 |
OngNikon
Lives in
Singapore
Joined on
Feb 4, 2009
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
ppastoris: To DPReview : a suggestion. Could you guys please post equivalent F-numbers (in terms of DOF and light gathering ability) when you post equivalent focal length numbers? E.g. LX7's 4.7-17.7 F1.4-2.3 is the equivalent of 24-90 F7.2-11.7, not of 24-90 F1.4-2.3; similarly for FZ200 it's either 4.5-108 F2.8 or the equivalent of 25-600 F15.6 in 35mm standard.
Being one of the most influential camera review websites on the Internet you could really help your readers to understand what a lens designed for a smaller than 35mm sensor is actually capable of photographically. Clearly posting the equivalent angle of view (by posting an equivalent focal length) is only half of the story.
Just like global politics: a confused state is confusing others with confused 'facts'. What an analysis!
now logical extension to this: it seems all non-35mm or full frame cameras manufacturers are misleading the customers????
ppastoris: To DPReview : a suggestion. Could you guys please post equivalent F-numbers (in terms of DOF and light gathering ability) when you post equivalent focal length numbers? E.g. LX7's 4.7-17.7 F1.4-2.3 is the equivalent of 24-90 F7.2-11.7, not of 24-90 F1.4-2.3; similarly for FZ200 it's either 4.5-108 F2.8 or the equivalent of 25-600 F15.6 in 35mm standard.
Being one of the most influential camera review websites on the Internet you could really help your readers to understand what a lens designed for a smaller than 35mm sensor is actually capable of photographically. Clearly posting the equivalent angle of view (by posting an equivalent focal length) is only half of the story.
May I know what is equivalent f-number??
I wish to know my own ignorance so as not be confused expert.
ppastoris: To DPReview : a suggestion. Could you guys please post equivalent F-numbers (in terms of DOF and light gathering ability) when you post equivalent focal length numbers? E.g. LX7's 4.7-17.7 F1.4-2.3 is the equivalent of 24-90 F7.2-11.7, not of 24-90 F1.4-2.3; similarly for FZ200 it's either 4.5-108 F2.8 or the equivalent of 25-600 F15.6 in 35mm standard.
Being one of the most influential camera review websites on the Internet you could really help your readers to understand what a lens designed for a smaller than 35mm sensor is actually capable of photographically. Clearly posting the equivalent angle of view (by posting an equivalent focal length) is only half of the story.
@ppastoris
Your are wrong!.
In your above example, a 25 times less 'liight' is shining on a 25times less area. The 'brightness'per unit sensor area is the same - and i think this what f-number is proxying..
And if you want to bring in the image quality stuff in, then it is because of the smaller sensor size and hence smaller pixel area for a given sensor MP count. that smaller pixel area mulitply by the same 'brightness/area give a low intensity,, blah blah...
DPReview is correct to present the values this way. Do it your way is not correct.
DXO should reflect on these comments critically.
Why a new released of a much loved software is not greeted with wide open arms!
Browsing through the comments, no one really complain about the its image correction capabiltiies, if there is any, it is satisfaction.
DXO is a 'technical product'. Photographers are techies by nature.... Repackaging, with peripheral enhancement, or ór forced upgrading - as sameone put it' , or trying to chase that last corner of the market trying to suport the lastest cameras, with few user base - will not go well. Pls pay a little more attention to the needs of existing customers...., Polish up the glitches of exiting version...Give us the things that DXO is good at - the stuff that got me to buy and happy in the first place.
Happy customers is the best market team any companies can have! Happy customers will get many more new customers, many many more than any bean-counting-marketing division can get.
I was so confident when I got my GF2 when first released that my loved DXO will help improve my image. after 1 year and both my std kit lens modules are still not there- postponing...!!! then there is the utliity lens 45-200?? These are the ones that DXO impact will be greatest!!
I like this s/w and it seems it releases many modules regularly, but I am beginning to wonder a little: are those what the main bulk of DXO users want OR those are what DXO think the the main users want?
In the absence, I start using PTlens plugin - though still not lens speciific.. but I am beginning to use less and less of DXO, even for those cam/lens which I have the modules....For non batch processing, and in conjunction with my other PS plugin, correction with PTlens is much simpler
How does DXO priotise the modules release?