Re: General discussion chat Megapixels is literally how many pixels there are in the image so *is* the resolution (well, ignoring varied aspect ratio, but close enough). Alot of people seem to immediately assume that a 10 megapixel camera is better than a 5 megapixel camera - total bullshit. In reality, the sensor detects light falling on it, but of course that light isn't necessarily in focus or anything. The phone has a fixed focus lens (actually part of the sensor itself), the sensor can only do some limited software correction on that. Otherwise it just has a clear piece of plastic for protection. The lens has a tiny aperture for receiving light. The camera has a proper optical lens with adjustments on it for focus and zoom. The sensor is also physically larger. The sensors can only image what light falls on them which in the case of the phone is utter crap compared to the camera. This is evidenced by the 2 megapixel image from the camera and even the 3 megapixel *lossy* compressed camera image being visibly better versus the 5 megapixel phone picture. The phone has terrible colour reproduction and poor lighting, its also out of focus, the camera has little issue. On the same lens, more megapixels is probably better. But otherwise, its a meaningless comparison in many cases. This was prompted by mum exclaiming that her iPhone camera is just as good as her old digital compact because of how many megapixels it has. Sadly I dont have the power cord for her old camera so I can't charge it and take an iPhone (5S) comparison.
Re: General discussion chat Exactly. A 10 megapixel phone can still take shit photos. It's just used for marketing, really. I mean, both my camera and my phone take 8mp pictures and the photos from my camera look a lot better. (Not great or anything, just better. It's a cheap little touchscreen Bloggie. Don't really like it, but it's better than my phone. Plus it shoots HD 60FPS.)
Re: General discussion chat My Nikon D50 shoots at 9 megapixel. My dads Dsomething (Might be a 9000?) shoots at like 17 megapixel. I notice no difference between the two cameras, one being form 2004, one being from 2012.
Re: General discussion chat Most compact camera manufacturers just stuff high resolution sensors in the camera to sell it, advertising 30MP as great image quality. They're all still shit. A proper camera can take infinitely better photos with a 16MP or even smaller sensor. So far I haven't used a single compact camera I've liked. The worst thing about them is having no optical visor, but having to look through the screen. And the fact that you can't just go manual on everything, specially focus points and distance. They're annoying. I'm quite used to proper professional cameras and I know how to use one properly, having used lots of old lenses with no auto focus, so I can take pretty good pictures on manual settings. Having everything set to auto is just crap. Sometimes you want to use a long shutter time for some reason and a compact camera locked on auto settings won't let you adjust anything. Sometimes the automatic system goes bonkers and takes shit pictures but nope, you can only change the ISO. They seem to forget that photography is about taking great pictures, not about having the most accurate possible recreation of your face in every single bloody place you've been to. And you need manual settings for that. /rant
Re: General discussion chat Which is also a point to bring up on my camera, it was a budget compact camera several years ago (I dont even know how old it is, 5 years maybe?). Not a fancy expensive SLR.
Re: General discussion chat True, however, that does not mean more MP=marketing. A good sensor with a high MP number can take brilliant photos. Take the iphone 6. It takes "eh" pictures. If you JB and get the raw data out, downscale, and then do some photoshop on the jaggies and other general aesthetics it looks brilliant. I'm not saying it is a good camera, but if you follow the same steps pros do with DLSRs it can look fantastic. Most of the pictures you see in the media are photoshopped anyway. It's horrid at low-light though.
Re: General discussion chat I agree that auto is not going to give best results. But most people seem to just pick cameras up (whether as part of a phone, a compact or an SLR - maybe less so on the SLR as that tends to be people who know what they are doing a little more) and use them with the automatic settings. The phone I have played with manual settings and honestly, the best I could do was bump ISO from 400 to 800 and set exposure to +0.1, everything else was just fine on auto (or rather white balance, which chose cloudy), even then the image was only marginally better than what I posted. My compact doesn't allow as many settings changes. Both only allow white balance, exposure and ISO changes but the compact has a macro mode (which I do use for stuff) but the phone doesnt. I don't consider myself a photographer at all. Its just something that irks me. Something else to point out. The phone used an ISO of 400 on auto. The camera chose 160. Manually setting 200 on the phone makes the image ridiculously dark. The camera also had a much shorter exposure time according to the file properties. Shows that the camera is receiving a much larger quantity of light through its lens.
Re: General discussion chat I really want a DSLR camera. Unfortunately they cost way too much for me considering I'm not even a photographer.
Re: General discussion chat The difference between a phone camera or a compact and a good DSLR is that the latter can take great pictures without the need for photoshopping. All phones and compacts I've used are "meh" without editing, while I've taken some really good pictures with my dad's camera I didn't have to edit. Mostly landscape pictures, I'm terrible at taking photos of people. Partly because I hate it. - - - Updated - - - My dad's a photographer, and I've always been rather interested in photography. I learned to use manual settings because he has many high-end lenses from older film cameras which of course lack auto-focus ability, then I got used to it and started using full manual settings with the modern lenses as well. I'm sort of used to the image quality of an SLR camera, and I'm also used to its shape and weight, so using a compact/phone is a bit like holding nothing. My mum's compact is utterly terrible, every single picture is out of focus, and the auto settings are rubbish. Having to look at my picture through a shitty screen really bugs me. I'm not a photographer at all, but I'm good enough with a manual camera and I find auto settings really annoying, even more when they're not the same in every camera but rather completely different.
Re: General discussion chat Yeah, my dad has a DSLR. He rarely lets me use it. It's so much better than my Bloggie. (He mostly uses it when we go to Maine, my brother's baseball games, and with his telescope and other things.) I'm pretty sure it's a Canon D60.
Re: General discussion chat My mom has a Canon Rebel T2i. It's a fantastic camera, but I think she has used it 3 times since 2011-2012. ¯\(°_°)/¯
Re: General discussion chat http://m.imgur.com/lbpfexY Second review in screenshot That is NOT acceptable at all, 40 fps on low with 2x r9-290x(crossfire disabled, when he enabled it he got 50 fps on high, but still unacceptable as that means you need to have a very expensive and high end pc to run it)? Gta iv compared to this is one of the best ports ever Heck, even the consoles are having lag problems (and they literally only had to optimize for 2 sets of specs with consoles) Sent from the 3rd galaxy via the talks of tapping
Re: General discussion chat Ubisoft's hole is so deep at this point, I don't know how they can keep digging. They deserve the worst company to have ever existed award.
Re: General discussion chat AC:unity, Ubisoft's(or should I say ubishit's) latest gsme Sent from the 3rd galaxy via the talks of tapping
Re: General discussion chat I dont know, they messed up pretty bad this time (I dont think even EA has put out a port this bad) Sent from the 3rd galaxy via the talks of tapping
Re: General discussion chat EA is just a money whoring company. Ubisoft is full of flat out dumbasses.
Re: General discussion chat Minimum System requirements for AC:U Cpu: i7-5690x Ram:1tb gddr5 Gpu: the one in the above quote Lol jk, making fun of games optimization is always fun Sent from the 3rd galaxy via the talks of tapping
