Samuel Dilworth

Samuel Dilworth

Lives in France Paris, France
Joined on Feb 20, 2011

Comments

Total: 798, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

The Silver Nemesis: Bravo! This is one of the most mature, well-written articles seen here in a loooooong time.
Can we have more of these, please? Appreciated. Thank you.

Agreed. But I nearly missed it in the busier-than-ever home page. It would be nice to be able to sign up for notifications for the good stuff (maybe anything by Richard Butler?).

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 20:19 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (479 comments in total)
In reply to:

Samuel Dilworth: I want built-in GPS.

You tell me! You have the gall to say I don’t understand what I’m talking about, while quoting battery capacities in Ah and having no idea of the power draw of old GPS receivers, never mind the latest ones that run off minuscule watch batteries. This is the problem with the internet. To unknowledgeable observers, it’s a toss-up who to listen to.

Regardless, those who insist for bizarre reasons that a GPS radio is a power hog can turn it off. The rest of us would love the option to drain our batteries with this useful feature, as we do anyway with ancient and clumsy plug-in GPS devices.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2017 at 09:02 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (479 comments in total)
In reply to:

Samuel Dilworth: I want built-in GPS.

Eh? Wh is a unit of energy, the only relevant thing here (a watt second would be equal to a joule). The D810’s battery has an output voltage of around 7 V, so with its 1.9 Ah rating it stores about 13 Wh of energy (compare to the 5 Wh of a pair of eneloop cells).

Even accounting for your units mix-up, I don’t see how you came up with 240 mAh. Arithmetic mistake too?

None of this matters. It should be obvious that GPS receivers can now use trivial amounts of power, in the context of a big SLR battery, by the fact that tiny phone batteries can run them continuously for a day, and even smaller watch batteries can run them for many hours.

Even my ancient di-GPS plug-in GPS receiver for my D800, powered by the camera’s battery, typically ran all day when sightseeing on holiday.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2017 at 08:16 UTC
In reply to:

Bambi24: what's the point of illuminated controls

serious question, I just tested and I could operate my camera's buttons blindfolded if I wanted to

Another bullet point on the feature list.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 20:29 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (479 comments in total)
In reply to:

Samuel Dilworth: I want built-in GPS.

I have looked up the specs of some GPS receivers and the battery consumption on an SLR battery is negligible even if you run it continuously for a week. Even my ancient eTrex 20 can run a GPS receiver and moving map on a colour display for over a day on 5 Wh of energy (two eneloop AA cells).

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 17:30 UTC
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (479 comments in total)

I want built-in GPS.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2017 at 07:15 UTC as 155th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

cosinaphile: 1\3 of the length of this lens is just barrel in front of the first element

i find it huge which is the new "thing" for lenses

You complain about the barrel extending beyond the optics while others complain on the same page about the lack of life-size magnification. Spare a thought for the designers caught between these conflicting expectations!

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 22:20 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon IXUS 50 / SD400 Digital ELPH (64 comments in total)
In reply to:

sean lee: This is timeless design to me.
very good looking compact with optical view finder!!

Canon’s industrial design was so good.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

NickyB66: Nice SUV

It’s not nice.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 10:49 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Firstlight: Come back? Never left -45 years of D76, Dektol, and fixer in my blood. Love my D800; been mostly in digital since the late 90's, but happy to see new films coming out again. I love digital, but still have my 6x7 and 35mm film systems and an active Color/B&W darkroom. I enjoy both film and digital photography. Analog (film) is making a niche comeback (much like records ) - but never coming back in large numbers again ; its just too complex for the vast majority of those raised on digital (but It is comical seeing Polaroids making a pop comeback in stores like B&N). Now if only someone wold revive Ciba! Prices of used film cameras (the really good ones like Pentax 67II) are going up fast and darkroom equipment getting astronomical. Even B&H doesn't stock much analog anymore. My dry to dry automatic 11x14 color print processor is now worth a mint, as is my LPL 670MXL enlarger, Peak Model1 and more. MF scanners are out of sight. It used to be you couldn't give the stuff away.

The scanner problem is becoming serious. Never mind film in artful boxes; we need a new scanner, people!

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 07:37 UTC
In reply to:

Toni Salmonelli: "The relative lack of lateral AF coverage means that the 6D Mark II won't be particularly versatile when it comes to off-center compositions or tracking, but to be quite honest, I suspect that most potential buyers won't care."

@ Barney: Why so you thinkpotential buyers won't care? That is one major reason I am somewhat disappointed from this announcement. I'm fed up throwing big portions away from my 6D images because I have to use the central AF point (all other points pretty much suck on the 6D IMHO) and crop the images later to a non central composition.

Barney may be old (LOL), but he knows that most people are capable of focusing with one point and then re-composing, just as photographers have done for nearly a century. You are too! Give it a try.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2017 at 07:15 UTC

Beautiful pictures. They make me want to visit New York.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2017 at 07:10 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

chshooter: Overpriced fashion items that lack practicality and basically ask to be stolen immediately

I’ll grant you they are fashionable these days, though I’ve had mine since before that was true. However, they are hands down the most practical camera bags available. A joy to work out of. It’s not for nothing that photojournalists have preferred them for decades.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2017 at 06:38 UTC
In reply to:

Matthew_R: What I'd love to see is a way for registered users to complete a profile about what we are looking for in a camera and to have the final "grade" that you give a camera based on that. For example, I'm a professional commercial photographer. I don't care about JPG and I don't really care about video. I don't even care so much if something is expensive if it's something that I actually need. Wouldn't it be great if when I logged in I could get a version of your in-depth reviews that puts less emphasis (in the conclusion) about those things? I know that it's a bunch of work, but the plus side is you'd get additional marketing information about each of your users.

Just a pie in the sky idea.

It’s an interesting idea, but it would be complex to implement and may produce unexpected results – and therefore risky results from DPReview’s point of view. DPReview will never be able to guess with useful precision how any individual would weight the various performance factors.

In practice, I already interpret the reviews like this, in that I ignore all the stuff that doesn’t matter to me (e.g. the many features related to in-camera JPEGs) and carefully consider things that barely get a mention (e.g. built-in GPS is a huge advantage to me). Sum-up scores are pretty useless to me, though they’re given a lot of attention here.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2017 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): I have no appreciation for Tamron. I bought a zoom from them years ago, it was junk, one of the worst performing lenses I ever owned.

I have a Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8 in F-mount that is not only extraordinarily cheap for the headline specifications but also optically better than comparable lenses and mechanically more robust than Nikkors of twice the price. Not to mention smaller than any competitor.

So I have a lot of appreciation for Tamron.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 20:00 UTC
On article Olympus TG-5 gallery updated (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben Herrmann: On the surface, these images look great - with a nice color tonality and clarity typically missing from cameras of this genre. But regardless of MP count, you can't escape the limitations of these small sensors.

Enlarge each image to 100% and you'll see the typical compression artifacts, noise, or what have you that has plagued most of these much smaller sensors, regardless of brand. But Olympus did a great job on this one. I can definitely see bringing this camera along when a heavy duty pocket camera will do.

And wallaaaaa...it has RAW capabilities which will help quite a bit in order to achieve the best IQ possible for the genre.

The alternative argument is that you need all the help you can get when working with small sensors and slow zoom lenses. Raw capture gives you that.

For me, it’s simply a more elegant way to work, and my workflow is already based around Raw files coming in. JPEG is really a delivery codec, and pressing it into service for capture forces you to make unnecessary in-camera decisions (if the camera even allows you to) about things like the sharpening radius, colour balance, and contrast ratio.

I do understand that you’re saying these cameras are so poor that Raw doesn’t give a meaningful benefit over JPEG even at capture, but that’s not been my experience. Even if the in-camera noise reduction, for example, is as good as it gets (never the case), the minimum setting is usually stronger than I want, especially at low ISOs (I normally use compacts at base ISO).

Another issue is that learning every camera’s JPEG engine is pointless effort that I can bypass with Raw capture. This is especially important for a camera like this TG-5, which would be a secondary camera for most buyers.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2017 at 19:36 UTC
On article Olympus TG-5 gallery updated (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

George1958: Nice set of images, looks a good rugged camera with decent IQ. Seriously considering buying one for use on motorcycle trips.

The problem is price, though.

Olympus has us over the barrel in a way, because, to my enduring astonishment, hardly anyone makes a waterproof camera that shoots raw. This is basically a zero-cost feature that is nonetheless a deal-breaker for many keen photographers. And many keen photographers are looking for a waterproof compact (or just one with GPS, also bafflingly uncommon) to take into the weather on walks, bicycle rides, motorbike rides, water sports, etc., etc. The rarity of the raw option is a strange omission on most of these cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2017 at 15:25 UTC
In reply to:

Scales USA: When I hired into Boeing in 1966, I was assigned to 737 Engineering. The plane garnered few sales, but United saved the program with a huge order for a extended body version, the 737-200. They got a steal on the price, but it kept the program going. Then I worked on several more versions before moving to other new models. Of all those models, only the 737, 767, 777, and the 747 are still in production. The 737 has had a amazing run, but in 1966, it was fighting to keep from being cancelled. The others, 707, 727, 757, and SST, are now history. I was one of the few to work on initial design of many models, and did at least some work on all but the 787.

I have heard from reliable sources that the only reason Barney allowed DPReview to move away from London was to be closer to his precious Boeings.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 19:46 UTC
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: Twin long haul still doesn't make sense. Most capital city airports are at or near full capacity as it is. Lower pax aircraft like 787 will not free up slots at the gate. Take London - Sydney as an example. BA has become an also-ran on the kangaroo root with 777 equipment. All passenger traffic to Uk is via middle east with A380 Qatar emirates Etihad. Even QF discontinued the kangaroo root.

I think the problem with the A380 is that it’s not big enough (not yet stretched and probably never will be now), while its wingspan is smaller than ideal for ground-handling reasons. Combined, these factors mean its costs per seat-mile, while lower than other aircraft’s, are not low enough to offset the inflexible operation of such a large aircraft. Therefore it’s only attractive on very high-volume, long-haul routes where reducing fuel costs is extremely important.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 19:40 UTC

Traditional photography maps a 3D world onto a rectilinear 2D image, i.e. one without geometric distortion. Curving the display breaks the whole premise. You don’t get halfway to 3D with this; you just get uncontrolled deviations from correct imaging, with an additional random variation with viewing position.

Little else about this display is attractive for photography anyway, but the curvature alone precludes its usefulness.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 20:24 UTC as 7th comment
Total: 798, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »