leekil

Lives in United States New England, United States
Joined on Jan 21, 2009

Comments

Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

leekil: Looking at the updated results, it looks a lot like the A7R III images also need to be reshot, as they look pretty soft. Significantly softer than the A7R II, at least in the high-detail areas, even at ISO 100. Does the Sony also use noise reduction?

A7R II comparison

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7riii&attr13_1=sony_a7rii&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=nikon_d850&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=64&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&attr171_0=1&attr171_1=1&attr171_2=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=full&widget=565&x=0.7791248860528714&y=0.61979119511091

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2018 at 17:05 UTC
In reply to:

leekil: Looking at the updated results, it looks a lot like the A7R III images also need to be reshot, as they look pretty soft. Significantly softer than the A7R II, at least in the high-detail areas, even at ISO 100. Does the Sony also use noise reduction?

K-1 II comparison

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=pentax_k1ii&attr13_1=pentax_k1&attr13_2=nikon_d850&attr13_3=sony_a7riii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&normalization=full&widget=607&x=0.7771578838725968&y=0.6127432360676436

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2018 at 17:00 UTC

Looking at the updated results, it looks a lot like the A7R III images also need to be reshot, as they look pretty soft. Significantly softer than the A7R II, at least in the high-detail areas, even at ISO 100. Does the Sony also use noise reduction?

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2018 at 16:59 UTC as 75th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: When it can detect and correct subject movement between exposures and combine the files in the camera, Sony or whoever gets there first, will really have something.

Yes, Pentax does.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2018 at 07:19 UTC
In reply to:

Fotoni: Motion is a problem for pixel shift, so the process should be as fast as possible. Sony decided to make inferior pixel shift which is weird. Sony has these strange solutions like that uncompressed RAW, but no lossless RAW which is waste of space and bandwidth. Latest problem is PDAF stripes which show as dotted lines when shooting certain types of highlights.

How about a compressed vs. uncompressed option?

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2018 at 07:18 UTC

This is a similar case that happened a while ago with nearly identical images. Though a bit easier to do, as there was not a lot of motion in the subject.

https://petapixel.com/2015/02/03/contest-copyright-controversy-crazy-coincidence/

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 08:01 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

Robbie Corrigan: Little typo in article. * lens have an AW designation for All Weather which is not to be confused with WR for Weather Resistant. In simple terms, AW can survive a dunking whereas WR can survive a splash ๐Ÿ˜€

The DA* series includes WR/AW (one of those). That is specifically a feature of the "*" lenses.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: To achieve that, the SR mechanism inside that camera must be so beefed up, so complicated, that there must some severe penance elsewhere. Such SR can never be completely shut off, even in power-saving mode it consumes a lot of power. What's the battery life like in K1-II?

Pentax battery life is quite good; I get many time the rated number of shots for the K-1. The K1 II has a slightly lower rating, which makes sense with the extra chip, but still, probably 2500 shots are possible.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 22:33 UTC
In reply to:

Bobthearch: The issue seems silly at first glance, but sure looks as if Fujifilm deliberately designed their Instax Square borders to look exactly like Polaroid's instant photos. It's not merely a shape within another shape, but the exact same alignment and proportions.
And I can't see any justification for Fujifilm's demand that Polaroid's Registered Trademarks should be canceled.

You don't *need* to have one side bigger than the other, just one side big enough to hold the chemicals. You could have even borders on the top and bottom.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2017 at 07:52 UTC
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: Greed

Yes, nostalgia -- for Polaroid pictures.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2017 at 07:35 UTC
On article Google Pixel 2 sample gallery (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

medon78: Colors suck.
The iPhone 8+ Gallery is much better in comparison, although even these iPhone images have poor color rendition.
Somehow these image galleries of both the iPhone and the Pixel phone seem unnatural, kind of over-processed. I do like much more the look of classic cameras, even phone cameras, which do less background-processing.

Do you have specific images you are comparing from one to the other? It seemed to me that the Pixel gallery didn't have any photos in conditions that were as challenging as the iPhone gallery, so I'm not sure there is a good comparison to be made.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 05:52 UTC
On article Google Pixel 2 sample gallery (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wout de Zeeuw: Great photos, low light photos as well. The portrait mode worked generally well, except it got confused with the bicycle in photo 14.

The DOF control seemed to work the best for things that had gradual falloff, rather than something in the front and something in the back. It looked pretty good on the cameras receding into the distance and the sandwich, and there were no obvious artifacts like there were on the bike and the hair.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 05:22 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1101 comments in total)

Nice to see that the bicyclist played it safe and wore his helmet during the speed-priority test.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 03:13 UTC as 146th comment

A 10-year old camera isn't so bad -- that's 50 years younger than the astronaut, and he seems OK!

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 05:40 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

sh10453: I have had an eBay account almost since it was founded.
Aside from one bad purchase in 1999 or 2000 (seller was from Reno Nevada, if it makes a difference, and was banned from eBay since that time), I haven't had any issues that eBay or PayPal couldn't resolve satisfactorily, and I have made hundreds of purchases, including some $multi-thousand ones.
Most important is to look at the buyer's or the seller's feedback/history, over how many transactions.
I won't bother with sellers who have 98% or less positive feedback, but I also look at that negative feedback, because some of it could be unfair, coming from unreasonable buyers.
All you need is just some common sense.
There are scammers out there of course, but there are many more decent and honest people who are trying to make a living.

Personally, I would NEVER use Venmo to make a payment (or to accept one) in a sale transaction. I just do not trust Venmo.

Weirdly, Venmo is owned by PayPal, but doesn't offer the same protections as PayPal does.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 06:10 UTC
In reply to:

Toselli: I'd like to know how much the test varies after dpreview publicized it to us, that I think we are not the average people as far as those things are concerned!

When I did it, it had a specific question about photography interest.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:09 UTC
In reply to:

upptick: I think "post processing" is part of photography and the degree to which a photograph is manipulated before it becomes "fraudulent," per se, is debatable, seems to me.

In the instructions when they illustrated the types of manipulations you would see, they didn't go into that type of thing.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 21:50 UTC

7/10

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 21:50 UTC as 134th comment
In reply to:

net1994: 8 out of 10! It's all about the shadows.

At least one had a non-shadow manipulation, in my case.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 21:49 UTC
In reply to:

BadScience: "what gender do you identify as?"

what is the point of this nonsense? Is there going to be some analysis about how those with gender dysphoria view photographs? No...because they don't ask the simple question about what sex the person is, so any information they get about gender identity is irrelvent.

Stopped after this nonsense.

Unless they are really interested in correlation between ability to identify manipulated photos and what gender someone identifies as.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 21:48 UTC
Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »