SimenO1

Joined on Oct 13, 2011

Comments

Total: 556, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

shoevarek: Trolltunga is really nice, moderate hike but rather congested. The spotty weather could actually be a blessing - shorter queue to make that photo at the end of the trolls tongue. Like most of wilderness photographs - the real story is outside of the frame.

More untrained people are getting into trouble there every year it gets more popular. They had more then a hundred rescue missions last summer. Tourists dont get the dangers of changing weather. A few have even fell down from the trolls tounge with an obvious tragic outcome.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 20:15 UTC
In reply to:

yslee1: So that's where all the NX Galaxys went.

Yes, both of them. I wonder if these cameras are some old leftovers, refurbished or newly made? If the latter, maybe NX isnt truly dead, just hibernating?

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 14:17 UTC

Ok, you take some nice vacation photos. What is the motivation to return a rented camera that isnt in use, when the rent is free?

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 14:15 UTC as 103rd comment
In reply to:

zzzxtreme: the output looks good, unlike many other VR cams.

It looks softer then Ricoh Theta V to mee. Maybe even softer then the Theta S. And the video doesnt run good at all. Nice scenery though!

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 22:14 UTC
On article Sigma's new 16mm F1.4 will cost $450, ships this month (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

digitallollygag: This has to be the bargain of the year

Great price, but I guess a 24mm f/2,0 for full frame dont nesecarily will be more expensive.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2017 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

SimenO1: I know you could do this yourself or just "feel" it yourself, but here you go anyway. Hereare the full frame equivalencies, rounded to the nearest mm and nearest .1 aperture number. Price and weight where its known.

17mm f/3,2
24mm f/3,2 550g 4000$
36mm f/2,8 417g 2700$
28-59mm f/2,8-3,6
51mm f/2,2
63mm f/?
71mm f/2,5 619g 3200$
95mm f/2,8 1:2 semimacro 970g 4500$
107mm f/2,2
182mm f/3,8

Not so convincing now when considering weight and price of full frame lenses with larger equivalent apertures.

I agree. Field of view is a less confusing term then focal length equivalents. But we also need a measure of its depth of field capabilities, and light gathering capability.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 22:52 UTC

No interchangeable viewfinder?

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 20:30 UTC as 116th comment
In reply to:

SimenO1: I know you could do this yourself or just "feel" it yourself, but here you go anyway. Hereare the full frame equivalencies, rounded to the nearest mm and nearest .1 aperture number. Price and weight where its known.

17mm f/3,2
24mm f/3,2 550g 4000$
36mm f/2,8 417g 2700$
28-59mm f/2,8-3,6
51mm f/2,2
63mm f/?
71mm f/2,5 619g 3200$
95mm f/2,8 1:2 semimacro 970g 4500$
107mm f/2,2
182mm f/3,8

Not so convincing now when considering weight and price of full frame lenses with larger equivalent apertures.

kodac: I'm comparing DoF, field of view and shot noise.

Conrad: I help you get the message through. General knowledge will grow as people get this. I'm not a 4/3rds user. You should know the equivalencies are dissapointing on that system, especially considering price and weight. I use APS-C and FF.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2017 at 21:27 UTC

I know you could do this yourself or just "feel" it yourself, but here you go anyway. Hereare the full frame equivalencies, rounded to the nearest mm and nearest .1 aperture number. Price and weight where its known.

17mm f/3,2
24mm f/3,2 550g 4000$
36mm f/2,8 417g 2700$
28-59mm f/2,8-3,6
51mm f/2,2
63mm f/?
71mm f/2,5 619g 3200$
95mm f/2,8 1:2 semimacro 970g 4500$
107mm f/2,2
182mm f/3,8

Not so convincing now when considering weight and price of full frame lenses with larger equivalent apertures.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2017 at 19:17 UTC as 7th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Photo graphic: Pentax should have paid the DxO "bribe" to keep that Pentax 645Z DxOMark score published. Too bad it was later scrubbed from DxO's site.

Didn't DxO once claim their camera in "multi-shot" mode score higher than better cameras? :)

Allowing bribes like that would be like allowing cheating in poker, olympic games, and so on. I dont know what is going on, but it shure sounds fishy.

Yes, DXO allowed using multi exposures for their own camera, not for other cameras that can do that too. A 4 shot multi exposure is like averaging shot noise down 2 steps. Of course its cheating when different rules of the game apply to different players.

You should be suspicious when the card dealer wins the pot every time..

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 18:52 UTC
In reply to:

tgchan: or just buy PENTAX OR NIKON camera with sick dynamic range...

I think Don and tgchan talks past each other. Both are right. tgchan are probably talking about the in-camera HDR function, that can blend two (or more) images, both taken at ISO 100, but with different exposure time. In other words, you dont need to get ISO1600 noise in parts of the image, even if you want in camera images.

Don are right that even ISO 100 isnt noise free, I think tgchan understand but simplified.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 20:55 UTC
In reply to:

walker2000: What can this ND do but 2 shots HDR cannot do?

An upcoming trend is stacked sensors that can shoot bursts of images with extremely small latency in between shots. Stacking in camera can increase total DR by many stops.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 21:18 UTC
In reply to:

tgchan: or just buy PENTAX OR NIKON camera with sick dynamic range...

JACS: Right, but crazy DR doesnt add flare ether, like a filter do.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 21:14 UTC

The "neutral" and "trusted" tests they cheated with combining multiple exposures so they could advertise their own camera as better then it really is. Other cameras that can combine multiple exposures didnt get the same treatment. So much for that neutrality and trust.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 13:08 UTC as 27th comment
On article Photo story of the week: Colors of the Arctic (107 comments in total)
In reply to:

ozturert: I did not like the picture because it was taken by a camera with a low DR (according to DxO). I only like photos taken by high-DR cameras, others are just destined to be doomed! Go to hell low-DR cameras! How can a sane person think that (s)he can take good photos if the camera has lower than 12.5EV DR!

I got the Irony and fully agree. Its a fantastic low DR image, that shows how important 61 AF points and dual card slots are. Since one of two cards always dies, and you always buy card number one before number two, the image would be lost otherwise. The record compatibility with 444 lenses is of coruse invaluable in a situation like this. Not to mention the 6 fps that made it possible to catch just the right moment.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 23:00 UTC
On article The evolution of zoom on smartphone cameras (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

supeyugin1: They forgot to mention that all dual cameras use microscopic sensors with junky IQ. I prefer real optical zoom similar to Galaxy K Zoom, which actually produces decent results better than any of the current flagships.

I would also want a thicker phone (up to about 2 cm) in exchange of larger sensors, but I dont want to exchenge two f/1,8 primes into a f/4-5,6 zoom. With aperture equivalency you waste the light gathering properties that a larger sensor potentially could offer. Zooms are also in general a lot less sharp then primes because of more compromizes with aberration correction.

Having two primes on dedicated sensors is like having a two step zoom, but with smaller size of optics (given same sensor size), lower price and better IQ. Sharper, less abberations and so on. In the future I would want more cameras on the phone to get more steps of focal lengths. Those images may also overlap so the resolution increases towards the center of the image.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 21:14 UTC
On article The evolution of zoom on smartphone cameras (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

supeyugin1: They forgot to mention that all dual cameras use microscopic sensors with junky IQ. I prefer real optical zoom similar to Galaxy K Zoom, which actually produces decent results better than any of the current flagships.

@jnd. Agree! I would take two primes any day over a single optical zoom, because of size, quality and price.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 19:40 UTC
On article The evolution of zoom on smartphone cameras (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

webber15: Bet they can't catch up to the "real optical I.Q." of say a 100-400 zoom in our lifetimes...

Webber15 is right. Telephoto resoltion is an area where the physical limitations dont have even a theoretical way forward. Sure folded optics will help some but focal lenght and diffraction limitation cant be solved without growing out of accepted physical sizes for a phone.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2017 at 14:31 UTC
On article The evolution of zoom on smartphone cameras (24 comments in total)
In reply to:

supeyugin1: They forgot to mention that all dual cameras use microscopic sensors with junky IQ. I prefer real optical zoom similar to Galaxy K Zoom, which actually produces decent results better than any of the current flagships.

Sensor size cant be increased notably more without increasing z height. Z hight is the priority, so sensors wont be bigger. Within the z-height restraint its not possible to increase aperture size notably too. The potential is already used. The remaining potential have similarities to when CPU companies meet the frequency wall. They had to increase to more then one CPU core. Dual cameras are only the beginning of a larger trend. In the coming years we will se triple, quad and more cameras. Dual focal lengths are only one way of improvement. Soon we will get HDR and 3D too, as well as interleaving frames high speed 3D, multiple focus distance, then all of this combined, small + large pixels and add monochrome sensors (R, G, B, maybe IR or W) to improve noise performance. Some polarized cameras too. Batteries and screens become thinner. Cameras will counter z-height with having more of them. In a decade maybe we have hundreds of cameras in a 2mm thin sheath on the back of the phone.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2017 at 14:26 UTC
On article Ricoh Theta V hands-on (32 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lees Channel: Removable storage?

@Otto: 40 min @ 4K, not 19. The 120 mbitps streaming mode doesnt store the video and thus isnt limited by storage capacity.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2017 at 07:56 UTC
Total: 556, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »