chekist

chekist

Lives in United States Belmont, United States
Works as a Hi Tech
Joined on Mar 11, 2006

Comments

Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

tkbslc: They almost had me reeled in with early advertising last year, but then they weren't actually for sale yet. You had to plunk down a lot of money for a pre-order with an indeterminate shipping date at least a year out. It's very hard to buy on pure faith for some of us.

I paid $200. But perhaps they had another "special"

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: This is easily the most ground breaking innovation in photography since the invention of the camera, more so than Lytro. Although I imagine Light could do Lytro. I have always wished it would become technologically possible to develop a pocket camera with the resolving power of a large sensor DSLR. This is it. And it works like nature, using a compound 'eye'.

Human eye is more like DSLR – single lens, single focusing, single sensor. This is more like fly's eye. It is interesting to note that generally human eye produces better image, fly covers wider angle.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: They almost had me reeled in with early advertising last year, but then they weren't actually for sale yet. You had to plunk down a lot of money for a pre-order with an indeterminate shipping date at least a year out. It's very hard to buy on pure faith for some of us.

I think it is small amount to put down, given the full price. They will for sure deliver, perhaps with delays, and it will for sure flop – many people do not realize how many things need to go right for a camera to be successful. This is why interesting ideas – like Sigma and Lytro – loose to less ambitious models.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 13:57 UTC
On article Video Overview: Leica Q (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

chekist: Did he say "optically stabilized lens" - because all the other specs claim that it is not stabilized, or I misheard?

Never mind, it looks like others just did not mention it...

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2015 at 04:24 UTC
On article Video Overview: Leica Q (149 comments in total)

Did he say "optically stabilized lens" - because all the other specs claim that it is not stabilized, or I misheard?

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2015 at 04:15 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article Am I missing something here? (627 comments in total)

I get the point of this article. But when I used Nikon AW camera 1" sensor could not even produce results comparable the best smartphones in good light. Do not know how this is possible… Forget controls. Image quality was not there (at least in AW case).

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 13:13 UTC as 168th comment
In reply to:

Kevin Purcell: The Sigma claim that the three layers are blue, green and red is just not true. It's marketing BS along with the 39MPx claim.

The probablility of a photon being absorbed in the top layer is highest for the blue, next most light for greenish and least likely for the red but all three do get some absortion in that layer. It's a desaturated bluish cyan.

In the middle layer a lot of the blue has been filtered (but not all) so that middle layer is a desaturated greenish yellow (some blue, some red and mostly green). The bottom layer is orangish red (mostly red, a little green and a very little blue).

To get to real RGB primaries you have to stick these (noisy) signal though a color matrix to remove the crosstalk between the colors (giving even noisier RGB signal out).

This is the major reason for Foeveon sensors poor high ISO performance (noise goes up quicker than you'd expect) and poor color fidelity (because your original primaries aren't very good).

Kevin, it's useless to argue with Sigma crowd. They are the biggest brand fanatics. They will not argue with your physics, just your personality.
I arrived to the same conclusion as you looking at configuration - this is just a graceful way to slowly move to Bayer.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2014 at 04:24 UTC

If Soviet Union managed to convince many wstern journalists about good food situation in the middle of the worst regime inflicted femines in Russian history, North Korea can convince this guy.

But some of his comments - such as one about so much food that he saw, which would make it doubtful there is shortage - mark him as either an exceptionally simpleminded, or a paid propagandist.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2013 at 13:44 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply

It would be reasonable if Nikon offered discount upgrade to D600 customers. Otherwise pretty crappy move Nikon

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2013 at 14:14 UTC as 28th comment
In reply to:

reginalddwight: Gaylord is just a grumpy, greedy old man.

He was first commissioned by the Federal government to create the sculptures in 1990 for the Korean War Veterans Memorial. Then, he secures copyright protection on the sculptures which he no longer owns and now sit on public property.

Then in 2006 he proceeds to sue both amateur photographer John Alli for photographing The Column which is now owned by the U.S., as well as the U.S. for copyright infringement of a postage stamp of a photograph of "his" sculptures.

For love of money or country?

Gaylord and his attorneys have decided.

I absolutely agree. He is a greedy old man trying to double dip. But even worse - USPS was interested in monument because of what it represents, not how it looks. If this was a pile of rocks, this is what would be on the stamp.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2013 at 13:58 UTC

Clearly USPS was not trying to sell either Ali's or Gaylord's work - they were trying to remember the Koran War casualties.

Gaylord should feel lucky that he was hired to create the monument, and stop trying to make money off the dead solders.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2013 at 13:50 UTC as 87th comment | 1 reply
On article Dpreview Recommends: Top 5 Compact Cameras (559 comments in total)

I find this general recommendation a bit hard to interpret.

For instance "best all-rounder" sounds like the best all around... But probably has the worst image out of the bunch. RX100 which is quietly tacked at the bottom is a true gem, and its position misleads people to believe it is an afterthought. While Canon G15 is sitting in the top spot (I guess alphabetically) with meaningless comment like "fast lens, great ergonomics." Its lens is no faster than few others and ergonomics alone surely does not qualify a camera for such an endorsement.

Perhaps it would be better to have some table with types of features reviewers have been looking at and how each camera has scored. This would in a glance explain the criteria for each.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2012 at 14:54 UTC as 163rd comment | 3 replies

Though it is not clear what the outcome of the collaboration would be I am excited to see what could happen when two of the most innovative companies join forces.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2012 at 17:13 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

chekist: Sigma... What roller coaster! "I will sell it of one million dollars! No, $10,000 dollars! No $999? Fifty bucks?" It is very cool to have a truly pocketable camera with such resolution... But still, what is the practical application? Who are those photographers that *need* MF performance, but insist that camera has to fit in jeans pocket, and willing to sacrifice last 10 years of camera advances for that.

All of you are missing the point. I am not asking why not just use D4 all the time... There is DP2 (non-merrill) that has been around for years. If you are using S95, you are not getting the best quality that is available today, why do you care now? How many of you thought that resolution of DP2 was holding you back? I hope none. problem with DP2 was not the resolution, so I do not see how resolution can make it more appealing.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2012 at 16:30 UTC

Sigma... What roller coaster! "I will sell it of one million dollars! No, $10,000 dollars! No $999? Fifty bucks?" It is very cool to have a truly pocketable camera with such resolution... But still, what is the practical application? Who are those photographers that *need* MF performance, but insist that camera has to fit in jeans pocket, and willing to sacrifice last 10 years of camera advances for that.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2012 at 13:33 UTC as 52nd comment | 4 replies
On article Fujifilm launches M-mount adapter for X-Pro1's X-mount (97 comments in total)
In reply to:

chekist: Very nice, but for many people such as myself who use a dedicated adapter with every M-lens (to avoid complicated switching pattern between native and m-mount lenses) I would rather just have firmware that does the correction independent from the adapter...

but not all the lenses are coded, so this is not even feasible for many lenses. So profiles can be stored in the body, correction clearly also takes place in the body, lens selection can happen in the body. And then we would have an option to pay $70 instead of $200 dollars the adapters. What about non M-mount adapters? Why can't we correct those as well?

Link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 05:06 UTC
On article Fujifilm launches M-mount adapter for X-Pro1's X-mount (97 comments in total)

Very nice, but for many people such as myself who use a dedicated adapter with every M-lens (to avoid complicated switching pattern between native and m-mount lenses) I would rather just have firmware that does the correction independent from the adapter...

Link | Posted on May 24, 2012 at 05:53 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
On article Just Posted: Lytro Light Field Camera review and video (309 comments in total)

It is worse than I thought.

I thought no focusing would be great, but actually camera focuses and very slowly according to the preview.

I thought full range of possible focus points would be great, but turns out there is only some range where you can refocus.

On top of that silly things like -no flash, poor LCD, no buttons - which are not technological challenges and there is no reason not to have.

I guess VC that backed the company wanted to see some revenue 'now,' this is why this early stage prototype made it into production.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2012 at 17:20 UTC as 11th comment | 9 replies

Priced about right for what Fuji claims it is. How well will it live-up to the promise - time will tell.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2012 at 04:35 UTC as 149th comment

On one hand I do not think there is nothing wrong with charging $3000 or $10,000 for a wedding. I am aware of the expenses of photography, and I think there is no reason why person doing photography should not be able to make end meet, or even live well if his skill allows.

But I find the case that the photographer makes incredibly weak. Basically he proves that it is impossible to be a pro photographer working 20 days a year. I understand that photographer's income is not uniform and weddings pay a bit more than kind of work one can find on any given Monday morning; but I think it goes without saying that you should be able to occupy yourself a bit more than some 20-40 days a year. And if you skills do not allow you to do that much photography then it should be something else.

Also most of the expenses listed are dual use: cars, shoes, cell phone, computer. Clearly photography is not their only use.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2012 at 03:44 UTC as 325th comment
Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »