Barbu

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

Comments

Total: 266, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Kaso: "Canon beats Nikon to get . . ."

This is a sick and immature title.

There is no brand X beating brand Y. This is an "article" (!?) about this year's EISA awards -- period.

Sadly, amongst quite a few efforts to further the tech popularisation (and very nice galeries from some editors), the fact is that DPR is already way deep into the tabloid territory. They would to anything for getting one more page view and some „engagement” (sharing articles, commenting etc.); they make a point in giving outrageous titles to run-of-the-mill articles about boring factoids.
As a result, with a heavy heart I must say that I eliminated DPR from my AdBlock whitelist; it's the only way to hit them where it hurts the most. I endured it until now because I felt it would be unfair to „hit” the few professionals left here, at the same time as the tabloid-style editors. No more; we have to act somehow, and since the quantity of junk articles has surpassed the good content, I feel that the least I could do is using a small add-on to my browser.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 08:57 UTC
In reply to:

35mmBlueSky: It's about time Sony test the water with their 1' sensor in their next gen smartphone like the one they used for RX 100 V, Panasonic tried this before and I'm sure Sony could use a much better design to the advantage, their current offerings do not sell well, so might as well try that to dethrone Samsung and Apple in an unique way.

The real solution would be having a modular camera, inserting into a predefined slot completely embedded in the phone frame (not the bulky add-ons that LG is making). And no, don't think that the outrageously priced Hydrogen One has anything to do with it; it's just a niche, looking for well-heeled buyers that have nothing better to do with their wads of cash. Nothing wrong with it, but it's not the way that truly good cameras would be popular in the mass market.
Imagine having a detachable rectangle in the phone body; the phone would come with a basic camera module, and it could be replaced with a more advanced one. But then again, the manufacturers might not get the same revenue, if that standardised slot is happening; they would have no reason to tax you every 2-4 years for a new camera included in your new phone.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 08:47 UTC
In reply to:

35mmBlueSky: It's about time Sony test the water with their 1' sensor in their next gen smartphone like the one they used for RX 100 V, Panasonic tried this before and I'm sure Sony could use a much better design to the advantage, their current offerings do not sell well, so might as well try that to dethrone Samsung and Apple in an unique way.

Sadly, the specs of nice phones now will be just absurdly low-level in 3 years.
Could be a really decent camera (1inch sensor, or something a little more accomodating in a slim brick, but not 1/2.7 fractions of a fingernail); but, a decent camera without the absolutely top-of-the-line hardware would be just wasteful. Just think that three years ago (Panasonic CM1) a nice Android phone would have 2GB RAM; now 2GB is entry-level, and the apps have grown so much in size that 2GB is practically guaranteeing lots of hiccups. Unless you keep the phone without any other RAM-sucking apps, so basically you would just have a camera phone that can't really be a true smartphone, just a back-up.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 08:42 UTC

Quick, get Brandon to do a bike weaving test for the autofocus. If it can't follow, declare the camera as useless ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2017 at 10:40 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
On article Advertising vs reality: microSD memory card speed test (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: Is anyone really surprised? I blame the SD card association (or whatever it is called) for allowing manufacturers to get away with meaningless statements and bogus numbers regarding speed. Why are they allowed to list the READ speed when the truly IMPORTANT number is WRITE speed? Try and find the missing write speed numbers on some manufacturer sites. It is not easy sometimes, as they are very well hidden.

Ok DPR, here is a job for you. Do accurate and meaningfull speed tests of all memory cards and start holding manufacturer's feet to the fire when write speeds are not up to snuff, are not clearly listed or are completely missing. Ditto for misleading advertising.

Indeed, it's interesting that DPR chooses to go the clickbait route, linking a test which was clearly limited by some random equipment that limited the max speed.
I would be really interested in reading a serious test, based on multiple equipments (cameras and card readers). It would be an interesting thing expecially for top-end cameras, but also for medium ones to see if they can be coerced to obtain a little bit of extra buffering when shooting in high-speed drive.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 08:05 UTC
On article Humor: The 'horrifying' truth about radioactive lenses (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: It was an unsuccesfull attempt at sterilisiatng mankind, before They switched to chemtrails.

I'm sure that those are just rumors originating from people with salty tears... ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 10:02 UTC
On article Humor: The 'horrifying' truth about radioactive lenses (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: It was an unsuccesfull attempt at sterilisiatng mankind, before They switched to chemtrails.

Careful! I've heard that the chemists are whispering among themselves that even our drinking water has two thirds hydrogen in it; I don't need to tell you how dangerous hydrogen is... It might explode and violently burn you!

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 06:32 UTC
On article Humor: The 'horrifying' truth about radioactive lenses (176 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: It was an unsuccesfull attempt at sterilisiatng mankind, before They switched to chemtrails.

Please mark your jokes with a smilie or something; sadly every day there are new hordes of braindead people that would take your comment as being true...

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 10:23 UTC
In reply to:

CallumG: I hate to be this guy but could some lens galleries be shot with some Nikon bodies? I've seen alot of Canon bodies for lens tests as of late (for multi mount lenses).

Yeah, there is much wrong, very wow with the 80D sensor... if your normal procedure is underexposing at least 5 stops, and then „fix it in post” ;)

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2017 at 06:33 UTC
In reply to:

Tardyvar: You have got to feel for Nikon in this case, the battery technology involved was probably (almost definitely) designed and produced by a third party to Nikon specification. Lion technology is pushing the boundaries of what we, the 'consumer' want. Apple, Sony, Samsung and others have all felt the pain and need of all of us. Lion is just an intermediate step to battery Nirvana.

Li-Po is beautiful... when the object using it is just remotely ;) near you.
But having it on us, a lot of time in our pocket or bags, just begs a much bigger disaster than the few cases from Note7. And I don't even dare to discount the people that got their skin burned because of that...
And that energy, until people actually learn to safely harness it, will just be a disaster waiting no matter the technology used to procure or store; if it has enough power, it also has enough danger to have a disastruous release.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2017 at 13:01 UTC
In reply to:

cosmicnode: Is this anywhere near to the Buy More LOL

Awesome, that was my first thought: a real life Nerd Herd for canonites :)
Go Chuck (Westfall), go!

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 10:45 UTC
In reply to:

Tardyvar: You have got to feel for Nikon in this case, the battery technology involved was probably (almost definitely) designed and produced by a third party to Nikon specification. Lion technology is pushing the boundaries of what we, the 'consumer' want. Apple, Sony, Samsung and others have all felt the pain and need of all of us. Lion is just an intermediate step to battery Nirvana.

Looks like I got it completely backwards... :(
Mea culpa. I led myself into believing some marketing blurbs, promoting LiPo as the next holy hellholey grail; sounds more like hellholey grail... Did they really made a tech less safe than the previous/simpler generation?
Moot point anyway; NiCd, NiMH and Li-based batteries sound like bigger terrorists than the ones with bazookas. And it wasn't enough that they put a small pack of that stuff on most humans; now they want us to have an immensely „huger” bomb in our trunk ;)
(not that we don't know that continuously burning stuff won't get us extinct)
I wonder if in 100 or 500 years (after fuel cells, supercapacitors and portable fusion would be already obsolete) the next generations would wonder how could we tolerate bearing all around us various devices that are bound to kill (one by one or as a race). And we knowingly still used those.
But I'm so far off topic here...

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 00:19 UTC
In reply to:

Tardyvar: You have got to feel for Nikon in this case, the battery technology involved was probably (almost definitely) designed and produced by a third party to Nikon specification. Lion technology is pushing the boundaries of what we, the 'consumer' want. Apple, Sony, Samsung and others have all felt the pain and need of all of us. Lion is just an intermediate step to battery Nirvana.

Could be built by Sanyo or Panasonic (the heavyweights in the area, until consolidating) and still be asked more than what is reasonably safe; see the endless blunders in laptop batteries until about 5 years ago, or the obvious Note7 (for which soon we might be barred to bring onboard a plane *any* battery). And the new wave of recalls was based on Lithium-polymer, supposedly safer and more tolerant to mechanical damage... Yeah right, tell that to Samsung.

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

jimmy.walsh: It's interesting to see a pattern of Nikon updating existing AF-S models while some of the older AF lenses lenses are not (e.g. 135mm f2 and 180mm f2.8). In any case, it's good to see them pushing forward and releasing new glass for those who still enjoy shooting with a DSLR.

@jimmy.walsh indeed, I was thinking about the new 105/1.4
And I still remember perfectly the 180/2.8, including the weird thing with having *one* differently coloured screw in the mount (black/silver); besides being easier to use that it for prolonged periods (as compared to 70-200VR at the time those lenses went thru my hands), it had also the advantage of being somewhat low-key, usable on the street; the bright zoom was too big to avoid startled looks from the potential subjects.
Back at the 135/2DC: D7kSUK, the optical quality was questionable at best (like the corners on a 70-200VR first version) and the defocusing control was either too tacky or barely significant. For a while it convinced me that it was worth paying the equivalent of a good body back then; used it no more than 5 times on D700 (including portraits, but tried more varied subjects) and it was sold at a significant loss the very next year. Go on, sing praises, make me think that I saw something else than what I know.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 23:55 UTC
In reply to:

Tardyvar: You have got to feel for Nikon in this case, the battery technology involved was probably (almost definitely) designed and produced by a third party to Nikon specification. Lion technology is pushing the boundaries of what we, the 'consumer' want. Apple, Sony, Samsung and others have all felt the pain and need of all of us. Lion is just an intermediate step to battery Nirvana.

I really hope that either a new tech is developed (not a variant of Li-ion/LiPo) or we actually get powerful yet controllable supercapacitors.
Right now, the quest for more and more energy heads straight to where Zeppelin went when they were still using hydrogen for their airships.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 10:44 UTC
In reply to:

pacnwhobbyist: This is pretty much an answer to Canon's pedestrian full frame 70-300. Although this one is a tad slower at wide angle but also somewhat lighter than Canon's.

The only thing „pedestrian” is the boring ease at which Canon's 70-300v2 focuses lightning quick, not like some movie-pleasing „pulse motors” which mostly just give the impression of quickness, just because they're silent.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 10:22 UTC
In reply to:

jimmy.walsh: It's interesting to see a pattern of Nikon updating existing AF-S models while some of the older AF lenses lenses are not (e.g. 135mm f2 and 180mm f2.8). In any case, it's good to see them pushing forward and releasing new glass for those who still enjoy shooting with a DSLR.

135 f/2DC was a borderline useless lens. You got so much more with the new 135/1.4, in basically the same package. Even the price was „updated” surprisingly modest, basically less than the real value of the money when the 135/2 was launched.
On the other hand, while this might be a marginal example, the 180 looks like the perfect candidate to update. But Nikon clearly updates first the lenses that are bought in droves, not so much the specialised ones...

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 10:20 UTC
In reply to:

Faris Marino: it's weird, is there any nikon fx camera that support af-p lense?

People repeatedly informed you (in this article and in several others back in time) that backwards compatibility is for when you get a new camera with an old lens, not the other way around. Because sooner or later people tend to get new cameras, while using the same lenses for dozens of years (or even more). But no, you HAD to comment... Go get a covfefe, seems like you need it.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 10:16 UTC
In reply to:

Waqasilyas: i have both AF-P 18 55 VR & AF-P 70 300 VR and both are very fast lenses. pleasant colors and very sharp at any focal length. Highly recommended.

Fast for what? Landscapes? Never heard anyone daring to say that the P lenses are more than decent/mediocre when it comes to focusing speed.
Or, to put it another way: fast compared to what? Even the old screw-driven 70-300 has the same (or better) speed; it's mostly about the perception (because of the sound of the external in-camera motor) that people think that Nikon's pulse motors are faster. At least until they try to actually shoot on the run, fast subjects.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 10:10 UTC
In reply to:

FlyinDoc: Makes the Sony version appear way overpriced.

Meanwhile the Canon 70-300 v2 costs less, in what seems to be the best recent 70-300 (or equivalent) from any manufacturer.
But if there is cost involved, Tamron has a very nice 70-300 too.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 10:07 UTC
Total: 266, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »