HeezDeadJim

Joined on Dec 6, 2011

Comments

Total: 88, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: The term you fellas are looking for is "pixel pitch." It was an important metric on the site before these equivalence-spouting fifth columnists insinuated themselves and gave poor old Phil Askey the heave ho.
Phil even used to publish pixel pitch charts. It was a golden age.

Here's my point since you can't figure it out. You care about image quality...not technical stuff. What does it matter if one car can get to 35mph versus another one? They both hit 35mph.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

Paul_B Midlands UK: 3 grand its nuts, at that price I'd prefer to have some hardware like a complete Sony A7xx thanks, barmy.

Keeping a lens in mostly the same temperature without extreme deviations such as arctic traveling to the barren death valley....or rains of England and sandstorms of the Sahara. Dropping it subzero water and snow might compromise the lens and extreme temps could do the same thing. All it needs is a simple crack or misshaped barrel from a drop to start letting in less than desirable guests like dust and mold.

I have a bunch of FD lenses from my Canon A-1 (not AE-1) and they show no signs of anything other than the aperture blade grease. But I'll be using those lenses on any small camera body that will let me for however long they keep up.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 19:56 UTC
On article Kodak Ektra 'photography' smartphone goes on sale (87 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sailor Jo: If I want a camera, I buy a camera. Same for a phone. Nothing beats an SLR, not even a DSLR. As nice as pocket superzooms are (I own one besides a dozen other cameras), the best pictures I ever took were with a fully mechanical Exacta.

I you don't want a camera, you don't buy a camera. You'd be surprised how much my friends just don't care about understanding how even the settings on their phone work. That's actually 90% of all people. They care if the PHONE makes photos on auto with each iteration. Not the person. That's too much work.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 21:59 UTC
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: The term you fellas are looking for is "pixel pitch." It was an important metric on the site before these equivalence-spouting fifth columnists insinuated themselves and gave poor old Phil Askey the heave ho.
Phil even used to publish pixel pitch charts. It was a golden age.

Sacher, I hope you have a cheap car...because I'm pretty sure a Ford Escort can go 35mph "civilian" roads just as easily as a Dodge Viper. Who cares about the crap under the hood and all the technical stuff.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

mosc: Time and time again it's shown that two matching sized sensors with different pixel densities do not have a substantial sensitivity difference. 8mp sensor downsampled to 2mp should look almost identical to 2mp from the same sensor size. 4 pixels that are 1/4 the size can be added together to give the same sensitivity as 1 pixel with 4 times the area.

Downsampling at 30fps requires a lot of processor though which requires more hardware and more heat and less battery so there IS a potential advantage to purposely lower resolution sensors if:
1) The output resolution is an arbitrary maximum (like 1920x1080 for example)
2) You don't reduce the sensor size when you reduce the resolution
3) the overall cost or power consumption reduction is meaningful.

I don't think it has anything to do with image quality or low light performance though. Those would only come in if the alternative to low res is inherently flawed downsampling (which it shouldn't).

Reddog Steve: HD standard is arbitrary to modern digital cameras. Once we hit 3.1MP, it surpassed the 1920x1080 VIDEO resolution. 4K is starting to be the new standard and now finally ushering wider color gamuts, so our photos once viewed on 1280x720 sRGB phones will look much better on 4K 10-bit or 12-bit tablet panels.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 21:48 UTC

I'm sorry...but the bokeh looks exactly like camera shake to me. Especially on the METRO light photo. My Canon FD 20mm 2.8 does a better job of having round lights with that "sharp edges" around the disks. This just looks like everything with a hard shiny edge got clone/stamped a bunch of times by a toddler or a printer that has its heads misaligned. Bokeh is meant to be smoothing and relaxing. Not making you question if photo place you printed it at, the paper got jammed just slightly.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 21:38 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Paul_B Midlands UK: 3 grand its nuts, at that price I'd prefer to have some hardware like a complete Sony A7xx thanks, barmy.

I'm going to guess it breaks just as easily as any other expensive lens with glass. If and when it does, you can cry over the $3,000 you'll have to pony up again. As for the A7xx, most likely it will be sold off used and someone else will get a good camera body for a good price. Remember, old camera bodies doesn't mean they are terrible, just outdated. You don't buy a $3K lens to sell it later on because a newer/better version is out. It will get moldy and break (or stolen) over decades. Just see how far you can go before it does.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2016 at 21:32 UTC
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

samfan: - No buttons
- No hand grip
- Terrible handling
- Abysmal battery life
- No viewfinder, not even optional

I wouldn't care if it had a medium format sensor and would see in the night. With ergonomics like that, I find it unusable.

Correct. I had to look at crappy 160x120 photos of my coworkers kids on their flip phones long before the Jesus Messiah iPhone v1 came around with its "retina" 480x320 resolution. While cellphones have made huge leaps and bounds with the camera, it's still only in the "OK" department overall.

I guess you could make a full photobook of that lady photographer using the iPhone 1 and calling it: "The Best Camera is the One You Have With You". I have it sat on my coffee table next to my kid's book "The Poky Little Puppy". Because the best book is the one within reach.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 13:48 UTC
On article Xiaomi Redmi Pro quick review: dual-cam on a budget (41 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: I will not buy Xiaomi Redmi Pro from "Gearbest.com for $270" as Lars Rehm leads us too.

This is a $160 phone as seem from Xiaomi's home page:

http://www.mi.com/redmipro/

BTW, $160 USD ( CNY 1099 China Yuan) is MFC's listed price.

I was make a joke about the "steal price" of any Apple product -_-

The new Macbook "Pro" is......amazing.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

User8303410032: I think it would be better to see it as a smart phone that attach to a good camera to enhance it's communication and screen than create something that do nothing if it is not attached to the phone.
My question now, regarding the echo system, can I attach several things to the camera at the same time?

From what I read about reviews, the Q10 was very sluggish to connect. If it's anything like PlayMemories on my NEX, it literally feels "tacked on". Unlike the back of the camera LCD, "attaching it" meant 10-15fps update instead of 30 or 60 (video), and the picture was super grainy.

I think Moto is doing it right with contacts that touch the back of the phone. We have NFC for Android phones, why not a similar strip of contacts for different attachments?

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 13:39 UTC
On article Fast Five: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V Review (407 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hachu21: So 24fps burst is one of the main selling point of this new RX100.
Great.
But the french website "les numériques" is claiming a slightly different story :
To reach 24fps the camera double 1 image every 3 images taken.
this means that on 24ips, you have 16 real images taken and 8 that are doubled.
http://www.lesnumeriques.com/appareil-photo-numerique/sony-rx100-v-p35601/test.html

16fps is still an impressive score, but this marketing BS (if confirmed) is a bit irratating and useless.
Any details on this?

From the videos I've seen, it's not a true 24fps. It's like closer to 20-22. Plus, it assesses every frame if in auto, so you'll see some shots slightly brighter or darker than the next. Unless you have the matching 1/24th shutter speed, if you go higher, it won't have the motion blur that a 24fps movie has. It looks kind of jerky...like....a bunch of photos stitched together to make a movie :D

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 04:07 UTC

The front camera is only OK. The rear one is terrible! It keeps taking a shot of my hairy wrist!

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 03:47 UTC as 2nd comment

Wait. The SD cards were sticking out? I'm pretty sure I have a 2nd wave Asus netbook (remember those?) that had an SD card. Guess what? It didn't "stick out" half-way. In fact, it went all the way in and I used it as a "RAM expansion" for Win7 when it first came out. It never fell out or bumped out because it recessed and stayed inside the base.

That was at least 6 years ago. You're telling me Apple engineers couldn't make it flush inside the Macbook base? Also, with faster SD cards for both read and writes, you REALLY expect me to do wireless transfers of my 4K videos? What part of "efficient workflow" does Apple not understand?

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 03:36 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

User8303410032: I think it would be better to see it as a smart phone that attach to a good camera to enhance it's communication and screen than create something that do nothing if it is not attached to the phone.
My question now, regarding the echo system, can I attach several things to the camera at the same time?

You mean like the Sony Q10? I knew a guy that owned it. It took....fair photos. I say fair when compared to other point and shoots. It took great photos compared to any cellphone.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 03:29 UTC

This isn't anything new dropping important connections like Firewire from their Macbooks in 2008. You know....the connection professionals bragged about having on their video and music creation devices and had to use the slower USB 2.0 that rarely used even half of its speed? But at least that Macbook offered different connections that existed.

This one is just laughable about "for the future". It will take at least 2 years before USBC is in the average household (thanks to phones) and till then, the sleek design of a Mac will have unsightly wires and dongles on the side. At least a docking station hides the wires in the back.

Also, the whole purpose of HAVING wires is for maximum performance. I don't get the best reception in my apartment and the WiFi router is in the other room. Bluetooth is still far from transferring a 4K 10-bit YUV signal. Pros demand hard connections, not wireless.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 03:22 UTC as 14th comment
On article Xiaomi Redmi Pro quick review: dual-cam on a budget (41 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: I will not buy Xiaomi Redmi Pro from "Gearbest.com for $270" as Lars Rehm leads us too.

This is a $160 phone as seem from Xiaomi's home page:

http://www.mi.com/redmipro/

BTW, $160 USD ( CNY 1099 China Yuan) is MFC's listed price.

This is exactly why Americans have it great to buy the new Apple Macbook Pro 15" directly. Overseas it's EUR 2349+shipping. It's a steal at $2499 for the US :D

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 02:59 UTC
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZJ24: Like the review and images that demonstrate the features. I think the phone pic haters have to get that the smartphone has promoted photography in a way that nothing has probably since the Kodak Brownie in 1900.
My kids are 15 to 21 and take at least 5 to 10 photos every day with their iPhones and Galaxies - meaning they are selecting subjects, distance, composition, lighting several times a day every day.
They use my gear for shooting sports occasionally and are interested in the way certain Youtubers use manual focus in their videos so that's opened up a new set of conversations.
But for a lot of what they do, the quality, immediate feedback on a large high definition screen and access to filters and instant publication on social media is something we could have only dreamed of in the 80s.
It doesn't replace the skills and equipment of traditional photography, it complements them and promotes them. And also keeps you on your toes - there are some great phone pics out there.

You're talking about getting "good shots" by either accident (for the non-photographer), or having nearly all of the elements right to get a good shot with a crippled phone. Let's have Joe Blow gets a new custom controller colors for his Xbox1. He sets it on the coffee to take a shot. First shot is too bright with the LED. Second shot is blurry. Next shot is taken with a portable tripod, but the controller is in the middle of a bunch of other things on the table like pizza box, cords, cups, mail, etc. So he takes it level with the table, and all of the stuff in the background like DVD rack is distracting.

Jill Doe has a special phone where she can set the shutter speed to 30 seconds, physical 10x zoom, and bracketing shots for the new stuffed animal she made for her Etsy sales. By being able to saturate the colors with the longer exposure, longer lens for shallower DOF, and RAW output to the computer, her doll doesn't get lost with the background. No matter what I do, my GS5 is bad.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 01:55 UTC
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

melgross: The other thing not mentioned in the review is that the camera can take pictures in the wide band DCI-P3 standard that, so far at least, no other smartphone, or even DSLR, can. It is also the only smartphone that can display that P3 color gamut. Other Apple devices and computers can also display it.

The last thing which really needed to be mentioned, though the reviewer probably doesn't understand it, is that iOS is fully color managed, as is MacOS. This means that it will actually use the wide band display properly, which is something no Android device can, because there is no color management in Android. So you need to dig into the menu to select the color standard you need to see, and you have to do that constantly, if you view content with differing color standards. For example, 1080i/p is sRGB. But 4K UHD is DCI-P3.

As for the camera and phone being able to do DCI-P3, no one is going to care. I say "no one" because when I got Note 10" with a 2560x1600 RGBW display, it was the only thing that made my photos look better than a photo print. Having a bright backlit makes outside photos look more realistic. Given it won't have the "infinite" detail that a large print has, but for an 8x10 print and a 10" tablet next to it, the screen looks better. However, no one that I show photos to care. I have yet to have anyone ask about the high resolution and color accuracy the IPS has over the OLED versions.

That's because people notice the screen size and easier to see a photo than a 5" phone. Then again, people love to show their photos of their kids and pets on the same 5" phone screen. I doubt videographers or movie watchers are going to watch color graded movies on a 5" screen.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 01:36 UTC
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

melgross: The other thing not mentioned in the review is that the camera can take pictures in the wide band DCI-P3 standard that, so far at least, no other smartphone, or even DSLR, can. It is also the only smartphone that can display that P3 color gamut. Other Apple devices and computers can also display it.

The last thing which really needed to be mentioned, though the reviewer probably doesn't understand it, is that iOS is fully color managed, as is MacOS. This means that it will actually use the wide band display properly, which is something no Android device can, because there is no color management in Android. So you need to dig into the menu to select the color standard you need to see, and you have to do that constantly, if you view content with differing color standards. For example, 1080i/p is sRGB. But 4K UHD is DCI-P3.

I have done some hard researching and I finally found DisplayMate for the answer: Why have a P3 wide gamut if the display is only 8-bit panel (24bit)? While you can extol all you want about reds and greens will be deeper, if you can only use 12 crayons at one time from a maximum box of 96 crayons...then you're limited in gradation. Wider gamut is nice, but there's a reason why 4K displays are 10 or 12-bit color because having 1024 grades of a color is much better than 256 that 8-bit is limited to.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 01:33 UTC
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZJ24: Like the review and images that demonstrate the features. I think the phone pic haters have to get that the smartphone has promoted photography in a way that nothing has probably since the Kodak Brownie in 1900.
My kids are 15 to 21 and take at least 5 to 10 photos every day with their iPhones and Galaxies - meaning they are selecting subjects, distance, composition, lighting several times a day every day.
They use my gear for shooting sports occasionally and are interested in the way certain Youtubers use manual focus in their videos so that's opened up a new set of conversations.
But for a lot of what they do, the quality, immediate feedback on a large high definition screen and access to filters and instant publication on social media is something we could have only dreamed of in the 80s.
It doesn't replace the skills and equipment of traditional photography, it complements them and promotes them. And also keeps you on your toes - there are some great phone pics out there.

I wouldn't say it compliments or promotes good photography. I'd compare it with "look how many kids are typing things today!" Thanks to the phones, people are typing more about their erroneous opinions, using improper grammar and punctuation to promote all the book writers out there!

With many phones that don't even offer shutter or aperture settings, how on earth are they actually going to learn how complex take a photo with controls is going to be? That's like picking a story with Adlibs and inserting your own words into blanks at certain points and then declaring it's a "story". That's fine for children, but hardly what a real writer or person wanting to get into photography even can use.

The new LG V10/20 have near full manual controls. THAT is a start. Because if people want to go full auto, they can. For the persons interested in doing a few manual stuff, they can too.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 21:32 UTC
Total: 88, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »