Eric Glam

Lives in Israel Israel
Joined on Mar 29, 2010

Comments

Total: 84, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I've just tried the Guetzli compression on a high-quality 9490KB JPG file from my Nikon D5300. I ran it at default quality (95) on my Windows machine with an i5-3570K CPU.
The "conversion" took a really long time - about 20 minutes for just this single file, but the result is undeniable: I cannot see any differences between the original JPG (9490KB) and the output JPG, which is 4388KB in size. It's roughly 46% of the original, which is better compression than they advertised.

I tried to look at all the details and little subtleties, in whites, in shadows, in colors, in focused areas, in out-of-focus areas, at 100%, at 200% - every pixel seems exactly the same. Bravo, Google team!

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 15:08 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

barrym1966: I think google forgot that 99% of people arent IT illiterate enough to download a git depository and run the necessary commands to get the program to work

maybe they should have made a GUI with a friendly installer (thats if they want it to be widely used anyway)

From a command line to say, Photoshop plugin, it's not much of a stretch.
My guess we'll see a Photoshop plugin which will allow to save a "Guetzli JPEG" soon...

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 14:02 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: How can one call this lens a champion when its full of terrible chromatic abberations as is clearly seen here:

https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/2895939821/DSC07028.jpeg

To me all this halleluja feels like product placement and plugging of a far from perfect lens. I agree the sharpness is there and the overall colour rendition is fine. But you can't use this lens wide open or else your images will be full of terrible chroma. Now let the 85mm be one of those lenses that you would like to use full open pretty often in its use...

I agree.
I would say the usable range for high IQ would be from f/2.0 to f/11.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 10:22 UTC
On article Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art DxO results: a new king is crowned (249 comments in total)

I would call this lens an "F4 lens", which happens to do OK with wider apertures.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2017 at 17:10 UTC as 54th comment | 9 replies
On article Nikon D5600 DSLR announced, though not in the US (297 comments in total)
In reply to:

Samuel Dilworth: Still no built-in GPS. Even action-camera makers know the importance of this today.

Baffling.

I've got the D5300, which has a built-in GPS.
But I never use it, as it drains the battery faster.
Anyway, it's not a must-have feature, trust me.
You can still use your phone's GPS to geo-locate your travel, if you must.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 09:34 UTC
On article Nikon D5600 DSLR announced, though not in the US (297 comments in total)

I've been using the D5300 for about 3 years now.
When the D5500 was announced, I told people to skip it.
Now I'm looking at the specs of this new D5600, and I would still advise to skip it.
The D5600 would give you the same stills & video quality as the D5300.
And I'll bet that Live-view still sucks...

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 09:30 UTC as 69th comment | 6 replies
On article Modern Mirrorless: Canon EOS M5 Review (1627 comments in total)

The battery life says it all - meaning, it's not for me.
Thanks, but no thanks, Canon.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:48 UTC as 280th comment | 4 replies
On article Beta: try out our new 'light' color scheme (722 comments in total)

I like it fine just the way it is now....The light theme is an eye-sore.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 06:22 UTC as 321st comment

I'd like to chime in and offer my thoughts on this new RX10 mk3:
If you look at the core specs - sensor, processor, LCD, battery..they are exactly the same as the previous RX10 mk2. The main difference here is the lens, which is great at offering a x25 zoom, but loses the constant aperture. So win some, lose some. Some would gladly trade off the longer reach for a constant aperture.
The video capabilities are exactly the same as the previous RX10 mk2, so nothing new here.

On the plus side - The weather sealing is a welcome upgrade.

I wonder if some people would actually like the Panasonic ZS100 over this RX10 mk3. Pocket friendly with x10 zoom and cheaper price could be the better balance.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 20:33 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply

Impressive AF and frame-rate, but:
- LCD is very low-res.
- Flash sync limited to 1/160th.
- No touch-screen
- Battery life is too low. Should be at least 600 shots.
- No mention if the 14 bit RAW is lossy or lossless compressed.
- No mention if the menus have been re-arranged to make them easier to navigate and quickly find what you're looking for.
- No IBIS like in the A7r mk2.
- $1000 for the body is a little expensive.

All in all, the camera should be fun to use, but too many negatives to really want one.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 19:34 UTC as 228th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Eric Glam: Better to buy a Dic&Mic P303c. 175cm extended height, Carbon Fiber legs, ball head that's rated for up to 15Kg, and much more. $188 shipped.

James,
I'm happy for you. You made a good decision.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2015 at 06:49 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II added to studio test scene (209 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric Glam: The lens is such a disappointment!
Every (p)review I've read so far praised how good the fixed lens is and how sharp it is corner to corner. So not true!!! People can compare the photos but they pay more attention to the words, which are so misleading.

I've compared photos both here on DPreview and on Imaging Resource, and the conclusion is that the fixed lens on the Sony RX1r mk2 is NOT good enough. From about 75% and outwards, the photo is fuzzy and blurry.
The good news is that the sensor produces excellent blacks, and noise performance is also excellent. But the lens is simply not up to par.

0lf,
Yes. For example, open the Comparometer and put the still life shot @ 6400 ISO next to the A7R mk2 with the same still life shot@6400 ISO.
The shot from the RX1R mk2 has fuzzy/blurry edges.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 19:54 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II added to studio test scene (209 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric Glam: The lens is such a disappointment!
Every (p)review I've read so far praised how good the fixed lens is and how sharp it is corner to corner. So not true!!! People can compare the photos but they pay more attention to the words, which are so misleading.

I've compared photos both here on DPreview and on Imaging Resource, and the conclusion is that the fixed lens on the Sony RX1r mk2 is NOT good enough. From about 75% and outwards, the photo is fuzzy and blurry.
The good news is that the sensor produces excellent blacks, and noise performance is also excellent. But the lens is simply not up to par.

Rishi,
When I say that I compared photos, I meant that I compared high ISO (3200, 6400, 12800, 25,600) RAW shots in the low light scene. It is here that blacks get affected by all kinds of weirdness: Chroma noise, Luma noise & brightness shift. The RX1r mk2 seems to hold blacks very well.

I don't believe you have a faulty unit with regards to lens softness, as I saw the same thing with the previous RX1R.

As someone who only shoots RAW and spends an awful lot of post-time in ACR and PS, I can tell you that holding the blacks is very important, and so does color-separation, for that matter. Sure, you can move a slider or stretch a curve, but the starting point on this camera should be great to begin with.

zodiacfml,
For the price of this camera, I expect Otus-like performance (or at least Batis). It's fixed and cannot be replaced, so if your're going to be "stuck" with it, it better be top-notch. For now, an A7r mk2 coupled with a Batis 25mm or the FE 55mm 1.8 would be a better combo.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 11:25 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II added to studio test scene (209 comments in total)

The lens is such a disappointment!
Every (p)review I've read so far praised how good the fixed lens is and how sharp it is corner to corner. So not true!!! People can compare the photos but they pay more attention to the words, which are so misleading.

I've compared photos both here on DPreview and on Imaging Resource, and the conclusion is that the fixed lens on the Sony RX1r mk2 is NOT good enough. From about 75% and outwards, the photo is fuzzy and blurry.
The good news is that the sensor produces excellent blacks, and noise performance is also excellent. But the lens is simply not up to par.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 07:15 UTC as 19th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Eric Glam: Better to buy a Dic&Mic P303c. 175cm extended height, Carbon Fiber legs, ball head that's rated for up to 15Kg, and much more. $188 shipped.

James,

Here:
http://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/DiC-MiC-P303C-Carbon-Fiber-Tripod-monopod-For-camera-professional-Camera-stand-suitable-for-tall-photographer/332269_32376630772.html

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2015 at 11:55 UTC
In reply to:

Eric Glam: Better to buy a Dic&Mic P303c. 175cm extended height, Carbon Fiber legs, ball head that's rated for up to 15Kg, and much more. $188 shipped.

babola,
The best Benro Travel Angel II has a max height of 165cm.
The P303c is similar in design, but is higher (175cm).

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2015 at 14:39 UTC

Better to buy a Dic&Mic P303c. 175cm extended height, Carbon Fiber legs, ball head that's rated for up to 15Kg, and much more. $188 shipped.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2015 at 09:30 UTC as 7th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Eric Glam: I'd like to express my thoughts on this new camera, based on specs alone:
1. Shutter limited to 1/4000 sec. They could easily offer 1/8000 sec.
2. Still no optical zoom. Not even x1.5. And no, cropping won't get you the same quality you'd achieve with optical zoom.
3. No touch-screen, so no touch-focus and no touch-shutter and no quick menu adjustments.
4. $3300 USD!! insane.
5. Battery life is pathetic.
6. Video limited to 1080p60. Bitrate limited to 50Mbps. In this day & age? really??
7. No weather sealing. Why not?
8. EVF with XGA resolution. Nice to have the EVF, but why limited to XGA (1024 x 768)? That's less than 1MP. I would have liked to see an EVF with 1.92MP (1600x1200) which can refresh at 120Hz.
9. Only 25 Contrast-detect AF points. They should at least double that.
10. 42MP is way too much. 33MP would have been more welcome. larger pixels, smaller files, faster writes to card, better low-light high ISO shots.

I think I said enough.

Hi Marc,

Thanks for tip about the Yashica, but aperture is a little limiting.
Also, I do want AF & IS/VR, especially with a zoom lens.
Good option none the less.
Cheers.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2015 at 22:03 UTC
In reply to:

Eric Glam: I'd like to express my thoughts on this new camera, based on specs alone:
1. Shutter limited to 1/4000 sec. They could easily offer 1/8000 sec.
2. Still no optical zoom. Not even x1.5. And no, cropping won't get you the same quality you'd achieve with optical zoom.
3. No touch-screen, so no touch-focus and no touch-shutter and no quick menu adjustments.
4. $3300 USD!! insane.
5. Battery life is pathetic.
6. Video limited to 1080p60. Bitrate limited to 50Mbps. In this day & age? really??
7. No weather sealing. Why not?
8. EVF with XGA resolution. Nice to have the EVF, but why limited to XGA (1024 x 768)? That's less than 1MP. I would have liked to see an EVF with 1.92MP (1600x1200) which can refresh at 120Hz.
9. Only 25 Contrast-detect AF points. They should at least double that.
10. 42MP is way too much. 33MP would have been more welcome. larger pixels, smaller files, faster writes to card, better low-light high ISO shots.

I think I said enough.

vscd,
I don't care how big the camea+lens combo would get.
If I'm going to be "stuck" with one (admittedly great) camera, it better have some zoom capability.
Believe me, I've been using a Nikon D5300 with just a fast prime - a 35mm f/1.8 lens, for about 2 years now. Often times I wish I could zoom in or out, but I was stuck at 35mm (50mm equiv.). Sure, I have 24MP to work with, which is a lot. I often crop a shot if needed. The result is OK, but not great.
As you can probably guess, I put a lot of emphasis on quality and results. I only shoot 14bit RAW and process. And I don't like switching lenses, for various reasons.

Well, I ain't having it no more with one stinking focal length.
If I were to choose the RX1R mk2, it would only be if it had a zoom, preferably a 28-50 f/2.0. That's not practical, I know. Doable? You bet'cha. And like I said - I don't care how large/heavy that would get.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 06:05 UTC
In reply to:

Eric Glam: I'd like to express my thoughts on this new camera, based on specs alone:
1. Shutter limited to 1/4000 sec. They could easily offer 1/8000 sec.
2. Still no optical zoom. Not even x1.5. And no, cropping won't get you the same quality you'd achieve with optical zoom.
3. No touch-screen, so no touch-focus and no touch-shutter and no quick menu adjustments.
4. $3300 USD!! insane.
5. Battery life is pathetic.
6. Video limited to 1080p60. Bitrate limited to 50Mbps. In this day & age? really??
7. No weather sealing. Why not?
8. EVF with XGA resolution. Nice to have the EVF, but why limited to XGA (1024 x 768)? That's less than 1MP. I would have liked to see an EVF with 1.92MP (1600x1200) which can refresh at 120Hz.
9. Only 25 Contrast-detect AF points. They should at least double that.
10. 42MP is way too much. 33MP would have been more welcome. larger pixels, smaller files, faster writes to card, better low-light high ISO shots.

I think I said enough.

marc petzold,
Almost everyone here is saying "if I could afford it".
This only tells you that the starting price of this camera is way too high. Price will drop over time, as almost all cameras, but it would take a long time for it to fall to a more affordable price point. I'd say $2499 would have been very fair to start with.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 19:07 UTC
Total: 84, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »