Samsung Galaxy S7 vs. Samsung Galaxy S5 Camera

I recently upgraded to a Samsung S7 phone from a Samsung S5 phone.  My S5 was getting a little long in the tooth - falling apart, I changed the body once, the screen twice, and the camera lens cover, the back battery cover several times and the accelerometer died on it recently as well so taking landscape photos I would have to manually rotate them.  It was time.
There has been high praise for the S7 camera, most people saying that it is one of the bast, if not the best cameras on a cell phone as of today, and this was really the major contributor in me wanting to get a new phone.  I really wanted the S7 active and not a regular S7, since it has 33% larger battery, some built in protection for dropping, but for some reason Samsung decided to make it not only a carrier specific phone (AT&T, but a country specific phone, meaning it it not available in Canada.  This wouldn't be a big deal - I could buy one off of ebay and unlock it, but the cost is prohibitive.  A new one is about 700-800 dollars due to the CAD horrible exchange rate for a new-ish phoine, and because of Ebays lame Global Shipping program, it meant I'd pay another 150 dollars or more for duty, shipping, etc.
I found a barely used S7 on Kijiji for 450 dollars and jumped at the chance.

The camera simply blows me away.  It is eons beyond my two and a half year old Samsung Galaxy S5.  Gone are the days of grainy out of focus photos almost all cell phones were plagued with 5 years ago, even in good light.  In good light all cell phone cameras take good photos, but low light has always been a challenge.

 Low Light Performance
The Samsung S5 is a decent performing camera in bright light,   Low light left something to be desired.   Even in moderately lit situations such as a pub, the photos are grainy and the camera need to be held completely still.  With the dual pixel camera, and F1.7 lens in the S7 just amazes me in low light. The live view of the camera can actually see brighter than my eyes can - it's always been the other way around.  Compare these two photos and the difference is obvious.

















S7                                                                                                                                                        S5

Autofocus
Autofocus is slow on the S5 and it has a hard time with macro focus, not being able to focus on some things that are a foot or two away.  The S7 does not have any problems.  The autofocus is lightning fast on the S7 compared to the S5. 

Pro Mode

This is my first cell phone, and also one of the first available that you can manually control the ISO, shutter speed and focus if you wish to do so in Pro Mode.  It also shows you the autofocus points in the frame.  And, as well, it has the option to save as a RAW file!  Photographers know that RAW mode gives you more control in post editing, especially when it comes to white balance adjustment. 

Wider Angle
I sometimes struggle to get subjects in view with the S5, especially tight indoor scenes and landscapes, but the S7 has a much wider view. See above photos for comparison.

Ease of Access to Camera
Another plus on the S7 camera is the speed it takes to get to the camera taking mode.  Just a double tap on the home key brings up the camera.  I've missed many good opportunities with my S5 in the time it takes to access the camera, even with the swipe to open camera option on it.

Fast Charging
This phone charges ridiculously fast..  another great plus.  Many times I was just about to run out of the house with my S5 but found the battery wasn't charged, and the charging on this phone takes significantly longer than the S7.  Just plug the S7 into a fast charger for a quick top up in a few minutes and it is good to go.


Other Things and some Negatives
The processor speed is very noticeable quicker on the S7 which is great.
There are a few other funky features that I have yet to play with such as motion photo which captures video before you take a photo, slow mo, hyperlapse that the S5 does not have.

 But, everything isn't all roses with the S7.. there are some negative things I don't like about it.
I do not really like the glass back cover on this thing - it's just looking to get broken.  This is an overreaction by Samsung to the whiners complaining of the plastic on the S5, so they went overboard on trying to make the phone feel like a premium phone.  I don't really like putting my phone in a case to make it more bulky and collect dust - typically I only put a glass screen protector on it to save the real screen from scratches.
The S7 is also horrible for repairability compared to the S5.  I changed a screen and the body myself on the S5 and I don't think I'll be trying that on the S7 - to do repair anything, you have to heat the back cover up to soften the adhesive and pull the back off with a suction cup and use guitar picks to pry it off.   It would be nice to be able to change the battery, since 2 years from now, the battery capacity will have degraded enough to be noticeable, as all batteries do.  On the S5, I simply swapped the battery.

Summary
Some great upgrades with just the camera itself make this phone a must-have upgrade in my books if you like photography, along with the speed of the new processor and memory, but be careful with it!

Garmin eTrex30X First Impressions

I'm preparing to go to the Adirondack High Peaks on Sunday and although it's not a must have, I do like to have a GPS for a little added security and lower frustration in some situations especially since I will be solo. I pulled out my old Garmin 62s and found out the micro USB connector had crapped out and I couldn't connect at all to my computer.  If I had a bunch of time, I'd probably send it in to Garmin to get it fixed, but I don't have time.  I figured I'd pick up a new one instead.  After doing some research I think I'd like an eTrex 30X.  Besides Garmin there really isn't much competition other than Delorme.
I can't stand touch screens for backcountry.  I don't know who would.  Your hands are dusty, wet, covered in gloves, etc.  But some people must since Garmin keeps pumping out new models. The eTrex and the 64s aren't touch screen.  The eTrex is the only thing you can even remotely call light weight in Garmin's lineup.  Somewhere along the line it seems noone gave Garmin's product managers the memo that people like super light weight things in the backcountry.  My old 62s is a beast and the newer 64s hasn't changed at all since that.  Honestly I think the only thing different is the processor is faster and maybe more memory.  The eTrex blows the others away in terms of weight, as well as an impressive-on-paper 25 hours operating time on batteries, compared to 16 for most others Garmin offers. On top of that, the resolution of 240x320 is twice that of the 64s ridiculously low resolution of  160x240 (what is this, 1992?).
Opening the box and taking it out, the 30X IS small, with a smaller screen compared to my 62s.  That's OK.  I transfered my old SD card with some maps on it to the 30X, fired it up and put some maps on the 30X via MapSource (screw Basecamp, it still sucks), then threw some batteries in it and turned it on.  The rear cover has a quarter turn lock on it, similar to the 62S but not with the overdesigned investment cast aluminum dovetail the 62S has - this time it's plastic for the eTrex, and I'm OK with that.  I managed to set my preferences easily enough as the controls and still confusing-as-hell to find the option you want OS is very similar to the 62s.
Putting it on my kitchen scale, the 30X is 99 grams sans betteries.  The 62S is 167 grams.  That means the 30X is only 60% the weight of the 62s..  sweet!
Well, I guess I'll see how this works practically in the next week, but so far, I think it's an improvement over my old 62s in terms of size, weight, resolution and battery life.  I'm sure Garmin could take another 1/3 of the weight out of this thing if they put their minds to it, and make the screen larger at the same time...  those two items would be on my wishlist for improvements.

Nikon D300S to D600 Transition Comparisons

     So, I’ve been casually using my Nikon D600 a bit lately and have been getting more familiar with it.  I come from a D300S, which I had for maybe 6 years prior to getting the D600.  So now I know enough to do a comparison between the two.  The pros, cons, and some things that jut need adjusting when switching between the two cameras.  I might say, that I never fully used the D300S.  I use a lot of the basic stuff, but not so much the plethora of adjustment in the camera.  In any case, here goes..

Quick comparison of switching to a Nikon D600 from a Nikon D300S:

Pros

- I’ll start with the obvious: better low light performance, and depth of field control on the FX sensor

- Connector doors on the left side are much improved on the D600.  Instead of the one piece rubber door, that is consistently a pint to seal, the D600 has three separate doors with proper hinges.  Yay.

- The D600 has Scene modes, like a point and shoot.  At first I thought it was pretty cheesy and almost offensive to have these on a close to $2000 camera body, but some of the odd ones may come in handy instead of having to fiddle with 5 or more adjustments.

- Custom Menu – the D600 has a menu at the bottom that you can select the popular menu selections you frequently use out of any of the categories to have them all in one menu for quick access.  Yay again.  No longer are the days where I have to scroll though pages of menu items I never or rarely ever use, just to get to the white balance or ISO auto adjustment menus.

- The body is actually lighter for the D600 than D300S.  Although that is offset by the heavier lenses you have to use for full frame sensors.

- The D600 has a better battery latch mechanism than the D600.  It is purpose built with a latch for the battery and a spring to eject the battery, with the door providing only the function of covering the battery..  The D300S has a lower cost design that the door itself is the latch holding in the battery, and the springs are the actual battery contacts.

- Most functions to control the ISO, focus, exposure, white balance, and even size/type of files can be accessed through the rear buttons, holding them and rotating the selectors instead of having to go into the camera menus in the D300S.  That’s awesome.

Cons

- Battery life when left on:  for some reason, the battery seems to drain fast on the D600 when I inadvertently leave the camera on while uploading photos to my computer or whatever.  My D300 seemed to last much longer when this happens.  Leave the D600 on overnight and the battery is dead.  The D300 would only drain a small amount.

- Having to switch battery formats is a bit of a negative, since I had extra batteries for my D300S I could have used.  Although the reason for the format change was to lessen the potential to short the contacts out.  And the new ones have more capacity, so that is a positive to offset the negative.

- I use a Nikon AH-4 handstrap with my camera.  On my D300S, it didn’t interfere with the battery door and battery removal.  On the D600 it does, and I have to rotate the bottom plate out of the way (thankfully don’t have to remove it) to remove the battery.

- The D600 only allows up to a three bracket exposure set for some reason.  Despite the higher inherent dynamic range on the D600, I would much prefer the options on the D300S with up to 9, I don’t know why it can’t have more, it’s only a software change.  On the good side, you can choose a spread up to 2ev on the D600.  The D300S was only 1ev max.

- The controls for light metering pattern, and autofocus have been changed significantly.  I think I prefer the D300S style better, with the hard switches for both, the focus at the top of the back panel and the light metering on the bottom.  Instead, now you have to hold a button down and use the selector wheels to change things.  It’s just not as quick.

- The soft flash button.  The flash doesn’t automatically pop up when the button is pressed for the flash as the D300S had.  On the D600, the flack will pop up when you press the shutter.

- Focus range of field – the D300S has more autofocus points and when choosing a single point focus, has a greater range in the visible field, if I want to focus on something that is near the edge of the field of view.

Other Things

- The zoom in and zoom out buttons for viewing photos are reversed on the D600.  Instead of zooming out, I keep hitting the erase photo lock button instead.

- Bracketing on D300S I needed to trigger each shot by itself.  D600 it does the bracketing sequence automatically, which is probably a good thing, since the photos are in close succession.

- The size/weight of the battery charger.  Seriously, this MH-25 beast of a charger is unnecessarily huge and a terrible design..  I spend a good deal of time lugging around gear to take landscape photography.  A small, lightweight charger would have been more appropriate and useful.  Why design such a large charger for no reason except to impress??









Please excuse the photos, I was feeling lazy/drunk today to produce some decent comparison photos :-)