peterpainter

Lives in France Finistère, France
Joined on Aug 12, 2008

Comments

Total: 147, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article SeaLife DC2000 sample gallery (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: Mmm downloaded 34 and 35 raws and ran them though Faststone - look much warmer ('pinkish' almost), very different from the JPEG. No idea which is more accurate or if Faststone is a problem. Ah well, will wait for the review.....

Yes, and I 'developed' it, unchanged, to a tiff and it was 'pinkish,' just like the embedded JPEG is. No surprise, there, I guess, although I had expected the embedded JPEG to represent the 'look' of the finished JPEG, not an unmodified raw - possibly my misunderstanding......
Tbh, though, my interest is that the raw and embedded JPEG showed a nice, 'warm' scene (probably a bit too warm, really, but I wasn't there when the picture was taken..) whereas the gallery shot is rather 'cold' - so I wondered which was closer to the truth, what WB setting were used and so on. The difference made me wonder how 'accurate' the JPEGs actually are.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2018 at 19:26 UTC
On article SeaLife DC2000 sample gallery (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: Interesting, and thank-you. Seems an odd choice (well to my mind, anyway) of settings on 16, though - 1/400 at f2.8 - difficult seeing where focus is, or is that because the camera isn't doing it's job?

Understood - thanks!

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 21:34 UTC
On article SeaLife DC2000 sample gallery (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: Mmm downloaded 34 and 35 raws and ran them though Faststone - look much warmer ('pinkish' almost), very different from the JPEG. No idea which is more accurate or if Faststone is a problem. Ah well, will wait for the review.....

Fine, but my main interest in this is as a 'go anywhere' camera, so for that it would help to know how good the WB / JPEG processing is for that purpose. Quote from the article, explaining the reason for the gallery:
"A quick search across the interwebs turns up no shortage of stunning underwater photography that's been captured with this camera, but remarkably little from its use above land as a large-ish sensor point-and-shoot that's both easy to carry around and will withstand a knock or two"

*edited to add. It has been mentioned elsewhere that RAW processing is slow, hence JPEG may be a better option. To be fair, though, I find JPEGS often quite good start points - it would just be nice if they were good to start off with.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 15:25 UTC
On article SeaLife DC2000 sample gallery (156 comments in total)

Mmm downloaded 34 and 35 raws and ran them though Faststone - look much warmer ('pinkish' almost), very different from the JPEG. No idea which is more accurate or if Faststone is a problem. Ah well, will wait for the review.....

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 14:47 UTC as 34th comment | 4 replies
On article SeaLife DC2000 sample gallery (156 comments in total)

Interesting, and thank-you. Seems an odd choice (well to my mind, anyway) of settings on 16, though - 1/400 at f2.8 - difficult seeing where focus is, or is that because the camera isn't doing it's job?

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2018 at 14:19 UTC as 36th comment | 3 replies
On article DPReview TV: Waterproof camera shootout 2018 (177 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: Some here have mentioned cameras not reviewed such as the Leica XU or Sealife but another option for those not satisfied with those offerings might be the Sony DSC-RX0. A little pricey perhaps but does have a 1" sensor and 24mm equivalent lens.

Review of the Sealife here - looks like you can use it with or without the housing (different depths of course) and there are lots of add-on options - from my point of view the basic camera alone would interest me as I don't go scuba diving.
http://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special-features/article/review-sealife-dc2000-underwater-camera

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 19:09 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Waterproof camera shootout 2018 (177 comments in total)

Thought I'd see the Sealife camera in this review. 1" sensor, waterproof and comes with waterproof case for extra depth etc. it would be nice to know more about it....Ah well, https://www.uwcamerastore.com/sealife-dc2000-underwater-camera-sl740?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIk5vCx5WV2wIVSbcbCh2JrQVWEAAYASAAEgJoxPD_BwE

Link | Posted on May 20, 2018 at 20:56 UTC as 43rd comment | 8 replies
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)
In reply to:

powderhound: Using the image comparison tool, it does appear that the sample images for the K-1ii have been changed (for the better) since yesterday.

"I wonder how many orders were not placed, cancelled or postponed due to this review."
I wondered that, so started a poll a few days ago - not specifically about this camera (although I did mention it) but about the affect of a 'poor review' here. People's definition of a 'poor review' may vary etc. etc. and the poll is still open so I've no idea how it will look eventually - at the time of writing this it showed a reasonable proportion would not buy if the camera had a 'poor review,' and of course sample size, not the right questions (7 people said none of the options suited them when there were just over 100 votes and that number will rise) and so on... still, I think reviews here could affect buying habits: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61119660

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 19:14 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: Something very wrong here. For their flagship camera to get such an awful review it isn't going to do much for Ricoh / Pentax in terms of image (company image, that is;)) - they really need to respond. Despite what DPR might say, such a lukewarm reception for the product here could seriously damage sales - some of the 'faithful' may dismiss this review but many people who are considering buying will just dismiss the camera.

I don't know, Kris, I can only say that when I'm buying gear I check reviews on-line. It's pretty difficult to check all the gear out oneself, so I usually draw up a short-list. Stuff that gets poor reviews doesn't make the list unless it has feature(s) that I want and that the others don't have.
With DPR being linked to from Amazon and their popping up prominently on internet searches when looking for gear I'd say there is a good chance of their reviews are seen by people going through the same process. However I don't know of any research into the subject and I'd be interested to see some! Reviews certainly affect my buying choices more than the manufacturers' advertising, but other people's mileage may vary.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 13:41 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1539 comments in total)

Something very wrong here. For their flagship camera to get such an awful review it isn't going to do much for Ricoh / Pentax in terms of image (company image, that is;)) - they really need to respond. Despite what DPR might say, such a lukewarm reception for the product here could seriously damage sales - some of the 'faithful' may dismiss this review but many people who are considering buying will just dismiss the camera.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2018 at 12:07 UTC as 174th comment | 2 replies

The swirly ones remind me of van Gogh night paintings, like the idea but on the whole I'm one of the 'didn't like it' crowd - even after I'd turned the sound down. Some of that is due to the hectic city time-lapse, the rest due to the cut-out effect against the sky - but maybe the latter would look better on a larger scale (and I have to admit I groaned inwardly at the juxtaposition of the roundabout with a swirly sky - I mean, subtle it wasn't, was it?).
Thanks for sharing.
(It's easy to criticize and no I couldn't do better etc. - just my opinion and we're all different..... hopefully they will do more)

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2018 at 10:59 UTC as 21st comment
On article Canon EOS M50 Review (1319 comments in total)
In reply to:

thoth22: I wonder if it would score differently if no 4k, as that is where many negatives reside. You can see lots of potential here, nicely played Canon.

Doesn't that raise a question about the usefulness of the scoring system to us punters? Suppose we want to choose between the M5 and the M50? I guess we have to read the reviews and take the scores 'with a pinch of salt' (which, tbh, I do). The reality is that 4K is very important to some people whereas to others it's an irrelevance - tricky stuff.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2018 at 19:26 UTC
On article Canon EOS M50 Review (1319 comments in total)
In reply to:

peterpainter: I wish you'd expand a bit on 'other use cases.' Specifically, on another forum someone is using an M5 with adapter / normal EOS lenses for wildlife and so far finding it very successful. Is there any reason why the M50 should be worse for this? (AF looks good and there are loads of EOS compatible long lenses available so I thought that the M50 might do OK)

Thanks - that's interesting. I tend not to use TCs as the ones I've had in the past (cheapies admittedly) have been pretty awful but I know there are some good ones around.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2018 at 11:19 UTC
On article Canon EOS M50 Review (1319 comments in total)

I wish you'd expand a bit on 'other use cases.' Specifically, on another forum someone is using an M5 with adapter / normal EOS lenses for wildlife and so far finding it very successful. Is there any reason why the M50 should be worse for this? (AF looks good and there are loads of EOS compatible long lenses available so I thought that the M50 might do OK)

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 18:57 UTC as 104th comment | 2 replies

I was looking into buying a P&S - not an expensive one, just something to keep in the pocket when not using DSLR or bridge camera. Other than the 'expert compacts' most of them start at f3 or narrower, poor low light performance (CCDs in the mix too) whereas phones are now going for F2 or wider. No chance of takng photos in anything but good light or using flash - why don't the compact manufacturers wake up? How difficult can it be to develop a cam with small (BSI?) sensor, wide aperture and forget the my zoom's bigger than yours gimmick?

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2018 at 21:11 UTC as 84th comment | 4 replies
On article Why brand market share shouldn't matter to you (552 comments in total)

Of course it matters. It's like which football ('soccer' to those on the wrong side of the Atlantic) team you support. The arguments about which is best / the winner are pretty similar to those the BBC feedback for football games. Makes you feel so much better if your team is number 1. I'm OK with it all at the moment because although my DSLR's team is really struggling my bridge camera's team is right there at the top with a fighting chance.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2018 at 17:44 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Prognathous: 20-25 seconds delay for handheld PS is terrible. The camera should do the processing when idle, not prevent the photographer from taking more pictures until it's done.

Mind-you, it could be a nice feature to have the camera do the processing later. Take some pics then let the camera do the processing while you have a beer or something. Would be useful if the light were just right and you wanted to get a number of shots before it changed. Just a thought.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2018 at 17:12 UTC

Great. Thanks!

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2018 at 23:35 UTC as 29th comment

My first thought was this was another example of how a lot of money goes to a few people instead of being spread between many, kind of most of the wealth being owned by the top whatever it is percentage. But, as I can't really figure it out how that happened (which is why I'm not in the top whatever it is percentage) I guess I'll just have to say nothing. Oh wait, I think I just did;)

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 13:08 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

peterpainter: Evidently a good photographer, so thanks for sharing.
Interested in the processing here, though. I downloaded the 'Kathmandu cucumbers' full-sized image out of curiosity and it's duller than the small version shown here - to get the 'same' effect as the small version I used 'auto-adjust colors' in Faststone.
(Btw., yep, right tool and all that, but I'm still using a DSLR bought (new old stock) just over 2 years ago for about £300 with lenses - ah well, I suppose if one keeps up with the latest etc. etc. but I'm not that keen. Maybe one day, when smartphone development has plateaued I'll take a look at them.)

*added: Also downloaded the full-sized portrait mode pic and that's much duller than the one presented in the article.....is it my software, are these photos a representation of what the camera produces directly, are they modified etc. ?

The portrait mode photo, btw. was the 2nd one, the one of the student.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:33 UTC
Total: 147, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »