Lives in United States Danville, AK, United States
Works as a Systems Manager
Has a website at
Joined on Jan 22, 2006


Total: 916, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article 2017 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (480 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: I guess this comparison would be pointless, if you had included the new Nikon models in the evals.

Considering they have been cancelled, I guess you would have preferred they never publish a review?

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 14:02 UTC
In reply to:

ChrisH37: 'Game changer' gets thrown about too often but this is certainly heading that way, maybe not with this model but certainly a few model revisions down the line.

Silent FF shooting at mega FPS with effectively a global shutter would be the holy grail for many in certain pro industries. Weddings, events, certain sports etc could benefit hugely.

Fascinating to see where this leads us, CaNikon are walking into an ever darkening tunnel with mechanical DSLRs and don't currently have an 'option B'. I have no particular investment in Sony but it will be interesting to see if they keep adding pro glass and if top photographers start making the switch.

A Sony FE mount body at the next Olympics looks a lot more viable now than it did yesterday.

Given it's design and purpose as a pro sports camera not having the lens for its niche seems like a pretty big oversight.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 06:14 UTC
On article Light's L16 camera is in final stages of testing (300 comments in total)
In reply to:

noisephotographer: Disadvantages of the L16:
-Allegedly (that's what Light said last year) only 3 MP in-camera images (you need to connect the camera with your computer in order to get more megapixels)
-at 150mm you likely get only 13 megapixels, so you don't get 5x lossless zoom at 52 megapixels, at 150mm noise will be likely worse, too
-macro: not all cameras have the same minimum focus distance, therefore not all can be used => more noise and probably only 13 megapixels
-flash: only dual led
-no optical image stabilization
-shutter speed only up to 15s
-iso only up to 3200
-No evf, no tiltable display
-battery not replaceable, though you can buy a camera grip which has an additional battery
-the internal storage of 238 GiB is for only 1000+ images, so you could expect that one raw image likely requires more than 150 MiB
-video: probably only 1 camera at the same time => bad image quality
-some sample images show visible artefacts / much noise although only 3mp, and there is a 6.7 mp image with noticeable corner softness

Do you understand how tiny a market needs over 15s shutter? Or even over 1s shutter? Do you see how many cameras sell without evf or tilt? Try not putting up strawmen or assuming your needs are anywhere near the majority or even that every camera must be usable for every purpose or situation.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2017 at 19:18 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (534 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: Well, it looks like a nice D7200 Upgrade (which is itself being a great DSLR still), but is it just me - or is the Eyecup onto the D7500 really smaller? It looks like from a beginners Nikon DSLR...personally, i'd have opted for the rounded D500 Eyecup in place here.

Also being way sad that one selling Keypoint of the D7x00 Series - the 2nd SD Card Slot, which was being way handy for features as continous recording, keeping RAW/JPEG separate, or record the same on both Cards for Backup Security purposes, is no more....perhaps i'd someday upgrade my D7000 to the D7200...or maybe D7500...but i'd guess i'd grow my Canon or Sony FF-Setup then, because my D7000 is still good enough...and Fujifilm does have (way more) in terms of great APS-C Lenses for their X-Series Setup, which are sadly missing into the Nikon DX Lineup.

Do you really think the second slot is the reason most bought the D7200 instead of an alternative?

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 15:12 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (534 comments in total)
In reply to:

elementare: People just cry. Consumers just look at specs and innovations which often will not make any use. Who use cameras because of a specific working reason knows what is really important and the combination of:

- the best aps-c sensor ever made for low light fast action/reportage and not only - canon and m43 cameras that cost the same or more can only dream for it
- the 2nd best autofocus module in 2017 after nikon d5/500
- 50 raw at 8 fps
- autotune af
- 4k at 144Mbps

make this camera a very good camera and above all a RIGHT camera for the price at which it is sold.

This camera is in the same segment of Canon 80d and Fuji xt20 and neither of them has dual sd card slot but anyone here is complaining for the Nikon.
Canon 80d has actually the best video live view af but not 4k and from a pure photographic view this nikon d7500 is a better camera. Who need a reliable tool aimed for nearly serious photography can take in consideration this camera.
The others should not bother at all.

Some useful features? What else does the D7500 lack besides the second slot?

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 15:07 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (534 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pritzl: Hmmm... probably a fine camera but did Nikon just take a page out of Canon's playbook? I thought they had a patent on product differentiation designed solely to prevent cannibalizing sales of their higher end bodies?

This particular "upgrade" reminds me a lot about the move from EOS 50D to 60D; more video features + flippy screen but ditch half of what made the XXD series appealing in the first place to leave room for 7D. Slot D7200 for 50D, D500 for 7D and D7500 for 60D and the parallels are intriguing.

Besides removing the second slot, what else is downgraded compared to the D7200? I don't think they've come close to the 60D in removing features yet. Perhaps they have studied the matter and discovered the majority don't use the second slot?

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 15:03 UTC
In reply to:

Eric Calabros: The whole ILC market is doomed. Announcing a buzz making product as anniversary thing doesn't change that.


Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2017 at 13:24 UTC
On article Canon EOS M6 sample gallery (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

lukecookphoto: Confusing naming, is this a successor to the M5 that came out yesterday or a budget friendly camera? Canon releasing cameras faster than Sony it seems.

Edit: No EVF, so a cheaper model. Got it. Still stupid, sounds like it's a successor not a budget version.

Canon used to have a pretty simple system but lately they've gone rogue. Like all single digit camera lines, higher numbers are the economical versions (e.g. 1D, 5D, 6D).

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 13:59 UTC
In reply to:

kwa_photo: I take this as they "scale back" will really be a re-focus on the cameras that MAKE money. They have to scale down the models and focus, much like Fuji has done (almost an exclusive focus on the X series). This is what I would do as Panasonic, and yes, I know some of the moves may not be popular:

1) Cut down to 2 main camera groups (m4/3 and high end 1" compacts). All else, incl. sub-1" compacts/point and shoots, super-zooms, etc. are eliminated.
2) m4/3: Keep GH, GX and G.
3) 1": FZ2500 and 1 to compete with Sony RX100 line.
4) Fixed lens m4/3 compact: LX200, but CONSIDER moving this to a 1" sensor.

That's it. m4/3, 1" and maybe an LX100 successor (I love my Top 109). It's also time to re-eval the Leica relationship. I'm not sure how the financing of it works and if it brings IN cash to Panasonic. I think Panny can drop the Leica partnership and stand on their own to legs with their excellent lenses.

Why should they be embarrassed if the LX100 isn't selling enough?

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 13:54 UTC
In reply to:

beckmarc: Apple, google, Facebook etc are mega profitable and they dominate mainstream photography. They have cleverly crept up on camera manufacturers and have taken all their customers from the low end up. Now the iPhone 7 is a very capable point and shoot. Sony could have done this but they were stuck in the 20th century mind set for too long. The American IT companies destroyed the music companies, the camera companies and next is the car industry.

Actually I think most out Apple's brand is polish - their phones just work. Their computers just work. Their router was technologically behind but it just worked. They've sometimes lost the edge but they keep polishing.

And people will pay for that kind of quality.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 13:46 UTC
In reply to:

LiangMing: Not long ago the photo viewing platform was TV or Computer screen. Now most people look at photo through the tiny cellphone screen. There is not that much interest in good quality picture from cell phone world.

She probably just wonders why anyone would spend so much money on something so inflexible and incapable as a compact camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

radissimo: Panasonic, please don't forget to bring LX100 sucessor, thanks

Besides Canon and Nikon, there were plenty of film camera manufacturers, some quite serious. Perhaps you've heard of Pentax, Leica, Olympus, Minolta? As for niches there were also companies like Fuji, Kodak, Vivitar and plenty of others making lots of portable and compact cameras. If anything there are a lot fewer camera companies today even if you count smartphone manufacturers.

Prosumer and up cameras are simply observing a course correction back to the market that existed for 35mm before there was a huge one-time bump from the digital conversion.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 13:27 UTC
In reply to:

morepix: For my taste, it would be an improvement if Panasonic and others camera makers revised their product revisions to once every four years, instead of every two, with more significant improvements at each step. The manufacturers would save money, we buyers would save money -- altogether a win-win.

Who is compelling you to buy everything two years?

Just buy every for years and get what you want for yourself..

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2017 at 13:19 UTC
In reply to:

dmanthree: Geez, no love for Apple. On the upside, the prices of used iPads will fall a bit, making them a better deal than any new iPad. While I do agree that Apple lags on updating tech, the are still nice units.

What tablets have newer/better tech?

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

Leonp: Is somebody trying to convince me with one 20x24 px example? Serious?

It turns out less and fewer are actually interchangeable regardless of convention.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:41 UTC
In reply to:

fyngyrz: Lossy image saving methods are fairly described as "image damaging methodologies."

Other than use as thumbnails.... ugh.

If implemented properly, multiple re-saves of a jpeg file after non-global editing shouldn't reduce quality but in any case jpeg isn't an archival / editor format it is a publishing format. You should save in the native format of your image editor or if paranoid in a lossless editor neutral format like tiff (at the expense of losing features such as making and layers).

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:38 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: What's the difference between using this protocol versus the conventional JPEG engine in our photo apps at, say, 60-70 quality level?

It trades time for size. You could save as a PNG, run through this and create a 35% smaller file at similar quality or get a much better quality for the same size.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:34 UTC
In reply to:

W5JCK: I don't see any need for this. Why turn a lossy format into a more lossy format. If you need to make your crappy website load faster, then hire someone who knows how to code it properly and stop using that garbage called Adobe Flash. JPEGs are not slowing down the internet much in the age of high speed connectivity. Lousy web page designs and video slow things down way more. Again, this is trying to solve an issue that doesn't really exist, and it does a terrible job in the process.

You didn't read the article? This turns jpeg into a less lossy format, allowing a better trade off of quality for size.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

haylebob: hello,

is there a ready-to-use download version available, i have no idea to build this for windows 10.


Yes, see the directions under using.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2017 at 18:27 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (743 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: Fuji is making great cameras all across the board and their colors and processing is stellar. Sony and Fuji and the 2 new dominant names in the world of photography today.. everyone else is irrelevant.. that's it.

Perhaps you've heard of Canon's dual pixel AF?

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 05:31 UTC
Total: 916, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »