David Hull

David Hull

Lives in United States San Diego, CA, United States
Works as a Electronics Engineer (Semiconductors) -- retired
Joined on Mar 25, 2005

Comments

Total: 165, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Excellent article, I can't wait to read the next ones.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2021 at 15:43 UTC as 76th comment
In reply to:

10 FPS: Can’t wait for the reviews on this. If it’s compelling enough, I might just consider selling my 15-35.

My thoughts exactly. A lot less weight for a travel kit and with the IS in the R5, the extra stop isn't all that compelling.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2021 at 04:31 UTC

Looks like an exchange of weight for length to me.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2021 at 13:52 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies

OMG -- someone actually successfully implemented "Double Super PDAF." in a production device. Canon is indeed doomed :-)

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2021 at 19:13 UTC as 14th comment | 8 replies

My first digital cameras was the Nikon CoolPix 880. It was not that bad, 3.3 MP i believe. I moved from there 5 years later to the Canon 20D and have been Canon ever since.

Prior to the CP 880, i had an AE-1 and an A1. Currently with an R and an R5.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2021 at 23:22 UTC as 33rd comment
In reply to:

David Hull: Some good shots of the "Russian Woodpecker" (the antenna arrays). This was an over the horizon radar that operated in the early '70s and was a plague to many amateur radio operators in the US with it's broad band pop, pop, pop sound in the middle of the 40 meter ham band. In those days there was much speculation as to what the hell it was. Now we see it.

Answers:

1. I wouldn't need gigawatts. there would be a 1/r^2 loss coming to the target from their transmitter and then the radar signature if the target is probably somewhat small. So I figured that the power I originated (a few hundred watts) might be similar to what the target returned.

2. No idea on that but we did noticed that when we did that they would sometimes alter their frequency. That might have been part of their plan, though.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2021 at 01:41 UTC
In reply to:

David Hull: Some good shots of the "Russian Woodpecker" (the antenna arrays). This was an over the horizon radar that operated in the early '70s and was a plague to many amateur radio operators in the US with it's broad band pop, pop, pop sound in the middle of the 40 meter ham band. In those days there was much speculation as to what the hell it was. Now we see it.

OK, that's interesting. I wonder if all of those dipoles were some sort of steerable array? I used to listen to that thing on 40 meters and would often send out a series of CW pulses to it to see if I could mess with them since we all thought it was some sort of over the horizon radar which turned out to be correct.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2021 at 20:44 UTC
In reply to:

David Hull: Some good shots of the "Russian Woodpecker" (the antenna arrays). This was an over the horizon radar that operated in the early '70s and was a plague to many amateur radio operators in the US with it's broad band pop, pop, pop sound in the middle of the 40 meter ham band. In those days there was much speculation as to what the hell it was. Now we see it.

I am sure that it was really sophisticated for it's day. All vacuum tubes and lots of transmitter power. We never get to see the radios and the electronics. All that seems to remain is the antenna array.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2021 at 22:23 UTC

Some good shots of the "Russian Woodpecker" (the antenna arrays). This was an over the horizon radar that operated in the early '70s and was a plague to many amateur radio operators in the US with it's broad band pop, pop, pop sound in the middle of the 40 meter ham band. In those days there was much speculation as to what the hell it was. Now we see it.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2021 at 15:26 UTC as 15th comment | 8 replies
On article Closer look: Canon RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

David Hull: Did is read something wrong or they actually asking you to pony up another $59 for a $1400 "L" lens? Do you have to pay extra for the little grey bag as well?

Looks like it is included in the US as well. I got the impression from one of the early review sites that it was not. Good news.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2021 at 15:35 UTC
On article Closer look: Canon RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

David Hull: Did is read something wrong or they actually asking you to pony up another $59 for a $1400 "L" lens? Do you have to pay extra for the little grey bag as well?

Ups, my bad, I left out the key part of the comment. It looks like they are not including the lens hood but are charging another $60 for it.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2021 at 01:32 UTC
On article Closer look: Canon RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM (181 comments in total)

Did is read something wrong or they actually asking you to pony up another $59 for a $1400 "L" lens? Do you have to pay extra for the little grey bag as well?

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2021 at 18:51 UTC as 26th comment | 6 replies

Serious question: At more than twice the cost of the 600 EX-RT, what does this thing really bring to the game?

Not only is the damn thing $1100 but a couple spare bats are probably another $200 on top of that.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2020 at 15:29 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply

$1099????? You got to be kidding. Damn thing better make coffee.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2020 at 04:40 UTC as 53rd comment | 1 reply

A7 with built in PlayStation.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2020 at 18:19 UTC as 78th comment
In reply to:

David Hull: I think that all of this discussion of overheating in video modes raises the question of what can photographers focused primarily on stills expect? It seems to me that, with the R5, Canon has finally provided the camera that the traditional photography crowd has been screaming for: relatively high resolution, DR competitive with Sony and Nikon, IBIS, very competitive AF and tracking etc.

I think all of this discussion of video overheat raises a certain amount of FUD for stills shooters. I would like to see some commentary from the camera testers regarding the effect of this issue on stills shooting. Perhaps it exists and I have missed it?

1, Are there any limits imposed on stills shooting?
2. If you run it up against the wall in video use do you have to wait for 20 minutes before you can squeeze off a still shot?
3. Does DR depend on the number of shots taken i.e. does heat buildup on the sensor raise read noise noticeably? how does that compare to other cameras etc.
4....

FWIW: My background is in the manufacturing of consumer electronics equipment. Cable Modems, Satellite and Cable TV Set Top Boxes etc. I did this for about 30 years. This informs some of my comments about costs etc.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 21:04 UTC
In reply to:

David Hull: I think that all of this discussion of overheating in video modes raises the question of what can photographers focused primarily on stills expect? It seems to me that, with the R5, Canon has finally provided the camera that the traditional photography crowd has been screaming for: relatively high resolution, DR competitive with Sony and Nikon, IBIS, very competitive AF and tracking etc.

I think all of this discussion of video overheat raises a certain amount of FUD for stills shooters. I would like to see some commentary from the camera testers regarding the effect of this issue on stills shooting. Perhaps it exists and I have missed it?

1, Are there any limits imposed on stills shooting?
2. If you run it up against the wall in video use do you have to wait for 20 minutes before you can squeeze off a still shot?
3. Does DR depend on the number of shots taken i.e. does heat buildup on the sensor raise read noise noticeably? how does that compare to other cameras etc.
4....

@xeppelin: That is the $1000 question, isn't it. I don't think the difference is due to cost. To me Canon have priced to value, rather than cost. They seem to think that the inclusion of these modes are worth a certain amount of money and they are charging accordingly.

I don't mean to say that video is "free" you have a point that all that stuff costs something, I just don't think it is as much as people think. We got video almost as soon as we got live view. It seems that once you have done Live View, the video is there.

All that being said, if you put in a feature, and ask money for it, people are going to expect it to work. One could argue that a feature that can be used for 30 minutes and then you have to let the camera cool down for two hours is not really functional and certainly not very practical. So we "stills" shooters are being charged for the value of not only something we don't need, but something one could argue doesn't really work. :-(.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2020 at 21:01 UTC
In reply to:

David Hull: I think that all of this discussion of overheating in video modes raises the question of what can photographers focused primarily on stills expect? It seems to me that, with the R5, Canon has finally provided the camera that the traditional photography crowd has been screaming for: relatively high resolution, DR competitive with Sony and Nikon, IBIS, very competitive AF and tracking etc.

I think all of this discussion of video overheat raises a certain amount of FUD for stills shooters. I would like to see some commentary from the camera testers regarding the effect of this issue on stills shooting. Perhaps it exists and I have missed it?

1, Are there any limits imposed on stills shooting?
2. If you run it up against the wall in video use do you have to wait for 20 minutes before you can squeeze off a still shot?
3. Does DR depend on the number of shots taken i.e. does heat buildup on the sensor raise read noise noticeably? how does that compare to other cameras etc.
4....

Most of that stuff is not that expansive and exists in the R6 and the R both of which sell at significantly lower prices. They have to read and process that sensor data 120 times /s to refresh the VF as well.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 23:26 UTC
In reply to:

David Hull: I think that all of this discussion of overheating in video modes raises the question of what can photographers focused primarily on stills expect? It seems to me that, with the R5, Canon has finally provided the camera that the traditional photography crowd has been screaming for: relatively high resolution, DR competitive with Sony and Nikon, IBIS, very competitive AF and tracking etc.

I think all of this discussion of video overheat raises a certain amount of FUD for stills shooters. I would like to see some commentary from the camera testers regarding the effect of this issue on stills shooting. Perhaps it exists and I have missed it?

1, Are there any limits imposed on stills shooting?
2. If you run it up against the wall in video use do you have to wait for 20 minutes before you can squeeze off a still shot?
3. Does DR depend on the number of shots taken i.e. does heat buildup on the sensor raise read noise noticeably? how does that compare to other cameras etc.
4....

OK, if Canon were to have only included FullHD video what parts could you remove and what would the cost savings be?

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

David Hull: I think that all of this discussion of overheating in video modes raises the question of what can photographers focused primarily on stills expect? It seems to me that, with the R5, Canon has finally provided the camera that the traditional photography crowd has been screaming for: relatively high resolution, DR competitive with Sony and Nikon, IBIS, very competitive AF and tracking etc.

I think all of this discussion of video overheat raises a certain amount of FUD for stills shooters. I would like to see some commentary from the camera testers regarding the effect of this issue on stills shooting. Perhaps it exists and I have missed it?

1, Are there any limits imposed on stills shooting?
2. If you run it up against the wall in video use do you have to wait for 20 minutes before you can squeeze off a still shot?
3. Does DR depend on the number of shots taken i.e. does heat buildup on the sensor raise read noise noticeably? how does that compare to other cameras etc.
4....

I would be willing to bet that Canon can sell the R5 for a lot less than € 4500 if they have to. Look at what they are doing with the EOS R. I don't think that video stuff raises the price too much. The video has to exist in order to run the EVF. That doesn't stop them from trying to monitize the feature. If it is a € 2000 camera (which i doubt), it will eventually be there -- you just have to wait. The competition will make it happen -- that's what Sony is for ;-) . Again, look at the EOS R.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2020 at 16:19 UTC
Total: 165, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »