tkbslc

Lives in United States Salt Lake City, UT, United States
Joined on May 30, 2008

Comments

Total: 5520, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »

Would love a 35/85 color and 35 mono configuration. I can use panorama for wider angle.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 22:50 UTC as 49th comment | 3 replies
On article Zack Arias on Unsplash and the 'race to the bottom' (282 comments in total)

If you need a photo of a very specific object, person or one-time event, then you still need to hire a photographer. But general objects, ideas, and scenery have all been photographed for fun by millions of people, millions of times. Why should photos like that have value when the supply is essentially infinite?

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 21:02 UTC as 47th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Marty4650: I cannot imagine why anyone would take a $10,000 trip to Nepal, and only bring a camera phone with them. Sure, it is a pretty good Point and Shoot camera, but even a five year old Pentax Q would get better results.

I bring my cell phone when I travel to Walmart.
I bring the best cameras and lenses I can find when I travel abroad.

Cool.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 19:29 UTC
In reply to:

Aaron801: To me the photos are surprisingly good. Still, the iPhone fails for me in images where there's lots of detail/texture, like the landscape shots in this series. When I look at the those shots at 100% they have the characteristic smearing of detail and blocky flat colors that I see with cell phones. Even so, this generation of phones has gotten much better and I see that kind of smearing of detail much less than on older phones.... or on the cheap phone that I have(which is terrible!). The portraits and other closer, less detailed shots look fine to me and even that "portrait mode" thing with the shallow DOF looks OK.

I'm impressed that so much can be done with a phone; it's a really nicely done series. As good as the quality of these photos are though, if I were going on such a trip and going really minimalist, with a pocketable, single focal length lens camera, I'd much prefer something like a little Ricoh than any kind of phone.

Why look at 100%. Not to mention, 100% is not a fixed size as it depends on the size and resolution of your display.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 17:53 UTC
In reply to:

RegisS: This is terrible. There's tape covering the selphie cam on every laptop, tablet, or smartphone I own. How can I block the damn thing on my next phone?

It seems silly to worry about. If your camera can be secretly recording, so could your microphone and your screen. And all your keystrokes and password entry. And all the data from all your apps. And all the photos you've taken. So taping your camera is just an illusion of control.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 16:43 UTC

LG v30 can do 4K Log capture. That probably would have been a better choice.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 15:57 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

SamStoned: If this had a viewfinder...

If it had a viewfinder it would be called the X-E3....

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 06:24 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: No VF and slow 4K? Way to stay classy Fuji. Panasonic, Sony and now Fuji have all lowered their standards to launch crappy flip up screen based compact cameras without viewfinders for the narcissist YouTubers. How low can we go.

They've been making this line for years now, where have you been?

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 06:23 UTC
In reply to:

CaptainNoddy: While people teasing Fuji made 4K 15p video for its LOWEST-end camera, the Canon 6DII, 80D & M series cameras are still doing 1080p and they are generally accepted by the customers :)

TBH, GREAT ENTRY CAMERA INDEED. Well Done, Fuji!

It's better to just own that you are a 1080p camera than to pretend that 15fps is video. It's dishonest.

At $600 brand new with a lens, the specs are great without the phony 4k. If they called it 4K still mode or action mode or something, then fine.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 06:21 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

105012: I’ve had iPhone’s since 2008, but instantly adjusted to the lack of home button, I have no idea why anyone would struggle with that! Love the large screen in such a compact device and Face ID.

I don't think it's the same, and I don't like using my iPad as much since iOS 11.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 21:29 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

105012: I’ve had iPhone’s since 2008, but instantly adjusted to the lack of home button, I have no idea why anyone would struggle with that! Love the large screen in such a compact device and Face ID.

My kids could figure out the iPad when they were 2 because it was click on app icon to start and click on home button to close. My 90 year old grandpa could too. That was the genius of the interface.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 20:27 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: How is 52mm "telephoto"? I don't think any manufacturer classifies their 50mm standard lenses as telephoto.

They are definitely stretching that definition, but I think it is just in reference to two lens options. When talking about your 16-35mm lens, you might call 35mm the "tele" end of the zoom range, even though it's still wide.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 20:21 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

ozturert: So why has Apple halved the production quantity of IPhone X?

-Too expensive
-Too expensive to repair
-No home button
-Apple always marketed simplicity and now they want you to memorize a dozen swipe gestures just to perform basic functions.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 16:24 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anulu: There are hundreds of sites with smartphone reviews, who cares about a phone in a photography site. Yes, yes i know you can take pictures with this toys, but they are unsuitable for serious photography. Pictures from a phone looking acceptable in 4-5-6" displays but soon as you watch in a monitor they are look like oil paintings

I care.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: A solution in search of a problem.

I'm pretty open minded, but I can't see anyone I've ever met using one of those. No, not everyone enjoys photography. But at least with a phone they can see that the picture is taken and make sure to stand in the right place and point the camera at the action, and move if someone gets in the way or the action changes places. With this, you still have to turn it on and point it in the right direction, but you have no guarantee that someone at your party won't stand in front of it the whole time or that the action won't turn the other way. So it's not really set it and forget it. It almost requires more thought. Image choosing technology can be implemented in any device. But until this can crawl around your walls like a spider following the action and position changes, I don't see it being useful or practical.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 05:08 UTC

A solution in search of a problem.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2018 at 20:17 UTC as 33rd comment | 4 replies
On article PowerShot Shootout: Canon's G1 X III vs G7 X II (251 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg OH: Excellent analysis. I recently got a G7X II, and I'd compare the results to an APS-C DSLR. Despite the larger sensors, DSLRs don't have f/1.8 IS lenses.

I agree that it compares to APS-C but only if comparing to a f3.5-5.6 kit lens. If you put an f2.8 zoom or f1.8 primes on the APS-C camera, the 1" cam can't compete.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2018 at 22:45 UTC
On article PowerShot Shootout: Canon's G1 X III vs G7 X II (251 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg OH: Also, the portrait comparison also illustrates clearly the advantage of the 7's greater zoom range. If the RX100 V had a 100mm lens, I probably would have chosen it over the G7X II.

Since this shot was with a distant background, you can use the physical aperture size to calculate the amount of blur. The G1X III has an 8mm maximum aperture diameter and the G7X II has a 13.1mm one. So just based on that, if you set up equal framing, the G7X II has 63% more blur (meaning the blur circles are 63% larger). The G1X III would need to have an f3.4 lens to match that (about 1.5 stops faster)

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2018 at 22:42 UTC
On article PowerShot Shootout: Canon's G1 X III vs G7 X II (251 comments in total)
In reply to:

zos xavius: I think the takeaway here is that the G7 is better for general use and the G1 is better for landscaping or studio shooting on a tripod. If ultimate IQ is your goal the G1 is a little sharper, but as soon as the light goes down the G7 is going to give you cleaner files with less dof. I was actually comparing these two recently and came to the same conclusion. In reality for most people the differences in IQ are going to be small and the G7 is probably the better camera.

if ultimate image quality is your goal, Use a better lens on an ILC.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2018 at 22:33 UTC
In reply to:

Rick880: So, DPR is promoting fake news now?

Isn't this debunking fake news? Maybe we read different articles.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2018 at 20:55 UTC
Total: 5520, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »