keeponkeepingon

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

Comments

Total: 995, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II Review (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: When I look at a comparison test scene such as one of the ones linked to here the jpeg size of the Canon 9x II is 5mb while every other camera is 10mb or more.

OTOH the RAW file of the canon is substatially bigger 28mb versus 20mb

So..... what's going on here? Am I looking at a more aggressive jpeg compression engine or an inferior lens?

Also are all the cameras set to the best quality jpegs?

At 125 ISO
9x II jpeg: 5mb raw:28mb
RX100 jpeg: 10.7mb raw 20mb

Thanks!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g9xii&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100&attr13_2=canon_g7xii&attr13_3=panasonic_dmclx10&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=125&attr16_1=125&attr16_2=125&attr16_3=125&normalization=full&widget=575&x=0.11404834780436014&y=-0.9950051091277425

Wow going from 10 to 11 did double the size. So now when looking at the RAWs the displayed raw from jpeg should all be on a level playing field.

Did it make a difference? If it did it's not a lot but anyway thanks for correcting it eliminating a variable between the tests.

Regarding the saves I was confusing the jpeg from RAW with the SOC jpeg you get when using the dropdown to select the jpeg images. A bit confusing to have the two different types of jpegs but now I "get it".

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2017 at 19:26 UTC
In reply to:

hypnotictortoise: For those bemoaning the absence of a quality camera in this sector.

Leica X-U

https://www.dpreview.com/products/leica/compacts/leica_x-u_typ113

Sony RX0

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4343428297/sony-rx0-puts-a-1-inch-sensor-into-a-rugged-and-ultra-compact-body

And I just bought a Fuji XP120 (if I spend too much money I won't be going anywhere over Christmas) and it's pretty bloody average.

'semantics."

Wow you finally got that? And it's not objections I just pointed out that

"however, the go-pro isn't in the same league as the Sony, " is the same as saying the Sony is a go-pro on steroids.

Affirming that t I agreed with your assessment of the Sony but then in response you went off with the volgar name calling.

But at least you learned something so my job is done...... Now you just need to apologize for your tirade.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2017 at 08:53 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II Review (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: When I look at a comparison test scene such as one of the ones linked to here the jpeg size of the Canon 9x II is 5mb while every other camera is 10mb or more.

OTOH the RAW file of the canon is substatially bigger 28mb versus 20mb

So..... what's going on here? Am I looking at a more aggressive jpeg compression engine or an inferior lens?

Also are all the cameras set to the best quality jpegs?

At 125 ISO
9x II jpeg: 5mb raw:28mb
RX100 jpeg: 10.7mb raw 20mb

Thanks!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g9xii&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100&attr13_2=canon_g7xii&attr13_3=panasonic_dmclx10&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=125&attr16_1=125&attr16_2=125&attr16_3=125&normalization=full&widget=575&x=0.11404834780436014&y=-0.9950051091277425

Under history parameters the XMP data shows:

converted from image/x-canon-cr2 to image/tiff,
from image/tiff to image/jpeg,
converted from image/tiff to image/jpeg

History sofware Agent XMP data shows:
Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw (Macintosh),
Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw (Macintosh),
Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw (Macintosh),
Adobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh),
Adobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh),
Adobe Bridge CC 2018 (Macintosh)

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 19:43 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II Review (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: When I look at a comparison test scene such as one of the ones linked to here the jpeg size of the Canon 9x II is 5mb while every other camera is 10mb or more.

OTOH the RAW file of the canon is substatially bigger 28mb versus 20mb

So..... what's going on here? Am I looking at a more aggressive jpeg compression engine or an inferior lens?

Also are all the cameras set to the best quality jpegs?

At 125 ISO
9x II jpeg: 5mb raw:28mb
RX100 jpeg: 10.7mb raw 20mb

Thanks!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g9xii&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100&attr13_2=canon_g7xii&attr13_3=panasonic_dmclx10&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=125&attr16_1=125&attr16_2=125&attr16_3=125&normalization=full&widget=575&x=0.11404834780436014&y=-0.9950051091277425

Richard Butler

Thanks for looking into this. I can't imagine that going from quality 11 to 10 would cut the file size in 1/2.

Regarding "how I know" here's the specific steps I took:

I downloaded the jpeg from the 9x II 125 ISO then uploaded it to jefferey's exif viewer.

I am clicking on the "jpeg" download link for 125 ISO on the g9-X II studio comparison linked above which takes me to this file:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/download-image?s3Key=a68c923363b74a49b6ec5041c5e0a9cb.acr.jpg

Jefferey's exif viewer can be found here:
http://exif.regex.info/exif.cgi

Jefferey chokes on the above URL so I download the file then upload it to jeffery.

Under "history action" the XMP data (I mispoke when I said exif) is showing:
saved,
saved,
derived,
saved,
saved,
converted,
derived,
saved,
saved

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 19:42 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II Review (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: When I look at a comparison test scene such as one of the ones linked to here the jpeg size of the Canon 9x II is 5mb while every other camera is 10mb or more.

OTOH the RAW file of the canon is substatially bigger 28mb versus 20mb

So..... what's going on here? Am I looking at a more aggressive jpeg compression engine or an inferior lens?

Also are all the cameras set to the best quality jpegs?

At 125 ISO
9x II jpeg: 5mb raw:28mb
RX100 jpeg: 10.7mb raw 20mb

Thanks!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g9xii&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100&attr13_2=canon_g7xii&attr13_3=panasonic_dmclx10&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=125&attr16_1=125&attr16_2=125&attr16_3=125&normalization=full&widget=575&x=0.11404834780436014&y=-0.9950051091277425

Looking at the jpeg file you've provided for the 9x II....

according to the exif data in the jpeg file you converted it from raw to tiff then tiff to jpeg twice.

So it's not a camera jpeg setting but something you are doing in your post processing of the cr2 file that is generating a file that is more than two times smaller than the other cameras.......

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 12:25 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II Review (281 comments in total)

When I look at a comparison test scene such as one of the ones linked to here the jpeg size of the Canon 9x II is 5mb while every other camera is 10mb or more.

OTOH the RAW file of the canon is substatially bigger 28mb versus 20mb

So..... what's going on here? Am I looking at a more aggressive jpeg compression engine or an inferior lens?

Also are all the cameras set to the best quality jpegs?

At 125 ISO
9x II jpeg: 5mb raw:28mb
RX100 jpeg: 10.7mb raw 20mb

Thanks!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g9xii&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100&attr13_2=canon_g7xii&attr13_3=panasonic_dmclx10&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=125&attr16_1=125&attr16_2=125&attr16_3=125&normalization=full&widget=575&x=0.11404834780436014&y=-0.9950051091277425

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 11:40 UTC as 34th comment | 8 replies
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras for beginners (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: This is a bit surprising having read most of these reviews.

The EOS-M100 review was enthusiastic and you got the impression the reviewer really liked using the little wonder.

The SL2 review on the other hand gave me the impression that the reviewer was upset he had to dirty his hands handling a low end canon piece of garbage.

Including sony in the roundup is confusing as is the fact that you don't mention that its' a dated 2014 camera. Since when do you include 3+ year old cameras in an annual roundup while excluding other brands with decent, current offerings?

Sony is focusing on the high end ignoring the low end. Got it, that's their choice but it they don't want to play these low end reindeer games why included them while excluding other heavy hitters showering love on the low end such as Panasonic or Fuji?

Exaclty Marty. Sorry if I implied it's only a sony thing but they are perhaps a more extreme example than the other manufactureres (expecially compared to canon with the M100, M6, Sl2, T7i, T77 etc all released this year) . While the number of releases has declined your own table shows that 18 entry level ILC cameras were released after the sony 5100. Surely there has to be one of them that is a better option than the antique sony to put on this list?

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 11:16 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

Toni Salmonelli: As for the EOS M Line-Up. The handling is great (as is typical for Canon IMO and Dual Pixel AF is a joy to use, but this is not enough to get on a top list IMHO.

Why?

1. New EOS M models like the EOS M5 and M5 feel really cheap in comparison to older EOS M models and I'm comparison to the competition.

2. As those are ILCs, lens selection should be factored in. Though there are some high value lenses around, the EF-M lens line up leaves a lot to be desired.

3. The absence of such basic features like Auto-ISO settings in cameras of the price range like the EOS M5 (which is the top level camera of the EIS M line-up btw) and the EOS M6 us inexcusable IMO.

4. I can't tell for the EOS M6, but I encountered a serious quirk with my EOS M5: Once the attached lenses are stopped down and not used at their fastest aperture, the frame rate drops down significantly to about half the advertised max. frame rate of 8fps.

BTW, I did not even get started about 4K ;-)

"When Shooting 4K video it is easy to grab single frames "

Which isn't supported on the M's. My theory is Canon dropped the feature because of 4K..... then forgot to add the 4K.

Even if they had 4K my problem with this solution is that I'm now left with big video files I need to watch to capture a scene of the perfect moment (potentially doubling the time taken for the capture) verus just snapping a pict when it happens

"but I missed quite some candid shots of my kids and friends, "

Wow this is still a problem? I call the firmware on my T2i "overly optimistic" because it often picks shutter speeds way to slow.

For anything that moves, often I'm using Tv or manual and keeping an eye on the ISO to let me know if I need to pull the flash out.

Agreed more lenses would be nice but I don't find my 100mm, 10-18 or 55-250 hard to handle on the M .. I just hold the lens instead of the camera (but of course the size is anything but small).

Thanks again for the info!

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 08:14 UTC
In reply to:

hypnotictortoise: For those bemoaning the absence of a quality camera in this sector.

Leica X-U

https://www.dpreview.com/products/leica/compacts/leica_x-u_typ113

Sony RX0

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4343428297/sony-rx0-puts-a-1-inch-sensor-into-a-rugged-and-ultra-compact-body

And I just bought a Fuji XP120 (if I spend too much money I won't be going anywhere over Christmas) and it's pretty bloody average.

Sealife is a "name brand" for underwater cameras. They've been making popular underwater cameras for over a quarter of a century.

"If it makes you feel at all better, my English is likely better than yours."

Ha rolls eyes whatevah. Totally over your head. woossh. It's not your "Better" english that is in question it's your understanding of american slang. "on steroids" implies that the sony "isn't in the same league".

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 19:39 UTC
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras for beginners (80 comments in total)

This is a bit surprising having read most of these reviews.

The EOS-M100 review was enthusiastic and you got the impression the reviewer really liked using the little wonder.

The SL2 review on the other hand gave me the impression that the reviewer was upset he had to dirty his hands handling a low end canon piece of garbage.

Including sony in the roundup is confusing as is the fact that you don't mention that its' a dated 2014 camera. Since when do you include 3+ year old cameras in an annual roundup while excluding other brands with decent, current offerings?

Sony is focusing on the high end ignoring the low end. Got it, that's their choice but it they don't want to play these low end reindeer games why included them while excluding other heavy hitters showering love on the low end such as Panasonic or Fuji?

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2017 at 19:24 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

hypnotictortoise: For those bemoaning the absence of a quality camera in this sector.

Leica X-U

https://www.dpreview.com/products/leica/compacts/leica_x-u_typ113

Sony RX0

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4343428297/sony-rx0-puts-a-1-inch-sensor-into-a-rugged-and-ultra-compact-body

And I just bought a Fuji XP120 (if I spend too much money I won't be going anywhere over Christmas) and it's pretty bloody average.

ESL? "On steroids"
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/on+steroids

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2017 at 12:57 UTC
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: Time for at least a 1inch sensor?

He meant the 00 but it's more like a go pro than a point and shoot camera.

Nikon has had a 1" waterproof for some time now:
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Nikon1/Nikon-1-AW1.html

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2017 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

hypnotictortoise: For those bemoaning the absence of a quality camera in this sector.

Leica X-U

https://www.dpreview.com/products/leica/compacts/leica_x-u_typ113

Sony RX0

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4343428297/sony-rx0-puts-a-1-inch-sensor-into-a-rugged-and-ultra-compact-body

And I just bought a Fuji XP120 (if I spend too much money I won't be going anywhere over Christmas) and it's pretty bloody average.

Niether of those are really "this sector".

X-U is bigger not pocketable and fits in the same niche as the nikon waterproof 1" sensor camera and the sony is more like a go-pro on steroids.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2017 at 12:01 UTC

Holy cow, I've never seen such a device limited app:

"Affinity Photo for iPad supports iPad Pro, iPad Air 2 and iPad (early 2017). Please note that older iPads are not supported. **"

App of the year is a little suspicious as most iPad users would need to upgrade in order to use it.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2017 at 11:55 UTC as 4th comment
On article Before and after: Shooting Raw with the iPhone X (67 comments in total)

Curious article that left me wanting.

As many of the examples are backlit I was most interested in a comparison to RAW + PP versus in-camera HDR (or for google HDR+).

Then of course you could do HDR with RAW so I'm also interested in how well that works (especially for moving subjects) versus the baked in HDR support with jpegs.

Maybe all of the above will be addressed in a later update but given the tone/level of the current offering I seriously doubt it.

So how about dpreviewers: What are your results comparing RAW (or RAW with HDR in post processsing) to in-phone native HDR support?

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 06:29 UTC as 10th comment
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras under $1500 (62 comments in total)

I was just thinking probably one of the two of the top things driving non-pro camera sales are Kids and Travel.

Folks feel obliged to buy a "good camera" when they get kids or go on a trip.

So how about "The best camera for photographing kids" and the "The best camera for Travel". (I think you used to do a travel category in years past but I don't think I've ever seen kids)

Oh and "Best camera kit for a beginner". My favorite quote from a new mom talking about her A6000: "They said it was the fastest camera you can buy but it doesn't take very good pictures." (of course the A6000 can take good pictures but meh lighting with that awful kit lens and it falls on it's face.)

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 10:12 UTC as 5th comment
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

Toni Salmonelli: As for the EOS M Line-Up. The handling is great (as is typical for Canon IMO and Dual Pixel AF is a joy to use, but this is not enough to get on a top list IMHO.

Why?

1. New EOS M models like the EOS M5 and M5 feel really cheap in comparison to older EOS M models and I'm comparison to the competition.

2. As those are ILCs, lens selection should be factored in. Though there are some high value lenses around, the EF-M lens line up leaves a lot to be desired.

3. The absence of such basic features like Auto-ISO settings in cameras of the price range like the EOS M5 (which is the top level camera of the EIS M line-up btw) and the EOS M6 us inexcusable IMO.

4. I can't tell for the EOS M6, but I encountered a serious quirk with my EOS M5: Once the attached lenses are stopped down and not used at their fastest aperture, the frame rate drops down significantly to about half the advertised max. frame rate of 8fps.

BTW, I did not even get started about 4K ;-)

What do you mean by this? Every canon I've used has auto ISO.

"absence of such basic features like Auto-ISO settings "

Also disapointing about the build quality. You can fault my origiinal EOS-M for a lot of things but it's built like a tank

One thing I'd add to your list is that you can't take a picture while taking a movie. Pro's don't care but for hanging out with family I've loved that feature but canon recently dropped from their entire line-up and even with 100s pages of coverage on the new canon's by dpreview it was not mentioned here once.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 10:05 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (486 comments in total)
In reply to:

Toni Salmonelli: As for the EOS M Line-Up. The handling is great (as is typical for Canon IMO and Dual Pixel AF is a joy to use, but this is not enough to get on a top list IMHO.

Why?

1. New EOS M models like the EOS M5 and M5 feel really cheap in comparison to older EOS M models and I'm comparison to the competition.

2. As those are ILCs, lens selection should be factored in. Though there are some high value lenses around, the EF-M lens line up leaves a lot to be desired.

3. The absence of such basic features like Auto-ISO settings in cameras of the price range like the EOS M5 (which is the top level camera of the EIS M line-up btw) and the EOS M6 us inexcusable IMO.

4. I can't tell for the EOS M6, but I encountered a serious quirk with my EOS M5: Once the attached lenses are stopped down and not used at their fastest aperture, the frame rate drops down significantly to about half the advertised max. frame rate of 8fps.

BTW, I did not even get started about 4K ;-)

"the EF-M lens line up leaves a lot to be desired"

I think they've done a pretty good job. I shoot both sony and canon MILC and while sony has more lenses canon has more that I can actually afford and that I want to buy.

For the average user they have zoom covered 11mm to 250mm, a couple of nice primes (22mm F2, 28mm macro ).

They haven't duplicated EF lenses like the 50 or 40 but both of those, even with the adapter are the same size or smaller than sony's 50.

Sure there's no F2.8 zooms but those are huge anyway making the size of the adapter a non-issue.

On my wish list would be a prime wider than the 20mm but other than that not much else......

And compared to the rube goldberg adapter my A6000 uses with a built in pelical mirror based focusing system the canon adapter is a total joy. I have to look twice to see if it's even on my bigger lenses like the 100mm F2.8 Macro.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 10:02 UTC
On article These are the best cameras you can buy right now (486 comments in total)

For some reason I'm not getting much out of these this year.

The comments are fun as all the trolls and fanboys are out in force but for the actual articles.... meh.

Show of hands: Who thinks these are well done, as good or better than in the past and "value-added" to your future camera shopping?

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 09:55 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
On article Buying Guide: The best cameras under $2000 (99 comments in total)

Is it me or are these "best of" fairly bad this year?

I've just scanned a couple and the recommendations were fairly wacked with few justifications and little content.

For the last few like this I've skipped through to the comments which so far (even after filtering out the trolls/fanboys) are lightyears more informative than the original article.

Show of hands: Who thinks these are well done, as good or better than in the past and "value-added" to your future camera shopping?

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 09:52 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply
Total: 995, showing: 221 – 240
« First‹ Previous1011121314Next ›Last »