April 21, 2014, 02:08:00 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - hamada

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
Canon General / MIT study about online reviews & fanboys
« on: July 15, 2013, 06:09:45 PM »
Self-Appointed Brand Managers
The second explanation is in some respects the reverse of the upset customers explanation. It is possible that these customers are acting as “self-appointed brand managers”. They are loyal to the brand and want an avenue to provide feedback to the company about how to improve its products. They will even do so on products they have not purchased.9
We can further investigate this explanation by asking: when would a self-appointed brand manager be most likely to write a review? One possibility is that customers are more likely to react when they see a product that they did not expect. If a customer, who has only purchased women’s apparel from the firm, is browsing the firm’s website and notices that the firm now sells pet products (for example), this may prompt the self-appointed brand managers to provide feedback by clicking the button inviting a review. Why would self-appointed brand managers be more likely to write a negative review? The French have a phrase that may help to answer this question: “Qui aime bien châtie bien,” which translates (approximately) to “your best friends are your hardest critics.” We investigated whether there is a relationship between the number of items that customers have purchased and the reviewers’ product ratings. The pair-wise correlation between a reviewer’s average product rating and the number of items purchased is 0.048 (p < 0.01). In other words, the most loyal customers are the most negative reviewers.
Prior Units Index: The total number of units of this item sold by the firm in the year before the date of the review. At the request of the retailer we index this measure by setting the average to 100% for the reviews with a prior transaction. We investigate this possibility by calculating the following measures:
Niche Items: Equal to one if Prior Units is in the bottom 10% of items with reviews, and equal to zero otherwise.
Very Niche Items: Equal to one if Prior Units is in the bottom 1% of items with reviews, and equal to zero otherwise.
Product Age: Number of years between the date of the review and the date the item was first sold.
New Item: Equal to one if Product Age is less than 2 years and equal to zero otherwise.
New Category: Equal to one if the maximum Product Age in the product category is less than 2 years, and equal to zero otherwise

In the Table 9 we report the average of each measure for reviews with and without prior transactions. The findings reveal large (and highly significant) differences on all of these measures. Reviews without a
prior transaction are more likely to be written for items that were introduced recently. They also tend to be niche items with relatively small sales volumes. These findings are all consistent with the prediction that customers are more likely to provide feedback on items they had not purchased when they see the firm selling a product that they did not expect to see.

something interesting to read.... i bet it fits many members here.....


I reckon 18 months.

it´s not a xxxD.

Sorry - I really don't see any benefit here.

It's pretty clear from your examples that the 200x images from the Zeiss lens are dramatically better than the 100x images from the Zeiss + 2x converter. In all honesty, I am not surprised.

In addition to wrecking the image sharpness, the tc also costs you two stops of light. It drives the lens closer to diffraction (if not completely off the cliff) and adds copious dollops of CA to a lens that's almost entirely free of it.

In what way can this possibly be better?

grain is often perceivced as "sharper".

but it´s just grain.... not usefull information.

sony is making 63% of it´s profit from insurance these days.

the electronic part of sony is a money grave.

it´s more and more likely sony will split off or even sell the electronics department.
canon would be dumb to depend on sony for sensor manufacturing in the long run.

and i have not much trust in the sony DSLR system either.

sony may has invested the most in manufacturing plants... but it does not PAY.


Canon General / Re: Clarification....Fine Art
« on: July 06, 2013, 08:08:09 AM »
make it B&W....print it on expensive paper. sell it for lots of $.

if it´s a boring image... print it HUGE.
and if you have a name in the fine art scene you can even sell snapshots printed on baryta as fine art.

oh i forgot... when you make a youtube video about fine art prints,wear white cotton gloves!!

Technical Support / Re: Help needes: EOS 7D - noisy pictures
« on: July 04, 2013, 04:31:42 AM »
Turned off Auto Lighting Optimizer? cuz that stuff will boost up dark areas in a photo and increasing noise that way

again.... not for RAW files (manual: page 75).

Technical Support / Re: Help needes: EOS 7D - noisy pictures
« on: July 04, 2013, 04:17:28 AM »
But the image provided is a JPG and has been processed.  It is obvious when you magnify the JPG file and see the blocking from JPG compression.

but HE has the problems with a RAW file.
saying "it looks like JPG artifacts" does not help then.  ;)

As far as HTP and HINR is concerned, I am the source and now turn both off due to the effects it produces on RAW images.  There are a couple of options in the FW that affect raw images and those are two if them.

you know more then the canon engineers.... im impressed... (not) ;)

as far as i know this only affects the metadata of the RAW file so the effect is "rendered" when using DPP. but not visible in a program like lightroom.

afaik that why the manual says it affects the RAW when you print DIRECTLY from camera or view the images from camera.

but the RAW data is not affected by these settings.
so programs who do not interprete this canon metadata tags (afaik all except DPP) will ignore them.

i have tried, in the studio, with identical light conditions, and i did not see an effect.
so if you say it has an effect.... you better prove it or i have to say you are telling nonsense. ;)

Technical Support / Re: Help needes: EOS 7D - noisy pictures
« on: July 03, 2013, 06:41:08 PM »
It looks like JPG compression noise..maybe either in camera or was adjusted again using software?

it´s an raw image she is talking about.. see the screenshot.

Sometimes the HINR can introduce noise even when not shooting high ISO....even in RAW mode.

it does not affect RAW at all when we trust the manual.
and i never heard about this option affecting RAW... you have a source?

Technical Support / Re: Help needes: EOS 7D - noisy pictures
« on: July 03, 2013, 06:37:09 PM »
Its not noisy it just out of focus

it is out of focus... but it´s noisy too.
if this is not a crop it´s really bad quality.

Are you EATING them?  What are you using 5 flashes for? :)

He's dealing, man. Flash is the hottest new thing on the mean streets of Boston. Didn't you hear?  ;)

i wonder when he will find time dealing FLASH... he is around the clock online.   ;)

i bought one last week from amazon germany.
reviews are positive here.
only one 1 star rating and that one is obviously from an i___t.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 70d for stills - IQ Improvement ?
« on: July 02, 2013, 07:05:54 PM »

Still, with no AFMA, I'll be passing it up.

as every review i saw today mentioned it has AFMA.

I am a 550d shooter looking to upgrade. I primarily shoot stills not video, so my question is pertaining stills only.

then i guess you best choice will be the 6D or 5D MK3.
i don´t expect huge improvements from the 70D.

going from my 550D to fullframe, was the best thing i could do.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Dual Pixel Liveview Autofocus
« on: July 02, 2013, 07:20:10 AM »
The new AF-system is faster, but can´t beat the AF-system of the HG3, G6 and GF6.

i had the GF6 for a couple of days the AF is not that impressive.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 02, 2013, 06:03:49 AM »
1. The much touted AF improvement seems to have improved Live View performance, I'm not reading this as saying it will improve AF performance through the View Finder. So perhaps more of a videographer's advantage that say an action/bird photographer?

Probably not for action, but for everything else and for the general photography crowd of course it's damn convenient to have the touch screen immediately af to where you point, anywhere on the screen. In this regard Canon really has a tech edge and doesn't disappoint.

2.  Nowhere in the promoted features does it mention enhanced noise performance. I'm pretty certain that if Canon had managed noise free images at say ISO 800/1600, it would've been a headline feature.

From the sample shots, I cannot tell anything about the iso performance because of the noise reduction, the 1600 butterfly shot looks heavily nr'ed in the background, and the 3200 shot speaks for itsself. For me, the iso performance is the most important issue if I'd upgrade, because at the end it comes down to if the resulting shots are a lot different from the current 18mp crop sensor - and it doesn't seem so.

Canon's goal probably was only to match the d7100 noise which also isn't too good though they have some more mp. And I'd still expect Nikon's sony sensors to have the edge in dynamic range, we'll see.

For sure. We're doing loads of hypothesizing right now which may or may not lead to some very incorrect assumptions.
I currently shoot with a 500D and although I love my camera, I have two big issues with her performance, which of course is relative to my rank amateur status.
First is noise. I hate that my first post processing action is to set my noise reduction slider when shooting at ISO 400! An ISO range of 100 - 12800 and already I'm seeing noise only two clicks up!?
Secondly, it's DR. I use the ETTR methodology for landscapes and generally an f stop of 16. Yet when I try to recover detail in the shadows, I get that ugly, messy noise.

i liked my 550D too.

for me it was not so much color noise or even luimnance noise.
it was this strange look i got at 100% on some images.
i can´t really describe it... frizzy.

it looks a bit like JPG artifacts (i shot RAW of course).. but then not really.
not like film grain.. i would be fine with that.. more like a labyrint pattern on some images on other like heat haze.
edged that should be sharp and definite (like the iris in the eyes) seem to frazzle.
as i said... hard to describe. :)

anyway it was the reason i hardly ever shoot above ISO 800 with the 550D.
with ISO 800 i felt uneasy already.

since i am using FF i don´t have these problems anymore.

not bad so far but nothing to drool about either.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 02, 2013, 05:25:41 AM »
From the picture it didn't seem that it has a shoulder display. That seems strange.

are you blind?
No, but thanks for asking in such a kind way. I only saw the picture on the landing page though.

yeah your fault then. ;)

it is pretty useless to judge the front cover of a book only by looking at the back cover.  :P

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8