Fazal Majid

Fazal Majid

Lives in United States San Francisco, CA, United States
Works as a Telecommunications Engineer
Has a website at http://www.majid.info/
Joined on May 11, 2001

Comments

Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Fazal Majid: Nice, but not a successor for the Cousteau-designed Nikonos, which had optics specially designed to work in water, which has a different refractive index than air. Unfortunately neither does the Nikon AW1.

@Wildbegonia
No, the X-U is fine above water. It's not optimized for underwater shooting, unlike the Nikonos. The Nikonos is the one which would not be ideal above water.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

1Dx4me: that is what i said to my friends: i'll take a LOOOOOONG LOOOOOng time for public to accept 4K monitors and for manufacturers to provide and make it a household item!!!!! it'll take another 10years for consumers to catch on with this new technology--actually it'll probably an old tech. by the time public understand and accepts it ;-)

Only the lowest-end TVs are 1080p any more, and usually they lack essential features like local dimming. I would expect them to be entirely gone from all but blue-light specials within a year, two tops. Both my TVs at home are 4K (but not HDR, unfortunately), the only 1080p device I have left is a projector.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2016 at 17:25 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: Finally catching up to the quality of 35mm motion film..

Nope, normal 35mm barely managess 2K resolution, let alone 4K. 70mm (e.g. Todd-AO, as in Lawrence of Arabia) is comparable to 4K (Lawrence of Arabia was telecine'd in 8K to map the grain, not because the emulsion recorded that resolution).

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2016 at 17:21 UTC
In reply to:

Melchiorum: People may scoff at 8K all they want, but there is a need for it in some areas, such as:

1. 360' video. 4K is already too low-res for spherical videos. What seems like a lot of pixels on a TV screen or a monitor, becomes quite blurry and low-def in VR helmet when you stretch it to cover the entire sphere around the viewer.
2. Photography. Whether we want it or not, but photography and videography are merging and extracting photos from video is already a thing with some cameras. 8K definition will make it better.
3. Cinemas and other large displays. Nothing to add here.

No one said we should buy an 8K TV, because there definitely no need for that. However, it does not mean that the demand for high-def video isn't there.

Mike Abrash, chief scientist at Oculus, once wrote truly immersive VR would require dual 8K in the VR headset (more precisely something between 4K x 4K and 8K x 8K):
http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/when-it-comes-to-resolution-its-all-relative/

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2016 at 17:06 UTC
On article Apple planning to open imaging research lab in France (43 comments in total)

STMicro's sensor fab in Crolles near Grenoble is one of the most advanced in the world, and they are very strong at MEMS like accelerometers or Time-of-Flight detectors (cameras that can sense depth like a laser rangefinder). The French emphasis on mathematics makes them a good fit for imaging, where you need both physics and algorithms. DXO is a French company, for instance.

Apple needs to go find talent wherever it is, hence their setting up labs in Hyderabad, India for mapping tech, Cambridge UK (some of Apple's photo tech comes from their acquisition of Imsense there), Shanghai, Israel and Taiwan. French labor laws may be quite rigid (although they are slowly being liberalized), but the flip side is that French engineers are significantly cheaper than Californian ones, and harder-working to boot when not on vacation.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2016 at 05:27 UTC as 9th comment | 4 replies

It's not the first time Hasselblad has done aerial photography. The legendary SWC with its ultra-low distortion Zeiss Biogon 38mm f/4.5 lens was developed for that purpose.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 00:13 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

sjprg: One of the major problems of film was controlling processing temperature. Color required 68deg F +/- 2 deg. as I remember. Before air conditioning and refrigeration to enclose your developing tanks getting accurate fluids was next to impossible unless you had a lot of money. Winter worked better. The AA darkroom video did not address how he solved the temp problem.

He lived in San Francisco and Carmel, where the temperature is pretty consistent all year round.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 06:17 UTC

I'm just happy that obnoxious little popup in the lower right corner is gone.

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2016 at 04:03 UTC as 120th comment
In reply to:

kodachromeguy: I don't understand. Why the cr@p does anyone listen to what some " influencer" says on social media? Are typical consumers so unable to make the own decisions that they let themselves be directed by shills on social media? Do people really function like that?

Neither do I, but then again why does Nikon seek the endorsement of mediacrities like Ashton Kutcher, and what is the relevance of Maria Sharapova to Canon?

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 03:29 UTC

I wonder if those inside side pockets are big enough to hold an iPad like a ScotteVest. Those don't have good pockets for cameras.

Link | Posted on May 14, 2016 at 00:47 UTC as 49th comment
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

Horshack: Those interested in this FX form factor should seriously consider a used RX1 instead. I recently picked one up for 1/3 the cost of a new RX1M2 including the add-on EVF. You get the same great lens and a usable EVF in a slightly larger package; neither camera is pants-pocketable anyway so you don't really give up much in convenience size. The only big downside of the original RX1 is its atrocious AF - it simply fails to acquire at light levels than even a $100 P&S camera has no problem with. First-hand RX1M2 accounts of trusted people I've read say the AF is much better but still noticeably below the performance of other MILCs esp the Q, so if the RX1M2's AF improvements are important to you I would carefully evaluate how good the AF actually is before committing to a purchase.

The AF is good enough for me and my very active 4 year old daughter, and the RX1RII replaced my Fuji X100S, where the RX1 was inadequate. As the review points out, the limiting factor is probably the lens drive motor. If the Q were available in 35mm, I'd go for that instead, but 28mm is just too wide for me.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2016 at 03:26 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dotes: Why on earth would anyone want uncompressed raw seeing as losslessly compressed raw is usually half the size... And why would any manufacturer even bother including uncompressed raw as an option.

Nikon also had lossy NEF compression for a long time. Lossless compression has a high CPU cost. On my Mac Pro, it takes 9 seconds to compress a RX1RII ARF from 82M to 54M using bzip2 (single-threaded). Obviously a camera won't have the same hardware resources. Putting a faster CPU in the camera would only exacerbate the poor battery life issue.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2016 at 20:20 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

miksto: Ultra-compact? This camera is not pocketable. Why is it ultra-compact? What is then Sony RX100 line up? Super ultra compact?

The title just seems silly and inadequate in this part.

It's my every day carry jacket pocket camera as well. Bulkier than the previous one (a Fuji X100S) because of the prominent lens, but still doable.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 18:02 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thoughts: Is it correct to suggest that the EVF could be fixed. The current design is smart, but potentially prone to dust etc.
I wish Sony could use Contax T cameras' Zeiss Sonnar design, truly compact and excellent.

The symmetrical Biogon design would be a better option, to get flatness of field and zero distortion (the Sonnar on the RX1 series has pronounced barrel distortion).

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
On article Ultra-compact: Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II review (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dotes: Why on earth would anyone want uncompressed raw seeing as losslessly compressed raw is usually half the size... And why would any manufacturer even bother including uncompressed raw as an option.

Sony's compressed RAW are lossy. Their uncompressed RAW is bloated because they use an inefficient 16-bit per pixel encoding even if the pixels only have 12-14 bits of data.

The solution is to convert to DNG in post (you are using Lightroom, right?), which will shave off 50-60% from the file size.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 17:56 UTC

It looks comparable to the Gitzo GT1544T, which is $170 more ($570 vs $400). The Gitzo is significantly lighter, folds smaller and has slightly more capacity, but the Manfrotto's center column can be turned into a horizontal boom (good for macro or copy work)..

The good news is, Manfrotto has finally seen the light and ditched its god-awful finger-pinching flip locks. Considering they are probably built in the same factory, a pretty sweet deal.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2016 at 07:06 UTC as 9th comment
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

steelhead3: Fuji is one smart company...wrapping older Sony sensors in a Hassy styled retro camera allows for great cost ratio and they only have to concentrate on lenses.

Hmmm, it seems my information (based on a 2012 Chipworks report) is out of date - Sony used copper in its FF sensors, and the new Fuji sensor is the first APS-C one fabbed by Sony in copper:
http://photorumors.com/2016/01/15/the-sensor-inside-the-new-fuji-x-pro2-camera-is-made-by-sony-and-other-interesting-facts/

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 08:00 UTC
On article Going Pro: We interview Fujifilm execs in Tokyo (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

steelhead3: Fuji is one smart company...wrapping older Sony sensors in a Hassy styled retro camera allows for great cost ratio and they only have to concentrate on lenses.

@Don
I noticed that as well. Sony sensor fabs use aluminium interconnects, whereas Samsung, Toshiba (now part of Sony, I suppose) and STMicroelectronics (as featured by Leica) use the superior copper technology.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 07:57 UTC

Nice, but not a successor for the Cousteau-designed Nikonos, which had optics specially designed to work in water, which has a different refractive index than air. Unfortunately neither does the Nikon AW1.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 20:42 UTC as 95th comment | 5 replies

It has a lousy 2/3" sensor. I bought the ZS50 to use as a birding camera, but the results were abysmal. Perhaps that's what Panasonic means when they talk about "exceptional low light performance" - exceptionally bad.

The TZ100 might stand a chance, but sensors under 1" don't belong in 2016.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2016 at 09:18 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »