dqnielg

Lives in United States Cincinnati, United States
Works as a Environmental Engineering Student
Joined on May 20, 2007

Comments

Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
On article Lily Robotics sued over claims of false advertising (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: I'm not surprised by this at all. I first heard about the drone a year and a half ago, and thought it was so cool. The promotional video was shown on the big screen at an educational technology conference I attended.

When I looked it up and saw the low introductory price for early orders, I thought it was too good to be true. It was around 500 bucks, and I thought there was no way someone could make a drone do all that (tracking the subject after being tossed into the river, etc.) for five hundred bucks.

After about a year I started seeing complaints online about the delays and began to suspect that the product wasn't happening.

Finally, if they faked the promo video, that is not cool. I wonder the same thing about the Cicret wrist band that projects a smartphone screen on the arm. I saw the promo video at the same convention. No product yet that I can find. And the video appears to have a different design than what they are now showing. Was that video faked?

"I'm not saying Cicret faked their video."

They did. No need to worry about libel. It was fake.

They did a poor superimposition of a cell phone screen onto skin for the video. The distortion, color, and brightness are all wrong. It floats around oddly because the superimposition was lazy.

It was fake.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 13:43 UTC
On article Lily Robotics sued over claims of false advertising (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: I'm not surprised by this at all. I first heard about the drone a year and a half ago, and thought it was so cool. The promotional video was shown on the big screen at an educational technology conference I attended.

When I looked it up and saw the low introductory price for early orders, I thought it was too good to be true. It was around 500 bucks, and I thought there was no way someone could make a drone do all that (tracking the subject after being tossed into the river, etc.) for five hundred bucks.

After about a year I started seeing complaints online about the delays and began to suspect that the product wasn't happening.

Finally, if they faked the promo video, that is not cool. I wonder the same thing about the Cicret wrist band that projects a smartphone screen on the arm. I saw the promo video at the same convention. No product yet that I can find. And the video appears to have a different design than what they are now showing. Was that video faked?

The Cicret promo, if you're referring to the 2014 one that went viral, was definitely fake.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 23:23 UTC
On article Lily Robotics sued over claims of false advertising (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlanG: So the pre-orders were between $499 and $899. One just has to look at the industry and see how DJI has been developing technology and driving the price down. (DJI will sell you a Phantom Standard refurb for $359... an actual product that works well!) DJI has a lot of top designers and programmers plus the economy of scale along with efficient production, marketing and distribution.

So if DJI can't sell one that is waterproof along with tracking etc. for the price of the Lily, how could Lily be able to do this?

The Lily does not appear to have a gimbal for the camera and does not have a radio control system with live video feed. Really... people must have to be pretty ignorant and hopeful to want to buy something like that.

I'd argue that DJI's drones are targeting a market whereas Lily was simply exploiting a market--one apparently filled with very trusting and naive people.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

nikos theodosiou: Great winning picture but I think the actual exposure info is incorrect:
1/30 sec at f2.8; ISO 231
f2.8?! everything is sharp from the top of the tree to the bottom, plus 1/30th sec for a moving subject, no wind?
Seems hard to believe the info here.

It's a GoPro. f/2.8 is right.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 22:10 UTC
In reply to:

marike6: Lenstip tested the Sigma 30 f/1.4 DC DN, it broke resolution records, besting the previous records holders (Voigtlander 25 and Olympus 75) and reaching a phenomenally high value of 83.6 lpmm at f/2.8 and f/4 easily beating the Panasonic 25 f/1.4. Don't believe the lukewarm tone of this review, the Sigma is a superb lens.

Sample to sample variation is also a real thing. It's completely possible that the Lenstip sample had better resolution than DPReview's.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2016 at 13:30 UTC
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

PKDanny: Which lens you use?

Every photo has the lens info displayed on the right :)

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 01:44 UTC
In reply to:

dqnielg: No touchscreen? Very disappointing. One of the best parts of using a mirror-less with a touch screen is QUICKLY selecting the focus point for certain situations.

Same thoughts as me salsaguy.

The A6300 has most of the features I want while the A5x00 series does not. It's only missing a touchscreen, basically.

Zandalee's analogy is silly. It's not like I criticized a DSLR for having a viewfinder--it would make sense for the A6300 to have a touchscreen, while it wouldn't make sense for a 911 buyer to want 4 doors.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2016 at 19:07 UTC
In reply to:

Eugene232: price is ridiculous..
who will by this camera for $1100 while Olympus PEN-F with smaller sensor costs $1200 or Fujifilm X-Pro2 costs $1700?

I see that a lot of people on here don't understand sarcasm.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 22:27 UTC

No touchscreen? Very disappointing. One of the best parts of using a mirror-less with a touch screen is QUICKLY selecting the focus point for certain situations.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 22:24 UTC as 173rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

pannumon: These are cheaper alternatives to the excellent f/0.95 MF lenses by other manufacturers. Bravo!

And they'll probably be optically superior, to be honest.

Samyang has been making some great stuff, recently.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2015 at 00:50 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

dqnielg: looks like a winner in almost all respects. i love the size, inclusion of more direct controls and an EVF, the improvement over the GX7 for video, and many other aspects of this body.

however, the rated battery life is atrocious. surely, with the improvements in power consumption seen in the mobile computing scene, we can expect some improvements in our enthusiast cameras. oddly shaped lithium polymer batteries that are engineered to maximize capacity while still fitting the constraints of a compact body would help, and i'd be willing to pay more for the extra R&D and production costs.

"I didn't say lithium polymer batteries could not power a camera."

they use less space than standard lithium ion batteries yet have the same capabilities when it comes to power delivery. you said "they also have to be able to produce and handle the required power for the application." i'm saying that's a straw man argument since they can handle the power requirements of a camera just fine.

"I'm guessing that that wasted space between battery cylinders is not significant enough to make any real difference especially considering additional costs."

your guess would be wrong, if the paradigm shift to their usage in portable devices is any indication. there's probably no market more critical of battery life and portability than smartphone users, so engineers in that market use them despite their slight added cost. they can pack greater energy density into small, ergonomically shaped electronics. mirrorless cameras would see the same benefits, so it would be prudent to follow suit.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 23:28 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

dqnielg: looks like a winner in almost all respects. i love the size, inclusion of more direct controls and an EVF, the improvement over the GX7 for video, and many other aspects of this body.

however, the rated battery life is atrocious. surely, with the improvements in power consumption seen in the mobile computing scene, we can expect some improvements in our enthusiast cameras. oddly shaped lithium polymer batteries that are engineered to maximize capacity while still fitting the constraints of a compact body would help, and i'd be willing to pay more for the extra R&D and production costs.

"Cell phones use less power than cameras."

1. cell phones have faster SoCs, higher resolution screens that consume more power, and GPUs. so if cameras are consuming more power, we should ask why.

2. even if cell phones use less power than phones, how does that help your argument? lithium polymer batteries are capable of powering laptops and even cars; they can power a camera just fine.

"As I said, the battery compartment is already filled with the battery so if you are talking about molding custom batteries inside the camera that's just not feasible."

within the casing of a camera's l-ion battery there is wasted space; it's comprised of cylinders inside of a cuboid. in addition to wasted space within the battery itself, there is wasted space inside the grip of a camera because a grip is never exactly cuboidal. it's generally rounded or a trapezoidal prism. this, again, leaves wasted space that a cuboid lithium ion battery cannot occupy but a lithium polymer battery could.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 16:58 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

dqnielg: looks like a winner in almost all respects. i love the size, inclusion of more direct controls and an EVF, the improvement over the GX7 for video, and many other aspects of this body.

however, the rated battery life is atrocious. surely, with the improvements in power consumption seen in the mobile computing scene, we can expect some improvements in our enthusiast cameras. oddly shaped lithium polymer batteries that are engineered to maximize capacity while still fitting the constraints of a compact body would help, and i'd be willing to pay more for the extra R&D and production costs.

"I'm not sure there is much they can do to maximize a camera batteries shape, it's already a tight fit."

they could do a lot, since the current batteries are essentially generic cuboids.

cell phones are smaller than mirrorless cameras, and yet can have batteries with 3 times the capacity. using lithium polymer technology allows uniquely shaped batteries that can fit the abstract contours of a camera's internals, which would maximize the capacity of the battery. there's a reason high-end cell phones and laptops have moved to LiPo.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 11:18 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 (305 comments in total)

looks like a winner in almost all respects. i love the size, inclusion of more direct controls and an EVF, the improvement over the GX7 for video, and many other aspects of this body.

however, the rated battery life is atrocious. surely, with the improvements in power consumption seen in the mobile computing scene, we can expect some improvements in our enthusiast cameras. oddly shaped lithium polymer batteries that are engineered to maximize capacity while still fitting the constraints of a compact body would help, and i'd be willing to pay more for the extra R&D and production costs.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 19:14 UTC as 44th comment | 13 replies

I bet a lot of work (lighting, processing) went into making these shots passable. The same amount of work put into shots taken with a real camera would have resulted in much more appealing images.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2013 at 21:39 UTC as 57th comment | 1 reply
On photo - in the Boldness challenge (2 comments in total)

really good timing.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 07:15 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Nathaniel George Weir: So heres the mega pixel count for Nikon cameras.
clueless picture taker: d3200 24.2 Megapixels
amateur: d5100 16.2 Megapixels
semi-pro: d7000 16.2 Megapixels
pro: d300s 12.3 Megapixels
pro: d800 36.3 Megapixels
Very pro: D4 16.2 Megapixels

So why would nikon put an obsurdly large megapixels sensor in a $700 camera? Because Nikon know that people who buy these budget consumer cameras, shoot in the green box mode (auto), and are too stupid to understand that having so many megapixels doesn't make you take better pictures. Most people assume that if you have more megapixels, then your camera is better and you are a better photographer. 95% people that are in the market to buy a d3200 won't print photos that are bigger than 8x10. There's a reason that the D4 has 16 Megapixels. Because real pros that take great pictures don't need a camera that has 16 Megapixels. I have printed a 24x36 print from a 12 Megapixel and the print quality is fine. I doubt that people who will take

@Ashley

Now what, exactly, did he say in his harmless post that made you decide it was your prerogative to belittle him? This is just a discussion about camera gear- there's no need to insult anybody.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

Ashley Pomeroy: It's a shame they couldn't build the wireless thing into the body. That's the way things are going. I've always maintained that entry-level photographers generally *need* pro-calibre cameras; they need fast, reliable autofocus to capture their kids, they need excellent high-ISO and flash metering for parties, and they need a built-in wireless transmitter to get the photos to Facebook. Until recently the only cameras that could do those things were pro-level, but now things are changing.

Entry-level camera buyers are essentially photojournalists, taking and sharing images of real life - maybe not whilst being shot at, but real life nonetheless. Something that future generations might relate to. Rather than boring seascapes and awful HDR rubbish that will die and be forgotten. The amateurs and the pros are alive; the people in the middle - with their tripods and graduated filters and waffling blog posts about their workflow - they're the dead ones. Dead inside.

I'd rather look at a picture of a seascape than a picture of somebody I've never known and don't care about. To each his or her own.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 18:20 UTC
On photo let-them-free... in the Fenced Out challenge (5 comments in total)

against it if even to preserve from extinction?

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2012 at 00:10 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20