Barbu

Lives in Romania Bucure?ti, Romania
Joined on Apr 8, 2009

Comments

Total: 313, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: And fcebook itself? that's the one that interests me. I can't see why anyone would be excited about 4K messenger pics when most of these will be viewed for a second or two on a small screen.

Meanwhile, Facebook pics are pretty much the photo album these days. That's where I need the resolution. It's the only reason I don't use facebook for my photography.

@scotthunter Care to share a comparison? I habitually resize my pics to 2048px for almost any online usage, but never seen a pic getting worse thru the app than thru the browser.
Will test, but my suspicion is that there's some snake oil involved...

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 11:18 UTC
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: Good goys, post better images for facial recognition projects as part of PRISM.

t. Zuckerberg

The capture and storing of data travelling over backbone lines: not a conspiracy, but an act funded by USA govt for (at least) 10 years.
The jew slurred implication: nothing more than a weak attempt to divert the conversation.
Of course, it was already pretty off-topic already, but still an important point to raise.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 10:53 UTC
In reply to:

d2f: Amazing. At some point legacy lenses should reach their ceiling and limit the system performance. Long before that time sensor technology will evolve, maybe in the direction of high speed electronic pixel shifting or a new low noise organic semiconductor technology combined with direct 3D memory write. Memory storage as we know it now will likewise evolve beyond semiconductor based memory cards. Maybe reaching molecular level densities allowing terabytes of storage in the size of a grain of salt. Optics may evolve to flexible adaptive elements correcting allowing for dynamic optical phase alignment and corrections for even atmospheric distortion. At this point anything is possible.

At the moment a lot of those are solved by brute force (and a lot of processing power), but in camera *systems* hundreds/thousands of times more expensive than the commercially available ones.
Expect some inroads in the next 7-10 years, and pocket devices in... Well, too soon to predict, but some (not many) decades.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 13:33 UTC
In reply to:

Phily: There is one thing in what you write which is probably unfair to the Macbook Pros and it is processing power. The Surface Book 2's i7-8650u has a passmark of 6588 and costs $3299 (with 1TB SSD and GTX 1060 ). For $2899 you get a 15'4" Macbook Pro 2.9 also Quad-Core, but with a passmark score of 9415. And they have the same memory and SSD specs but with an AMD Radeon Pro 460 GPU which is slower but this should be a wash for photo editing

You really, really missed the point... Passmark, 3Dmark, shmuckmark, touchbarmark. Could have a score of zero or aproximately 45.27 billions, the end result is how it actually works. When it steals the show, nobody asks if it has the latest 3-core hair card with 192 bits per curl.

Link | Posted on Nov 17, 2017 at 07:50 UTC
On article Sharp's new 8K camera is $77,000 (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shamsheed: Shooting 8k may benefit some productions, like shooting an interview. Editing in HD will benefit from a medium , close mid and close shot, saving the need to use 3 cameras. But I also wonder how the final look will be like? As different focal lengths have different perspective and dof. Has any one tried this out?

Nope. A crop from a larger shot will have exactly the same DOF as the original shot.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 11:36 UTC
On article Sharp's new 8K camera is $77,000 (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thorfinn: As HiRES at the olympics 2020 are announced, I will invest in cooling & refridgerating suppliers - These monstrous amount of data has to be computed somewhere.

I am so much not looking forward to count the blades of the green. Maybee some pixelpeekers will love it.
There is only SD footage of Mark Spitz, Jessie Owens run is only b/w. So what!

You can scan old movies at 20mp, push it even to 33-40mp (depending on the width/height ratio) but all you would do, on film from before 1965, is enlarging the grain. Nothing stops you from using not just 8K/33MP, but 16k/130MP, or go crazy and run multiple scans and mix them for 200MP/frame. Still no aditional detail, DR or...
Some people have a fetish for film, I swear to (or at?) God; after all, maybe somebody will fund a religion based on film rolls spaghetti ;) monster, which would have exactly the same relevance as any christian, islamic or whatever else imaginary entity that people feel the need to pray at.
P.S.: just to be clear, you can derive pleasure from shooting film or doing exercises on your praying mat; anyone is free to do whatever they please, as long as they don't take away the same right from others. Still... Don't try to pass things as "8k ready" as facts, or at least not if you try to imply actual resolution. Otherwise, see above: old films are 32K ready too :P

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 11:32 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: Switch out the film back for a FF digital back and then we can talk.

If wanted an all-manual m42 SLR I'd use an Asahi SV ($50).

The camera looks like truly modular, so one could exchange the mount (!!!) and various other things. If someone would design a digital back, it would solve one of the sore points about digital cameras nowadays: when the sensor and the underlying electronics become obsolete, you throw them away with the entire body.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 09:39 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: Pentax K1 released February 2016. First prime for the new high resolution digital era: summer 2018. Pentax better speed up the lens development if they want K-mount to be relevant.

Are you intentionally NOT counting the D-FA 100 macro? More than enough for high-resolution digital. And it came more than 5 years before the actual FF.
The high-resolution part (like any 90-120mm macro lens), the FF part, the digital (D-FA) part.
I don't personally know the results from the D-FA 50mm Macro, but that would be a second lens that looks like fulfilling your criteria.
So again, there are already options, not just legacy ones.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 09:25 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: I wonder if the 11-18mm f/2.8 has a markedly different optical formula compared to the tokina 11-16/20mm f/2.8.

You can buy the Tokina tonight and shoot in the morning, while the pentax, you will probably be dead by then.

There is no thick(ened) plot; the patents state clearly who designed what.
The Pentax design was also used by Tokina, which rushed a bit to come with the products on the market.
But it's interesting to see how vocal are some people... Based on nothing more than the shared design, they pretend to know which was the „original” and which was a copy.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 09:04 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: So much negativity, trolling and hate...
Has DPReview always been such a toxic place? I don't remember it that way...

Wow, so quick to turn ad hominem...
Free speech has nothing to do with insults.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 08:42 UTC
On article More Nikon D850 samples images added (167 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): DPR staff seems to be getting a hammering here, but it’s a self-inflicted wound; we really didn’t need yet more sample photos from this camera, but Amazon did require the clicks I guess. “Another D850 page – keep up the momentum!”

The guy who taught me about photography was wise, savvy and a sharp observer; and his advice was unequivocal – quality, not quantity. We really don’t need any more than 30 – 40 sample images, but they should properly represent the capabilities of the camera.

160 images in a sample gallery is just ludicrous, and serves neither Nikon, Amazon or us, the audience.

I’m sure the D850 is a very capable camera, so why does it require so many promotional pieces? (Hype?)

As editorial content goes, I heartily agree: adding more serves no purpose of demoing the camera.
Still, I have to remember two things:
1) I am a frequent visitor here (at least once per day, during workdays) so what is boring to me is still useful for the occasional visitors, especially the ones who came here to research on D850 as their next buy;
2) Some of the samples are uninteresting *to me*, while some other samples are simply amazing (again, to me) and deserve my applauses; this, combined with the fact that tastes differ amongst people, makes me think that the more samples, the better chance for everyone to catch something to their interest. Not in the least bit, again for research; the camera might be useful in the studio, but that doesn't tell me too much about how it fares when taking pics of airplanes (for example).
___________
.
Frankly, I prefer having more. I'm not worried (yet) about spam, but I really hope they won't repeat the eggregious thing they did with the A9.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 01:11 UTC
In reply to:

ShaiKhulud: >The bad news is, there's no current plans to implement it.
Typical Adobe. And when they will finally implement this feature it will be avalable on per-object subscription plan.

In all their generosity, at the end of subscription they will still allow you to look at the images you already processed. But only with one of your eyes; for more, you have to renew your plan.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 01:01 UTC
In reply to:

HRC2016: Why is there a discussion of a three-year old camera?
Aren't there any new cameras or gear to write about and discuss?

That's exactly the reasoning exposed in the article: 3 years doesn't really means old, but it's here exactly because the camera was killed off in spite of its top performance.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 06:56 UTC
In reply to:

pshummer: This was the best mirroeless camera back then and it was actually a DSLR killer. Too bad they could not find enough market for this cam. Nikon acquired NX1's sensor technology about 2 years ago and I wonder what they did with it. We'll see when Nikon's first mirrorless FF camera showed up.

@pshummer: I really wish your memory is correct, but I'd rather have the link.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 06:53 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

frod: The most appropriate model would be a small license fee for new RAW converters. It's been several years since I needed any of the new features in lightroom itself.

Quite a few brands opted to offer DNG straight from the camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:32 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

NDT0001: The anger on these forums is hilarious. Im happy with the subscription model. <$15 PM is a bargain for 2 top tier pieces of software. If you cant justify that in your business, you better change business because its the cheapest thing in photography you will get. If you are a hobbyist, find an alternative, there are several to choose from. Its a predictable month to month expense and seamless and incremental in its integration. I prefer it over big yearly or 2 yearly updates which may go wrong. Do people here feel the same about their Netflix or cable or utilities bills?

You really, really didn't read the article.
Once again, the point made in it: if you buy some piece of software, you expect it to continue functioning as long as you want. If you are forced to a subscription model, you basically can't use the software as soon as you don't pay the „protection tax”. If I don't pay, I can't use even for the archive (as underlined in the article). Blackmail at its finest.
It has nothing to do with a business; there are millions of enthusiasts that use Lightroom. The one thing I agree with, from your comment: if Adobe doesn't offer anymore the option to buy it and use it in perpetuity (just like you buy a camera), then we can (and we will) choose to pay somewhere else.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:30 UTC
In reply to:

Graham Austin: 5mm headphone jack?

One more thing: the Mate10 Pro doesn't have the headphone jack :(
(and that should be mentioned in the differences from the standard version)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 07:00 UTC
In reply to:

A Smich: little inconsistencies in the article: text says 6GB, but bullet points mention 4GB of RAM. also, is a 2560 x 1440 display correctly named 2K? extra: you sure that the display is 2"?

Indeed, the „fake bokeh” sorely stood out. I don't remember reading something like this written in the iPhone8/X article.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 06:59 UTC
In reply to:

armanius: I don't think the non-pro version has a AMOLED display. It's a conventional LED.

As is written in the article: conventional AMOLED with RGBW pixels.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 06:54 UTC
On article New product overview videos: Sony a9 and FE lenses (128 comments in total)
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: When is the RX10IV review coming out?

Defeats the purpose. A small(ish) camera adorned with an optional converter becomes a kludge to use, and even a kludge to carry. And then there's the benefit of using a lens tailored for that, as opposed to putting a glob of glass in front of another lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2017 at 11:09 UTC
Total: 313, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »