453C

Lives in Canada Canada
Joined on Aug 15, 2010

Comments

Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Peak Design Everyday Backpack Review (112 comments in total)

Peak Designs may make good bags, but I'm tired of the "boutique company" label being used as an excuse for high prices for heavy bags made from common materials. For a little more money, Zpacks (a "boutique backpack company") sells ultralight packs featuring carbon fiber and Dyneema Composite Fabric - and they can actually carry a load well. Other pack makers sell products at the same price points as Peak Designs, at lower weights, with much better load carrying capabilities.

If Peak Designs wants to deliver something interesting, let's see them move beyond fashion products with pedestrian materials and heavy weights - or drop their prices accordingly.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2017 at 13:57 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

Christop82: Polar ice thinning and breaking away is a fake story. The thickness of the summer ice has been unprecedented. Reports of it being over five meters thick. Polar bears follow food, not ice.

This may be helpful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Ok, probably not. Life is a hoax, after all.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 03:32 UTC
In reply to:

Christop82: Polar ice thinning and breaking away is a fake story. The thickness of the summer ice has been unprecedented. Reports of it being over five meters thick. Polar bears follow food, not ice.

"Polar bears follow food, not ice." - The polar bear's food follows the ice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear#Hunting_and_diet

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 03:16 UTC
In reply to:

Contra Mundum: "An Iñupiaq whaling crew cleans the hide of a polar bear that attacked their camp the previous day. Many Iñupiaq believe that declining sea ice has lead to these animals starving."

And many civilized people believe that savage killing has lead to declining wide life population.

Many civilized people would never find themselves in an Iñupiaq camp. That didn't look like Central Park, and I doubt the bear was riding a unicycle.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2017 at 03:13 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: With smartphone cameras getting better every few months, and mirrorless APS-C cameras gaining steam, the gap between the two is slowly closing so it's making MFT even more "irrelevant." And now we have APS-C cameras (like the Fuji X-T2/X-T20, Sony a6xxx-line, etc) that are about the same size as most MFT bodies, but with larger sensors which offer somewhat better low-light performance. So the MFT line I feel will slowly go extinct (in terms of new additions to the existing line). It's a slowly dying format that will be overtaken by smartphones and larger-sensor mirrorless cameras as prices between APS-C and MFT cameras are about the same, and since physical size is about the same, MFT doesn't really have a whole lot of advantage left, other than interchangability of lenses between different MFT manufacturers.

SirHawk, you simply don't know what you're talking about. No need to continue proving the point.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2017 at 15:57 UTC
In reply to:

Franka T.L.: In fact I think its way too late for that. 4/3 suppose to bring the same quality at much reduced package but the promise never come through. Even today with Micro 4/3 we are not seeing the package size advantage though finally we are seeing on par performance vs APS-C but then we have FF now so the arguments keep going around. That stated the M4/3 had establish itself.

As tech advance we will see such like the Ricoh GXR; the 4/3; and then some

The "package size advantage" is quite apparent if small MFT bodies and lenses are selected. OTOH, the same system boasts some very capable bodies & lenses, but they may come with some additional size & weight. Unlike some other systems, there's a range of options.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:31 UTC
In reply to:

Arkon: They just can't compete with Sony, Nikon and Canon systems.

I think you meant "couldn't compete". Olympus still makes plenty of ILCs, just not for the 4/3 system.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:26 UTC
In reply to:

MOSSYLENZ33: No tears shed here. After having the viewfinder in my OM-D E-M1 replaced three times because of yellow specks forming in each viewfinder, I got disgusted and switched to a Fujifilm X-T1 and then to X-T2. I have to say that I loved how the Olympus felt in my hands. And its construction seemed solid. I still have it and wished my Fuji felt as nice. BUT, weighing all aspects of the two camera brands, Fuji's X-T2 with an APS-C sensor (not 4/3) wins out big time. Companies can kill loyalty by not addressing problems. I personally have no more interest in Olympus.

That's fine, but the article is about the end of the 4/3 system, not Micro Four Thirds. Olympus still has plenty of MFT options for you if Fuji ever lets you down.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:23 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: With smartphone cameras getting better every few months, and mirrorless APS-C cameras gaining steam, the gap between the two is slowly closing so it's making MFT even more "irrelevant." And now we have APS-C cameras (like the Fuji X-T2/X-T20, Sony a6xxx-line, etc) that are about the same size as most MFT bodies, but with larger sensors which offer somewhat better low-light performance. So the MFT line I feel will slowly go extinct (in terms of new additions to the existing line). It's a slowly dying format that will be overtaken by smartphones and larger-sensor mirrorless cameras as prices between APS-C and MFT cameras are about the same, and since physical size is about the same, MFT doesn't really have a whole lot of advantage left, other than interchangability of lenses between different MFT manufacturers.

"With smartphone cameras getting better every few months, and mirrorless APS-C cameras gaining steam, the gap between the two is slowly closing so it's making MFT even more "irrelevant." "

If smartphone performance increases while APS-C performance increases, how is the gap between the two "slowly closing"? Also, your conflicted opinion ignores that improvements in MFT sensors are occurring at the same time.

There's more to an ILC than body size. In many instances, lenses of equivalent FL are smaller on MFT than APS-C and FF, leading to an overall smaller & lighter kit. This is frequently forgotten when dire predictions like yours are made about the irrelevancy of the format. The IQ delivered by MFT is quite good, especially with the better lenses, but if it isn't a good fit, another option should be used.

IMO, all dedicated cameras are under pressure from smartphones. MFT isn't in a unique position in that regard.

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

Albert Valentino: Always sad to see an old icon retired. Olympus glass is still excellent but with a twist for the digital age. Lenses are far from optical excellence on their own and require lenses profiles to deal with issues like massive barrel distortion (12-40 and 7-14 Pro lenses). Unlike the need for a great lens for a film camera we now have great results from not-so-great designs that require under the hood adjustments. Progress?

Albert,

I read what you wrote in the above comments, and it clearly wasn't complimentary towards software correction. I don't know why you're acting like your comments were in any way positive about SC. If you don't like it, fine by me, but anyone moaning about IQ when software correction is removed is disingenuous, at best. The lenses are designed to be corrected via software. Removing that correction is pointless.

I believe I've seen similar comments from you on the topic in the DPR forums, but if not, that's my mistake and I apologize. I don't like to "stir up trouble", but I don't like people that play games as you have here, either. You can drop the old "try reading what I wrote" line and just own up to what you said, and your opinion on SC. I may not agree with you, but you'd at least be honest about the conversation.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
In reply to:

Albert Valentino: Always sad to see an old icon retired. Olympus glass is still excellent but with a twist for the digital age. Lenses are far from optical excellence on their own and require lenses profiles to deal with issues like massive barrel distortion (12-40 and 7-14 Pro lenses). Unlike the need for a great lens for a film camera we now have great results from not-so-great designs that require under the hood adjustments. Progress?

Come now, let's have your full gripe if you're going to try backpedaling:

"Unlike the need for a great lens for a film camera we now have great results from not-so-great designs that require under the hood adjustments. Progress?"

Not quite the same as what you just posted, eh?

I've seen posts by you and others trying to make software correction out to be an evil force running amok in the photographic world. It's like watching someone bash their ex. SC is a viable method for meeting design goals, no matter how little you care for it.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 01:55 UTC
In reply to:

Albert Valentino: Always sad to see an old icon retired. Olympus glass is still excellent but with a twist for the digital age. Lenses are far from optical excellence on their own and require lenses profiles to deal with issues like massive barrel distortion (12-40 and 7-14 Pro lenses). Unlike the need for a great lens for a film camera we now have great results from not-so-great designs that require under the hood adjustments. Progress?

There are plenty of larger, heavier, optically corrected lenses out there for those with a puritanical bent about software correction.

I have no idea why anyone views photos with software correction disabled, then feels the need to post about imaginary "issues like massive barrel distortion". Makes as much sense as scrubbing lens coatings off and complaining about massive flare, or running a high compression engine on low octane fuel and complaining about a lack of power due to engine knock.

I'm with Jim. If the IQ is good, why does the method of correction matter?

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 23:21 UTC
In reply to:

tko: No drone under the FAA weight limit needs to be registered. There is nothing special about a short range or limited flying time. Even if they don't have to be registered, they still have to met the drone laws. Meaning, you could get arrested for flying one of these things at a National Park, a National Monument, too close to a building, in New York, within 5 miles of an airport, at a parade, etc.

Personally, I'd rather have a 2 pound drone flying by at 200 feet above me, that a swarm of these things circling as flown by idiots trying to take their photos at famous locations.

Be prepared to bring a flyswatter.

Flyswatters? Nets? Don't be silly.

If the goal is destruction, a tennis racket is the perfect tool for this job.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2017 at 23:11 UTC

What kind of interchangeable backpack for creatives defines me as a person?

https://youtu.be/DkVRL2po0Y8

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 20:07 UTC as 14th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

JayLu: I have just picked up a 12-100 pro and like it very much, but it has one substantial oddity and i'd like to know if others see the same. If i have focus locked in (eg manual focus engaged) and zoom out towards 12mm there's a sudden shift in focus at 16mm. The image stays out of focus until 12mm when it snaps back in. I tried a different lens at Park Cameras - same thing on two different bodies. Ok, so i can refocus but this feels like a massive design flaw. Just zoomin from 17mm to 14mm completely defocuses. Anyone else seen this? I'd be interested to hear what Olympus say about it.

If it was a parfocal lens, it'd be a flaw.

But it isn't.

So it's not.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 05:27 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: I would like to know if we can still use an external battery (with the new USB-C) to run long recordings.

I found out my Yi 4K doesn't allow input from a mic to overlay my voice over directly, like GoPoor's. Does the new Yi 4K+ allow that with the USB-C? I really hope so!!

I do like that 4K allow e-stabilization, albeit with crop and 30 fps.

I'd still like to see a wireless mic option for either camera. Keeping the cam sealed up in a case while in wet or dusty conditions would be useful for audio tracks, and for voice command.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 04:34 UTC

Full spec sheet here:
https://www.yitechnology.com/actioncamera/specs/id/11

It should answer many questions.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 03:25 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

ChrisH37: Big hands or is it really that small?!

Same size as my 4K, which is quite small.

https://www.yitechnology.com/actioncamera/specs/id/11

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 03:24 UTC
In reply to:

Yudi Hilmawan: The only thing that prevent me from buying YI Action cam is crappy sound recording, i hope the new version have better sound.

The 4K+ has external mic support.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 03:20 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: I would like to know if we can still use an external battery (with the new USB-C) to run long recordings.

I found out my Yi 4K doesn't allow input from a mic to overlay my voice over directly, like GoPoor's. Does the new Yi 4K+ allow that with the USB-C? I really hope so!!

I do like that 4K allow e-stabilization, albeit with crop and 30 fps.

I've seen speculation that a wireless mic may be coming for the 4K, so we may be in luck. It's an obvious fix that'd also protect the cam from the environment.

The 4K+ is ready for a wired mic, though.

"Fast and Convenient USB Connection

YI 4K+ comes with fully reversible USB Type-C connector which gives you the ultimate convenience. And the data capabilities are greatly enhanced, including faster data transfer with USB 3.0 support and external microphone support."
https://www.yitechnology.com/yi-4k-plus-action-camera

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 03:18 UTC
Total: 149, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »