Why do people think....

Started May 14, 2012 | Discussions
Biological_Viewfinder
Senior MemberPosts: 1,194
Like?
Re: Why do people think....
In reply to brianj, May 16, 2012

I hope that I'm not the only one to really answer the OP's question.
Anyway, the Original Poster asked this question, according to the Subject Line
"Why do people think...."

It's a very interesting question, and I suppose we could elaborate on why people's brains work the way they do and all that stuff; but eventually we have to get down to the real answer, the simple truth.

Why do people think?

Because if they didn't, we would all be government workers.
(It's actually kind of rhetorical if you throw in taxes).

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ed Rizk
Senior MemberPosts: 1,400
Like?
Re: Normal lens
In reply to Christoph Stephan, May 16, 2012

Christoph Stephan wrote:

An important question in that respect is "what is a normal lens" On my film SLR, I started with a 50 mm and a 28 mm prime and found them quite handy. On city trips, the 28 mm sometimes was the sole lens I used. However, I always found a 50 mm lens very awkward to use on a 1.6 crop DSLR - always a tad to long, but not long enough for that portrait.

I think the "official" definition of normal focal length is a FF equivalent to 40 to 60mm, which would make a 50mm a little on the telephoto side. I went with the 35mmF2 for my normal prime lens. 30 or even 28mm would be just as "normal".

-- hide signature --

Ed Rizk

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Berghof
Senior MemberPosts: 1,144
Like?
just use an iphone
In reply to brianj, May 17, 2012

well, if you wish to be more creative and you wish to achieve certain higher standard of your images then you wouldn't mind to carry something bigger like let's say the Pen Olympus cameras. Otherwise just use your iphone and you'll be fine.
--
Berghof G.C.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LensBeginner
Regular MemberPosts: 249Gear list
Like?
Re: Equipment envy
In reply to MisterBG, May 17, 2012

Please expalin how changing your lens (by which I presume you mean focal length) changes your point of view?

There is only one thing that changes your point of view and that is if you physically move position.
The focal length of the lens has nothing to do with it.

If you want to be fussy, then, yes, you are right.

But I regard focusing on a detail rather than having an overall view a rather massive change in perspective.

Add to this the modification to the distances that a tele lens entails (and also dof differences) and you will - maybe - get my point.

This forum seems (at least lately) to be a hive for people who refuse to understand on purpose what other people are saying and try to be the more finicky they can about things that make look good...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Andy Crowe
Senior MemberPosts: 1,559Gear list
Like?
Leave sensors to the designers
In reply to brianj, May 17, 2012

Do you actually know that BSI would give you a worthwhile improvement on a larger 1/1.7" sensor? The point of BSI is that the interconnects around the sensor pixels no-longer get in the way, and proportional these take up more space on a small 1/2.3 sensor than a larger 1/1.7 sensor.

While this may give a marginal improvement on a 1/1.7" sensor have you considered that the improvement isn't enough to justify the extra cost, hence no-one is yet offering one? I'm pretty sure there isn't some big conspiracy to keep a 1/1.7 BSI CMOS sensor out of your hands

I already have a premium compact with a 1/1.7 CCD, what I am talking about is a future one using 1/1.7 BSI-CMOS. The feature search of this site shows that such a camera doesn't exist, the closest is the canon S100 which is CMOS but not backlit. The 1/2.3 BSI-CMOS sensors are giving about the same high ISO performance as the 1/1.7 CCD, example like the canon SX240HS show this, so it is possible that if the sensor could be scaled up then there would be a performance gain for the enthusiast class of camera. My concern is that this may never be made.

Most responders in this thread have jumped to the conclusion that I am trying to limit what they can buy, but they can buy what they need, I am only talking about what I want. For those that can understand english please do not twist around what I am saying.

My point was that most of what you want is available, but your perfect camera (pocketable 1/1.7" 10x zoom) isn't practical. Not sure why you're so hung-up on a BSI sensor, I'm sure if it's worthwhile for 1/1.7 sensors it will be used.

You want both a large/wide zoom range and a larger sensor in a compact body? Can't be done, a larger sensor requires either a physically larger lens (which you don't want) or a smaller max aperture, which negates most the advantages of the larger sensor anyway.

I agree, so far existing long zoom models have often used apertures as small as f3.5 where I want at least f1.8

If you want pocketable then you can have either a fast limited zoom like the f1.8-2.5 4x zoom on the Olympus XZ-1 or a slower long 10-12x zoom. You can't have both, that's just the laws of physics. Hypothetical designs such as liquid lenses might be able to deliver this, but we're going to have to wait for those

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brianj
Forum ProPosts: 13,179Gear list
Like?
Re: Leave sensors to the designers
In reply to Andy Crowe, May 17, 2012

Andy Crowe wrote:

Do you actually know that BSI would give you a worthwhile improvement on a larger 1/1.7" sensor? The point of BSI is that the interconnects around the sensor pixels no-longer get in the way, and proportional these take up more space on a small 1/2.3 sensor than a larger 1/1.7 sensor.

While this may give a marginal improvement on a 1/1.7" sensor have you considered that the improvement isn't enough to justify the extra cost, hence no-one is yet offering one? I'm pretty sure there isn't some big conspiracy to keep a 1/1.7 BSI CMOS sensor out of your hands

I have heard of the diminishing returns as this technology is scaled up, so I am not sure if the gain will be there, not until a camera is produced. I never even imagined that there was a conspiracy, only market forces at work.

I already have a premium compact with a 1/1.7 CCD, what I am talking about is a future one using 1/1.7 BSI-CMOS. The feature search of this site shows that such a camera doesn't exist, the closest is the canon S100 which is CMOS but not backlit. The 1/2.3 BSI-CMOS sensors are giving about the same high ISO performance as the 1/1.7 CCD, example like the canon SX240HS show this, so it is possible that if the sensor could be scaled up then there would be a performance gain for the enthusiast class of camera. My concern is that this may never be made.

Most responders in this thread have jumped to the conclusion that I am trying to limit what they can buy, but they can buy what they need, I am only talking about what I want. For those that can understand english please do not twist around what I am saying.

By the way, this last paragraph wasn't about you.

My point was that most of what you want is available, but your perfect camera (pocketable 1/1.7" 10x zoom) isn't practical. Not sure why you're so hung-up on a BSI sensor, I'm sure if it's worthwhile for 1/1.7 sensors it will be used.

I already own a CCD based EX1 with 24-72mm, and it would be nice to have the same performance in a slightly smaller package and with a bit more zoom. I don't want the current batch of 1000mm super zooms based on the 1/2.3 BSI-CMOS, as someone has already pointed out the lens performance suffers too much. I have been thinking that a good step forward from where pocketable enthusiast camera are currently could be achieved using BSI-CMOS. The reason why I would like to see the larger BSI made is because based on the smaller one it looks like cleaner higher ISO may be achievable. If it doesn't happen then it won't be the end of the world as far as I am concerned.

You want both a large/wide zoom range and a larger sensor in a compact body? Can't be done, a larger sensor requires either a physically larger lens (which you don't want) or a smaller max aperture, which negates most the advantages of the larger sensor anyway.

I agree, so far existing long zoom models have often used apertures as small as f3.5 where I want at least f1.8

If you want pocketable then you can have either a fast limited zoom like the f1.8-2.5 4x zoom on the Olympus XZ-1 or a slower long 10-12x zoom. You can't have both, that's just the laws of physics. Hypothetical designs such as liquid lenses might be able to deliver this, but we're going to have to wait for those

I've already owned the equivalent for two years now, it would be nice to see an upgrade path.

Brian

 brianj's gear list:brianj's gear list
Canon PowerShot ELPH 330 HS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Andy Crowe
Senior MemberPosts: 1,559Gear list
Like?
Out of date rule
In reply to MisterBG, May 17, 2012

As a rough guide, take the longest focal length and divide it by the shortest focal length. If the answer is much over 3 than it's not so good. If it's over 5 then it will be awful.

That may have been true 10 years ago, but these days the zoom length has no real connection to IQ (size is another matter). For example, the Panasonic 14-140 10x zoom matches or beats the very well regarded Olympus 14-42 3x zoom at various focal lengths, and well out performs the Olympus 17mm f2.8 prime at the same focal length.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx?reviews=57,12&fullscreen=true&av=4,4&fl=14,14&vis=VisualiserSharpnessMTF,VisualiserSharpnessMTF&stack=horizontal&&config=/lensreviews/widget/LensReviewConfiguration.xml%3F4

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Andy Crowe
Senior MemberPosts: 1,559Gear list
Like?
Progress is incremental
In reply to brianj, May 17, 2012

Do you actually know that BSI would give you a worthwhile improvement on a larger 1/1.7" sensor? The point of BSI is that the interconnects around the sensor pixels no-longer get in the way, and proportional these take up more space on a small 1/2.3 sensor than a larger 1/1.7 sensor.

While this may give a marginal improvement on a 1/1.7" sensor have you considered that the improvement isn't enough to justify the extra cost, hence no-one is yet offering one? I'm pretty sure there isn't some big conspiracy to keep a 1/1.7 BSI CMOS sensor out of your hands

I have heard of the diminishing returns as this technology is scaled up, so I am not sure if the gain will be there, not until a camera is produced. I never even imagined that there was a conspiracy, only market forces at work.

This is the thing, almost all camera progress is incremental so as technology improves you will get better quality in small (2/3" and below) sensors and better lenses, but your original post sounded like you thought all that (larger, higher quality sensor with a smaller 10x pocket zoom lens) was possible right now but was being suppressed to push people on to interchangeable lens cameras, not because such a camera isn't yet practical/economical to produce.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brianj
Forum ProPosts: 13,179Gear list
Like?
Re: Progress is incremental
In reply to Andy Crowe, May 17, 2012

Andy Crowe wrote:

Do you actually know that BSI would give you a worthwhile improvement on a larger 1/1.7" sensor? The point of BSI is that the interconnects around the sensor pixels no-longer get in the way, and proportional these take up more space on a small 1/2.3 sensor than a larger 1/1.7 sensor.

While this may give a marginal improvement on a 1/1.7" sensor have you considered that the improvement isn't enough to justify the extra cost, hence no-one is yet offering one? I'm pretty sure there isn't some big conspiracy to keep a 1/1.7 BSI CMOS sensor out of your hands

I have heard of the diminishing returns as this technology is scaled up, so I am not sure if the gain will be there, not until a camera is produced. I never even imagined that there was a conspiracy, only market forces at work.

This is the thing, almost all camera progress is incremental so as technology improves you will get better quality in small (2/3" and below) sensors and better lenses, but your original post sounded like you thought all that (larger, higher quality sensor with a smaller 10x pocket zoom lens) was possible right now but was being suppressed to push people on to interchangeable lens cameras, not because such a camera isn't yet practical/economical to produce.

That's an interesting thought, I am not sure if I know the answer, we all know that companies stop products that will be a threat to their other product lines, canon not releasing a mirrorless model is a classic of that behaviour. So who knows what is possible or not possible within a given time frame. The Japanese had a saying once, something like it doesn't matter what you manufacture, what is important is to convince people that they need it and create the market desire for that item.

Brian

 brianj's gear list:brianj's gear list
Canon PowerShot ELPH 330 HS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jrtrent
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,314
Like?
finicky
In reply to LensBeginner, May 17, 2012

LensBeginner wrote:

This forum seems (at least lately) to be a hive for people who refuse to understand on purpose what other people are saying and try to be the more finicky

Ain't that the truth!

I think there's also a psychological reason.

When you change lens you alter your pov, and have the impression that you can change the world around you (in fact, you simply change the way you see it).

That's a good point. I think Alain Briot stated it well in one of his articles on aesthetics and photography:

"Human beings always see the same angular distance, the same field of view. While we can focus our attention to a narrow section of our field of view, this field of view remains fixed. When looking at the world through a camera we can vary the field of view by changing the lens. How much a camera sees depends on the focal length of the lens that is attached to it. . . Hence a camera, and a set of wide angle, normal and telephoto lenses (or zoom lenses), allows us to expand what our eyes can see beyond our human limits. Through the use of lenses we can see wider than we normally can or we can see further than we normally can. Our field of view becomes adjustable. Our ability to see is both enhanced and expanded. A new field of endeavor opens itself to us: showing the world in ways human eyes alone cannot see it."

My preference is to record scenes in a way that helps me remember what it looked like when I was there, so I'm happy to take pictures with just a normal focal length lens almost all the time. Other people with other purposes/objectives will need other tools.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads