camcom12

Joined on Feb 21, 2012

Comments

Total: 115, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Writing, storing and retrieving all the 2 to 8 Mbyte jpegs in the world cloud uses significant energy, especially that 90% are viewed at less than ~600x400, or maybe 1920x1080. So this could be a good thing, moreso if it can be applied to video too. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/25/server-data-centre-emissions-air-travel-web-google-facebook-greenhouse-gas
(there's a good reason that some of Amazon's & Google's server farms are located along the Columbia River: cheap, minimal GHG hydro-power)

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 19:54 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply

All very good images, with a few standouts. The marque photo being one, and 6, 10, 11, 18 & 29 personal favorites from a topical viewpoint. So called "Photo contest winners", per se, would likely include a few different choices. Nice.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2016 at 19:39 UTC as 13th comment
On article Fujifilm X-E2S: What you need to know (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

camcom12: The D3400's battery rating is wonderful. It's amazing how often my mirrorless battery goes flat at the worst moments during shooting. As more of an opportunistic, grab-n-go camera user, battery endurance & shelf-life are important. Hence my old nikon is a trusted friend -- it always powers up, ready to go if needed. I do bring spare batteries, but admit there not always nearby.

Actually meant to post this comment in DPR's "Nikon D3400 Initial Impressions" article, but my deletion did not take.
Well, it's somewhat on topic....
Ok, a big plug for the Fuji X-E2S in particular: it has excellent eyepoint/eye-relief, more than any Nikon DSLR sold I think. One of many reasons I prefer shooting with certain mirrorless/EVF models.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2016 at 04:07 UTC
In reply to:

david vella: Why does Nikon even make this sort of low end DSLR anymore ?

The sensor maybe fine , but in this sort of handicapped basic body configuration ( tunnel viewfinder ) with such slow zooms to match? Mirrorless brands now offer far better options inc. fast/small lens choices, just carry a few spare batteries !

The D3400's battery rating is wonderful. It's amazing how often my mirrorless battery goes flat at the worst moments during shooting. As more of an opportunistic, grab-n-go camera user, battery endurance & shelf-life are important. Hence my old nikon is a trusted friend -- it always powers up, ready to go if needed. I do bring spare batteries, but admit there not always nearby.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 20:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2S: What you need to know (85 comments in total)

The D3400's battery rating is wonderful. It's amazing how often my mirrorless battery goes flat at the worst moments during shooting. As more of an opportunistic, grab-n-go camera user, battery endurance & shelf-life are important. Hence my old nikon is a trusted friend -- it always powers up, ready to go if needed. I do bring spare batteries, but admit there not always nearby.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 20:05 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On article An introduction to our studio test scene (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

notpc: Am I the only one who thinks dpreview's previous test scene was FAR more useful in showing the real differences that I'm looking for in a photo when comparing cameras? When DPR changed scenes, I started using Imaging Resource's test samples because they still use a more typical/natural set of objects (the one with the bottles, crayon box, fabrics, threads, etc) where I can see the combo of noise, contrast, sharpness, etc in the way that I want to. It matters that it's more like a real photograph. At dpreview, most of the scene seems artificial, contrived and flat. I REALLY would prefer to go back to the previous scene. Other than that, the interactive aspect of the comparison tools is excellent.

I agree to some extent but the new scene fixes a few shortcomings of the older one. The faces have always looked very plastic or wax-like to me, I avoid these areas unless I'm checking relative tonality. Yes, the interactive design is excellent. As good as IR's is, it is rather cumbersome. But who am I to complain? (though, actually, we really are paying for this stuff, especially those with G.A.S.)

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2016 at 22:18 UTC
On article An introduction to our studio test scene (105 comments in total)

With more high quality fixed-zoom lens cameras appearing over the past 5 years, could the test scene also be used not only at nominal focal length (~50mm equivalent) but also at the camera's widest, half-zoom, and when practical, full zoom? I realize there are technicalities that would need sorting out: e.g. how to properly test max F.L. on superzooms.

That said, DPR's review of the RX10 III has some very useful max-zoom images since studio-restricted images may not reveal all capabilities.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2016 at 22:00 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
On article An introduction to our studio test scene (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Holloway: No disrespect, but I've bought many SLRs and never used this as part of a decision. Browsing real shots on photo sites from the camera / lens continually reminds me that I am the weakest link in my system.
That said, so many great parts in your reviews.
I increasingly appreciate you'd articles on technique and other photographers
Thanks

@ Leonp: Similar thoughts here. But perhaps we shouldn't tell DPR.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2016 at 21:15 UTC
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (369 comments in total)

Well presented article. Though one might think a person actually asking this question might be weighing the D7200 against the D610. Maybe not.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 22:26 UTC as 56th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (362 comments in total)
In reply to:

JosephScha: Re: "So which one should you buy?" Really? Is that the purpose of the info presented on dpreview? I hope not. Using phrases like that will bring out all the people who think Amazon has influenced content, to say "see? See? I told you so!".

Not quite on point but a bit of a laugh: http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-meh-factor-or-why-x-is-deal-killer.html

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 23:02 UTC
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

snapa: It seems Sony is really churning out all kinds of high quality FF FE and GM lenses :0
It's a shame Sony can't squeeze out 1-2 new (or improved) native APS-C E-mount zoom lenses. Maybe even 1-2 high IQ pancake wide angle primes would be nice too. Does every lens they make have to cost $1,000-2,500 and be a FF lens? What ever happened to the days of the original small, inexpensive, light, NEX cameras and lenses? It looks like those days are over with :(

Agree on all points. Problem is, a better Sony E 16-70mm may price at $1200 or something, and very few A6X00 owners would buy in. Too bad Sigma & Tamron are on the sidelines with respect to E (APS-C) mount.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 23:29 UTC
On article Sony Alpha SLT-A68 real-world samples (120 comments in total)

The "edited to taste" images look great - more 'pop' (contrast, sharpness & shadow retention). But it would also be interesting to see if the in-camera jpeg adjustments could nearly accomplish the same effects. I think on the Sonys, shadows are brightened using the 'DRO' parameter, which usually offers Auto, Low, Medium & High. On my Sony I use 'High' DRO most of the time for OOC jpegs, plus one notch up on contrast, sharpness, and/or saturation.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2016 at 19:03 UTC as 13th comment
On article All about that lens: Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III review (448 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Obviously not for sports. But what would happen if they shortened the zoom to 300mm, lens speed was 3.5 - 5.6? Image quality would go up, size, price and weight would go down. 24mm-300mm would cover what most people use, or could reasonably expect from a fixed-lens camera.

A ZS100 perhaps? Not perfect but worth a glance.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2016 at 22:07 UTC

It could be my monitor, but to me, the shadowed foliage in the jpeg examples (bird-in-pond and red-hatted-person-on-walkway in particular) look simply like dark brown muck. It should appear as dimly-lit green foliage if the goal is for a more natural appearance.
Often Mr. Keller presented jpegs samples with the D-range or Shadow compensation settings varied from none, medium & high. I encourage DP review to continue to emulate this useful practice. The raw Dynamic Range test is helpful indeed, but including a few jpeg examples would be great too. The multiple-imaged 'mouse-over' feature works well for this. Thanks DPR!

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2016 at 20:32 UTC as 99th comment
On article Opinion: Enthusiast compacts have finally come of age (492 comments in total)
In reply to:

steve ohlhaber: I think the average person wants something that is small, 24-200mm and a big a sensor as can be managed. The Panasonic zs100 pretty much nails it at a price. I think for people that need more zoom, the Sony HX line has been THE camera to get for years. I am talking about non pros with some money. I have seen people buy the Sony RX due to all the hype, and just hate it due to the small zoom range. 1 camera that can do everything when you only own 1 camera, that is what these are great at. Most people don't have 5 cameras, they want one, and these days, its one that is better than their phone, so it needs to be fairly noticeably better to the average person.

There still isn't really an in betweener. Something cheaper with a sensor between the 1/2.33" and 1". Maybe $500. I would say that would be the best camera for the masses ever, but nobody has made it.

"...Something cheaper with a sensor between the 1/2.33" and 1". Maybe $500...."
A quest of mine too. Not perfect but close (28-300mm, 1/1.7 sensor, $550):
http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/compacts/oly_stylus1s
Considered it but I really need 24/25mm. In a year the $650 ZS100 will drop to $500 by Nov '16.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 03:59 UTC
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1090 comments in total)

Looks like a great camera, but not for those who prefer to leave their (sun)glasses on, since it has only 16mm eye releif. Also no built-in convenience flash. Most of the xxD Canons spec 22mm. Fine unit otherwise.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2016 at 21:52 UTC as 142nd comment | 1 reply
On article 2016 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-800 (213 comments in total)
In reply to:

QuietOC: Why is the Canon SL1 included, but not the Sony A58? They are both current models introduced in 2013. I am sure Sony would rather sell A6000s, but the slightly older A58 has some big advantages like IBIS and better lens selection.

Or Sony A68...

Link | Posted on May 9, 2016 at 18:21 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (289 comments in total)
In reply to:

dszc: GPS!
NONE of these cameras have GPS. To me, that is curious and bordering on the unacceptable.
I suppose there are some who don't care about GPS, and maybe even some who don't want it. But to me, one of the most important features of a "TRAVEL" camera is GPS.
How wonderful it is to go exploring and take pictures of interesting and unknown things, and then come back home, offload into Lightroom, and see and know what and where I was photographing.
Right now I would go out and buy 3 copies of the Panasonic TZ100 for myself and my traveling relatives, IF it had GPS. But without GPS it is of no use to me. Pity.

I too wish more had GPS. Will never sell my Canon S100. The older 1/2.3" Panny and Sony travel zooms have it, and last year's super zoom Nikons. But no 1" or u4/3 have it. I would rather not leave my smartphone on all day to record coordinates, then transfer the data, etc etc.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2016 at 23:46 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (289 comments in total)

Nice round-up.
Would have liked to see Canon's G3 X included, but hope to see it in an upcoming enthusiast's Super-Zoom round-up with the new Sony, Nikon & Panasonic SZs. (fwiw: the 'Specifications Compared' link is incorrect on a few pages.)

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 22:36 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

webber15: Put this down in the desert and you'll never find it again ;-)

Perfect for the Kalahari / safari touring, with Thom H.
(hate to admit it - I kinda like the colors)

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2016 at 23:32 UTC
Total: 115, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »