AngryCorgi

AngryCorgi

Lives in United States NoVA, United States
Joined on Sep 5, 2006

Comments

Total: 424, showing: 181 – 200
« First‹ Previous89101112Next ›Last »

Since when did hassleblad become a company that did "certifications"? This reads like an online diploma company.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 16:06 UTC as 20th comment
On article New camera app features in Apple's iOS 8 (67 comments in total)

I'll stick with snappycam until they match the ani-gif output option

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 15:25 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony a6000 Review (894 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: The DR tests, it strikes me, don't really test DR. The only cameras that really pump up the DR significantly are the Fujis (DR400% etc, two stops extra in the highlights). These 'DRO' and sometimes 'HDR' tests seem merely to flatten the tone curve and lighten the darks. That's not DR.

X-T1 snippet:

"Both Adobe Camera Raw and Capture One recognise the DR mode tags in the Raw files, so render their output at the correct brightness, but neither applies the different tone curves necessary to incorporate any additional highlight information. This means so you'll need to manually adjust DR200 and 400 images to get the full benefit."

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 22:47 UTC
On article Sony a6000 Review (894 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: The DR tests, it strikes me, don't really test DR. The only cameras that really pump up the DR significantly are the Fujis (DR400% etc, two stops extra in the highlights). These 'DRO' and sometimes 'HDR' tests seem merely to flatten the tone curve and lighten the darks. That's not DR.

Yes, the built-in "DRO" setting is not a DR EXPANSION setting. It is a DR curve modifier. The DR400% setting (and the like) that you refer to is an in-camera push of an underexposed shot with a tone curve adjustment to compress more highlight info in an area below the clipping level, in essence. Hence why the resulting ISO setting changes with the expansion setting. DR200 = a 1EV push. DR400 = a 2EV push. The SNR drop at these settings confirms this, as fine details start to degrade. You are better off looking at section 9 "Image Quality" in this review for information regarding the flexibility of the raw files, as you would have to manipulate your files manually to achieve the same results. The good news is that the review demonstrates at least 3EV of flexibility, vs the 2EV offered by Fuji's in-camera cooking. Again, anytime you do this, the image will degrade to some extent. The X-T1 review covers the need for manual tone adjustment when shooting in raw as well.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 22:41 UTC

Hilarious. I want a list of all the people who buy this POS so I can call them up and laugh at them.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 22:13 UTC as 66th comment
On article Sony a6000 Review (894 comments in total)

Geez...the one thing that really stands out from the studio shot(s):

the FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA is one insanely sharp lens. Look at the micro-contrast from that son of a gun. WOW.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 21:47 UTC as 169th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony a6000 Review (894 comments in total)

Throngs of Fanboys: "How did this camera get a Gold Award?!?! Gold Awards go to cameras I would buy and I wouldn't buy this one!!! I guess Sony drenched DPR in piles upon piles of cash yet again!! We all know that [insert other manufactuer] Rules!!! I'm canceling my DPR account right now!!"

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 19:42 UTC as 177th comment
On article Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II Review (707 comments in total)

Actually, one would expect that, given the advantage of using a sensor that is 201% the size of the RX100, the G1X mk2 would be 1EV better in regards to SNR. The results of the comparison tool do not bear this out though. If you set the G1X mk2 to ISO3200 and compare it to the RX100 mk3 at ISO1600 (1EV difference), the RX100 mk3 looks better. So while the sensor is larger, the advantage is smaller than if the two sensors had similar technology/efficiency. This is a result of Canon not spending any apparent effort to match other sensor manufacturers' sensor efficiency. This is apparent even when comparing JPEGs, despite the fact that the Sony JPEG NR engine is among the worst available.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2014 at 17:22 UTC as 43rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

vroy: This is very useful for morons that wouldn't protect their costly lenses by filters.

I'm with Ken. Long ago, when I first bought an SLR, I had a concern about protection of the lenses...then after actual use I realized it wasn't as big of a deal as some make it out to be. I've also bought old Nikon Ai lenses that have had scratches on the front and it doesn't affect IQ at all.

But back when I didn't know what the hell I was doing, I probably thought people not using a UV filter or some such to protect their investment was a moron.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2014 at 12:23 UTC
On article Samsung NX30 Review (431 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: And I thought Sony's JPEG engine was crappy. I'd never shoot JPEG with a camera that performed this poorly.

I'm ill-informed?? I guess all three SONY cameras (NEX-3, RX100, a3000) I own are freaking liars!! I'm sending them back ASAP!

How can you be so freaking arrogant as to say someone's opinion, a person you know exactly nothing about, is somehow ill-informed??

Welcome to the internet, where the clowns come out to play!!

Link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 14:34 UTC
On article Samsung NX30 Review (431 comments in total)

And I thought Sony's JPEG engine was crappy. I'd never shoot JPEG with a camera that performed this poorly.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 12:02 UTC as 45th comment | 4 replies
On article Samsung NX30 Review (431 comments in total)

Shoulda been the bronze award...or maybe the balsa wood award. Hate the IQ of this camera.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 21:32 UTC as 72nd comment | 24 replies
On article Lytro Illum in the hands of five leading photographers (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: It would be better if Lytro gave DPReview a beta body with beta software and DPReview played with both for month.

Instead we're getting independently created sales brochures from the company.

I saw one of these beta bodies a few weeks ago. Seems more promising than the first, but I could not shoot and then keep files to play with later at home. Not like the software is available to the general public yet.

HowaboutRAW -

I'm with you there. The pricing is a bit too high to entice casually interested photographers/hobbyists. I think the original Lytro's $400 price tag not succeeding is a good indicator of this.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 19:48 UTC
On article Lytro Illum in the hands of five leading photographers (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: It would be better if Lytro gave DPReview a beta body with beta software and DPReview played with both for month.

Instead we're getting independently created sales brochures from the company.

I saw one of these beta bodies a few weeks ago. Seems more promising than the first, but I could not shoot and then keep files to play with later at home. Not like the software is available to the general public yet.

pcworth -

I think you misunderstand what I meant. You are 100% correct: the analysis that is applicable is not necessarily applicable to the light-field cameras. If someone looked simply at the surface of it (the output resolution for one), this camera will fail. This is a camera that is attempting to target your emotional side or tap into a very specific area of your artistic side. Numbers won't do this camera any favors as direct comparison is simply not possible in any meaningful way.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 19:47 UTC
On article Lytro Illum in the hands of five leading photographers (164 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: It would be better if Lytro gave DPReview a beta body with beta software and DPReview played with both for month.

Instead we're getting independently created sales brochures from the company.

I saw one of these beta bodies a few weeks ago. Seems more promising than the first, but I could not shoot and then keep files to play with later at home. Not like the software is available to the general public yet.

Not gonna happen. This is all about getting testimonials, not having it analyzed. It will never sell based off an "analysis", but perhaps they can sway you this way.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 17:03 UTC
On article Walmart sues photographer's widow over family pictures (164 comments in total)

Why pay for something when you can bully someone into giving it to you for free? I seem to have missed the part of the story where the billionaire Walton family offered the widow ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY for the originals. Is there more to the story or is Wal-Mart actually trying to scare someone rather than pay them??

Link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 09:41 UTC as 77th comment

Holy cow. Sony just showed the world how to design a camera. That is genius!

Link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 08:38 UTC as 33rd comment
Total: 424, showing: 181 – 200
« First‹ Previous89101112Next ›Last »