use my £250 headphones and charge the phone? Buy some wireless ones instead, that I won't be able to use on a plane?

Android just became attractive to me for the first time, for a reason I'd never have expected.

I think this will be the first time in history that being out by 3.5mm will cost a company $1B.

You're a consumer, it's your money, you have a choice. If it doesn't suit you, It's your choice.

Personally I hate headphone cables. While notionally the cables serve the purpose of transmitting audio signals from the devices to the the drivers, it has become evident that their true purpose is simply to prove the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Many approaches have been attempted, in vain; roll-up cables, thick cables, flat cables, coiled cables. Didn't someone once offer a definition of madness as to keep on doing the same thing and expect different results?

So now we have no cables, and guess what, I think the entanglement issue might finally be solved, because someone did something different.

I'm a consumer too, and now, like you, I have a choice based on my wire preferences too.

Choice is great isn't it?

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 15:31 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (946 comments in total)
In reply to:

estarkey: Why is the screen so low resolution?

Apple focus on features users can use, and make their use seamless, Samsung focus on numbers to make things sound better and generate hype, and it's a successful strategy for both.

That doesn't mean Samsung's are featureless, they are jam packed with features, it's just that those features lack any evidence of cohesive design on the integration and UX side.

As ttran88 points out, the screen is a good example of this. Retina means that at normal viewing distances, individual pixels are no longer distinguishable. There are very very few benefits to having resolution go beyond this (none I can think of for normal usage), while there are a number of downsides, power usage and graphics performance being the obvious ones.

My girlfriend has the Galaxy S6 Edge, I have the iPhone 6s. The Samsung is a beautiful looking phone and takes great photos, but she gets frustrated trying to figure how to do more with it and asks for my help. Coming from iPhone I find the Galaxy UX an abomination.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 05:03 UTC
On article 6 tips for shooting fall color (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: Always wondered if Autumn was such a difficult word for our American cousins to use, why dont they simply call the other seasons, Cold, Grow and Hot?

Oh dear, I was hoping it wouldn't come to this. World history in less than 900 characters. Pay attention.

Britain was Albion, albino, white cliffs of Dover, what invaders saw first.

We were conquered by Germanics, Vikings and Romans. By procreation, our DNA is forged from warriors, technicians and, er, Romans. We're relentlessly inventive (V+G), we're reserved yet flamboyant (V+R) and we are paranoid (G+R).

There are only 4 territories:
Albion: Us
Australia: Those who wanted to stay but were not welcome.
America: Those welcome to stay but didn't want to
Empire: The rest. But actual execution of this (efficiently G), got interrupted by debauchery (R).

There are only 4 names:

William: The Devine
Harold: The Ambassador
George: The Warrior
Charles: The plan B

(Add James for the religious)

France did not conquered Albion. Just a case of identity fraud by a guy called William of Normandy. Harold got punished, first by death, then by having his lineage name changed to Henry or Harry.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 18:05 UTC
On article 6 tips for shooting fall color (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: Always wondered if Autumn was such a difficult word for our American cousins to use, why dont they simply call the other seasons, Cold, Grow and Hot?

Now that really takes the cookie.

It's not anti-American to question Americas World Image, which is just a media implied synthetic persona that bares little resemblance to the actual collective of people who make up the country. I've been many times and met many people I like very much.

English is the most widely spoken language in the USA. As a native of England, it's also my native language. When I see/hear it used differently, it pricks the brain, it's just a natural part part of communication, some words will get your attention. It's quite normal, and a widespread phenomenon, there have even been popular songs written about it.

As already mentioned by tbcass, Autumn is used just as much. So perhaps the real question my brain was prodding me to ask is, why would DPR choose to use the American-English only version of the world for their global website, when there is a better version of the word that is inclusive to all English speakers?

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 08:34 UTC
On article 6 tips for shooting fall color (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: Always wondered if Autumn was such a difficult word for our American cousins to use, why dont they simply call the other seasons, Cold, Grow and Hot?

I'm only teasing. Language evolves.

Still, a bit surprised by the comment about mother tongue though. For example, in Sioux (Lacotah) it would be something like P'ti'-ay-too. Or in a SE Asian language (first settlers now thought to be from SE Asia), like Thai, it would be:

ฤดูใบไม้ร่วง (assume ggl xlate working)
;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2016 at 08:26 UTC
On article 6 tips for shooting fall color (80 comments in total)

Always wondered if Autumn was such a difficult word for our American cousins to use, why dont they simply call the other seasons, Cold, Grow and Hot?

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2016 at 20:55 UTC as 18th comment | 15 replies
In reply to:

Nikonandmore: I have an EVO S. Small US company, not Chinese. I don't buy Chinese stuff and mostly run away scared from anything made in China, though I hear DJI products are "generally" good, mainly their drones. My EVO Gimbal is killer and works flawlessly. I've had it for a few months and has not failed me once or ever drifted or frozen. And dudes at EVO are supper friendly and supportive, about the opposite of all Chinese companies' support on anything they make. And by the way, DJI sets their price DIRECTLY to compete with the EVO, same at $299. Anyway, I can't speak for the DJI since I haven't tried it (and wont), but if you want a killer gimbal for your phone, get the EVO. Do your own research and check your phone's compatability and reviews etc. But for me, it's been great. And I like to support made in USA stuff. Tired of Chinese crop.. it's all always crop ultimately. These are 2 cents in this..

@bossanesta, yes, but as 'luck' would have it, they moved manufacture here (Thailand) just as severe flooding started becoming a seasonal occurrence, making a large number of factories inoperable/inaccessible for several months. Seven major industrial estates where in up to 10 feet of water, causing supply shortages in automotive and electronics. I believe many are considering relocating again, either to drier areas or other parts of SE Asia.

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2016 at 06:02 UTC
In reply to:

Rob Sims: Been using the new version for a few days and have to say the implementation is very good. I use the SD card-Lightning port dongle to transfer from my camera to my iPhone 6S+ and the RAW part of the development is kept in its own module so as not to confuse it with all the other effects.

In particular, the new faces module is very slick, able to highlight eyes and smooth skin much quicker than I'd normally be able to do back at my desk in Lightroom. So for a mobile app (and a free one at that!) it's a great tool for editing the occasional photo while on the road.

Question, what exactly does Google get out of this? Maybe it's obvious, but I don't know.

The most obvious thing they get is a worldwide license to use any content you load to their services. From their T&C:

"When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps)."

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2016 at 05:15 UTC
In reply to:

Kiwisnap: Can you actually access RAW images on an iOS device now?

Always been able to use raw files on iPhone/iPad, just that it wasn't a satisfying or particularly useful experience. iOS itself recognised the files as photos (so they get stored in camera roll (then, now Photos) and they could be used as photos throughout the system, but it iOS and most apps only used the embedded JPEG for faster display.

To use the actual raw data (instead of the embedded jpeg) required an app with its own built in raw processor, like raw photo pro or pirawnha.

These were quite limited in features so usually required saving a jpeg or tiff to work with in other apps.

The big change expected next month, based on a slide at the developers conference is raw photo editing but no one sure of the full meaning of that yet. Sounds promising though.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2016 at 17:10 UTC
Total: 411, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »