kkardster

kkardster

Lives in United States Blaine, MN, United States
Joined on Aug 25, 2011

Comments

Total: 92, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Processing Techniques: Stacking challenge (3 comments in total)
In reply to:

dopravopat: HDR is also stacking - stacking of exposure.

Classic HDR uses image stacking to retrieve tone maps, which is analogous to stacking multiple planes of focus to increase DOF or multiple frames to average out noise. It's true you can do HDR from a single photo, but you can also sharpen or remove noise from single images as well without stacking.

And there are obviously more than just the two types of stacking you've noted above. Another is to depict movement, as we see in the stacked flag and the stacked watch hands in this challenge or in star trails, etc. And I'm sure there are other uses for image stacking as well.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 17:54 UTC
On Time flies in the Processing Techniques: Stacking challenge (2 comments in total)

Interesting shot - looks great enlarged! And you phosphorescence appears to last well over an hour.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 17:43 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On Cactus flowering in the Processing Techniques: Stacking challenge (2 comments in total)

Interesting stack with unique result.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 16:56 UTC as 1st comment
On airport 2_edited-1 in the Processing Techniques: Selective Desaturation challenge (2 comments in total)

I can't tell which is which. Did you destitute and the blue out the sky?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 02:59 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On Pink! in the Processing Techniques: Selective Desaturation challenge (1 comment in total)

Go Vikes#

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2014 at 02:52 UTC as 1st comment
On Dragonfly Flight in the Dragonflies #2 challenge (13 comments in total)

Nice catch!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2014 at 22:16 UTC as 13th comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (774 comments in total)
In reply to:

Todd3608: How many consumers actually want 4K quality. I am the geek in our family and have zero desire for 4K. 1080P is good enough for me.

@dougbm_2: No poll necessary - all I had to do was read the many FZ1000 threads in the Panasonic Compact Cameras forum.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2014 at 13:12 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (774 comments in total)
In reply to:

Todd3608: How many consumers actually want 4K quality. I am the geek in our family and have zero desire for 4K. 1080P is good enough for me.

It's likely that downsampled 4k video will result in better 480p that shooting directly in 480. 1080p and 4K are just formats, much like MP4 and AVCHD are. Most cameras that shoot 1080p can't resolve 1080 lines - just like these 4K cameras can't resolve full 4K resolution. However, these 4K cameras can resolve more lines than their 1080 counterparts and thus will result in better downsampling results.

For example, if the 4k camera could really only resolve 1100 lines but the 1080 version only 700 lines, it's obvious that you should get better 480 results from the 4k video. I've seen other comments in Panasonic threads where this is exactly what many are hoping for from the 4k video. I've also seen that 4k video editing isn't that much of an increased strain for processing.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 23:30 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (774 comments in total)
In reply to:

Todd3608: How many consumers actually want 4K quality. I am the geek in our family and have zero desire for 4K. 1080P is good enough for me.

Many are interested in using 4K in shutter-priority mode as an 8MP 30fps stills burst mode with zero buffer lag.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 21, 2014 at 21:00 UTC
In reply to:

EthanP99: Just so we're clear, f4 is now considered "fast lens" ?

f/2.8 is always bigger than f/4 and one could also argue brighter. But f/4 can be faster than f/2.8 if the sensor allows use of higher ISO for same IQ. f/2.8 is faster glass than f/4, but not necessarily a faster camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2014 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Leica:
f=9.1mm-146mm zoom
ad=f/2.8-f/4.0=9.1/2.8-146/4.0=3.25mm-36.5mm aperture diameters

FF(x2.747/x2.740):Eq.FoV=25mm-400mm
f-stop=FoV/ad=25/3.25-400/36.5:
=
25mm-400mm f7.7-f11 Eq.DoF+FoV

Thanks for noting this correctly as Eq.DoF+FoV. There are near fist fights in some of these comments over the use of Equivalent Aperture instead of the true equivalencies.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2014 at 19:05 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

You are baiting your own hook.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 22:29 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

What's with all the Full Frame comparisons? Are you afraid that your newly established empire is cracking because of the FZ1000? Do you seriously think this camera has nothing to offer? It must, or you wouldn't be trolling the P&S stories looking for stones to throw. I suggest either taking off your blinders or pointing them back to the FF forums where the "real" photographers hang out and drink kool-aid.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 21:54 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

The fact that aperture relates to opening vs focal length but does not use FOV nor DOF in that calculation clearly shows that you are attributing variable effective calculations based on sensor size to the known physics of aperture. That in itself shows that there really is not effective aperture but rather effective FOV and effective DOF. Why not just call them what they are and use EFOV and EDOF like we use EFL instead of trying to redefine aperture?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 20:14 UTC
On Panasonic FZ1000: Not just another superzoom... article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Bridge cameras like this one and the RX10 or still what I consider to be sub-enthusiast level. The 1" sensor is too small to deliver quality IQ at any low light level. That f/2.8 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/5.0 lens on an APC-S camera. Pretty darn slow for wide open, and thus rather lacking in low light capability. A f/4.0 lens on a 1" sensor is equivalent to a f/7.1 lens on an APC-S camera. So this camera basically has a f/4--f/7.1 zoom lens compared to APS-C DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. Meh! For the price of the RX10 you would be better off with a a6000 and a few good lenses. This one is cheaper, but still not worth the price for anyone who wants an enthusiasts level and above IQ. This is a mom/dad camera used to take little pictures to post on the internet. Again, meh!

"But another way to look at this may also be to consider how high an ISO is usable across different size sensors. All else being equal, maybe you can re-interpret f stop "usefulness" based on ISO and noise."

Then talk about "ISO usability" or "# stops quieter" or whatever. Please don't go down the aperture equivalent rat hole.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 16:53 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

pgphoto_ca: Be carefull....it's not a f2.8-f4 with this sensor (2.7x crop)....it's f5.6-f8 or more.......the crop factor need also to be apply to the aperture :)

A real 400mm f4...is much bigger ! :)

Per Tony Northrup:

"If you want to figure out the total light gathered, which my tests determined is the primary factor for image noise (with differing sensor technology amounting to 0.2%), then multiply the aperture by the crop factor. That allows you to calculate both depth-of-field and total image noise--easy!"

Fine, but why do you need to drag this down the "equivalents" rat hole? Leave aperture what it is and call these goofy equivalents something else like "Light Sensitivity" and "DOF". Your attempts to redefine a physical specification that's been part of photography since the beginning is just muddying the waters.

And yes, I understand 35mm equivalents - I bought my first 35mm SLR in 1974 - I just don't like relative specifications.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 15:54 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

pgphoto_ca: Be carefull....it's not a f2.8-f4 with this sensor (2.7x crop)....it's f5.6-f8 or more.......the crop factor need also to be apply to the aperture :)

A real 400mm f4...is much bigger ! :)

Again, it's equivalents that are at fault. They can be helpful but for many they can be confusing. Camera makers don't seem to realize that there is a large percentage of people who have never shot with a 35mm camera - be it film or digital - and for many of them equivalents are just too much information.
Can we just use real specs? Please?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 07:09 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rodger1943: Hi Richard, thanks for your comprehensive preview. Just one question at the moment. How fast is the manual focus ring? My understanding with the Sony is that its quite slow and requires many turns to get anywhere.

Good question Rodger. And is MF focus-by-wire or is it a mechanical manual focus? Good/quick manual focus capability?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 06:15 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 First Impressions Review preview (1282 comments in total)
In reply to:

pgphoto_ca: Be carefull....it's not a f2.8-f4 with this sensor (2.7x crop)....it's f5.6-f8 or more.......the crop factor need also to be apply to the aperture :)

A real 400mm f4...is much bigger ! :)

The whole industry should dump equivalents and use lens specs that can stand on their own. Telescopes, binoculars, etc. can do it, why can't camera companies?

And for the sake of this argument, the FZ1000 is f/2.8-4.0 for exposure purposes, allowing for decent shutter speeds in most situations. Multiplying by the crop factor has to do with how the aperture affects DOF, not exposure.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 05:40 UTC
On ThinkTank Streetwalker HardDrive Backpack Review article (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: I dont agree with the way it is packed here, when the DSLR should be at the bottom facing up with the lenses either side of whatever its got on. Having the centre of gravity low surely adds to its useability. That said, if its good enough for Gagne, its a win win all around!

That would put the weight of everything else on top of the camera rather then the other way around. I know it's padded and all, but I'd be more comfortable with the camera only having to hold its own weight.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2014 at 15:27 UTC
Total: 92, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »