Lee Jay

Lee Jay

Lives in United States CO, United States
Works as a Electrical Engineer / Wind Energy Research
Joined on Oct 17, 2003

Comments

Total: 512, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1666 comments in total)

I'm hoping for a compact APS film camera with a 38-65 equivalent f/7.1-13.5 lens and no flash.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2014 at 14:14 UTC as 731st comment | 1 reply
On Post-Photokina polls - Tell us what you think article (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThatCamFan: 8.5% Don't know anything about photography apparently according to the poll.

Those people may be the ones that realize the poll itself is stupid because it doesn't specify what you are shooting. Some of the best and most difficult photography I've ever seen is done with sensors of around 1/4" - planetary astrophotography, with real focal lengths around 10m (10,000mm).

Other things are better done with larger sensors, but MF isn't too great for sports and wildlife because the cameras and lenses are just not built for that purpose.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2014 at 16:37 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I'm having a hard time understanding how this could not produce lots of astigmatism, coma, CA and so on. Also, it would seem that aperture would be constant leading to either a very narrow zoom range, some crazy fast f-stops at the wide end, or some crazy slow f-stops at the long end.

Many aberrations are not correctable in software, and corrections of many sorts cause an increase in noise or a decrease in acuity. It's not a magic bullet for everything. Mostly it's good for a small amount of vignetting, moderate geometric distortion, and lateral (not axial) CA.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 30, 2014 at 20:13 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I'm having a hard time understanding how this could not produce lots of astigmatism, coma, CA and so on. Also, it would seem that aperture would be constant leading to either a very narrow zoom range, some crazy fast f-stops at the wide end, or some crazy slow f-stops at the long end.

It probably would, as it would almost certainly mean horrible aberrations.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 30, 2014 at 19:59 UTC

I'm having a hard time understanding how this could not produce lots of astigmatism, coma, CA and so on. Also, it would seem that aperture would be constant leading to either a very narrow zoom range, some crazy fast f-stops at the wide end, or some crazy slow f-stops at the long end.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 30, 2014 at 19:26 UTC as 12th comment | 13 replies
On GoPro announces Hero4 lineup article (109 comments in total)

The Debut Hero is twice the cost of a Möbius, doesn't have interchangeable lenses, and is about as aerodynamic as a brick. Hmmmm...which to choose for a fast R/C airplane...I think I'll get two Möbius cameras, a medium focal length for the plane and a long focal length for my hat so I can make my own flight videos from two angles.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 30, 2014 at 06:43 UTC as 24th comment

#4 isn't a particularly good shot of Horsehead and Flame. I routinely see better ones on Cloudy Nights and in other places. It's not bad, but it's not special either.

Here's one I just found that I like:

http://www.astrobin.com/full/28275/0/

Direct link | Posted on Sep 26, 2014 at 14:57 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

There would be no difference, as the camera raw plugin will operate in 16 bit ProPhoto for the raw conversion for both applications.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 26, 2014 at 14:28 UTC
In reply to:

plasnu: He claims that Canon sensors to be the best, but I really want to know what measurements he is looking at.

My point was, who could they have gone to to buy a dual-pixel sensor?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 13:57 UTC
In reply to:

plasnu: He claims that Canon sensors to be the best, but I really want to know what measurements he is looking at.

Okay, who makes a better dual-pixel sensor than Canon?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 02:41 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

I'm a semi-pro with a lot of gear, over a quarter of a million photos under management, and I prefer Elements over CS6, and that's what I use. I do most all of the work in Lightroom meaning the work I do in Elements isn't limited at all by the fact that it's 8 bit.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 00:38 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

I get consumers all the time asking me for stuff that would make the item not work. Should I provide them anyway?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 22:00 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

I use Elements. I have CS6 but Elements is faster and easier to use.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 14:35 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

Like I said, get all your basic tonal adjustments, contrast stretching etc. done during the raw conversion and it will be sufficient.

I never, ever, get visible posterization from editing in 8 bit.

Just because people are asking for it doesn't make it necessary. Many people think it's necessary because it exists in full PS, not because they have a genuine reason to need it (16 bit editing using all tools).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 13:34 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

Got it in one, Barry!

Raw is linear, processed images are gamma corrected. Thus, if you get anywhere close in the raw conversion, 8 bit processing from then on is almost always sufficient. The only time it's not is when you do a whole bunch of stretching and stuff which you should try to get all done during the raw conversion.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 13:12 UTC
In reply to:

lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.

Are you even vaguely aware of the difference between 12 or 14 bit raw files and 8 bit processed files and why that difference usually make a no difference at all?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 05:49 UTC
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: Cow-towing? Or Kowtowing?
I didn't people still towed cows. :)

But I agree: no variangle touchscreen and no EVF = major FAIL.

0.1 x as good.

I can just go buy a Hoodman Cinema Kit Pro for $150 and snap it right on to the 7DII and instantly have a HUGE and bright 720x480 EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 14:12 UTC
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: Cow-towing? Or Kowtowing?
I didn't people still towed cows. :)

But I agree: no variangle touchscreen and no EVF = major FAIL.

0.1 x as good.

I can add and EVF to the 7DII. Can you add a through-the-lens OVF to a mirrorless camera?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 14:00 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: One thing Canon screwed the pooch on - this camera lacks the 3x digital zoom movie mode that is present on the 70D.

I was really hoping that it would not only be included, but expanded so that it could zoom from 1x to 3x (really 2.875x) while shooting. Many camcorders have this feature. Sony calls it "clear image zoom". It would greatly expand the effective zoom range of every lens in movie mode.

I forgot to mention that even the 70D doesn't use dual pixel focusing in 3x mode. It uses single shot contrast detect. This is also a substantial limitation.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 08:23 UTC
In reply to:

joyclick: how many do 10FPS,how often?
would 3-6FPS not suffice.
how many do pure birding/fast action how often?

would K3/D7100 deliver similar results @ 1100$ body only as opposed to 1800$ body only 7D MK II

Not if you need the "reach" of a high pixel density crop body, and not if already have Canon lenses, flashes, and other accessories. Plus, your complaint was about cost and the D750 is more expensive, not less. As I said above, if cost is a big deal, the 70D will get you a good bit of this performance at around 35% lower cost.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 08:21 UTC
Total: 512, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »