TrojMacReady

TrojMacReady

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Joined on May 17, 2010

Comments

Total: 1562, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (410 comments in total)
In reply to:

bartjeej: I think in the comparisons to the 1" sensor group, it's useful to remember that the lens speed equivalence does a good job of comparing dof across sensor formats, and gives a good indication of low light potential (which also depends on sensor efficiency, besides equivalent aperture)... but in good light, where you can be at base iso regardless of the lens speed, the difference in f-number is made up for by the shutter speed. So long as thats the case, the larger sensor will still collect more photons than the smaller, giving potential for better dynamic range and color depth.

In theory, ceteris (such as efficiency per unit sensor area) paribus, yes.

But the smaller sensor is probably a little more efficient per area too. The R100 mk V scores the same maximum DR as the M5 for example despite a 3 times smaller sensor. In terms of color depth, the APS-C sensor does score a little better still.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 08:06 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: Oh, heck yeah!

We shouldn't just get away from light pollution, we should reduce it. Look to Flagstaff, AZ for a guide.

And in fact, a lot of the street lighting does not help in any meaningful way:
http://cs.astronomy.com/asy/b/astronomy/archive/2015/07/29/humans-cling-to-their-primal-fear-of-the-dark.aspx

It does indeed affect organisms all around the world, in negative ways. That includes humans, as pointed out by Lee Jay.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 21:07 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Iuvenis: Some of these look quite good, but some are terrible. That last shot of the mountain is so mushy, for example.

Noise seems to be a factor in all the shots. Why not shoot at ISO 25? If base ISO is 50, they're really missing a trick.

The last one used digital zoom, as did a few others.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 13:29 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rigucci: At the resolution that the images are posted any of the decent phone cameras produces those images unless the images are posted for viewing the original file on a computer it is hard to determine whether the images are of good quality.

No, not every phone will do as well with large dynamic range scenes and subject isolation. In fact, barely any other phone does.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 04:50 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cheng Bao: Most of them are very good.
However, why #20 and #27 looked like heavy processed by water color filter @iso50?

They appear to be using digital zoom (27mm equiv. cropped and upsampled to mimic a longer FL).

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 22:53 UTC
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jake2046: From my experience with all smartphones...most outdoor photography look great...BUT once you are indoor the images quality diminished dramatically.

Some of the outdoor shots appear to have used digital zoom though (for example the very last one).

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 22:47 UTC
On article Nine things you should know about the Google Pixel 2 (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: Quality should be similar to a P&S camera with a 1/2.7" sensor (the smallest kind available on such cameras). What is there to be excited about?

Unedited ooc jpegs:

Https://photos.app.goo.gl/jdcvpsQtnE5iBALt2

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 07:13 UTC
On article Nine things you should know about the Google Pixel 2 (114 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: Quality should be similar to a P&S camera with a 1/2.7" sensor (the smallest kind available on such cameras). What is there to be excited about?

It's quite a bit better thanks to fast and smart multi frame processing.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 07:09 UTC
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: The first full frame dslr to score 100. An number of MF camera's with the 50mp sony Sensor score 101. Now the red helium has been tested and it scores 108. https://www.dxomark.com/red-helium-8k-dxomark-sensor-score-108-a-new-all-time-high-score2

No, not in this sense.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: The first full frame dslr to score 100. An number of MF camera's with the 50mp sony Sensor score 101. Now the red helium has been tested and it scores 108. https://www.dxomark.com/red-helium-8k-dxomark-sensor-score-108-a-new-all-time-high-score2

The reason Red cameras are never compared, is because they apply temporal NR to still images, similar to taking several consecutive shots on a still camera and combining them.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 18:58 UTC
On article Nikon D850 added to studio scene comparison (464 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: The Sony A7R seems to have an edge over the D850 in the high ISO performance. Maybe the sharpness of the D850 is lower by default... Hard to say.

Color noise, ...hmmm, different eyes, different interpretations:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=nikon_d850&attr13_1=nikon_d810&attr13_2=sony_a7rii&attr13_3=canon_eos5dsr&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&attr171_2=1&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.9022298657998822&y=-0.19140005287301848

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 01:00 UTC
In reply to:

LessMirrored19: Rx0 1 inch" sensor 699$
Hero 6 1/2.3 inch" 570$
Lol

The less than 1 stop advantage is specifically in low light or noise in midtones/highlights, because in terms of DR we're probably looking at roughly 2 stops difference (S-LOG to take advantage of it).

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2017 at 19:31 UTC
On article iPhone X vs. Samsung Note 8 (378 comments in total)

" It is smaller, but it's inarguably better in terms of color management. The iPhone X's wide gamut OLED is the most color accurate device on the market"

Nonsense. The Samsung displays have been accurately calibrated (choice between sRGB, Adobe RGB and/or even wider gamuts) since the Note 4, 3 years ago and held the crown in this department since. The Note 7 was the first to support HDR display, even for images. The Note 8 also supports an accurately calibrated DCI-P3 gamut (alongside sRGB and Adobe RGB). Even though Android in itself defaults to sRGB, apps (including galleries) can take advantage of larger gamuts, including DCI-P3.

This is the type of misinformation I'd expect to see on non technical sites.
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note8_ShootOut_100.htm

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 21:04 UTC as 54th comment | 3 replies
On article iPhone X vs. Samsung Note 8 (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: apple and samsung both make great phones ... for my needs the headphone jack and sd option are not sacrificable .... i found this interesting.....

http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/08/samsungs-note-8-headphone-jack-got-a-lot-of-applause.html

"vice-president Justin Denison came out to talk about...the Note 8. 64 GB storage, 256 with a microSD card. wireless charging. IP68 resistant.

But Denison saved the best . “Thanks to our partnership with Harman, the Note 8 will come with premium AKG headphones, tuned for a superior listening experience,”
he said. “But wait, there’s more. Guess what you can do with those earphones? That’s right: You can plug them into the standard earphone jack.”

And the crowd went wild.

People whistled. There may have been some whoos, perhaps even some hooting and hollering. In other words, one of

the biggest applause lines of Samsung’s hour-long presentation wasn’t because of any innovative new feature — it was its decision to not innovate."

You don't have to be. A good device gives you choice. Wireless is a choice on the Samsung. Wired still allows better quality (better DAC built in the phone than almost any wireless headphones, no measurable or audible loss in quality during transmission to the headphones) and no hassle with recharging (and eventually dying) batteries in wireless headphones.

Or when you don't want the wire limitations, you can connect a wireless set.

Wires still allow benefits in many situations too and for that reason, they are still all around us and will be for many years to come.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 20:44 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Compact cameras got really expensive and bulkier.
Costing $1700, i believe Sony's vision is even more profit.

I have yet to see a rebuttal with actual sound reasoning.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Compact cameras got really expensive and bulkier.
Costing $1700, i believe Sony's vision is even more profit.

"there is nothing to compare"

Yes there is, it's the same type of camera, just with a much larger sensor, more reach, much faster speed, a more robust build, more bells and whistles, a smaller body and a price that about doubled after inflation.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 17:00 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Compact cameras got really expensive and bulkier.
Costing $1700, i believe Sony's vision is even more profit.

Not really. Compare this for example to the superzoom benchmark from 11 years ago, the Panasonic FZ-50. Aperture values are similar over the same (35mm) equiv. focal lengths, but the Sony covers a much larger range (24-600mm equiv. vs 35-420mm). The Sony body is slightly taller, more narrow and much shorter (lens more compact). Here comes the kicker though: the Sony packs a sensor that is 3 times larger in surface, despite the overall smaller housing...

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 15:47 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Compact cameras got really expensive and bulkier.
Costing $1700, i believe Sony's vision is even more profit.

Not really. Compare this for example to the superzoom benchmark from 11 years ago, the Panasonic FZ-50. Aperture values are similar over the same (35mm) equiv. focal lengths, but the Sony covers a much larger range (24-600mm equiv. vs 35-420mm). The Sony body is slightly taller, more narrow and much shorter (lens more compact). Here comes the kicker though: the Sony packs a sensor that is 3 times larger in surface, despite the overall smaller housing...

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2017 at 15:46 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (1984 comments in total)
In reply to:

aioravecz: Seems like a great camera, but nothing really special compared to my a99II...probably a bit more rugged and the AF is probably on par. The video seems great on paper but will probably be dissapointing in real life. they should have incorporated a oversampled 1.5x crop mode....

The A99II on the other hand doesn't suffer from any shutter shock or mirror shock, has every lens (primes!) stabilized, has much better live view AF and appears to have better video (oversampling) and Wifi capabilities.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 14:12 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (1984 comments in total)
In reply to:

FujLiver: congratulations to Nikon for a great new camera. And also to Sony for the sensor and giving it to Nikon before they use it themselves (in the coming A7R iii).
time to dust off my Nikon lenses ...

The only thing Fuji designs is the color filter. Their sensors are existing Exmor Sony designs.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 14:09 UTC
Total: 1562, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »