mrmut

mrmut

Lives in Korea (North) Korea (North)
Joined on Jul 8, 2009

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mrmut: Something is seriously wrong with this camera. You simply can't have banding on the camera of this price point, and I don't really get it why it should be any banding there. It is not that 24MP is a big deal today.

Now, apart from this banding issue (which is a complete dealbreaker), the camera produces nice images of excellent color, altho a bit too noisy. It is weird to see that much noise at ISO160. The lens are excellent tho.

When you charge something for premium price, better be sure it is good before you ship it, or the community will kill you.

I don't get what is the deal with Leica and their camera lineup. They have SIX systems. Why?

HowaboutRAW - That is a decent display, how it is possible you can't see banding on other images? It is not there on all of them, but definitely is when conditions meet.

For example image 35, take a look at lower bottom door box. There is pronounced banding. If need be, increase shadows or exposure a bit. Etc. Banding not there on all images, but on some definitely is.

Is this sole camera defective, or entire series doesn't mean much. Especially if you need to go this lengths to justify shortcomings of an extremely expensive and nascent proprietary system.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 12:03 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: Something is seriously wrong with this camera. You simply can't have banding on the camera of this price point, and I don't really get it why it should be any banding there. It is not that 24MP is a big deal today.

Now, apart from this banding issue (which is a complete dealbreaker), the camera produces nice images of excellent color, altho a bit too noisy. It is weird to see that much noise at ISO160. The lens are excellent tho.

When you charge something for premium price, better be sure it is good before you ship it, or the community will kill you.

I don't get what is the deal with Leica and their camera lineup. They have SIX systems. Why?

HowaboutRAW - I too checked the RAWs, in ACR, and got the same results. What kind of monitor do you use? I use calibrated Adobe RGB screen.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 21:49 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: Something is seriously wrong with this camera. You simply can't have banding on the camera of this price point, and I don't really get it why it should be any banding there. It is not that 24MP is a big deal today.

Now, apart from this banding issue (which is a complete dealbreaker), the camera produces nice images of excellent color, altho a bit too noisy. It is weird to see that much noise at ISO160. The lens are excellent tho.

When you charge something for premium price, better be sure it is good before you ship it, or the community will kill you.

I don't get what is the deal with Leica and their camera lineup. They have SIX systems. Why?

HowaboutRAW - The banding can be seen on a number of images in this gallery, in uniform/darker areas. Image 13 is an obvious example, buy there is also 31, 35, 44, etc. Others commented on this. Banding is predominantly horizontal, but there is also vertical banding present.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 15:16 UTC

Something is seriously wrong with this camera. You simply can't have banding on the camera of this price point, and I don't really get it why it should be any banding there. It is not that 24MP is a big deal today.

Now, apart from this banding issue (which is a complete dealbreaker), the camera produces nice images of excellent color, altho a bit too noisy. It is weird to see that much noise at ISO160. The lens are excellent tho.

When you charge something for premium price, better be sure it is good before you ship it, or the community will kill you.

I don't get what is the deal with Leica and their camera lineup. They have SIX systems. Why?

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2015 at 14:19 UTC as 11th comment | 15 replies
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (470 comments in total)

Adobe makes fine products, but this cloud stuff is nonsense for the user, especially security-wise. It is virtually impossible to have completely safe storage of anything online.

Just from memory, Facebook, Linked In, Apple, Yandex (not to mention NSA) were hacked with all of their security, and now I need to trust yet _another_ company that they will be safe. Oh, yes, I forgot Adobe too was hacked.

And not to mention software subscriptions - today becomes harder and harder to just have something to work with, without constantly updating it. Hell, I have Power Mac PowerPC machines over ten years old, running Motorola-Mac software 30 years old without a problem.

It is irritating to see that wouldn't be possible with today's stuff.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2015 at 10:16 UTC as 5th comment | 4 replies

Stunning lens. I have had Contact distagon T* 25mm F2.8, and that was a great lens too, however this one is brilliant. Flare handling, OOF, SHARPNESS, etc. - WOW.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 14:52 UTC as 18th comment

Winning photo is stunning! :-)

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2015 at 21:28 UTC as 10th comment
On article Canon 7D mirror box filmed at 10,000fps (175 comments in total)

Brilliant video! Thanks! :-)

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2015 at 16:08 UTC as 9th comment

The photograph is nice; the price is but a detail.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2014 at 07:31 UTC as 40th comment

This looks phenomenal.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2014 at 22:49 UTC as 21st comment
On photo Morning Wake-up Call in the My Best Photo of the Week challenge (14 comments in total)

Phenomenal.

What is the pixel-level quality? This image is easily of fine-art quality.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 20:47 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Sdaniella: user programmable pixel level multi-iso (multi-gain) full res color zone-system full frame Ultra-HDR (DR 22+ EV) stills (video) real time capture FF 40mp+ (adjustable + previewable LIVE with Canon Final Image Simulation) with IQ with clean finest detail and 'no noise' (NR that doesn't distort details) in extreme lowest light (below 0.01 lux) dual-pixel PDAF (full-frame) ... and throw in global shutter, too ... (sensor that runs much cooler than any todate; DiG!C #?) ... and up to 240fps+ (intended for HDR flexibility) ... H.265 for video 4k/8k and 2k/1080p ... and ... tri-mode evf-ovf hybrid VF with a top hinged modular VASS (vari-angle swivel screen) ... touch screen wifi remote ...

(\ /)
( o.o) ---( hehehehe ... )
o(")(")

as for medium format ... they'd have to create a whole bunch of EOS E-MF lenses ... unlikely (not impossible)

Made my day :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 17:28 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: This is rude. I would sue, and request reparations.

The same situation is if a remote IR trigger is set, which would result in a photo when an animal snap it. If not for a photographer, the image would not exist.

I came to think that the monkey had a hidden agenda.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 15:59 UTC
In reply to:

Easycass: A simplified view...

Definition: To 'take' a photo means 'initiate the exposure', regardless of where the camera is mounted, what is in the frame, who or what is holding the camera, how much lugging it took to get there, how much expense, how much post-processing was done, who posted it, or where it was posted. Agreed?

Copyright: If a person initiates an exposure, whether a single shot, a self-timed, remote-released or trigger-released shot, creating a single exposure, sequence of exposures or video sequence, then, unless the person waives their rights in some written agreement, they own the copyright. Agreed?

Scenario 1: If a person is not holding the camera, but initiates the exposure(s) then copyright is theirs.

Scenario 2: If a person is not holding the camera, and does not initiate the exposure(s) then copyright is not theirs. If the exposure was initiated by another human, copyright belongs to that other person. If not initiated by a human, there is no copyright.

It is simple, really - the photographer did initiate the exposure, by giving the camera to monkey.

If he had handed a bomb to monkey, and monkey activated it, would anyone blame the monkey?

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 06:48 UTC

This is rude. I would sue, and request reparations.

The same situation is if a remote IR trigger is set, which would result in a photo when an animal snap it. If not for a photographer, the image would not exist.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2014 at 05:33 UTC as 410th comment | 4 replies
On article Sony Alpha 7S added to test scene comparison tool (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

NeilJones: 12mp is only really good for posting on Facebook. Looks like most photogs out there will be fine! Doh.

Good one. :-)

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 11:58 UTC
In reply to:

mrmut: Viewing war photos during exhibitions often makes me wander how in the world a photographer got out of that alive AND take a picture.

I am not sure if we should mourn war photographers, given that they accepted their faith in advance; mourning them seems a bit disrespectful. It makes much more sense just to appreciate photographer's work.

Apart from that, Afghanistan was not a very smart move for a woman photographer. Her presence there was insulting to locals on many levels (regardless of how that can be perceived by westerners - it is Afghans' country).

Just as an update - took a look at the documentary, but it didn't impress me. OTOH I personally met an talked extensively with some of the actual war photographers, all in all, it seemed to me that they all carry deep wounds that make them do what they do.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 21:02 UTC
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (247 comments in total)

The color after calibration is unrealistic, especially with monks.

I have been using Xrite ACR calibrator and Color Checker while ago. - They are a joke. ACR has really bad profiles as is, and it is not that CC and Yrite will fix that. I have also tried whole load of other calibration software packages, and in short - if you want precision, you need color checked SG, ideal lighting, and very expensive profiling software. The common Color Checker useful just to very if the colors are (relatively) OK.

But there is a trick! - If you want precise colors easy, just ask the manufacturer what settings to tick in their in-house RAW developer. And voila! The only thing left is precision of white balance.

The best way to verify the color precision is:
1. take a RAW photo of a colorful painting
2. load and process the image on a calibrated screen
3. put a painting one the side of a screen and light it well with light of correct temp

If the painting and the monitor image match, you are there.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 07:08 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
On article Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review (2256 comments in total)

A beautiful ode to consumerism, mixed with an enormous amount of pretentiousness (just take a look at their advert). What everyone would appreciate is that they made a Micro 43 body with CCD sensor with no AA filter. Or something in that line. This "T" is just nonsense. (Make a T camera, and not make it from Titanium at that price point. I would like to see them bragging about machining titanium.)

The comments below about how long this product is built to last is also very interesting. Any electronic or mechanical camera system can last however long you want it to, given you service it when needed. And when service is in Q, any professional system will do the same. My 11 year old Olympus E-1 is routinely sent to service, and all is fine. Try that with M8.

This is another idiotic product for rich people that don't know sh*t about photography. And yes, Hasselblad Luna immediately came to my mind. These two, and Leica X cameras all go hand-in-hand.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 08:32 UTC as 479th comment
On article Sony Alpha 7S in low-light: See video at ISO 409,600 (246 comments in total)

This is sick. If I haven't seen it, I wouldn't believe it.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 23:17 UTC as 50th comment
Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »