Rick Evertsz

Rick Evertsz

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Jan 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mais78: Can this drive a 5k monitor or we need to wait for the next intel chips?

@Mais78
Yes, sorry, it's the 15" model. I didn't even notice that the article mentioned the 13"; I was interested in the 8-cores :)

Link | Posted on May 26, 2019 at 09:13 UTC
In reply to:

Mais78: Can this drive a 5k monitor or we need to wait for the next intel chips?

Apparently it can drive two at once.

“Up to two displays with 5120-by-2880 resolution at 60Hz in over a billion colours
Up to four displays with 4096-by-2304 resolution at 60Hz in over a billion colours”

Link | Posted on May 24, 2019 at 02:20 UTC

Great customer service. My V1 anchors are 4 years old, with a bit of abrasion. I regarded this as fair wear and tear. Now they are sending me new V4s. Fantastic.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 03:17 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

Billiam29: Dear Apple, how about you reign in the fancy stuff and just give us the one simple simple thing thousands of people have been wanting for years:
The ability sort by f*&@#n' file name!

@Billiam29

Have a look at HashPhotos. I think I paid $5 for it ages ago. My photos are all tagged in C1 with various keywords. When I import into HashPhotos, it can pick up the IPTC keywords. I then create Smart Albums to organise the library by keyword. The app's UI is delightful. Best I've seen, having trialled quite a few photo management apps on iOS over the years. This is the first that works really nicely. It automatically allows you to filter by tag too, so if you just wanted to show photos from some birthday party, you would click on that tag, and it would just show those photos. I tend to go sour on an app after a while. This is the first photo management one that I still REALLY enjoy using.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2018 at 02:31 UTC

For the price of a cup of coffee, it's worth it even for just 10 mins of toying around. Early days for computational photography, but apps like this give a taste of what's coming. Of course this app has severe limitations, but it's fascinating adding lights and moving them forwards and backwards in 3D space, e.g. to create rim lighting. I don't know if I'll end up keeping the results of any of these experiments, but it's $2 well spent, just for the entertainment value!

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 05:45 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

Photoman: Didn't Steve Jobs HATE the stylus/pencil concept??? If he has alive, he would throw it at the Apple staff and swear at them!

Steve was talking about using a stylus as the MAIN interaction device. He argued that fingers are better for that. Using a stylus for specialised functions, like drawing and photo editing is a different use case to web browsing, writing emails, etc.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2018 at 23:28 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (569 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

I haven’t read the original statement, but perhaps their frame of reference was Sony’s latest range of FF mirrorless models. That would explain why they refer to the A7iii as basic. It’s certainly not basic when compared to the cameras of its competitors.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 19:57 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Evertsz: Judging by the volume of vitriol in the comments preceding mine, I seem to be in the minority. I thought the article was nicely balanced - not partisan at all (e.g. the nod to the Pixel's image stacking). As a rank amateur, I still find it interesting to read about the conditions under which a pro photographer considers a smartphone to be good enough, and what trade-offs tip the balance in the phone's favour, or otherwise.

I don't come here as often as I used to, so I guess I forget how uncharitable and narrow in their assessment people can be!

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 21:59 UTC

Judging by the volume of vitriol in the comments preceding mine, I seem to be in the minority. I thought the article was nicely balanced - not partisan at all (e.g. the nod to the Pixel's image stacking). As a rank amateur, I still find it interesting to read about the conditions under which a pro photographer considers a smartphone to be good enough, and what trade-offs tip the balance in the phone's favour, or otherwise.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 21:45 UTC as 196th comment | 3 replies

A9:28 D5:25 1Dxii: 19

A7s shooter. Before that Sony A700, and before that Minolta. So, that may have "coloured" my perspective.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 06:37 UTC as 202nd comment
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2740 comments in total)
In reply to:

davids8560: I can't wait till 2029 when I snag one of these off eBay almost NIB complete with two G Master lenses and one of those ancient 512GB UHS-II SD cards for $327.90!

@Geedorama: I think 2019 is a typo. He uses 2005 5D for comparison. That's 12 years ago; 2029 is 12 years from now.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 10:29 UTC
On article Next level: iPhone 7 Plus camera review (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

Menneisyys: Excerpt: "At lower light levels things unfortunately look slightly different. Due to the slower aperture and lack of optical image stabilization in the 56mm camera module, the stock camera app decides it is best to use the wide-angle lens and zoom digitally in lower light, as you can see in the samples below. This essentially means that with the stock camera app, in anything darker than a well-lit interior, the tele-lens is deactivated."

I would also add that this
1, can't be circumvented while using the stock Camera app (you can't force the phone to use the tele sensor) and

2, the app's decision is ONLY based on the light levels and not on, say, being on a tripod, that is, accelerometer etc. sensor input. This, regretfully, means that you can't shoot with the tele lens in worse light, not even from a tripod.

This is VERY bad news as, otherwise, the 4K recording quality of the camera isn't at all bad. (Continued below.)

Use Mavis. That lets you select the tele lens for video. Mavis is pricey, but seems to be streets ahead of the other video apps on iOS.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 07:09 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2512 comments in total)
In reply to:

gtstone: The title of this article took me back to 1966-1967 when I took workshops with Minor White. One of his big themes was the concept of "equivalence" (or sometimes "equivalents") where he would show us image after image of clouds and try to get us to understand that the image of a cloud-scape was "equivalent" to a feeling he wanted to convey. Similarly sea-scapes and rocks.

Here's a link about this:
http://jnevins.com/whitereading.htm

He never talked about photographic technique: he had lab assistants to help us with that. What he wanted to talk in about in class was how we would respond to a print (as opposed to "react").

Another frequent theme was pre-visualization: you don't look for something interesting to photograph, you look for something that will make an interesting photograph. You look around and pre-visualize what a print of what you see before you would look like considering all the steps to get there. I often wonder what he would have done with with Photoshop!

I wouldn't go as far as to say it's ungrammatical. New terms get defined all the time; whether or not they get adopted is another matter. I am previsualizing a selfie to see if it's worth taking :)

From Wikipedia: "The term previsualization has been attributed to Minor White who divided visualization into previsualization, referring to visualization while studying the subject; and postvisualization, referring to remembering the visualized image at printing time."

Apparently, previsualization is more specific than visualization. So, xandxor is correct in saying that every instance of previsualization is visualization. However, the reverse is not the case, so the word is not redundant (assuming one agrees that a distinction between pre and post-visualization is worthwhile).

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 20:19 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2512 comments in total)
In reply to:

gtstone: The title of this article took me back to 1966-1967 when I took workshops with Minor White. One of his big themes was the concept of "equivalence" (or sometimes "equivalents") where he would show us image after image of clouds and try to get us to understand that the image of a cloud-scape was "equivalent" to a feeling he wanted to convey. Similarly sea-scapes and rocks.

Here's a link about this:
http://jnevins.com/whitereading.htm

He never talked about photographic technique: he had lab assistants to help us with that. What he wanted to talk in about in class was how we would respond to a print (as opposed to "react").

Another frequent theme was pre-visualization: you don't look for something interesting to photograph, you look for something that will make an interesting photograph. You look around and pre-visualize what a print of what you see before you would look like considering all the steps to get there. I often wonder what he would have done with with Photoshop!

@gtstone: Splendid article. Thanks for the link.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 01:55 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2512 comments in total)

I love how simply and clearly this article explains equivalence. Some people can't help but nitpick, which is fine for them, I don't begrudge people sweating the fine detail. But, for the average reader, this article is perfectly pitched.

I think this article will be valued for years to come, thanks to the clarity of presentation.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 21:46 UTC as 407th comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

dehenderson: I got a Sony RX100 iii this week and have found it very underwhelming despite all the hype. Makes me wonder if I got a faulty RX100 iii:

- Image quality is okay but not great. Similar to a Canon S-95.

- There apparently are no codec files, as yet, for its RAW images. So, it's useless with Lightroom.

- Image write time is very slow even with a high-speed Sandisk Extreme 16GB card. About 5-6 sec write time.

- The instruction booklet is obtusely written by someone with English as a second language, lacking detail and not helpful in learning such a complex camera with so much packed inside.

- Syncing to my iMac and/or Wifi just does not happen despite hours of attempts. It does not sync via WiFi in my opinion.

All-in-all, I would give it a marginal C-grade for such a pricy camera.

Anyone have thoughts for an alternative?

- Lightroom has handled m3 RAW files for a while now.
- WiFi works fine for me (transferring to iPhone and iPad). Worked first time and has been flawless (unlike Eye-Fi card, that sometimes erroneously thinks it's already transferred pics). Have a look on the forum for discussions amongst people, who like you, were initially stumped by its WiFi. I think it's straightforward, but as always, if you expect it to work differently, it can be confusing (hint: the camera is the hotspot).
- Card write times are fast for me (on 15MB/s write SanDisk).
- Like the m1, I find the image quality to be astounding for such a small camera. S-95 doesn't come close, unless there is heaps of light. Try shooting ISO3200 RAW. Have a look in Lightroom. I had the m1 for 2 years, and I am still blown away by how good the high ISO RAW files are for such a diminutive camera.
- I give it a A++++++++++ (as they say on eBay!)

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2014 at 10:57 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

skyrunr: Can you please test/review turning the flash on and off (flash fill specifically) quickly? I had the original RX100 for a year and this drove me crazy. First you had to enable the flash in a menu, then half-press the shutter, then it would pop-up, then you could take a photo.

Keep in mind this is something my $99 IS300 does more quickly (without an OK confirmation too, like Nikon still does). I'd much rather have a fully articulating screen or touchscreen than a tilt or EVF.

Did I mention the shutter had no feel and was too sensitive? Have they improved the half press detent? I can't for the life of me figure out why we haven't gotten rid of or vastly improved shutter buttons yet. On small cameras they are a major cause of camera shake. I'd didn't care for the shutter location on this model. I'd rather it be out farther. My Android phone takes photos with a whistle. Don't knock it until you try it. ;)

Fair enough. The A700 was terribly inconsistent with flash, so it wouldn't have surprised me if the RX100m3 had issues too. Seems ok so far though.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 22:36 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I would like to see more discussion about the crop capability of this combination. f2.8 70mm 1" sensor is a lot of light, especially with 20mp of resolution to capture it. The lens seems very sharp in the center at the very least, a combination that should lead to reasonable crop results. The chart above includes The S120 which uses a 43mm2 sensor. The RX100 can be cropped down to that size and would offer 1.7x crop, still at f2.8 but now 7.4mp (sufficient) and 118mm, very similar to the 120mm maximum of the S120. Basically, the RX100 still has a huge telephoto advantage over the S120 because it's sensor is so much bigger and it's aperture at max telephoto is so much brighter that even cropping it down it's still f13 equivalent at 120mm at still 7.4mp resolution, far better than the S120.

The RX100's zoom doesn't reach past 70 but it's photos from just as physically far away will contain more photons than several of it's competitors with longer reach.

@Altruisto. Well, if you move back to take the shot and then crop, you will get the same perspective as a longer focal length lens from that latter position. So, I think Mosc is right. But if you stand in the same place and crop, then the perspective is of course the same. The point is that you can, for example, use it for the typical portrait focal length range by moving back and cropping. Less MP, same perspective, same exposure.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 21:53 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

skyrunr: Can you please test/review turning the flash on and off (flash fill specifically) quickly? I had the original RX100 for a year and this drove me crazy. First you had to enable the flash in a menu, then half-press the shutter, then it would pop-up, then you could take a photo.

Keep in mind this is something my $99 IS300 does more quickly (without an OK confirmation too, like Nikon still does). I'd much rather have a fully articulating screen or touchscreen than a tilt or EVF.

Did I mention the shutter had no feel and was too sensitive? Have they improved the half press detent? I can't for the life of me figure out why we haven't gotten rid of or vastly improved shutter buttons yet. On small cameras they are a major cause of camera shake. I'd didn't care for the shutter location on this model. I'd rather it be out farther. My Android phone takes photos with a whistle. Don't knock it until you try it. ;)

Hi Daniel. I just did a quick investigation of this on the RX100m3. In M and A modes, if you fix ISO, it keeps shutter speed and aperture unchanged for Fill and Slow Sync (I didn't try other modes). If you use Auto ISO, it lowers the ISO (in the situation I tested it in). In all cases, the shot was well exposed. Seems well behaved to me.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 21:39 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

skyrunr: Can you please test/review turning the flash on and off (flash fill specifically) quickly? I had the original RX100 for a year and this drove me crazy. First you had to enable the flash in a menu, then half-press the shutter, then it would pop-up, then you could take a photo.

Keep in mind this is something my $99 IS300 does more quickly (without an OK confirmation too, like Nikon still does). I'd much rather have a fully articulating screen or touchscreen than a tilt or EVF.

Did I mention the shutter had no feel and was too sensitive? Have they improved the half press detent? I can't for the life of me figure out why we haven't gotten rid of or vastly improved shutter buttons yet. On small cameras they are a major cause of camera shake. I'd didn't care for the shutter location on this model. I'd rather it be out farther. My Android phone takes photos with a whistle. Don't knock it until you try it. ;)

That's weird indeed. Thanks for the heads up. I'll check this out. Definitely NOT what I want the camera to do.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 01:33 UTC
Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »