Claudio NC

Claudio NC

Lives in Italy Camporosso, Italy
Works as a Outdoor photographer
Has a website at www.alpinow.com
Joined on Feb 15, 2011

Comments

Total: 186, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Extremely dramatic video touts Canon's CMOS technology (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Robert Zanatta: Can't wait to work on a 250 megapixel RAW file in Lightroom.

But you will be obliged to wait much longer, with Canon.
In 2005 or 2006, Canon stated that it was already able to produce cameras with 100 Mpixels sensors ...

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 21:42 UTC
On article Extremely dramatic video touts Canon's CMOS technology (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

GinoSVK: Nice to see 4 milon ISO, especially when my camera is unusable over 2000.

Not true, those cameras are usable with great success as a strong casual coloured noise machines, it is not a trivial matter, very usefull for many applications.
Come on, be happy!

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 21:37 UTC
On article Extremely dramatic video touts Canon's CMOS technology (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

Playright: Was anyone else confused by the "Canon made pixels bigger to catch more light" and "Canon made pixels smaller to catch more resolution"?

Never seen before!
Only Canon can make this miracle, the pixels multiplication in a CMOS image sensor.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 21:21 UTC
In reply to:

Doberman: Are these really great images??? Besides the POV, what really makes them so great?

Makingtrax ...
Please comments and let comment, criticizes and let criticize, remarks and let remark.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: I hate all of these except that very last one which looks more natural like it could have been taken from a higher hill.

The rest seem like weird abstracts; bad photographs showing a rare view because we do not fly does not make them good photographs. They're just angles we normally do not see, but they're still bad pictures.

I arrived there by myself, thanks for this Biological obviousness, but the brightest parts in this picture, the sun, albeit veiled, and the branches of trees covered with snow and maybe ice, are near the middle gray, gray-yellowish, so all is too much under-exposed and the closure of the shadows is excessive, too net, without intermediate shades, gradations.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 19:22 UTC
In reply to:

Biological_Viewfinder: I hate all of these except that very last one which looks more natural like it could have been taken from a higher hill.

The rest seem like weird abstracts; bad photographs showing a rare view because we do not fly does not make them good photographs. They're just angles we normally do not see, but they're still bad pictures.

The very last one more natural ?!
Have you perhaps forgotten to add the "un" in front of natural?
This is near to an ugly HDR.
Dark snow?
WOW!
And where?
Is that snow of water on the Earth, or it's another substance crystallized on another planet?

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 13:12 UTC
In reply to:

Doberman: Are these really great images??? Besides the POV, what really makes them so great?

Was thinking the same thing.
Particulary the last two pictures, great to be ... heavy and gloomy, near to an ugly HDR style.
Only nice, certainly not incredible, are the 1, 2, 5.
Seem that Allison likes big, capturing titles or have not a good point of reference.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 12:53 UTC
In reply to:

JP001: In the first shot the drone flies in from the opposite site. If that's where it's coming from, the operator activated 'return to home' with the space needle in between the drone and the pilot. If true, that explains why it's flying straight into the space needle. The drone just did what the operator told it to do: fly back to it's home position in a straight line. You can't blame DJI for pilot stupidity. The way the pilot adjust the camera tilt doesn't look like he's very experienced either. So, if you're not to confident as a pilot, you have no business flying at that altitude, above a city or around people. Let alone all three of them. People like that give drone's a bad rep and are the course of all the strict legislation.

Is clear to see one of the 4 landing feet of the Inspire 1: T 2:41 ... 2:46

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 13:55 UTC
In reply to:

JP001: In the first shot the drone flies in from the opposite site. If that's where it's coming from, the operator activated 'return to home' with the space needle in between the drone and the pilot. If true, that explains why it's flying straight into the space needle. The drone just did what the operator told it to do: fly back to it's home position in a straight line. You can't blame DJI for pilot stupidity. The way the pilot adjust the camera tilt doesn't look like he's very experienced either. So, if you're not to confident as a pilot, you have no business flying at that altitude, above a city or around people. Let alone all three of them. People like that give drone's a bad rep and are the course of all the strict legislation.

Was ... is an Inspire 1, not Phantom.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 13:44 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Best Camera Drones Under $1500 (96 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: Thanks for the very useful roundup. I've been toying with the idea as they are often on promotion here in Thailand but I never got around to building a feature comparison to know if the promotions are a good deal or just clearance of older generations with older features.

One negative comment for the roundup is the lack of consistency in highlighting important specs, for example, unless I still missed it after reading it twice, I don't see any specs for the range of the DJI Phantom 4 models.

Around mountains, far from cities, I have reached more than 6 km, with perfect video signal, so it is possible to go more far.
However I stopped there about 2 or 3 minutes for my photographic mission, to take many pictures (as on a sky tripod). Then during the RTH, I was forced to land about 1km from the Home Point (the take off point), due to the low level battery, it was impossible to do the landing at the take off point.
After the landing the remaining power was down to 5% or less and it was 100% at the take off moment.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 17:24 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Best Camera Drones Under $1500 (96 comments in total)

Audronis,
where did you get the 13 km info about the Mavic Pro?!
This is false.
DJI info writes 7 km and the maximum distance limit settable in its app (DJI GO 4) is 8000 m, with these data, the 13 km is obviously wrong.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 16:51 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

miric: Gold bayonet? O really? What a silly idea.

The body has little or nothing of the real gold color (in this picture) and obviously cannot be gold-plated, it would cost at least 10 times more.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 12:05 UTC
In reply to:

Maverick_: Had to stop after less than a min. Most annoying to see NY mothers act like their pre school play dates. Google, this is a fail. I like the comment below in giving it to real kids and not 40 year olds forcebly acting like one.
Things to keep in mind, Sony makes the camera for the latest iPhone. HTC makes the Pixel phone, but not sure who makes the camera for it. The video stabilizer seems to work well though.

I have had the courage and I watched the entire video, more than 2 minutes long, but I had the same feeling of discomfort, one of two women in particular with all the continuous hyper-ultra childish expressions, rather pathetic.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2016 at 12:17 UTC

However, it should be up soon Inspire 2 Pro ...

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 13:06 UTC as 1st comment

"about 10 minutes longer than the DJI Inspire 1" ?

If the 29.5 minutes are real (in optimal condition of course), I could say is about a quarter of hour more than Inspire 1 with TB48 battery, probably the worst aspect of this DJI wonderful drone.
And what about the max altitude from take-off of PowerEye?
Is it already known?

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 13:02 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

Eric Calabros: Dear Epson, please spend more of your R&D money on your need-to-be-much-better EVF screens that many of photographers are using or going to use, instead of these stupid projects only %1 of us would use. You don't listen of course, but I just wanted to ask it.

Not a stupid idea at all, maybe is stupid for you if you don't shot with a camera drone.
If will be well done, this is a very smart project and very useful.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 18:32 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maurizio Camagna: Focusing behavior (focus at the chosen aperture and not wide open) of Sony Lenses is a big big issue in dim light particularly when using AF-C (best option to shoot people in studio). This is particularly bad because beyond f5.6 (but even f4) you really can't focus at all or, even worse, get focus errors even when camera says it's ok. Manual focus at the same time is much harder if you don't have the "wide open" view. I consider this a serious bug and a bad mistake from Sony. At the moment it's the only real issue with the otherwise fantastic A7 bodies and I feel particularly sad because I've invested a lot in the system without realizing that this behavior was present. No other camera of any other manufacturer has this issue and would be easy from Sony to correct it with a firmware upgrade. Worse than that it wasn't this way at the beginning, it's a choice done only lately from Sony. A change for the worse, a change that really creates a problem for anybody shooting beyond f4.

Salient point due to the focus-shift effect/defect at different apertures of some lenses, right?

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 13:54 UTC
On article Comparison Review: Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA vs 55mm F1.8 ZA (258 comments in total)

The test-comparison about coma is naively poorly done.
Does not show the actual coma defect that occurs always, in its maximum intensity on the end of the frame corners.
Obviously this is badly done, the most distant, small lights had to get up to the top edge of the image.
Come on, how do you think to propose this?!

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 13:27 UTC as 35th comment
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (366 comments in total)

Why people that writes reviews and camera makers almost never think, or don't think cleverly enough about this type of photo shoots, that don't require only a quick camera, but also the right design, the right functionalities and ergonomic for vertical orientation - without a power booster grip that create another stability problem (meaning blurred shots), and unwanted weight added during long hicking?
Too difficult?
Or maybe we are white mountaineer dolphins, never seen before and never satisfied?

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 14:29 UTC as 61st comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X-Pro2 versus X-T2: Seven key differences (366 comments in total)

I don't take for panning and sports. For me using lenses of all types, fixed and zoom, from wide to tele, using the camera almost always in portrait orientation on a tripod, rotating the camera always on the vertical axis, and often on the horizontal also, and then doing the stitching of tens or hundreds of images, the XT-2 is the right choice, not the X Pro-2.
I do not want a camera that, during rotation and shots taken in rapid sequence (often with AE bracketings), slow down or stop, not allowing me to continue taking quickly all the shots until the end of the wide view that I want to cover.
If the clouds in the sky, or those that cover the mountains partially, with all the moving shadows, are quickly moving, the merge between shots becomes more and more difficult, much more time consuming, if not impossible to do at all!
This is just an example, a typical situation.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 14:29 UTC as 62nd comment
Total: 186, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »