MrZorbatron

What is it with you and saying Moo? Anyway, since you're using Imgur then it's super easy to use smaller pics. Just click the "Large Thumbnail" button to the right and it'll do the hard part for you.

Finally someone asks about the cow reference as an indicator of exasperation.

 

Anyway, I don't see how the image size matters. Additionally, I do not see that option in the app.

I suspect that your increased latencies are related to your needlessly massive screenshots that you posted.

 

AJ

Moo. I just upload to imgur and post.

 

Anyway, it happens regardless of test server, though I didn't want to just bang away at the speed tests. This is happening all over this area. Great speeds, crap pings. Here's a few days ago:

 

 

 

While this is what I used to see:

My latencies (ping times) have gone through the roof in the last few months. Any ideas? Any of you have this lately?

These are just now:

EDIT: Resized images via HTML.

I only tested it on one site in Colorado for all of 15 minutes, but in that specific observation with an N5, GN2 and a GS3, the Nexus 5 bested them in every instance of signal strength and data throughput. And I was confirmed on the same site/sector. As for battery life, I am not able to say.

 

The N5 in my observations was 3-5dBm better not being held, and about 7-8dBm better while being held than the GN2. It was about 5-7dBm better than the GS3 unheld, and about 10dBm better held. The GN2 was less affected being held than the GS3. But that didn't surprise me given the size of the device.

 

My Netgear Zing beat them all, and even picked up a distant B41 site.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

My observation is a little less scientific.  Frequency of dropped calls, call delivery failures (straight to voice mail).

are you a ham radio operator?

 

Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk

Not presently. Eventually I will pull everything out of the boxes, set up my tower, renew my license, and get back on the air. I just haven't gotten around to it, way too busy since I have been here.

 

Just listening at the moment, Drake R8B with a long wire from end to end of the attic of my ranch style house (102'). Amazing what it picks up, really.

Is it a good thing that the market I live in is a Samsung then? lol 

No.  Ericsson maintains that, too.

svlte is a non-issue.  I have an ecfb device.  Let me tell you unless you are trying to watch video and be on the phone at the same time there's no difference with an ecsfb device.  The battery life is also much better due to not having to run as many radios at once.  As much as i loved svlte or even svevdo ecsfb makes it a wash.  Even if you don't have ecsfb the sv(insert type here) isn't that big of a deal.  It really does help with battery life and i can tell you as a ham having all of these paths inside already..it's hard enough to not have them interfere with each other...sv(whatever) just makes it worse by either adding more signal paths(which introduces crosstalk) or having to shift between signal paths. Wiwavelength has this exactly right.  SDR has nothing to do with not having crosstalk between the signal paths..wiwavelength is absolutely correct and it's not a Sprint BS thing either.

I make parts orders all the time over the phone while looking at things online.  This means I will need a mobile hotspot or something now.

Best modem or SDR in the world is not going to work if it is getting interfered with by a powerful in band signal in the same handset.

Yes and no.  It works now on SVLTE and SVDO devices.  It would still work on a tri band device at least as well as today, and probably better because they could be on different bands.  There are other options, too.  They could require the data and voice be on different bands, say use 2500MHz or throttled 800MHz LTE while on a PCS voice call.

 

Be careful with what you're calling in-band.  It is very easy to tune the selectivity of a radio.  We do it all the time on HF (Shortwave) radio on extremely closely spaced, very narrow, often SSB frequencies, running many times more power than a phone does.  I know that there are plenty of issues there still, but it is doable.

 

Either way, we have this crosstalk potential on SVwhatever devices now, but tri-band devices have yet to show any significant signal performance improvements.  I can tell you from experience that on PCS, the Nexus 5 doesn't have any improvement that I can see when compared to a Galaxy S 3 or Note 2.  I know because I have a friend with one and it is no better than mine.

They had success in the past rebranding fuji stuff but fuji sold at roughly the same price in Japan (well at a moderate discount, but not orders of magnitude) but it was for literally the same camera. As digital has made photography substantially easier (a quick check of the number of uncle bob's and SMWAC's shooting weddings shows this) as compared to ye olde film days the market for better cameras has increased significantly. Hassie is basically playing for the 'dentist camera' market segment. People with very significant amounts of disposable income who want a camera to be seen with rather than it's robustness, image quality etc. They want a better camera than somebody else because frankly they dont stand a chance of being a better photographer. As much as it beggars belief it must be working, they have done it a third time (an a99 is on the way) and hassie is VC owned (capitalists, not the southern asian kind) and they tend to not repeat mistakes. Just as there is a market out there for cell phones with 4 year old tech but diamonds selling for insane prices it seems there is a market for grossly overpriced blinged up cameras.

 

At those prices you could buy a decent mid tier full frame pro camera and a couple of pro lenses.

They have had some success, not in the professional or enthusiast groups, but with the rich idiot group. the cameras have been pretty well universally can buy professionals, reviewers, and photography equipment experts. For example, the Stellar is a good good camera because the RX100 is a good camera - for its $600 price that is. It isn't a good camera for $2000.

Anyone seen those new Hasselblad digitals that are re-bodied Sony models with slightly tweaked firmware?

 

The $7000 Lunar aka NEX7 and the $2000 Stellar aka RX100 are the first two if the series.

 

Additionally, Hasselblad doesn't do itself any favor when it talks about the premium feel and build quality, rather than great performance. Now, both of those are good cameras in either Sony or Hasselblad trim, but they are in no way worth the Hasselblad prices ranging from 3 to 5 times that of the Sony model from which it is derived.

Oh, come on. That sounds more like a typical wounded, emotional reaction to the disappearance of SVLTE than any reasoned analysis. You need to substantiate that before you make such a cockamamie accusation. It is not just a Sprint "BS" line -- it is an engineering line that single radio devices perform better.

 

Now, one reason for that could be largely, even exclusively Sprint specific because Sprint is running CDMA2000 and LTE in the same PCS 1900 MHz band. Off the top of my head, I can think of no other operator in the world running CDMA2000 and LTE in the same frequency band. So, for SVLTE devices, that presents a filter challenge. Both of the two separate radio paths are transmitting/receiving at similar PCS frequencies, and they are only centimeters, even millimeters apart inside the handset. Keeping CDMA1X 1900 from interfering with LTE 1900 and vice versa becomes a challenge or a shortcoming of SVLTE devices.

 

AJ

Filtering is a concern, but somewhat lessened on modern hardware with essentially software defined radios. Selectivity As hugely better than it was even just a couple years ago. additionally, the benefit of improved antenna tuning should easily overcome any reduction in performance from additional filtering.

 

Further, SVLTE between bands would not interfere. It should be possible in not now then soon to use a true multi mode multi frequency radio. The RRUs use them.

It's not a issue of space either, since they were apparently able to fit in a second WiFi antenna into the GS5. That extra antenna is nice, but I think a separate path for data makes much more sense until VoLTE is deployed and enabled.

It's never a space issue, especially with how much larger phones are getting.  It would only be a space issue if they had to put a dozen antennas in it.  Anyway, having additional antennas is good for reception.  Sprint's BS line about improving range and cell's edge performance is a complete crock to anyone who understands radio.  They posed is as if a single larger antenna is less effective than several smaller, which isn't true.  Different bands require different antenna tuning.  Varying lengths and shapes of elements is much more effective than electronic tuning, even though some electronic lengthening (adding inductance) will still be required for 800MHz in any instance.  Either way, I would rather see separate antennas for voice and date even if they both require electronic tuning.  Losing the feature is a HUGE headache for me.

 

I also do not believe the battery life difference to be that significant, since you could still user CSFB with it in so-enabled areas.  Just put the CDMA 1x radio to sleep and wake it up when signaled over LTE that you have a call.  It wouldn't be any different than changing one radio to another band or technology.  For greater on-call battery savings, make the simultaneous voice/data a selectable option so it would put the data radio to sleep while on a call if it was disabled.

 

Being that I am in Eastern Michigan and not a particularly heavy data user, there is very little benefit to me in having anything but a single band device, so I will just ride that one as far as I can for now.  I use data for professional purposes, so while additional speed is nice, it isn't extremely important.  I used to do ordering over the old Sprint network, even in the middle of nowhere when I practically had to climb to the roof somewhere to grab 1x, or god forbid Verizon 1x roaming, and had a pretty easy time with it.

 

Incidentally, I seriously believe that Verizon significantly degrades Sprint users' 1x roaming speeds.  When I was up north a few months ago, I got WAY better speed on Sprint 1x on the absolute ragged edge of the cell where I had to be careful how I held my GS3, than when I was roaming on Verizon with 3-4 bars.

There is no more simultaneously using data and voice on triband devices. It is possible in single band phones. If you need both voice and data at the same time I'd stay single band.

I can't wait until they get their heads on straight and do it like the GS3 was.  There's a 1x T/R path and a data T/R path.  The data T/R path can be either LTE or EVDO.  I don't get why the Note 2 isn't the same, it has a CDMA path and LTE path.  Dumb because theoretically it could be on EVDO and LTE at the same time, even though the firmware would never allow it.

 

There's no reason you can't have a multiband data side with the same arrangement of separate 1x.

Nope, I still shoot some 6x7 but living out here getting E6 chems is insanely tough due to it not being able to fly and I hate shipping film for someone else to soup so mostly b&w. I did pretty much stop shooting 35mm film, the shoots I used it for were better suited to dslr's. Before I hung up the cameras I was doing a decent amount of hybrid work, combining digital 35mm and film MF and it paid pretty well. The portraits tended to blow up better with film (never be shocked by just how large some brides want their portraits) but that is hugely subjective. I was toying with going back to LF but it would have meant hiring an extra set of hands and also the scanning cost would have been a lot higher.

I actually meant for cell site pictures. I use an old (personally restored) 2x3 baby press camera with b&w for some things for fun sometimes. I have taken lots of cell site pictures with my old A1 because I have a 600mm lens for it and until recently, did not for my Nikons. I have a 4/3 lens that hits 300mm, but my bag with my E5 and a couple other lenses got stolen a few months ago. Never decided if I might just sell my remaining 4/3 gear or buy another E5. I really loved that camera, it felt indestructible and the pictures seemed to never need to be touched, though never looked processed.

 

Incidentally, the Sigma 150-500 for Nikon is outstanding. I was very surprised for a $1200 lens. It's actually hand holdable much of the time.

An S4GRU member has been spotted:

I think I am the only S4GRU member who still uses film at all.

One of the big things I'd suggest doing right away is setting the Auto ISO mode on and setting the max ISO to whatever you feel comfortable with (probably 1600 or 3200, maybe even 6400). That will give you a bit more flexibility with shutter speeds.

 

Honestly even the 18-55 kit lens is a pretty good lens, although I don't even carry mine around anymore now that I have the 35mm f/1.8 prime. Now if you're going to go tower hunting, a long zoom lens is definitely something you'll want; I've been happy with the 55-300mm, although you probably can get away with the less bulky 55-200mm.

Do NOT do this.  If you want to understand sensitivity, light, and exposure, auto ISO is not the way to do it.  If you do use auto, beware of noise and do not set it above about 800.  Auto ISO can kind of impart a feeling of more capability than you actually have, or actually know how to use.  Even in the dark, it's a lot better to brace the camera against something than cranking the ISO to 3200+.  Detail suffers rapidly.

 

You should also set noise reduction to a conservative setting, not Auto.  Auto NR is for the idiot who just takes his card to the drug store to print and always wants a non grainy picture, never knowing that his pictures are crap because he prints 4x6s of everything.  It is quite easy to eliminate noise in post processing and retain a lot more detail than most cameras will retain if you have them do it internally.

 

On your camera, consider going over 3200 to be a zone of last resort.  It's what you do if you if it's more important to get the shot than that the shot be good.

 

Don't forget, the 35mm prime lens is going to perform a lot better than simply locking your 18-55 kit lens to 35.  You won't believe the difference in low light performance that the larger max aperture will bring.

 

One thing to remember with high ISO settings is the amount of noise that you will get with them.  I try and shoot around 100-800 ISO on my Canon 50D.  That range is typically pretty good for keeping the image clean of sensor noise.  That said, you can use those higher ISO settings to introduce a bit of artistic flare in your photos to make them look a little grainy.

 

All part of the fun.

If you do this for this reason, just remember to turn off noise reduction entirely.

I've been seeing a lot more confusion lately about [CDMA 800 | 1X 800 | 800 SMR | CDMA1X800SMR] as it becomes more widespread, and I think the way SignalCheck displays it might be fueling the fire. So I'm throwing this out to everyone for an opinion.. any opposition to changing the CDMA 1X label to always show "1xRTT", and changing the provider to display "Sprint 800" when appropriate instead? That would keep it consistent with how I intend to identify Sprint LTE bands, and (hopefully) cut back on the misinformation.

 

Any/all opinions/ideas are welcome; if you're just going to "me too" something, just give the appropriate post a 'Like'. No need to clutter the thread with repetition.

 

Thanks,

-Mike

Is there not a way to determine if it's connected to 1xRTT or 1xA?

Definitely XDA. I haven't seen any NEC devices sold by domestic carriers. Unfortunate too.

Interesting. I assumed the D7100's crop factor was the same as the D300's, which my old D300's manual listed as 1.55.

 

As for the auto crop, I wasn't so much referring to that as to the simple situation of pixel count on APS-C vs APS-C sized crop on FX whether it is in body or not. I've been quite impressed with my D7100 with decent lenses.

 

One thing I have noticed is that using the 28-300 on a DX body does a great deal to hide some of its issues. It came with my D800 as a special deal but I am not find of it.

 

Incidentally, I saw a mention of a 55-200 up there. I have to honestly say that I don't care for it. Yes it's cheap, yes it's sharp. It's also extremely fragile and has no mount seals. The focus mechanism is particularly prone to breaking, too. My first 55-200 I bought as a mid tele for my old D100 (first digital Nikon and a camera I still quite like). It developed a problem where 9/10 times it would not lock focus, but instead rapidly oscillate the focus back and forth by about 2 degrees for as long as AF was active. The 55-300 can be found sometimes for as little as $300, and although quite a bit larger and heavier (the 55-200 is absolutely dinky for the reach it has) it has substantially better build quality, better AF mechanism, better VR, and has seals.

 

I also quite like some of the older Nikon lenses which will unfortunately not focus automatically on the 3100 due to using the screw mechanish on a body which lacks a focus motor. If you ever do upgrade, D7x00, D300s (not sure why anyone would buy that anymore), and all FX bodies to date, do have internal focus motors. Some of those old lenses can be found quite inexpensively and have great optical quality.

oh and some relatively cheap things to get if you want to do landscapes would be a semi decent tripod, a circular polarizing filter and some neutral density grad filters. I'd pickup something like the cokin P series holder and filters. Depending on who you listen to a UV filter can be a good idea, it can help protect the front element of the lens from getting scratched \ broken, the flip side is just as many people say it's just another layer of glass or resin screwing up image quality so it's pretty much a toss up. I use them most of the time but plenty of others dont.

The polarizing filter is good for cutting out reflections on water and deepening blues in sky's etc, it can get a little zany on wider angles (there are exceptions but it's not worth covering them). The grad filters help balance the difference in brightness between the sky and the ground so you don't either have a dark foreground and a blue sky or a well exposed foreground and a white sky. Normal (non graduated) ND filters can also be used to reduce the amount of light entering the lens allowing you to (for example) take those long exposure waterfall shots in the middle of the day or even make people and cars completely disappear I would stay away from any coloured filters, I know the temptation to pickup a tobacco filter is nearly irresistible but fight it!! If you insist on that kind of colour treatment its easier to do it in photoshop

 

This place do filters for a sane price.

http://2filter.com/cokin/cokinp.html

I have a cokin z pro kit buried somewhere for when I need nd grads. The p series is smaller but cheaper and more likely to be in stock. They're resin filters rather than glass but good enough.

don't use UV filters where they might shatter. You can get a pack of cheap Plexi/policarb protectors for that. The broken glass will do more damage to the front element of your lens than any environmental consideration will, and the reduction in quality from the plastic guard isn't bad of it's clean and unscratched (they come in a multipack for a reason).

Whilst the 50 1.8G is a full-frame lens (for future upgrade to full-frame), is optically amazing and is cheap, it is 75mm equivalent on a 1.5 crop sensor (DX). This puts it in the "telephoto" range on his camera and is a very awkward focal length on DX for a lot of photographers. I stand behind my recommendation for the even cheaper DX 35mm 1.8G. It's just as sharp as the 50 1.8 and will give him much better FoV on DX, especially for the beginner. The 35mm 1.8G also has a closer focus distance than the 50mm 1.8G. The 35mm 1.8G DX lens is much more versatile on DX. Once he's ready to step up to a true telephoto lens, there are much better options. Also, while the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DX VR lens is cheaply made, it is actually very sharp at most focal lengths. Yes, the 18-105mm (Nikon D7000/D7100 kit lens) is a better choice, he'd be better off just saving his money and skipping the 18-105 altogether and making his 18-55mm kit lens work for now. Especially since none of us would actually be able to tell if he used either at 18-55mm (as long as he has two decent copies). I especially don't recommend the "all-in-one" lenses like the 18-200mm lenses. They compromise too much on either end. There is NO free lunch. Once he gets comfortable with that (and with very little money spent on additional kit), then he can decide on where he wants to go next. There are so many great choices out there. I have over $56k in lenses alone. It can get crazy expensive. For the OP, if you are ever planning on eventually going full-frame one day (like the Nikon D800, D610, D3, D700, D4....etc), don't waste too much money on incompatible Nikon DX lenses. You won't be able to use them on FX (full-frame). The FX lenses work on both DX and FX, just keep in mind the multiplier factor (1.5x), when doing your focal length calculations for your D3100. FX lenses do cost more, but they're made better, usually always have weather sealing and can be used on any DSLR camera Nikon makes. That being said, there are a few DX lenses that are really worth it and the 35mm 1.8G DX is one of the only DX lenses I'd recommend buying. You can also use it on full-frame as well (one of the ONLY DX lenses than can be used on FX), although it will vignette in the corners, especially when stopped down (higher aperture F-number) and at hyperfocal lengths. There is a lot to learn, so take your time! AJ gave you great advice about keeping your camera in Aperture Priority so that you can see how everything interacts and works together. Google "Sunny 16", "rule of thirds" "aperture", "ISO", "Shutter speed" "Depth of Field", "Field of View" "Circle of Confusion" and just start putting the puzzle pieces together. That should get you going for now. Again, GL!

While I agree on the bit about excessive zoom ratios, 28-300 comes to mind, being too good to be true, I would suggest you get a few inexpensive DX lenses and decide if you will really go far with this. I'll put my D7100 against a D700 any day of the week, so don't think that FX is the do all end all. I have a D800 as well and have to say that in decent lighting, the 7100 always comes out ahead of a similarly sized crop from the 800. Remember that the subject should dictate the camera to a point. I do so much long telephoto stuff that the reduction in size and weight that the DX gear allows is amazingly nice.

 

As far as that 1.55 crop factor goes, 24MP vs about 15MP center crop is a huge difference in decent conditions.

 

Now, there's nothing wrong with using FX lenses on a DX body, the reverse will be less than impressive, generally leading to either an automatic crop to the center of the sensor area or a significant vignette. I still stand behind my suggestion to get a few decent but inexpensive DX lenses, however, as they will prove a valuable learning tool and be very easy to sell if you ever make the switch to FX.

 

Incidentally, the 50/1.8 is sharper than the 35. Not much, but it is. You will notice it more on modern DX bodies due to the pixel density. It is true that it is getting a bit into tele territory, however.

So my fiancée surprised me with a Nikon D3100 with stock 18-55mm lens. This is the first DSLR I have ever owned, and I want to learn how to make the most of it.

 

Does anyone have experience with DSLRs that can give me some guidance and tips/tricks?

 

Everyone I have spoken with suggests replacing the 18-55mm lens with a 35mm fixed focus lens, to better learn to "frame" pictures.

 

I'm a total novice shooter, and will be taking pictures of general scenery, people, etc.

I don't agree on the 35, BTW. Get the 55-300, which can be found for under 400. Get the 50mm /1.8. do not get the 55-200. While great optically, the 55-200 is not a durable lens. The 55-300 is weather sealed I'm case you get a higher end camera.

 

if you want to practice framing by moving around, the 50mm will give you more of a workout. Either way, I suggest you $hitcan the 18-55 in favor of 10-105 as an every day lens. It is sharper at every length and its implementation of VR is better. Until you are ready to spend $1000 on a walk around lens, you can't get better than the 18-105.

 

Just never forget to play with settings. Your brst learning will happen with the least guidance. Also remember that there is always a reset option if you really screw something up.

Sigma 150-500 plus D7100. End of story for telephoto. If you want affordable, 55-300 DX is very surprisingly good.

Ha! Still bullshit!

 

I actually have been writing a letter-length post to explain a few of my points, but as I have been inordinately preoccupied over the last few days, I haven't finished it.

he is correct I use my dslr with a 300 lens and I've got some pretty good shots. PM me and I'll share my Dropbox of sprint stuff. Somewhere in there I have some pdf files of some of the specs of the antennas used in utah. I think kmw and powerave?

 

Sent from my CoziBlurred4.3 gN2

Agreed. SLR every day. Actually, many of my pictures were taken using Canon A1.