Tom_A

Joined on Aug 19, 2010

Comments

Total: 319, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

aramgrg: Hilarious! Have you ever heard consumer car website claiming Rolls-Royce as the car of the year?

Actually I happily use Fuji and I am humble enough not to say that Leica doesn't deserve its price. A friend has a Q, I found it a perfect walk around camera with great results. An experience with an M240 a few years ago was also very positive.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2017 at 14:27 UTC
In reply to:

Atomez: Leica cameras and lenses are 90% made in Portugal. Then they're shipped to Germany where they insert the imaging sensor from Japan (Sony), the red dot and "Made in Germany" logo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMGKEdn4ULk
(the video is portuguese spoken, but you'll get it)

CMOSIS get a lot of their business from space agencies. Highly specialist sensors for satellites and the like. Hence, they sure know what they are doing.
I seem to remember that I once read that they use a fab in France, but honestly I might misremember.
I tried a friend's M240 when it came out. Camera is indeed a bit bloated as Barney remarks, the indoor evening pictures I made were very, very nice.
Based on that experience I have no problem believing Barney's statement that the sensor is "good enough". It is really more a matter if you are happy using such a truly manual tool compared to say a top fight nikon.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2017 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: And it has NO software for editing video included, or for editing photographs from RAW properly either, but here Apple are just like every other phone manufacturer. This is a deterrent if you are someone who ONLY uses their phone, because then you wont have anything to do such stuff already. Chances are that existing softwares that do work may not with the new phones. DXO11 cannot read LG G4 dng files for example, even though it is the latest version. Lightroom 4.4 can, though it is much older than the phone: such is well worth finding out first!! And if you do own a Mac, must you upgrade to High Sierra to be able to use it to read the latest iPhone's videos and images, and edit them? Can you edit them on a Mac OS own software, or do you have to buy expensive Apple softwares, on account of the fact that having been forced to upgrade to use your new phone at all, you have obsoleted your perfectly good video softwares!!??

Apple’s iMovie is a free download. Same with Garageband, Pages, Numbers etc.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 20:49 UTC

I tried it in the local Apple shop. Camera is really quite ok, sufficient for people who are not really into photography. There is a reason why P&S cameras are disappearing.
Very quick with good skin colours. Of course, if you zoom in afterwards you can see the difference with a "proper" camera, but I can perfectly understand why snapshot/souvenir photo takers like my parents and my brother only use a phone.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 13:44 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

coreyweb: $1000 though? No thank you. That's a pretty high price for very little end user improvements. I mean, don't get me wrong, the tech is cool......but it's just not THAT cool.

why is the 64gb "completely unusable"? for people who use iCloud and listen to streaming music it is plenty?

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 13:29 UTC
In reply to:

newe: Every few weeks we get a headline like this...honestly it is becoming boring.

but interesting enough to post a comment?

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 13:27 UTC
On article First iPhone X hands-on field test with sample photos (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

mailman88: Canon could throw the cellphone market off a cliff. If the new 7D mkIII can shoot, post on facebook and make phone calls.

“Is that a Canon phone in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?”

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 13:46 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

We actually agree. So many factors impact quality. It is just the often recurring remark that x is “faster” than y based on an equivalency calculation that I object to. Larger aperture is faster, period.
And indeed other factors are important as well for quality.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 02:59 UTC

A colleague has the black one. Very very nice walkaround camera. He actually rarely uses his more functional dslr gear anymore. The Q makes beautiful pictures, the lens angle is hood for general walking around and the resolution is sufficient to crop a little if required.
I find this probably the most attractive camera in the Leica range. Happy Fuji xt2 user myself these days, yet I can imagine using this for almost all my photos.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 02:56 UTC as 40th comment

Whether we like this effort or not, it is an example of “algorithmic imaging” becoming ever more important.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 00:45 UTC as 47th comment
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: Steve! Come back and save Apple! Because right now, your company is looking like a lemon.

A lemon laughing all the way to the bank.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 00:33 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

Hi, yes, I can agree with the enlarging analogy in the sense that the pixels in a large sensor (when compared to a smaller one of the same resolutionJ are bigger and hence will be of better, less noisy quality.
However it was mainly the comment that the 1/100s for handholding rule of thumb that i am not convinced about. When I make photos with my 6x9 medium format film camera it still seems to apply.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 21:58 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

I found your last comment about enlarging interesting and I never saw it before.
But is it correct? Not sure. Imagine 2 10 megapixel images. 1 from and APS sensor and 1 from a medium format size sensor. I can well imagine that the medium format sensor will yield a nicer image. But the pixels have lost a physical dimension once they are in the digital domain. the concept of enlarging is lost. I think that the 1/100s rule of thumb is exactly as applicable in both cases, independent of the sensor size.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

the point is that f1.8 is faster than 2.8, no need to calculate things.
you will get the double as quick shutter speed at the same iso at maximum opening. 1.8 is faster.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 08:58 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Today's lesson for the armed chair critics: Joined up thinking.

So Sony RX100v has a fast F/1.8-2.8 lens, but this lens is slow? Equivalent apertures:

RX100V: f/4.9-7.6
G1X.3: f/4.5-9

Well holy poop, it's the slow Canon that actually has the faster comparable aperture, 1/3 faster at wide, but 1/3 slower at tele. Tie?

Do you really shoot at max aperture most of the time? Most of the time you'll be shooting with the appropriate aperture for the scene.

My APS-C compact has f/2.5, but on this day: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60236163 I never had cause to use it once, yet the AP-C sensor was used for every shot.

Max aperture would account for less than 2% of my shooting, for example, shooting a group of friends around a beach fire. For this I would use the wider faster end of the lens. And be thankful for the dust protection too.

New cameras = more choice.

Pretty dumb to hate a camera just because it doesn't fit your choice, no? You wanted an RX100 clone?

Saul Goodman....

With the sony you can shoot at f1.8, good for evening shots.
No need to calculate equivalence. A hand light meter doesn t need to know your sensor size to determine exposure. 1.8 is faster.
Depth of field is another matter, but calculate whatever you want - with f1.8 you will get a higher shutter speed than on f2.8, when taking the same iso.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 10:12 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: A simple question to those in the know
if left to auto, iPhone8 or Note 8 or pixel 2 which is a better camera?

Is there a consensus here in dpreview?

Best to repeat that question when the X is here.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 02:06 UTC
In reply to:

Jefftan: People say RX100 mark 5 overpriced and it really is

but compare to iPhone8 or note8, it is a bargain

Comparing apples with, well, sonys.
Of course the sony will make better pictures, and the iphone is a much better communication device. So what is your point?

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 02:05 UTC
In reply to:

Old Cameras: Apple sells you a phone. Apple provides cloud service so they can host (and access and data mine) everything stored. Apple sends you continuous OS updates which coincidentally turn your phone into a dead fish after 2 years - time to upgrade. Now they want to analyze your photos with pseudo artificial intelligence so presumably they can effectively monetize your photos (and all other data - like your contact list and correlations there).

Whatever faults we can attribute to Apple, monetising your data isn't one of them, actually they seem more focused on customer privacy than most tech companies.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2017 at 04:46 UTC

For info I have a rather charming Lomography Belair 6x12, with the optional better quality lens by zenith for it. Quite similar in its basic operation, well priced, and if you take your time and use a tripod, you can get very nice images. If they ever do a v2 of it then they have to put the shutter release on the body though, because since if is now on the lens it is far too easy to introduce a bit of vibration.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 13:53 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Sigma SD1 (237 comments in total)

Because of the fans and detractors of foveon vs bayer below, I had a look in the new comparison between the D850 and the Sigma Quattro H, specifically examining the eye of the peacock feather at 100 iso jpeg. I was surprised to find the Sigma more detailed, but it could be due to the lens - ideally all the cameras would use the same physical lens with an adapter.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 02:14 UTC as 27th comment | 2 replies
Total: 319, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »