RPJG

Joined on Nov 4, 2011

Comments

Total: 843, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

RPJG: As a non-videographer, do the lenses really make *that* much difference to the end result? Are there any examples of the same video shot side-by-side on cheap-vs-expensive lenses, then processed in the same manner, for comparison?

I understand that there will be differences, but are the differences really noticeable to anyone except someone who's looking for it?

Thanks Charrick1, makes sense.

kooistraalexander, thanks as well. I should have said that I understand the other benefits of proper video lenses (such as little-or-no focus breathing etc), I was just wondering if the end-result was noticeably better.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2018 at 16:59 UTC

As a non-videographer, do the lenses really make *that* much difference to the end result? Are there any examples of the same video shot side-by-side on cheap-vs-expensive lenses, then processed in the same manner, for comparison?

I understand that there will be differences, but are the differences really noticeable to anyone except someone who's looking for it?

Link | Posted on May 26, 2018 at 05:15 UTC as 10th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

snapa: How many serious pro photogs us a laptop to PP photos or play serious games? Nice laptop, but not a professional computer for serious photogs to do professional work.

Maybe you've never needed to work on your images while travelling.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 02:08 UTC
In reply to:

PhozoKozmos: i remember seeing this feature in samsung cameras ages ago
it did not seem to catch on
making unwanted visual intrusions (clutter) disappear from a busy scene

If it's the same thing I 'm thinking of, didn't that tool require several photos to be taken? Then it removed anything that wasn't the same in each scene, e.g. people walking past. If so, that's different to this tool (although still handy for casual shooters).

Link | Posted on May 19, 2018 at 05:58 UTC
In reply to:

RPJG: Surely, this sort of thing is not what the patent system is for.

I'm not sure, but was that a "normal" patent, or a design patent (or whatever it's called), something slightly different?

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 02:06 UTC

Surely, this sort of thing is not what the patent system is for.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2018 at 15:29 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

ewelch: Infringed with little consequence? More like not infringed because their concept doesn't qualify for patent status I suspect.

Huckster: "Here Apple, check this out. It has a camera on the back and one on the front. So you don't have to turn the phone around to do a selfie! Is this a great idea or what? Pay us millions and YOU can use it too!"

Apple executive to Johny Ive - "Is he serious? What rock did he just crawl out from under?"

Those aren't the dual cameras you're looking for...

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 22:58 UTC
In reply to:

JRM PT: The million dollar question is "Will it be compatible with any of the current Nikkor lenses?" If not, give us just more great DSLR cameras like the 850!

xPhoenix, the weight of the body is the least of the advantages of a FF mirrorless system.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2018 at 13:58 UTC
In reply to:

dgumshu: More tax dollars and pork spending.

Well that came out sounding harsher than I meant it to. But still, you seem to think that one precludes the other, which clearly isn't the case. Deferring primary research is a false economy, and recipe for stagnation - whether in public or private spheres. Pretty simple.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 05:24 UTC
In reply to:

dgumshu: More tax dollars and pork spending.

There's so much wrong with your position that it's hard to know where to start. I guess the main point is, these things are not mutually exclusive, as you're implying.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 04:53 UTC
In reply to:

dgumshu: More tax dollars and pork spending.

OK, so you don't understand.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 16:20 UTC
In reply to:

dgumshu: More tax dollars and pork spending.

Then, do you also don't understand the enormous value of basic research?

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 15:12 UTC
In reply to:

dgumshu: More tax dollars and pork spending.

dgumshu, I think your difficulty is in understanding the difference between pork and sensible research.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 05:57 UTC
In reply to:

Rensol: The mere fact that they would accept preorders for 50% discount prrofs this is an overpriced garbage!
Can you Imagine Sony to give 50% off for early birds?
Or what about $1500 for first 1000 people who will pre-order Nikon D850?
Hard to imagine?

Rensol, I dont think you know as much as business as you think you do...

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 05:54 UTC
In reply to:

DominicVII: SmugMug costs money to use. The basic option is 3.99 USD per month. Flickr is dead.

Quality analysis there.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2018 at 14:29 UTC
In reply to:

Mortal Lion: Bright for them they mean. I am afraid the future is paid.

You made a point, it was answered, and then you couldn't/wouldn't rebut and so you just changed the topic? Brilliant.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2018 at 14:28 UTC
In reply to:

Protogonus1: These pissant 2 x 3 prints are actually about all the typical smartphone FAKE CAMERA is capable of, as we know by experience. Using an iPhone 6, printing 5 x 7 is the absolute limit and even then it shows trace pixels. Why bother? Why waste your precious time on Earth pretending to do PHOTOGRAPHY, which obviously requires a machine made to do the job. If it’s worth photography, it is worth using a real camera.

Jesus Protogonus1, you obviously have absolutely no idea who/what this device is intended for, and yet you feel the need to slam it. Think about things before you post.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2018 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

CaptainNoddy: Canon is diversifying their products to maintain the profit.

They know that they cannot maintain their market share leader for high end cameras in the future, given that their old tech.

Look at Fujifilm, their main profit is from INSTAX Cameras and Printers, rather than the X-series MILC.

Don't worry rrccad, it was just yet another an excuse to try to slam Canon for having "old tech".

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2018 at 14:52 UTC
In reply to:

barringtonpro1: Personally I like this, but most people can't tell the difference between cell phone quality chip and medium format quality chip, images. The rules of 1950's format still apply but, too few notice anymore. The "photo drawing true compression" from it's long focal length lenses and short distance must be beautiful.

The window of opportunity with this is maybe, 7 years, serving the uber rich. Wish I could be there.

Tom, you're going to end up going around in circles with people who don't understand the difference between perspective and angle of view.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2018 at 06:44 UTC
In reply to:

melgross: Why the specific call-out to Nikon and Sony, and not Canon?

No, not really. Hence my comment.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 09:44 UTC
Total: 843, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »