sportyaccordy

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 1, 2010

Comments

Total: 847, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: I had a Zenfone 3 Laser. Never again. Part of it was my fault- I got a 2GB version, which apparently is not enough to do anything with Android on but turn on. But it had some quality issues too. The headphone jack died almost immediately. Camera was not that good either from what I remember, at least compared to my Note 5.

Smartphone makers need to stop beating around the bush and implement the RGBL 4 module concept. They could cheap way out on the actual sensors since the design would take care of the rest (separate modules for each of the RGB and luminance channels.... no Bayer filter obviously, 4x the collected light per exposure and the DoF control of a 4x larger system)

Maybe ASUS just sucks.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2017 at 14:49 UTC

I had a Zenfone 3 Laser. Never again. Part of it was my fault- I got a 2GB version, which apparently is not enough to do anything with Android on but turn on. But it had some quality issues too. The headphone jack died almost immediately. Camera was not that good either from what I remember, at least compared to my Note 5.

Smartphone makers need to stop beating around the bush and implement the RGBL 4 module concept. They could cheap way out on the actual sensors since the design would take care of the rest (separate modules for each of the RGB and luminance channels.... no Bayer filter obviously, 4x the collected light per exposure and the DoF control of a 4x larger system)

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 14:33 UTC as 5th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: I've said it many times before.

You put 4 1/2.3" sensors together, you have the light gathering ability of an MFT sensor. You ditch the Bayer filter and assign each sensor to one of the R, G, B and L channels, you can probably cover the remaining gap between real MFT sensors and an ideal one, which is about where the top APS-C sensors are with dynamic range.

Oh yea, don't forget that it has been demonstrated that combining multiple lenses wide open yields a similarly thin depth of field comparable to a larger equivalent system. So those 4 1/2.5" sensors behind F/2 lenses would generate an image like an MFT camera with an F/2 lens of equivalent focal length, with BETTER sensor level image quality (and probably better resolution too with the removal of the Bayer filter). All in your pocket! And again, the cost of something like an Iphone camera is what, $10?

Bottom line, smartphones haven't even begun to scratch the surface and they are already taking out Jaws sized bites.

Hey, I'm just A Guy On The Internetâ„¢.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 14:21 UTC
On article Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM gallery (144 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: This is indeed a great lens. I had it for a while but sold it.... I prefer the 40mm FL and while it's light it's too visually big. The front element is huge

I mean I have a 40 1.4 with a front element that is probably 1/2 the 35 USM's diameter. They should have kept it about the size of the old 35/2, which was just about perfect IMO. Great lens otherwise.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 13:18 UTC
On article Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM gallery (144 comments in total)

This is indeed a great lens. I had it for a while but sold it.... I prefer the 40mm FL and while it's light it's too visually big. The front element is huge

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 13:14 UTC as 54th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

cjones63: How exciting! Next week we'll see pics of the lawns being cut.

Indeed, why should you care? Why are you still replying? You are more than free to express yourself, but what you are saying makes no sense.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 15:07 UTC
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: I've said it many times before.

You put 4 1/2.3" sensors together, you have the light gathering ability of an MFT sensor. You ditch the Bayer filter and assign each sensor to one of the R, G, B and L channels, you can probably cover the remaining gap between real MFT sensors and an ideal one, which is about where the top APS-C sensors are with dynamic range.

Oh yea, don't forget that it has been demonstrated that combining multiple lenses wide open yields a similarly thin depth of field comparable to a larger equivalent system. So those 4 1/2.5" sensors behind F/2 lenses would generate an image like an MFT camera with an F/2 lens of equivalent focal length, with BETTER sensor level image quality (and probably better resolution too with the removal of the Bayer filter). All in your pocket! And again, the cost of something like an Iphone camera is what, $10?

Bottom line, smartphones haven't even begun to scratch the surface and they are already taking out Jaws sized bites.

3 CCD cameras took the light entering one lens and split it three ways. My suggestion, which is already in play by the way, utilizes 1 lens per sensor, enabling and simplifying the light gathering ability by that much.

Broadcast requirements are very different from general camera stuff... in broadcasting they have full control of lighting. The fourth channel would add luminance data, which would take the lighting stress off the color channels, further helping with IQ. It's been done and proven to work.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 06:23 UTC
In reply to:

cjones63: How exciting! Next week we'll see pics of the lawns being cut.

So if we have no life for being excited about this, what do you have for thinking it's lame and still posting about it?

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 01:14 UTC

I've said it many times before.

You put 4 1/2.3" sensors together, you have the light gathering ability of an MFT sensor. You ditch the Bayer filter and assign each sensor to one of the R, G, B and L channels, you can probably cover the remaining gap between real MFT sensors and an ideal one, which is about where the top APS-C sensors are with dynamic range.

Oh yea, don't forget that it has been demonstrated that combining multiple lenses wide open yields a similarly thin depth of field comparable to a larger equivalent system. So those 4 1/2.5" sensors behind F/2 lenses would generate an image like an MFT camera with an F/2 lens of equivalent focal length, with BETTER sensor level image quality (and probably better resolution too with the removal of the Bayer filter). All in your pocket! And again, the cost of something like an Iphone camera is what, $10?

Bottom line, smartphones haven't even begun to scratch the surface and they are already taking out Jaws sized bites.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 01:13 UTC as 128th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

cjones63: How exciting! Next week we'll see pics of the lawns being cut.

Then don't click the article and comment on it. What a concept!

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 12:28 UTC

If you can live with EF-S lens selection, which is a big ask, its a no brainer.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 23:47 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1067 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: So just to recap:

Not good for:
- Landscapes (with high DR)
- Sports/Action (wack C-AF)
- Video (soft)
- Portraiture (through OVF)
- Travel (a bit heavy)
- Street/candid (too conspicuous)

Good stuff Canon

Putting your comments in context is not attacking you. The 6D2 is not a good value and has a lot of issues. It's not worth buying over pretty much any other camera in its price range, as well as its predecessor and crop equivalent (80D). And it represents a major misstep in Canon's otherwise stellar track record of camera releases lately. Anyway I know you will continue to defend the 6D2 to the death and I've already made my points so let's end it here.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 11:40 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1067 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: So just to recap:

Not good for:
- Landscapes (with high DR)
- Sports/Action (wack C-AF)
- Video (soft)
- Portraiture (through OVF)
- Travel (a bit heavy)
- Street/candid (too conspicuous)

Good stuff Canon

Hopefully Canon finds a lot of people like you, who are OK with 5 year old IQ, soft video and other mediocre specs. And yes, I know a camera is more than its specs, and I'll readily admit DSLRs offer a responsiveness MILCs can't match. But the A7II is not the 6D2's only competitor; there are other DSLRs that are just as responsive and easy to use while being better in a lot of important ways than the 6D2. And given your 6D2 spin tour campaign, and lack of any kind of posts I can find from you about an A7II, I'm going to file that "experience" in the "unverified" pile. In fact, a Google search yields a lot of disparaging remarks on Sony in general.

Heck, if you can't let go of your Canon fanboyism, you could buy a 6D + 70D and have everything the 6D2 was supposed to have (minus 4K of course). Canon has NOT given people, particularly 6D shooters, a good way to spend $2K, or even $1500.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 21:49 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1067 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: So just to recap:

Not good for:
- Landscapes (with high DR)
- Sports/Action (wack C-AF)
- Video (soft)
- Portraiture (through OVF)
- Travel (a bit heavy)
- Street/candid (too conspicuous)

Good stuff Canon

You are indeed taking things personally. You're up and down this thread running a full court press defense, commenting voraciously on a review you've deemed to be "nonsense". You don't have to/can't admit it, but your actions make it obvious.

There's a lot wrong with my A7II... no camera is perfect, especially at anything but a flagship price point. But it has better IQ, better live view AF, better video, better size for travel/street shooting (especially with smaller/legacy glass), portraiture (hi Eye AF!) and more... for a lower launch & "real" price. The only things the 6D2 is better at are the same things the 6D is better at for half the price (aside from the touch screen). It's a failure.

I have no beef with Canon- I was actually selling off lenses and positioning myself to buy the 6D2. But once it became clear there would be no 4K, I abandoned that plan. And now with all its shortcomings I'm totally turned off from the brand. They blew it.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 20:08 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1067 comments in total)
In reply to:

sportyaccordy: So just to recap:

Not good for:
- Landscapes (with high DR)
- Sports/Action (wack C-AF)
- Video (soft)
- Portraiture (through OVF)
- Travel (a bit heavy)
- Street/candid (too conspicuous)

Good stuff Canon

Yake, it's going to be a long day for you if you really decide to take all the criticisms of this camera personally.

Even if the discount is baked in, it's still overpriced. There are a long list of recently released cameras that offer more for the same or less.... most notably the Pentax K-1 ($2K launch price) and my beloved A7II ($1700 launch price 3 YEARS AGO!). Hell, compared to the 6D it's a hard sell. IQ is basically identical; DPAF implementation falls short; touchscreen doesn't utilize most obvious opportunity (touch/drag to focus) which wouldn't mean much anyway as the DPAF implementation on the 6D2 is no good for action. Just a bungled effort in many key areas.

It's OK, everything out of Canon can't be a winner; but it's a real shame that they dropped the ball on this as it's key. It would be like if Nikon had bombed on the D500 (which thankfully they didn't).

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 19:06 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1067 comments in total)

So just to recap:

Not good for:
- Landscapes (with high DR)
- Sports/Action (wack C-AF)
- Video (soft)
- Portraiture (through OVF)
- Travel (a bit heavy)
- Street/candid (too conspicuous)

Good stuff Canon

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 16:28 UTC as 207th comment | 12 replies

Gran Turismo and Forza Motorsports have had this for a while.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 19:56 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

vesa1tahti: So, Nikon seems to be better, with better IQ.

Based on what exactly? Worse video spec, fixed LCD, worse connectivity, and only ~7 pts on DxO's sensor score....

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 13:09 UTC

Wow, it's a real no brainer. Canon curbstomps Nikon in this space.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 13:06 UTC as 73rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Saurat: I can forgive the lack of 4K on the Canon 6Dii, it is obviously a still-shooters camera, but one card slot? As for supplying a completely uncharged battery with each new camera... that seems like sheer contempt for their customers.

?????????

What other full frame $2000 camera has dual card slots? What's the precedent for this claim of betrayal?

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 18:01 UTC
Total: 847, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »