Biowizard

Biowizard

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Oct 21, 2011

Comments

Total: 651, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Biowizard: Just to underline the point for all those naysayers who've been blasting Hasselblad for releasing a free bug-fix-plus-new-features update, saying Hassy should have got everything 100% right before releasing ...

... compare to Nikon, who have serious HARDWARE issues with their D750 shutters (see article about the recall here on DpReview).

Simple thing folks, modern gear is SO complex, both hardware and software, that things are bound to go wrong from time to time. All I say is Kudos to those companies that actively work to fix these problems, and release updates from time to time.

Brian

HowaboutRAW, see above link.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 12:26 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: Just to underline the point for all those naysayers who've been blasting Hasselblad for releasing a free bug-fix-plus-new-features update, saying Hassy should have got everything 100% right before releasing ...

... compare to Nikon, who have serious HARDWARE issues with their D750 shutters (see article about the recall here on DpReview).

Simple thing folks, modern gear is SO complex, both hardware and software, that things are bound to go wrong from time to time. All I say is Kudos to those companies that actively work to fix these problems, and release updates from time to time.

Brian

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5252259585/nikon-expands-d750-shutter-recall-yet-again-more-cameras-affected

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 12:25 UTC

Just to underline the point for all those naysayers who've been blasting Hasselblad for releasing a free bug-fix-plus-new-features update, saying Hassy should have got everything 100% right before releasing ...

... compare to Nikon, who have serious HARDWARE issues with their D750 shutters (see article about the recall here on DpReview).

Simple thing folks, modern gear is SO complex, both hardware and software, that things are bound to go wrong from time to time. All I say is Kudos to those companies that actively work to fix these problems, and release updates from time to time.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2017 at 12:10 UTC as 4th comment | 4 replies

One thing I've always liked about Wacom, is their use of battery-free, magnetic resonance pens/pucks/styli. What I haven't liked so much, is the extortionate cost of their Cintiq line (meaning I've had to make do with plain tablets).

Now that I have both an iPad Pro and a Surface Pro 4, I feel a lot less need ever to invest in a Wacom tablet. And with the cost of the larger proposed model, I'd be far more inclined to buy the Surface Studio if I wanted a large, draw-on screen.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 10:12 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: You really have to wonder why an $8,000 camera requires bug fixes so soon after introduction. Was this camera hastily rushed to market, and not thoroughly tested prior to introduction?

I can understand getting new features via firmware, but any new camera that costs this much should be bug free.

Even things like the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, and the NASA Space Shuttle, required tweaks after initial production. So why be so bone-headed about a mere camera? The point is, rather than tell you you are stuffed, Hassy FIXED the issues for free once they had been discovered.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

sibuzaru: Does that mean it can be powered while tethered, without a battery?

Even the original, standard iPad charger (USB socket) put out 10W, rather than the 5W of the iPhone charger. And that was 7 years ago. USB has been the obvious generic charging standard since then, and more and more electronics have been designed to conform to this standard. USB-C offers an order of magnitude more potentional power than this, and the sooner we get rid of the myriad of bespoke chargers with their different polarities, voltages and AC vs DC, often through the same-sized jack plugs, the better.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 09:34 UTC
In reply to:

frosti7: I didn't realize that such a high percentage of DPreview readers own this camera, to post this as news.

Agree with sts2. Luckily my choice of camera (currently Olympus OM-D E-M1) has also benefited from many post-purchase software upgrades, fixing some bugs, but also adding yummy new features like automatic focus stacking and more. It's almost like getting a new camera every few months as Oly sends out its latest new features, completely free of charge.

Bravo Hasselblad, Bravo Olympus.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 09:31 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: You really have to wonder why an $8,000 camera requires bug fixes so soon after introduction. Was this camera hastily rushed to market, and not thoroughly tested prior to introduction?

I can understand getting new features via firmware, but any new camera that costs this much should be bug free.

All software systems have bugs, plain and simple. As do hardware designs (oily shutters, jamming film advance gears, etc). At least with software issues, these days a fix can be downloaded and installed without you having to send your camera back to the manufacturer for mechanical adjustments/replacements.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 09:28 UTC

If I could justify the cost, this would definitely be my choice of medium format camera.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 09:26 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Biowizard: So a lump of Al or Ti, containing a non-existent technology (holographic displays have NOT yet been invented), and an algorithm to take carefully recorded stereo music and mangle into a polyphonic mess, is "available for pre-order" for well over a thousand bucks? I guess a lot of #Trump supporters will think it's a great idea ...

Brian

My TRUMP reference was not political. It's about the fact that this former TV Reality Host and Woman Molester does not believe in provable scientific fact, claiming that everything he doesn't like is "Fake News", and lives in a world of potentially disastrous cloud cuckoo land. Simples.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

aut0maticdan: The solutions will ultimately come from companies like DJI themselves. They want to stay in business and you can see with their recent updates that they are trying to mitigate the situation.

In the end, won't these precautions all be disabled by people that want to do real harm? At best, you end up catching a few of the oblivious.

I don't get the UAV hate. It is just another piece of equipment that some people have a use for or at least have a lot of fun with. Sure, there are bone heads out there, but I personally don't want to live my life by the lowest common denominator.

There is a lot of irony coming out of people claiming to be gun owners. I wonder how they'd feel with remote identification on their bullets and guns. I'm not a gun owner, but as an avid hobbyist of other sorts, I've always had some empathy. People do crappy things with guns too, but I don't cast all gun owners in that light. I believe in protecting everyone's liberties.

Absolutely aut0maticdan - I'd already commented on this, as the zone limitations have been in DJI drones for quite a while (see above, "DJI already geofence ...").

And turretless, even more absolutely. Large birds are routinely minced by jet engines; even entire flocks get "processed" into McNuggets especially near waterside airports. And the planes don't crash, because they have been tested with turkeys and the like tossed into them at full throttle. Something the mass of a Mavic or Phantom 4 is not going to challenge an engine.

On the other hand, I can quite imagine an 8-rotor DJI S1000 (4kg) carrying its maximum payload of 7kg as a lump of solid metal would cause aircraft operators some concern.

In short, I think the current FAA rules than insist large drones must be registered, but small ones need not, hits the right balance.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 15:38 UTC

So a lump of Al or Ti, containing a non-existent technology (holographic displays have NOT yet been invented), and an algorithm to take carefully recorded stereo music and mangle into a polyphonic mess, is "available for pre-order" for well over a thousand bucks? I guess a lot of #Trump supporters will think it's a great idea ...

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 10:24 UTC as 24th comment | 16 replies
In reply to:

aut0maticdan: The solutions will ultimately come from companies like DJI themselves. They want to stay in business and you can see with their recent updates that they are trying to mitigate the situation.

In the end, won't these precautions all be disabled by people that want to do real harm? At best, you end up catching a few of the oblivious.

I don't get the UAV hate. It is just another piece of equipment that some people have a use for or at least have a lot of fun with. Sure, there are bone heads out there, but I personally don't want to live my life by the lowest common denominator.

There is a lot of irony coming out of people claiming to be gun owners. I wonder how they'd feel with remote identification on their bullets and guns. I'm not a gun owner, but as an avid hobbyist of other sorts, I've always had some empathy. People do crappy things with guns too, but I don't cast all gun owners in that light. I believe in protecting everyone's liberties.

DJI already geofence their drones. People living in Washington DC complained that their new Phantom 3 drones would not work. Answer was that DJI had programmed in a several-mile exclusion zone around the White House. I believe most recent DJI drones also know about the majority of airport restriction zones, and refuse to enter protected airspace. They also will not fly above the 400ft from ground FAA/CAA limit.

But whatever DJI do, cheap drones, probably without GPS, will be flyable everywhere, without limits. A $60 syma x8c is about the same size as the $1,500 DJI Phantom 4 Pro, and can carry a small payload. It has no altimeter, no GPS, no telemetry, and so cannot be "tracked" from the ground. And any muppet could fly it up into the path of a vehicle or aircraft.

All that would happen on impact, is that a cloud of plastic fragments would end up fluttering back to the ground. I doubt it would even scratch the paintwork of the colliding aircraft.

So what's the fuss?

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 09:36 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: After Chicago's exemplary July 4th weekend, in which over 100 people died from gunshot wounds, this FAA is going wildly OTT here. Exactly HOW many people have been killed by lightweight consumer drones, WORLDWIDE, since they were invented?

Brian

Indeed - my point is more general: its the apparent hysteria about drones, in a country that also bans Kinder chocolates on the grounds that they are dangerous. Mind you, I'd ban Kinder on the ground the chocolate itself is rubbish.

Seriously, the point is that a lightweight piece of plastic is pretty much no danger to anything or anybody. If everyone who played with guns in Chicago last weekend, had been using Mavic Pro drones instead, not one person would have died. And yet the USA continues to promote gun ownership.

It's utterly out of proportion.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 09:29 UTC

After Chicago's exemplary July 4th weekend, in which over 100 people died from gunshot wounds, this FAA is going wildly OTT here. Exactly HOW many people have been killed by lightweight consumer drones, WORLDWIDE, since they were invented?

Brian

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 16:48 UTC as 6th comment | 4 replies

Haha! When I saw "Pro Light" in the headline, I assumed this was a new range of - er - photographic/video LIGHTING. #JustAnotherBackPack

Back to my LumeCubes :-)

Brian

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 15:32 UTC as 3rd comment

Point (6) is this MAIN issue - TRUE VR means you can move around freely in the virtual space, and interact with it. Simply being stuck at the location of a 360-degree camera is nowhere near VR. Even more so as the image is 2-dimensional.

Google's StreeView gives a slight taste of VR, as you can move up or down the roads they have photographed, as well as look around from any given point. But it is still WAY short of real VR, that would let you step off the road, and peer behind that building hoarding to see what it is concealing.

It is difference between a race-track arcade game, where try as you might, you cannot depart from the track, and a good flight simulator, where you CAN actually fly wherever you like.

In short, no amount of 360-degree photography, unless combined with multiple shots from all around a given scene, brilliant seamless interpolation algorithms and full 3D viewing, is even going to get close to VR.

An iPhone on a stereoscope is just a modern ViewMaster™.

Brian

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2017 at 15:39 UTC as 8th comment

Glass or Resin? And why not simply use a regular ND-10 or ND-20?

Brian

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2017 at 09:54 UTC as 6th comment

Brilliantly simple idea - a 1.4 teleconverter, in effect.

Brian

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 16:28 UTC as 6th comment
On article FilmLab is a film negative scanning app for smartphones (105 comments in total)

Nice solution looking for a problem - let's face it, basic flatbed scanners are dirt cheap these days (probably costing less than a Kaiser lightbox) - and you will be guaranteed better resolution and elimination of distortion using a scanner compared with hand-holding a iPhone over an illuminated film strip.

And then there is the proposed SUBSCRIPTION?!

Bye bye Filmlab!

Brian

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 10:26 UTC as 5th comment
Total: 651, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »