Lives in United States United States
Joined on Dec 17, 2002
About me:

Olympus E-520, E-1, 14-54 f/2.8-3.5, 50-200 f/2.8-3.5
Olympus C2040
Canon Elan II/EOS-50, 28-105 f/3.5-4.5
Pentax K1000
Kodak Instamatic
First camera: Kodak Brownie

Stabilization by Manfrotto


Total: 237, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »

The 21x12mm mentioned in the article is a bit smaller than Super35mm, which is 24.9mm wide. So either that is a typo, or JVC is proposing a slightly smaller variant of 35mm cinema format (there are already plenty of variants around!). It is also only a 1.7mm larger image circle diameter than the 22.5mm diagonal of the official 18x13.5mm of official 4/3" format, even if current MFT sensors are a bit smaller than that.
Since many lenses cover a comfortably larger image circle that the format they are for (in particular, longer than normal lenses and zooms at all except their shortest focal lengths), I doubt that vignetting will be much of a problem. Also, mild vignetting in the corners of a video frame could be corrected with "lens correction" firmware.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2014 at 18:41 UTC as 31st comment | 2 replies
On Connect post Tiny lens turns your smartphone camera into a microscope (25 comments in total)

Does it come in Apple bayonet mount?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2014 at 17:27 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

razorfish: Why doesn't anyone have the guts to make a 17-120mm for a dslr or mirrorless? That would be a dream standard zoom, but everything starts at 24mm only so you still need to carry a true wideangle

This is for Super35mm movie camera format (frame width about 24mm) so its wide-angle coverage is comparable to 24mm with the 36x24mm frame of 35mm still camera format.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 2, 2014 at 17:52 UTC
On article Samsung announces tiny NX mini mirrorless camera (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: The smaller Panasonic GM1 has a larger sensor.,491

"LxWxD" gives the volume of a box needed to store the camera with no lens attached; that does not strike me as a useful measure of portability.

Depth (front to back) with a lens attached is often the main constraint on fitting comfortably into a pocket or purse.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 18:01 UTC
On article Samsung announces tiny NX mini mirrorless camera (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: How is this better than a Panasonic LX7? You get a brighter lens with a bigger zoom range for a lot less money. Sure it has a bigger sensor than the Panasonic. However, the Panasonic's lens is much brighter(More than 2 stops).

The LX7's combination of 1/1.7" sensor with a very bright f/1.4-2.3 zoom lens gives about the same DOF wide open as 1" format with f/2.4-3.9: shallower DOF than with either of the initial two NX-M lenses, the f/3.5 prime and f/3.5-5.6 "25-75mm equivalent" zoom.

- the lower f-stops of the LX7 allow use of lower ISO speeds by a factor of about 6, so it probably has better low light performance.
- the LX7 zoom range of 24-90mm equivalent goes a bit wider and longer that the NX-M zoom.

So interchangeable lenses (not many for now though!) and the "selfie-screen" are the main advantages of the NX-M.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 17:55 UTC
In reply to:

drawer77: i have a question about Red cameras for you gurus out there. i know the Red camera are modular cameras. But do they use a reflex system like a DSLR or are they mirrorless ?

Do you see an OVF on the body in the photo above?

REDs are purely video-out cameras, with very big, high-quality EVFs and external LCDs available to attach to the basic 'brain'".

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 18:45 UTC
On article Phase One announces IQ250 50MP CMOS medium format back (192 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anastigmat: I wonder if Canon and/or Nikon will shake up the market by making its own medium format CMOS sensors, cameras and lenses.

(1) Phase One management has said that the Sony sensor is available to all; no exclusivity. So I hope for a Pentax 645DII using it soon.

(2) One big barrier for Canon, Nikon or Sony offering a full system in a format larger than 35mm is developing a range of high quality lenses for what is always going to be a low volume market with vastly loess total revenues and profits than the 35mm and APS-C format DSLR markets. I doubt they see sufficient return on investment there, compared to investing in their 35mm and APS-C format systems.

After all, Canon and Nikon never bothered with MF film cameras (nor did Minolta or Konica or Olympus or ...), and that was a far larger and more profitable market than digital MF. (DMF has higher unit prices and profits, but only about one tenth the sales volume of MF film cameras, and about one hundredth the unit sales of 35mm format DSLRs.)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2014 at 21:23 UTC
In reply to:

James Pilcher: I'm a µ4/3 user and I'm glad to see the OMD E-M1 receving such recognition. The E-M5 received similar accolades last year. Having used 35mm film cameras since 1971 before switching to digital, I have to wonder why the giants Nikon and Canon are not better represented at the forefront of camera development right now. Are we awaiting an explosion of technology from Canikon, or is something amiss at those companies?

I am very happy with the innovations in Micro Four Thirds (and from Fujifilm X and Sony E), but since Canon and Nikon DSLRs still dominate system camera sales and profits, their apparent lack of innovation might simply mean that they will only have a profit motive to take mirrorless systems seriously when those newcomers bite deeper into DSLR sales.

In particular, Canon is probably in a good position to make EOS-M a more serious competitor, by adding an EVF, dual pixel PDAF, and a few more lenses. All of which might already exist in the R&D department.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 4, 2014 at 17:21 UTC
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

neo_nights: One more thing: did anyone actually read the WHOLE study?

Anyone who has done an academic research knows how frustrating/infuriating it is to spend months/years reading, reasearching and such, write pages and more pages about something and then the press just publish a couple of lines about it, about its conclusion, and then everyone starts b*tching about it.

Be careful with pre-judgements, people.

Some commenters here do not even seem to have read the whole of the DPReview article; maybe they scanned the headline and jumped straight to the comments.

The second quote from the research paper indicates that the effect is likely to be only when people just take a quick snapshot and move on without otherwise paying attention to the subject, whereas looking at the subject carefully enough to compose a good photograph has the opposite effect.

In other words, some commenters here looked at the article in the the same way that some sloppy snapshooters look at the objects they are photographing; in either case, little is learnt.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 14, 2013 at 16:10 UTC
On article Roger Cicala cynically re-defines photography (54 comments in total)

He overlooked the classic
"Circle of Confusion: a bunch of photographers sitting around a table arguing about depth of field".

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2013 at 00:06 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On article SD card labeling for 4K video announced (50 comments in total)
In reply to:

scrup: Will the compact flash card die now! all it takes is for canon and Nikon to stop using this format. SD cards are getting faster and faster. all laptops have sd card slots.

The battle to replace CF is now between SD on one side and the two new rival "post-CF" high end formats, CFast and XQD on the other. The latter two offer higher speeds and capacities than CF or SD, and so might win some of the high-end video camera market, but I suspect that SD will continue its path to overall market dominance by becoming "good enough, supported by far more computers and cameras, and a lot cheaper".

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2013 at 23:15 UTC
In reply to:

Archiver: Interesting how this is available only for the C100 at this time. If this can be implemented with the C300, it will show that dual pixel AF is a function of the CMOS sensor shared by the C100, C300 and C500, rather than the C100's hardware.

The C100 has four photodiodes for each output pixel: a 3840x2160 photosite array but maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 pixels, so it could easily have a single microlens over each 2x2 cluster of photodiodes, allowing it to use a pair of them for AF. Maybe
under each lens and feeding wach output pixel,
and using the GG pair for AF.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2013 at 02:29 UTC

The C100 uses four photo-sites to produce each output pixel (3840x2160 active pixels, but maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 HD). That is probably critical to its ability to do dual pixel AF, which uses multiple photo-diodes per output pixel. The other dual pixel PDAF seniors also have those pairs of photo-sites behind a single micro lens, so it is also likely that each four photo-site cluster feeding a single output pixel in the C100 is behind a single micro lens.

So do not expect any such upgrades to other cameras whose sensors do not have these special hardware features.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2013 at 15:01 UTC as 36th comment
On article Hands-on with the retro Nikon Df (230 comments in total)
In reply to:

hidden1: Its a shame the included kit lens doesn't have an aperture ring.

It kind of ruins the retro camera experience when you have to use an e dial to set the aperture.

Apparently you have to use the dial anyway with any CPU lens: the aperture ring only works with (very old) non-CPU lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 18:56 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1394 comments in total)
In reply to:

3dreal: It will have a fixed prism and no AF, maybe removable screens. Dont dream too much. we dont need AF but the best focussing-system on all DSLRs.

It has both ann AF-on button and an AF kit lens.

What is entertaining about the Df teaser campaign is how it has lured some people to reveal their wishes and fantasies while ignoring any facts that contradict them. The Df is functionally a modern highly automated digital SLR, with the addition of half a dozen added dials and the pointless removal of video functionality.

Or is someone going to argue that adding one more video button along with the roughly 20 buttons it already has, or adding a fifth position on the MASP dial, would "ruin its photographic simplicity and purity"?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 4, 2013 at 20:56 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1394 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: But is it SLR? Or is it mirrorless? And if it is SLR, do it have a split image screen?

And is the rumor that it has no LCD true? That could be compatible with "Good things take time. They are worth the wait". I mean, you have to wait until you get home to look at the result.

"And is the rumor that it has no LCD true?"
No: the edge of the screen is visible in the rear view shot above. That "rumor" is just one of the delusional retro minimalist fantasies that people are projecting onto this camera with no supporting evidence at all. Another example is dreams of a split-image manual focusing VF on this AF camera.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2013 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Kriekira: That any of these might be assumed to be paintings says more about the viewer's inexperience with paintings than it does about the images.

And there is the additional, never-addressed issue of reproduction: is a photograph an image or a print? It is worth always keeping in mind that you cannot ever "see" a painting on a computer (or in a book) -- all you can see is a (photo-mechanical) reproduction.

I saw a large print of "Thorn Trees" close up in a nature photography exhibition, and my first reaction was "why is that drawing here"? The illusion is partly due to the amazing contrast in lighting and color, which the eye/brain at first takes as an artist's unrealistic fantasy.

That one is in a different league from painting-like effects produced in post-processing.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2013 at 18:45 UTC
In reply to:

Renzokuken: I wonder how much of this technological improvement will translate to better stills??

Canon seems to have their hands full on video and their cine-line recently...

Typo: with a _sensor_ that big (36x24mm)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2013 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

Renzokuken: I wonder how much of this technological improvement will translate to better stills??

Canon seems to have their hands full on video and their cine-line recently...

None: the only technological change here is having fewer, bigger photo sites; about 2MP, which is good enough for HD video, but too few for almost any still photography with a se SLR that big.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2013 at 22:23 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review (2090 comments in total)
In reply to:

dw2001: love these focus tracking test where you shoot at like F22 and absolutely everything in the frame is in focus...that really gives you an idea of how the focus tracking performs....

Look at the full resolution images by clicking on the small downsized ones displayed in the web page: the OOF effect is clear, and looking at the ground, the plane of focus is clearly at the front of the horse, very near the plane of its eyes whee it should be.

Of course tiny downsized "web thumbnail" images show lots of DOF.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2013 at 15:47 UTC
Total: 237, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »