SRT201

SRT201

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Mar 8, 2010

Comments

Total: 90, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1798 comments in total)

Looks like an amazing machine albeit out of the price range of most - but that's normal for PRO equipment.

Kudos to Sony for continuing to fine-tune their in-body stabilization born out of their cooperation with Olympus. Here's to the death of needlessly complex, fragile and expensive "stabilized" lenses. Canon and Nikon need to give up on that route as well and just admit in-body stabilization is the way to go. I wish my a6000 had in-body stabilization.

I didn't see the max "mechanical" shutter speed listed. I'm assuming 1/8000.

Also no mention of cross-type AF sensors. A ton of AF sensors is great, but still limiting if they are all single-direction like the a6000, RX100, etc.

Now, if Sony could finally make a menu system that didn't suck... that would be the icing on the cake. :-)

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 16:02 UTC as 350th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Our first cameras (391 comments in total)

Uh... can you guess what my first actual camera was? :-)

What an awesome machine it was. Designed to be dragged through the jungle and take photos with no power necessary.

I am not counting some of the crappy 110 and 126 compacts that came before my Minolta.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 15:53 UTC as 194th comment
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Third party lenses are always a double-edged sword; you may think you get a reasonable value for reasonable money, but the issues start adding up quickly, because the lens design and tech was not made exclusively for the best benefit of one mount only, or even some cameras within that mount, and third party manufacturer certainly has no information about the planned advancement of any of the mounts or camera tech specific to that mount. Whilst at the same time, camera manufacturers know all that vital information in advance.
There are too many variables to control, and I do not see how that ends up being either cheaper or better in the long run, because manufacturers like Sigma must compromise somewhere, and very much serve heated up, generic optical designs.

That view was true about a decade ago but things have changed in large part due to Sigma. There is no reason to believe that you are compromising anymore and as they have shown they can give the OEM's a run for their money. The belief in the OEM lens special sauce has only allowed companies like Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. to keep their lens prices artificially high. It's just like paying way too much for a Mercedes and in that case you're not even getting a better car. More competition will be good for the market and the consumers.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2017 at 13:54 UTC
On photo _F0A5334-Edit_small in the Open Air Fashion Photography challenge (13 comments in total)

Great shot, just the right DOF and wonderful diffuse Winter lighting. Great overall palette. You also got a real smile out of your model.

In all honesty though, you owe some percentage of your votes to the fact that she is a total stunner! Oh my! :-)

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 14:16 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Leica SL Review (1089 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peter von Reichenberg: Well...one would excpect little more, right? Especially from Leica with its price tag and reputation. OK, let's see if reddotted fanclub will buy enough of them. Instead of being a trendsetter Leica just hardly tries to compete to Sony...disappointing. On the other hand - whatta shame for CaNikon losing a chance to bring second full frame mirrorless after Sony. I don't see anything special in these pictures many other cameras can't do. For me the biggest WOW goes to Fuji GFX 50S.

Richard,

What's unfair about the comment? Leica is charging, as usual, many times the cost of cameras that can do more/better and in your own words it boils down to an unusual interface with good specs. It only compares well to other Leica's which are often well behind the rest of the industry in all but the claims of of mythical image quality.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 20:20 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1089 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Review is much too short for a Leica camera, and the snarky "Conclusion" section, the bit about "if you have your heart set on a camera with a red dot on it" is kind of obnoxious.

Actually it seems a completely rational analysis of the often irrational reason for buying a camera with a red dot - simply because it has a red dot. As the article points out, it doesn't really do anything distinctly better than other cameras. Why should it be given some special reverence and afforded a review length befitting a Leica? Just the comment conveys a certain conceit for Leica. The deference paid to Leica is often baffling especially when they produce products that aren't even on par. It's refreshing to see a Leica reviewed on its merits alone.

It doesn't appear that Leica is leading the field in any particular way with this camera? I'm sure it's a very nice camera albeit wildly overpriced. If you simply must have a camera with a red dot though that doesn't really matter does it.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2017 at 20:05 UTC
In reply to:

SRT201: This is just supposition on my part, but I think part of this may be due to the notion that charge time should be a selling feature for phones, tablets, etc.

First, it's important to understand that Lithium batteries are subject to a phenomena called "thermal runaway". Simply put, once the battery reaches a critical temperature it will continue on the path to it's destruction. In order to stop Lithium cells from reaching thermal runaway, their chemistry is tamed and you end up with Lithium Ion or Lithium Polymer batteries. These batteries have reduced energy density, but they are safer.

...

See part 2 below

?

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2017 at 22:24 UTC
In reply to:

SRT201: This is just supposition on my part, but I think part of this may be due to the notion that charge time should be a selling feature for phones, tablets, etc.

First, it's important to understand that Lithium batteries are subject to a phenomena called "thermal runaway". Simply put, once the battery reaches a critical temperature it will continue on the path to it's destruction. In order to stop Lithium cells from reaching thermal runaway, their chemistry is tamed and you end up with Lithium Ion or Lithium Polymer batteries. These batteries have reduced energy density, but they are safer.

...

See part 2 below

I would agree, residual heating would be very unlikely as a culprit.

I just spent time on the charging issue because that is a scenario where the battery is purposely pushed closer to critical limits. You can also push your battery by simply running CPU hungry apps like games that heat up the main CPU cores and the GPU thus pulling heavier current loads through the battery and heating it up in an environment that is now already heated up due to the chipset activity.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 16:28 UTC
In reply to:

SRT201: This is just supposition on my part, but I think part of this may be due to the notion that charge time should be a selling feature for phones, tablets, etc.

First, it's important to understand that Lithium batteries are subject to a phenomena called "thermal runaway". Simply put, once the battery reaches a critical temperature it will continue on the path to it's destruction. In order to stop Lithium cells from reaching thermal runaway, their chemistry is tamed and you end up with Lithium Ion or Lithium Polymer batteries. These batteries have reduced energy density, but they are safer.

...

See part 2 below

Yes, these are my opinions, but skepticism and concern over some of these new techniques is shared by others.

http://lifehacker.com/google-engineer-warns-against-phones-with-both-usb-c-an-1772442622

I can tell you that after witnessing just how hot my new HTC phone got with it's "Quick Charge" charger I decided to NEVER AGAIN use the factory charger. I went back to a good quality 5V, 2A charger that charges the battery in a reasonable time and at a much cooler temperature.

Did pushed battery chemistry or fast charge rates have anything to do with the Note 7 disaster? Only Samsung can say. I'm just using my EE background to form a hypothesis. Regardless, I can tell you that I do not and will not use the new fast charge systems on my devices. I want them to charge safely and I want maximum battery life-span out of them.

One last point, taking this and other events into account my advice is to NEVER EVER leave a lithium battery charging unattended.

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

SRT201: This is just supposition on my part, but I think part of this may be due to the notion that charge time should be a selling feature for phones, tablets, etc.

First, it's important to understand that Lithium batteries are subject to a phenomena called "thermal runaway". Simply put, once the battery reaches a critical temperature it will continue on the path to it's destruction. In order to stop Lithium cells from reaching thermal runaway, their chemistry is tamed and you end up with Lithium Ion or Lithium Polymer batteries. These batteries have reduced energy density, but they are safer.

...

See part 2 below

Runtime AND charge time are now selling points so the device OEM's are constantly trying to balance energy density and charge time. There are a couple possible problems here. In order to increase energy density and thus runtime, the battery design may specify a battery chemistry that is not as stable so even multiple vendors can still be a problem. Now combine that with the ever-impatient consumer (idiot) who wants their gizmos to charge in 15 seconds. New fast-charging technologies are in use that ramp charging voltage beyond the standard USB spec. 5V during the charge cycle in order to rapidly recharge the cells. Some of these system are ramping charge voltage up to 20V! Never mind the fact that this gets the battery closer to it's critical temperature during charging or that this extra heat will decrease battery life-span. The consumer wants something and the marketeers are happy to force the stupid design requirement on the engineering staff.

...

see part 3 below

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 14:14 UTC

This is just supposition on my part, but I think part of this may be due to the notion that charge time should be a selling feature for phones, tablets, etc.

First, it's important to understand that Lithium batteries are subject to a phenomena called "thermal runaway". Simply put, once the battery reaches a critical temperature it will continue on the path to it's destruction. In order to stop Lithium cells from reaching thermal runaway, their chemistry is tamed and you end up with Lithium Ion or Lithium Polymer batteries. These batteries have reduced energy density, but they are safer.

...

See part 2 below

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 14:12 UTC as 20th comment | 7 replies

Sounds nice, however the SNR of the affected image sections is already heavily degraded, they can only do so much to bring back the image portion that was buried in flare. You would think the camera would have gone through more rigorous testing regarding difficult lighting.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 18:11 UTC as 38th comment
In reply to:

snapa: The ONLY thing I was hoping to see was for Sony to introduce ANY new APS-C E-mount native lenses, or even improved MkII lenses of any kind. Since that did not happen (again), I hope Sigma will fill the need for very high quality 'NATIVE' zoom lenses. Even a new WA (16-20) pancake primes would also be welcome :(

Agreed. My a6000 sits mostly unused as Sony seems to think they are selling luxury cars when pricing their lenses. Their lens prices are really rather obscene. They also seem firmly focused on the full-frame line. I recently picked up the little Sigma 30mm which, even without IS, is an awesome little lens with excellent sharpness and contrast from wide-open. Sony seems to be starving their APS-C line and that is unfortunate.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 13:17 UTC
On article Corel PaintShop Pro X9 arrives with improved workflow (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

SRT201: YES, PLEASE Corel... get this right! We seriously need somebody to provide a good path AWAY from the Adobe weasels. ON1 RAW may be another way out of the Adobe gulag.

Good questions. ON1 is supposed to be by the end of the year. Don't know exactly when.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 02:05 UTC
On article Corel PaintShop Pro X9 arrives with improved workflow (48 comments in total)

YES, PLEASE Corel... get this right! We seriously need somebody to provide a good path AWAY from the Adobe weasels. ON1 RAW may be another way out of the Adobe gulag.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 19:20 UTC as 23rd comment | 2 replies
On photo Long Beach National Park, Vancouver Island in the Canada: Pacific Coast challenge (5 comments in total)

Agree with previous comment. It's a wonderful shot that shows 10MP is still more than enough. Don't feel the need to sharpen so heavily to compensate for resolution. It's not needed and is a little obvious even when viewing the full shot. Your composition and exposure blow past any resolution limits. It's very frame-worthy.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2016 at 12:52 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

barrym1966: APsc camera's are for non professionals and non professionals don't want to manual focus. Samyang fail

Aside from all the professionals who use APSC cameras and enthusiasts who like manual focus your blanket statement is of course perfectly accurate.
:-)

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 17:24 UTC
On article 2016 Roundups: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (193 comments in total)

Really DPR? You do a decent job of mentioning the Pro's and Con's except the most important one. How about almost medium-format levels of detail without any of the Bayer filter blurring we have all come to simply accept. A 19.6 megapixel Bayer image isn't even in the same league as a Quattro image. These images truly have to be seen to be believed. Taking landscape shots with the DP2Q and zooming in later is like visiting the place again. The details simply go on for miles because the Foveon sensor has been expertly matched to a truly stellar lens in each Quattro.

Yes, the high ISO performance is poor, the leaf shutter takes getting used to, it's a strange ergonomic design, and yes it requires thought and technique. It's not a "day at the theme park" camera. When used properly though, the results are like nothing else. I wouldn't give mine up and highly recommend the Quattro line to anyone looking for a second camera that does something truly special.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 13:20 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2661 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: Great camera, but I doubt this is enough for Pentax to stay in the race.

Sure it will attract lots of Pentax owners that currently shoot APS-C, but is this enough to attract completely new customers to the Pentax brand? For this to happen I am not so sure.

Personally I think they gambled on the wrong horse by opting for a traditional DSLR instead of a less 'proven' mirrorless system. Though with the current rapid development of on sensor phase detection AF. This type of AF now has come very close to that of any high end DSLR system (look at Sony A6300 and in lesser extend the Fujfilm X-Pro2 and forthcoming X-T2.)

Next to that there is also good improvements on EVF's over the last years that can nowadays deal with bright light situations much better then years ago and refresh rates have gone up over 100mhz.

NOT saying the DSLR is a dead horse btw.

But I think that if Pentax had gone MILC with this camera they could have won over more hearts and interest.

Barry, I've long been an avid Pentax user but the truth is, a simple Sony P&S provides a refreshingly confident AF relative to my K5 IIs or any Pentax I have owned for that matter. Again, my Olympus E-M10 simply destroys my Pentax DSLR's when it comes to AF. There's simply no reason for that at this point in camera technology. For unfathomable reasons, Pentax has held tightly to the weakest element of their cameras, the SAFOX AF system.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 18:53 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2661 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: Great camera, but I doubt this is enough for Pentax to stay in the race.

Sure it will attract lots of Pentax owners that currently shoot APS-C, but is this enough to attract completely new customers to the Pentax brand? For this to happen I am not so sure.

Personally I think they gambled on the wrong horse by opting for a traditional DSLR instead of a less 'proven' mirrorless system. Though with the current rapid development of on sensor phase detection AF. This type of AF now has come very close to that of any high end DSLR system (look at Sony A6300 and in lesser extend the Fujfilm X-Pro2 and forthcoming X-T2.)

Next to that there is also good improvements on EVF's over the last years that can nowadays deal with bright light situations much better then years ago and refresh rates have gone up over 100mhz.

NOT saying the DSLR is a dead horse btw.

But I think that if Pentax had gone MILC with this camera they could have won over more hearts and interest.

A smart mirrorless design that kept the lens communication protocols would have allowed Pentax to design a converter like Olympus that uses older lenses with no loss in functionality. That would have been a smart more for transitioning existing users and providing time to develop a new line of lenses. My E-M10 shoots AF Olympus 4/3 glass faster and more accurately than my Pentax gear!

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 18:31 UTC
Total: 90, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »