matthiasbasler

matthiasbasler

Lives in Germany Germany
Works as a GIS developer, hobby photographer
Has a website at baslerphotos.de
Joined on Nov 25, 2012

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Lytro ILLUM and Desktop software get major updates article (33 comments in total)

Concerning the AF improvements:

After one day of using the new camera firmware (2.0) I find that the AF is faster, but still slow compared to conventional cameras using phase detection.

Without having done scientific A-B tests I believe the big advantage of the new firmware is that the camera does not need to scan the full focus range any more in order to find the perfect distance, but starts off in the right direction immediately. However it subjectively still needs between 0.5s (wideangle) and 2s (telephoto) to get to the right point. In comparison, on my EOS 650D with the 18-135mm IS STM lens focusing from close to far (or back) is done after ~0.3 seconds or so at 135mm.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2015 at 08:33 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On Lytro ILLUM and Desktop software get major updates article (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

DStudio: When Lytro released their first camera it was written off by many as a gimmick. But I think the company's shown they are serious.

Rosenthal clearly believes in this vision, and it's slowly coming into focus for consumers.

I own an Illum and, honestly, it too is a gimmick, albeit with the form factor, look and build quality of a professional camera.

For me as someone doing experimental photography this is fine, but I can hardly imagine anyone (except Lytro) earning money with a camera whose images have an effective spatial resolution of 2MP and, depending on the type of subjects, often show artifacts. If I were to engage a portrait or wedding photographer, for example, I'd prefer one who gives me a sharp, clean 8MP 2D image instead.

I am not saying that light field cameras cannot be used seriously, but imho we are not yet there. It requires an even higher resolution sensor (60MP instead of 40), thus even more camera computing power, even faster desktop PCs to process the image. It also requires technical and usability improvements so that getting the focus right is not harder and slower than on a conventional camera. (Currently it is rather a science ...)

I hope we will get there some day.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2015 at 08:20 UTC
On Lytro ILLUM and Desktop software get major updates article (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

random78: "And in case you've forgotten some of our earlier coverage of the Illum, F1.0 gets you 30-250mm F2.7 full-frame equivalent lens performance"

But the previous coverage said that the lens is constant f2.0 which would be f5.4 FF equivalent in terms of DOF. The camera picture also says f2.0. Where does this f1.0 number come from?

Um, before you continue arguing about the exact crop factor in order to get an "equivalent DOF" value keep in mind that the Lytro Illum can get you almost every depth of field you want, so the crop factor is imho largely irrelevant in practice.

P.S. @Rishi Sanyal
The fact that you can now process your image to F1 even in the camera firmware already doesn't change the real (fixed) aperture of the lens, which to my knowledge (and backed by Wikipedia) is F2.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2015 at 07:52 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1262 comments in total)
In reply to:

kty: Now the big question for video folks is:

SHALL I WAIT FOR THE "A7s II" OR NOT ?!

@ Enginel
If I prefer cameras with lower pixel count then there are reasons beyond the (potentially) higher sensitivity. They include:
- smaller RAW files and faster processing of them at my PC
- camera needs less computing power, thus can potentially save some energy (and cooling is easier)
- at lower resolutions the camera can offer higher burst rates or can use its processing power for other useful things, like CA correction (which on my EOS 650D extremely reduces the burst rate).
- cameras with very high resolutions commonly do not offer small file sizes at all, and I don't want to shoot timelapse sequences in 21MP, just as an example.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2015 at 07:40 UTC
On Lytro ILLUM and Desktop software get major updates article (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

random78: "And in case you've forgotten some of our earlier coverage of the Illum, F1.0 gets you 30-250mm F2.7 full-frame equivalent lens performance"

But the previous coverage said that the lens is constant f2.0 which would be f5.4 FF equivalent in terms of DOF. The camera picture also says f2.0. Where does this f1.0 number come from?

> Where does this f1.0 number come from?

I believe it is an error. As far as I know the camera has an aperture of F2.0 in respect to exposure times and at the same time covers a depth range corresponding to F16.

The F1 maybe made its way into the article from the fact that the Lytro Desktop software allows to set the "virtual aperture" in post processing to anything from F1 to F16, meaning that you can actually compute the out-of-focus areas to be even more unsharp than the default value.

Concerning the sensor size: The specs at dpreview.com state 1/2", which seems to be wrong as well because the official website (https://www.lytro.com/illum/specs/) claims 1/1.2" (10.82 x 7.52 mm active area). A typo maybe.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2015 at 18:45 UTC
On Lytro ILLUM and Desktop software get major updates article (33 comments in total)

My favourite software improvements in Lytro Desktop 4.3:
- The depth map editor: No more exporting/importing with 3rd party software (e.g. Gimp) in order to correct for depth map artifacts. This is a big time saver.
- Ability to just import the images from the camera without processing them immediately.

@Everlast66
Yes, this camera is expensive for a high-tech toy (which is what I consider it). But hey, how many other camera manufacturers give you so significant software/firmware improvements for free? (My old Nikon D5000 did not get one single firmware update since I bought it ... and it wasn't free of quirks either.)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 23:01 UTC as 6th comment
On Lytro ILLUM and Desktop software get major updates article (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

creaDVty: It's great that they keep updating the firmware and desktop software to add more features. However, I don't understand the addition of phase detection AF. I thought the whole point of Lytro is that you don't have to focus in the first place because the focus could be chosen afterward. So I don't understand what difference it makes to add phase detection.

It is a common misconception that because it is a light field camera that can shoot 3D scenes then it needs no focusing. This camera neither has unlimited focus nor does it have a distinct range with everything within being equally sharp.

In reality this camera has two distinct sharpness maxima (at "-4" and "+4" on the relative range scale of the camera) with a slight dip inbetween and sharpness continually decreasing outwards. (Just imagine two overlapping gaussian curves.)

This is why this camera gives the sharpest images if you have a foreground subject and a background subject and place the focus range in a way that the foreground subject is at -4 and the background one at +4. Sounds complicated? It is, even though you can tell the camera to place the autofocused subject at -4 (or +4 at your liking).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 22:53 UTC

First, if a law is not enforced in practice, then this law is useless and thus obsolete (or should not be ratified in the first place).

Second, it is my personal opinion that if an artist or architect designs a sculpture or building to be placed in public space and gets paid for this then this payment should include the right (licence) for the public to take photos of the subject for *any* possible usage, including commercial.

If this is not possible then I think that the city councils should enforce a policy of only buying art for public spaces which includes the licence for public photography of any type.

Matthias

Direct link | Posted on Jul 4, 2015 at 18:08 UTC as 150th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

matthiasbasler: A question to the community (or dpreviewers), since the topic of battery life is often discussed here:
One of my use cases is timelapse photography. Many cameras do not allow to change battery while on a tripod so battery life *is* important. Leaving accessory grips out of discussion for now, is there anybody with practical experience just how much the battery life of a 300-CIPA-shots rated mirrorless camera compares to a 450 or 600-CIPY-shots rated DSLR in this specific use case where the camera is on/standby for hours continuously and shooting, lets say, one photo every 15 or 20 seconds?

I have an EOS650D, rated 440 shots, and during a night timelapse session at ~20°C temperature it worked 5.5hrs with one full (original Canon) battery. It did roughly 1000 shots every 20s with 4s exposure each.
Do you have any comparable data for a mirrorless ILC cameras?

Thank you all for your answers and suggestions.

@bwana4swahili
> The new A7R II allows one to power the camera via its USB port while shooting.
This sounds very good. My EOS 650D unfortunately doesn't take power from the PC although it is constantly connected to one. :-(

I am not aware that it is really possible to "power off" the display. When connected to the PC the EOS650D doesn't show anything on the display during my timelapse recordings, but it might still use battery on it. I don't know how to tell.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2015 at 08:29 UTC

A question to the community (or dpreviewers), since the topic of battery life is often discussed here:
One of my use cases is timelapse photography. Many cameras do not allow to change battery while on a tripod so battery life *is* important. Leaving accessory grips out of discussion for now, is there anybody with practical experience just how much the battery life of a 300-CIPA-shots rated mirrorless camera compares to a 450 or 600-CIPY-shots rated DSLR in this specific use case where the camera is on/standby for hours continuously and shooting, lets say, one photo every 15 or 20 seconds?

I have an EOS650D, rated 440 shots, and during a night timelapse session at ~20°C temperature it worked 5.5hrs with one full (original Canon) battery. It did roughly 1000 shots every 20s with 4s exposure each.
Do you have any comparable data for a mirrorless ILC cameras?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2015 at 10:46 UTC as 69th comment | 10 replies
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photoman: Is the RAW still 11bit?

@dswtan
Agreed, this is a significant issue. Doing some basic astrophotography myself I understand your worries in this case. Up to now I never thought these RAW compression artifacts could be worse than slight(!) JPG artifacts but indeed they look worse.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2015 at 10:24 UTC

While I do agree with the author on many details I do not agree on the point that there's a "convergence". Two technically distinct systems (with mirror and phase detection vs. w/o mirror using contrast detection) imho cannot "converge". What could converge is their appearance, feature set and the resulting image/video quality. But does this really happen?

Many mirrorless ILC cameras have adopted the look and feel of DSLRs and their layout. But you can still get a mirrorless of a small size/weight unachievable by conventional DSLRs. Concerning the feature set I cannot really see a trend for convergence. In some aspects (video capabilities, burst rate, tilting displays, silent shutter, Liveview AF speed) it is my impression that the mirrorless cameras have left the DSLRs behind without their manufacturers making much efforts to catch up. But in terms of battery life (for instance) DSLRs lead by a clear margin.

DSLRs will not disappear. Both camera classes appeal to different users.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2015 at 10:15 UTC as 70th comment
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1262 comments in total)
In reply to:

kty: Now the big question for video folks is:

SHALL I WAIT FOR THE "A7s II" OR NOT ?!

Exactly this question crossed my mind too, especially since I have absolutely no need for 42MP, and if the A7S II follows in the footsteps of the A7S (lower pixel count, higher sensitivity) then I personally would prefer it.
But with so many video features packed into the A7R II I wonder if there is still the need to have an even more videocentric model... at least for me. I am not a professional filmmaker, after all.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 19:30 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dervast: Would not a pro need two sd cards slots or the memory cards have really stopped failing?
Regards
Alex

Last time I had memory card issues is about 5 years ago when a memory card was full and I repeatedly deleted selected images, shot new ones, deleted some others, shot more and so on until the card was too much fragmented. This was solved after fetching the images from the card and formatting it again. I so far never ever had permanent SD (or CF) card failure with my SanDisk cards. But I am not usually shooting in deserts, rainforests or the south pole. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2015 at 19:19 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photoman: Is the RAW still 11bit?

I wonder: Is there really a human detectable difference between lossless RAW and Sony's "RAW lossy compression"? I am one of these people who do not see (and thus do not care about) the difference of a 92% quality JPG and a TIFF file but find it convenient to have files four times smaller. Same goes for RAW files, unless someone can prove the quality difference resulting from compression is significant.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2015 at 13:29 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1262 comments in total)

WOW!
This is the feature pack of today's professional conventional DSLRs in the body (and with the weight) of an entry level APSC-sensor DSLR. Plus, it has a tilting LCD which for me is so much more useful than a fixed one. This one can even play a Full HD video in full resolution. Plus it seemingly produces really good-looking, sharp 4K video. Plus it has the electronic silent shutter, so hopefully no more loud clicks in silent environments.
Of course the current price is a tribute to this all ... but it seems fair enough.

If it performs as good in practice as it performs on paper then I expect Nikon's and Canon's conventional prof. DSLS will become slow sellers.

(I continue to be impressed how the mirrorless cameras have surpassed their conventional counterparts in just a few years.)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 14, 2015 at 13:11 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

matthiasbasler: Se we've seen both the D5500 and the EOS750/760D released now. To be blunt, neither of them makes me want to have them.

I had an EOS 400D, a Nikon D5000 and now the EOS 650D. I just love flip-out displays and the touch screen of the EOS 650D. I also liked the very good image quality compared to compact cameras at their time. What I disliked were focus issues (like the camera usually focusing on the background instead on an animal, happened often with D5000), and the loud "click", especially when doing timelapse photography in quiet environment.

What has changed since then?
1. Ridiculous resolutions (I usually still shoot 8MP and created excellent looking posters from them.) Why 24 or 28MP?
2. Compact cameras offer almost equal image quality under daylight and cost far less.
3. ILC cameras offer 4K video, two times the burst rate, often smaller bodies, faster focus in "live view mode", no loud clicks. (See Panasonic GH4 or Samsung NX500. The GH4 even has built in time lapse mode.)

When it comes to the question of electronic vs. optical viewfinders I agree with Charrick. The only advantage of an optical viewfinder is imho the natural "look", usually because of no resolution limitations. For me as a wearer of glasses not really an argument, since I can hardly judge if an image is *really* sharp by what I see in the viewfinder. I f I want to be sure I switch to the display, magnify to 10x and then I know.

But given the fact that I sometimes started shooting with the wrong white balance and only realized afterwards I can only look forward to having an electronic viewfinder showing me white balance, exposure compensation, effects and a histogram live.
Oh, and for night photography an optical viewfinder is imho useless.

(I already used an EVF on the "Powershot Pro 1", 10 years ago. It was usable, and today's EVFs are even better.)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 19:33 UTC

Se we've seen both the D5500 and the EOS750/760D released now. To be blunt, neither of them makes me want to have them.

I had an EOS 400D, a Nikon D5000 and now the EOS 650D. I just love flip-out displays and the touch screen of the EOS 650D. I also liked the very good image quality compared to compact cameras at their time. What I disliked were focus issues (like the camera usually focusing on the background instead on an animal, happened often with D5000), and the loud "click", especially when doing timelapse photography in quiet environment.

What has changed since then?
1. Ridiculous resolutions (I usually still shoot 8MP and created excellent looking posters from them.) Why 24 or 28MP?
2. Compact cameras offer almost equal image quality under daylight and cost far less.
3. ILC cameras offer 4K video, two times the burst rate, often smaller bodies, faster focus in "live view mode", no loud clicks. (See Panasonic GH4 or Samsung NX500. The GH4 even has built in time lapse mode.)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2015 at 18:32 UTC as 202nd comment | 6 replies
On Nikon D5500 adds touchscreen and flat picture profile article (210 comments in total)
In reply to:

matthiasbasler: I am rather disappointed. After 14 months a predecessor is come out that looks like a slight improvement to some (like me who value a touch screen) and like a move back to others (who like GPS). Nikon can do better, I am sure, but I guess they limited the camera features in order not to compete with their higher level cameras.

For me this camera comes way too late, I switched to Canons EOS 650D, which offered a touch screen and similar features more than two years ago.

Maybe this is also another indication that the classical APSC frame DSLR cameras have passed their zenith with only marginal steps in the past two years. Look at the mirrorless camera market instead, which still has a much higher momentum and in some aspects makes these DSLR cameras look like dinosaurs. (Compare its 5fps and the 1080p video to 12fps and superb 4K video with H.265 codec of the Panasonic Lumix GH-4, which admittedly is twice the price. But even the Nikon D750 still only has 6.5 fps and 1080p.)

Correct, Sisung. I mixed up AVCHD (H.264) with HEVC (H.265). Thanks for noting.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2015 at 18:11 UTC
On Nikon D5500 adds touchscreen and flat picture profile article (210 comments in total)

I am rather disappointed. After 14 months a predecessor is come out that looks like a slight improvement to some (like me who value a touch screen) and like a move back to others (who like GPS). Nikon can do better, I am sure, but I guess they limited the camera features in order not to compete with their higher level cameras.

For me this camera comes way too late, I switched to Canons EOS 650D, which offered a touch screen and similar features more than two years ago.

Maybe this is also another indication that the classical APSC frame DSLR cameras have passed their zenith with only marginal steps in the past two years. Look at the mirrorless camera market instead, which still has a much higher momentum and in some aspects makes these DSLR cameras look like dinosaurs. (Compare its 5fps and the 1080p video to 12fps and superb 4K video with H.265 codec of the Panasonic Lumix GH-4, which admittedly is twice the price. But even the Nikon D750 still only has 6.5 fps and 1080p.)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2015 at 18:02 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »