Alec

Alec

Lives in United States New York City, NY, United States
Works as a Photographer / imaging artist
Has a website at http://karasevstudio.com/
Joined on Oct 24, 2000
About me:

* More architectural and recreational sports photography in the off-season (skiing and scuba);
* Roll out blog feature on the web site
* Put articles, more photos and video online
* Minolta archive!

Comments

Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Go wide! Hands-on with Canon's 11-24mm F4 L article (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

tuomov: If you desire a ultra wide(say below 15mm) rectilinear lens, or rather desire the image it produces, then it's better to buy a sharp Fisheye, say the new FF Samyang 12mm f2.8. With a fisheye you have a possibility to have the absolute widest FF shot(if needed), and additionally you can rectilinearize the fisheye afterwards to your liking, producing either a fully rectilinear 10-15mm equivalent, or even wider semi rectilinear shot. You also get more light with the fisheye and in my experience a sharper image, it's much more difficult to optically remove the barrel distortion thus keeping the distortion in the lens and removing it with software produces a sharper image, the Samyang fisheyes for crop and FF sensors are amazingly sharp and cheap, you don't basically have to focus them in normal shots...

I agree. Future cameras may in fact have the in-camera software to do this. As we move further into the future I see 200MP+ cameras whose megapixel counts are used in conjunction with SUPER sharp but simple lenses (thus high microcontrast, wide aperture, high flare resistance) but produce all sorts of distortions, which are fully correctable digitally.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 17:42 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2277 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: One issue is that diffraction limits will set in around f5.6. That, and what lenses can resolve properly on a 50MP sensor?

As someone who owns both 24MP and 36MP FF cameras, I can state that 36MP is already too much, for me.

One thing I did learn was that technique is VERY important at 36MP. I can only guess how very very important it will be at 50MP. This is a tripod, not hand held camera.

Ivan, I completely agree. Not everyone looks at cameras as practical tools and "it is what it is - what can I do with it?". Many folks make an emotional investment in a view what an ideal camera should be like, even if not all of them would pay for that ideal camera if made today, or use it to create a credible body of photographic work that would be otherwise unattainable.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 15:46 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2277 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Whoops! The problem is, the person who desperately "needs" 50mp is the same person who also wants lots of dynamic range.

Same for the ISO. Nobody needs 100,000,000 ISO but having a low ISO range suggests one thing: noise.

What a brag fest we will be treated to between the D810 owners and the 5Ds owners. DxO says this; DxO says that. Oy vey.

What we really need is interchangeable sensors. A 25ISO 100MP one with no low pass filter, and a 20MP high ISO one. Maybe a 16:9 native 4K full-frame readout one just for movies (slightly wider than 36mm because it's narrower than 24mm)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 05:49 UTC
On Canon EOS 5DS / SR First Impressions Review preview (2277 comments in total)
In reply to:

GodSpeaks: One issue is that diffraction limits will set in around f5.6. That, and what lenses can resolve properly on a 50MP sensor?

As someone who owns both 24MP and 36MP FF cameras, I can state that 36MP is already too much, for me.

One thing I did learn was that technique is VERY important at 36MP. I can only guess how very very important it will be at 50MP. This is a tripod, not hand held camera.

Ever since the 12MP days the debate has raged on regarding how much the lenses resolve. The answer is pretty simple: once you've reached a point where you don't need the low-pass filter OR software to cancel the moire with any and all subject matter, you've reached the lens resolution limit. Clearly Canon knows we're not there at 50MP. Arguably somewhere around 0.2...0.5GP we'll be there.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 05:46 UTC
In reply to:

Nordstjernen: A lot of people here are saying that many of the lenses look huge. Is there any spesifications for the lens size and weight avaiable?

These are full-frame lenses. The short rear flange distance of the Alpha mirror-less makes wide and normal lenses a bit shorter, but it does relatively little to reduce the front element diameter of telephotos and zooms.

ALSO, I think marketing plays a role - maybe they did focus groups and the consensus was people would expect to pay less for a diminutive lens...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2015 at 16:15 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Taylhardat: I wonder when we will have a full frame medium format camera or 8X10 sensor's with hundred of thousands of megapixel's?

If 40MP were the resolution limit of FF lenses, you'd not need anti-alias filters OR software on those sensors. I think eventually we'll see 0.5...0.7 gigapixel sensors on full frame, that continue to pull the last bits of useful detail from 1960s lenses.

Beyond that point, we may see further pixel counts go towards Lytro-like functionality, where you get synthetic DOF and/or one-lens 3D.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 18:28 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alec: I think the article ignores the wisdom built over the course of decades (of film days) that lenses make better investments than camera bodies. The "full frame" form factor has been so popular for so long that it makes for a devastatingly strong special case even if the author's argument in the context of other formats were valid. Especially considering something like the Sony full-frame mirrorless, which, through appropriate lens adapters, can use nearly any 35mm lens that has ever been made. As these adapters become more sophisticated, they facilitate more and more of the lenses' native functions.

@ Just, Flo: great point about the smaller formats. I have several submini cameras (Minox, Minolta MG-S, Pentax Auto110 Super to name a few) and used to shoot with them too. Obviously, iPhone and Instagram had killed off the film subminis, and have been shown to put pressure on dSLR sales not just compact cams. I talk about that here http://karasevstudio.com/o2/2013/32

Any size format can be made long term and viable. Emphasis on "be made". There has to be a critical mass. Clearly that wasn't the case for those submini cams, even though some manufacturers have put forth valiant individual efforts.

I don't think anybody would argue that 35mm has that critical mass. Not just quantity of lenses, but also of the mindset that is beyond "I'll get the best body I can afford, and a lens to go with it. In a few years, repeat".

All I'm saying, I'm less sure about APS-C 10 years from now. Say, do APS lenses work well on APS-C cameras? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Photo_System

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 18:21 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alec: I think the article ignores the wisdom built over the course of decades (of film days) that lenses make better investments than camera bodies. The "full frame" form factor has been so popular for so long that it makes for a devastatingly strong special case even if the author's argument in the context of other formats were valid. Especially considering something like the Sony full-frame mirrorless, which, through appropriate lens adapters, can use nearly any 35mm lens that has ever been made. As these adapters become more sophisticated, they facilitate more and more of the lenses' native functions.

In my post, I've specifically said "As these adapters become more sophisticated" - as you point out, Metabones is keenly aware of the AF speed issue, and it is valid to assume they (and their competitors) are motivated to be looking into this going forward. Not to mention all the great manual focus lenses, and the general case of critical focusing using LiveView, which make AF speed entirely moot.

I think, the percentage of award-winning or resonant or commercially viable shots where AF speed was the key enabler is actually fairly small - which is a whole other potential argument. One is entitled to shoot however they like. However, there are some objective realities that anticipation + forethought + prep + control that tend to go into the making of photographs that lots of other people will want to see, or even pay to see/own, also means reduced reliance on AF speed as a key ingredient.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 18:01 UTC
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)

I think for some objectively thought out stance on the various formats' expected uses and upgrade paths, we need only look at the manufacturers' lens lineups.

If the manufacturers genuinely believed that people will stick with APS-C or four-thirds for the long term, we'd see more f/2 or faster natively designed lenses for the format (not counting the scaled or mechanically cropped replicas of full frame designs, which don't offer anything near proportional size/weight/cost advantages over full frame, that is the whole entire point of these smaller formats).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 17:44 UTC as 164th comment
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)

I think the article ignores the wisdom built over the course of decades (of film days) that lenses make better investments than camera bodies. The "full frame" form factor has been so popular for so long that it makes for a devastatingly strong special case even if the author's argument in the context of other formats were valid. Especially considering something like the Sony full-frame mirrorless, which, through appropriate lens adapters, can use nearly any 35mm lens that has ever been made. As these adapters become more sophisticated, they facilitate more and more of the lenses' native functions.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 17:32 UTC as 165th comment | 3 replies
On Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path article (1410 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carlos Taylhardat: I wonder when we will have a full frame medium format camera or 8X10 sensor's with hundred of thousands of megapixel's?

Not until some disruptive technology such as light sensors made on a glass or plastic substrate instead of a silicone wafer and made with a process similar to today's laser or inkjet printers. If you look at what happened to TVs in the past 15 years, you could see how that's entirely possible; however, the demand for TVs is way more than for 8x10 cameras. Which is unfortunate in more ways than one.

Anyway, you may get your hands on a 4x5 or 8x10 scanning back - which is actually fine for still life that 8x10 cameras are often used.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 17:25 UTC
In reply to:

Preamp: I'd probably send in a boring picture from the beach, titled "What the world's best image sensor is made of"

Well if you put a nice girl on the beach playing with the sand with a smart look in her eyes, maybe wearing square-framed PhD glasses (and little else), and there are deep shadows in the sand ripples, the whole thing is bright and colorful and almost has a Dali feel to it, I could see how that could win the contest.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 16:33 UTC

"*Image should be delivered in Adobe sRGB (1998), 72 DPI, .png file format and sized 1000 pixels on the largest dimension."

Adobe sRGB (1998) - that's a tricky color space, isn't it? :) I hope they aren't trolling us.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 26, 2014 at 08:11 UTC as 3rd comment

I am wondering if the anonymous buyer who is a huge fan of Peter Lik's works ... isn't Peter Lik?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 02:54 UTC as 130th comment | 1 reply

Minolta was way ahead back in 1983 with this, ironically http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Minolta_Disc-7

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 21:07 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

frosti7: At last something interesting and original

http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Minolta_Disc-7 ironically I think, aside from digital, this Casio is WAY behind that Minolta

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

frosti7: At last something interesting and original

Actually there's a Minolta disc camera in my submini camera collection, that had a likewise curved mirror next to the lens. For selfies.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 21:04 UTC

where's the duck lips mode?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 21:03 UTC as 38th comment

I think there was no point to ruin a perfectly good Sony cam which was made to be used. Hasselblad should have carved the entire camera out of that wood. Lens, front, back, everything. No, I'm serious.

Then everything falls into place and begins to finally make sense:
- stands alone as a BOLD, yet refined expression
- A rich palette of fine woods was utilised both on the camera and packaging
- realised for the rare few that truly appreciate
- not intended to be judged against other cameras
- conceived and crafted exclusively for Aficionados, Collectors and Connoisseurs

Don't waste an actual camera on this - just sell those folks a wood block - it will take about as many pictures as these cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 06:31 UTC as 73rd comment
In reply to:

cgarrard: "Fuelled by our ongoing collaboration with Sony and Zeiss, the pocket-sized Stellar models are proving extremely popular....

Bull, Sheet.

No, I think the statement is valid but market size wise, they just got the plural wrong in the following sentence, which ought to have said:

"A photographer could be delighted to have the option of owning ..."

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 06:22 UTC
Total: 146, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »