Revenant

Joined on Jul 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 2419, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

99tollap: So more expensive than a Fuji XT20 with kit lens... sure the XT20 is not weather resistant nor has IS, but otherwise appears to me at least as a much more attractive proposition.

If this camera were $800, and assuming it is small enough in the hand, I would have been tempted.

Their #1 spot has lasted for more than a decade with such products.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:58 UTC
In reply to:

Ben Herrmann: Sigh... And why in the hell couldn't Samsung have continued with this advanced R&D in their camera systems. Ohhh, what could have been. And for those of us who still maintain Samsung NX systems, you know what I'm talkin' about.

Mobile devices are a much more lucrative market than regular cameras, especially in Samsung's case. The NX system had a very small market share.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 16:18 UTC
In reply to:

elementare: Sensor isn't all in photography, this score means nothing to photographers, but at least Nikon sells an estimable tech in this camera at the same price of the lower iso, lower DR, lower pixel, lower AF capabilities Canon 5D mk4.

"the only thing that take the photography to the next step is the sensor technology."

Only if you're talking about the purely technological aspects of image capture, as opposed to the artistic aspects of photography. It's like saying that recording technology is the only thing that takes music to the next level.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2017 at 19:24 UTC
In reply to:

elementare: To all accusing DXO, they just tested the sensor and stated that at this day it's the best camera sensor. They also specify that they state this especially and JUST for its low iso DR/pixel count ratio.
Are you all able to understand english language? I am not english mother tongue, but I try to read it at least.

"to all praising DXO, they just tested the... RAW files, and not the sensor itself"

The raw file is what the photographer has to work with, though. We don't have access to the data prior to being saved as a raw file, so the performance of "the sensor itself" isn't really interesting for practical, photographic purposes.

"image quality = sharpness and contrast."

Yes and no. Those are certainly two aspects of IQ, but there are several more, including colour, dynamic range and noise performance.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2017 at 19:17 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-A10 sample gallery (165 comments in total)
In reply to:

Halina123: The images looked fantastic when I downloaded them onto my smartphone.
But when I transferred them to a proper computer and pixel peeped. Oh dear. I'm sure a decent smartphone camera can thrash them.

Arguably, most people in the target market for an entry-level camera like this, will only look at the images on a smartphone, since social media is where all their images will be displayed. And in that case, how the images look when pixel-peeping them on a "proper" computer, doesn't matter much at all.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2017 at 09:22 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-A10 sample gallery (165 comments in total)
In reply to:

retr01976: Subjectively speaking this is why I like the X Trans sensor much more than dated Bayer technology. My 16mp XT10 more often than not delivers better looking images than my FF camera (which has a much larger sensor). I know the X Trans sensor is very controversial with some people, but the colors, tones, and details are all incredible to my eyes.

It's not even a different technology, just a different layout of the colour filter array, and therefore a different interpolation algorithm is required to demosaic the raw files. Same technology done differently.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2017 at 09:06 UTC
In reply to:

IR1234: Improved stability? And how much does this camera cost exactly? Are they really pitching this at professionals?

How can the improvement of IQ be seen as a bad thing? It doesn't mean that IQ wasn't excellent to begin with, only that it's now even better.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 17:29 UTC
In reply to:

Martin JC: Can humans tell the difference between a score of 90 and 92 in blind test of images taken?

I don't know about the mobile scores, but regarding the camera sensor scores, DxO claims that 5 points represents a difference of about 1/3 EV. They also state that the margin of error in their tests is 1/3 EV, which means that two cameras that are within 5 points of each other might not have different IQ at all.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 14:17 UTC
On article New product overview videos: Canon EOS 6D II and more (104 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: I assume that since this is paid content we can expect 2 things in the comments...
1) people will jump completely freaked out and accuse DPR of being paid shills for Canon, and
2) that Canon may actually read the comments (checking to see if their investment was worthwhile) and thus, we should see some VERY spirited comments regarding their specs/feature choices with regards to the 6D Mark II.

It doesn't make sense to sell all the gear that you were (presumably) happy with, just because the manufacturer released a disappointing camera model that you probably had no intention of buying, and that you think sets the tone for all the camera models to follow.

The 6D2 is the only recent Canon ILC not equipped with their latest generation of sensor, for whatever reason.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 18:44 UTC
On article Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D Review (545 comments in total)
In reply to:

TylerBreeden: How does this camera earn a 79% rating and silver recommendation with a 9pt AF system (that wasn’t spectacular even four years ago), a max of 3.5 FPS w/AF, and absolutely *no* interesting or compelling features?

This isn’t the Toyota Camry of cameras, this is a stripped Corolla. Sure, some people just want to get from A to B, but giving a high recommendation to what can only be described as bare minimum, 8 year-old tech, is partially what keeps Canon asleep at the wheel.

"absolutely *no* interesting or compelling features?"

If you're a photographer, the ability to compose and take a photo should be a pretty interesting feature, I think. ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 14:25 UTC
On article Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / EOS 200D Review (545 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philnw2: Canon says they are going to build some mirrorless cameras, but here we go again, the same old tired flapping mirror design that is so noisy and requires the post chimping to see how the image was exposed. Mirrorless shows you how the image is going to be exposed BEFORE you take the picture. Great for beginners, instead of these inscrutable flappers.

"Canon says they are going to build some mirrorless cameras, but here we go again"

Canon never promised that the SL2 would be mirrorless. Saying that you will make mirrorless cameras isn't the same as saying that you won't make DSLRs. It's possible to make both, and in fact that's what Canon does.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 14:17 UTC
In reply to:

Dee Fitch: They will never get a dollar out of me ever again. Worst customer service imaginable.

"For example, as a photographer I will not take anybody's business and will not treat everyone as important. No. I will pick my customers and set boundaries to exclude those who I believe are not right for me. "

That's not really the kind of business I was talking about, though. You aren't releasing a product on the market for anyone to buy, but you're actively choosing the clients you want to work for.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 14:15 UTC
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Leica will end up following Hasselblad's route swallowed by some huge Chinese corporation or otherwise disappear.

Selling reading glasses and cell phones won't save them.

The reason why Blackstone is selling its stake in the company, is that it's currently going very well for Leica. Investment companies usually sell their stakes in good times, not bad.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 06:57 UTC
In reply to:

Dee Fitch: They will never get a dollar out of me ever again. Worst customer service imaginable.

Every potential customer should be important to a company, every single one. To say that "we don't need those customers, since we are doing so well anyway" is not a good business attitude.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 06:26 UTC
In reply to:

Adam2: Wonder why I left the adobe revenue sucking stream? Poor customer support and products which didn't make photographic workflow easier. While others innovate, Adobe simply maximizes profits.

"While others innovate, Adobe simply maximizes profits."

Innovative or not, every commercial business is trying to maximize profits. For the smaller players in a market, innovation is often a great strategy to be competitive and maximize profits, since that gives their products a unique selling point vs. the market leaders' products.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 06:22 UTC
In reply to:

Under The Sun: Hopefully this will be a temporary thing as more and more designers and photographers find other more compelling alternatives to the Adobe ecosystem.

There's always a possibility that other companies will follow suit and introduce a subscription model too, when they see that it's working very well for Adobe.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2017 at 06:07 UTC
In reply to:

pancho_rivera: Good to Kodak still being active!

Well, they're actively licensing out the brand name to other companies, one of them being JK Imaging, the company behind the PixPro cameras.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2017 at 05:45 UTC
In reply to:

BadScience: Was my favourite 35mm film

https://www.flickr.com/photos/weesam/4448173522/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/weesam/4451934808/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/weesam/4486557230/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/weesam/4493261486/in/photostream/

But 35mm film is effectively dead. A nice hobby for some, and arguably good fun for some; but too expensive, too much hassle for too little reward: spending more time and more money to get a result that is much worse than cheap consumer digital camera technology from over a decade ago.

I guess that one man's hassle is another man's fun.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 18:12 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV (338 comments in total)
In reply to:

cyberpi1: "people will be highlighting in the comments, this is an equivalent aperture range of F6.5-10.9, which is not significantly slower than an F4.5-6.3 tele zoom on an APS-C camera."
The most weird comparison I've seen. What's the point of comparing equivalent FF F6.5-10.9 and APS-C F4.5-6.3 ?
Ether make the same equivalence or don't make it at all.

Even with the same pixel size, a larger sensor still has lower noise levels, when normalized to the same resolution, exactly because it collects more light in total. It's not just about the size of the individual pixel.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 15:55 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Kodak selling this is like Fred Astaire dancing with a vacuum cleaner. Someone please take Kodak out back and put it out of its misery before it starts selling action cam.

Correction: Not a real Kodak product, because the press release mentions the licensee C+A Global. It's not JK Imaging, though.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2017 at 19:19 UTC
Total: 2419, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »