luigibozi

luigibozi

Joined on Oct 12, 2011
About me:

bye! have fun! (Oct. 10, 2015)
;)

Comments

Total: 123, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.2 adds local dehaze (60 comments in total)
In reply to:

mclaren777: Lightroom for Web is fantastic!

:)))))))))))

:)))))))

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2015 at 06:21 UTC

Now it's Leica's turn to make some FE-mount lenses, eh?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2015 at 05:58 UTC as 38th comment
In reply to:

Cane: So for us non-Sony experts, are these APS-C lenses or FF lenses? Are they for use with the crop factor of a crop sensor, or are they really wide for FF? And what is the adapter for they mention if they are E-mount? Am I the only one that read that and went, "huh"?

:)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2015 at 05:52 UTC

Now it's Leica's turn to make some FE-mount lenses, eh?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 9, 2015 at 19:57 UTC as 60th comment | 4 replies
On article Light L16 packs 16 cameras into a single portable body (390 comments in total)

This surely has sharpness in the corner...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 22:43 UTC as 123rd comment
On article Adobe Camera Raw 9.2 adds local dehaze (60 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: I notice lightroom CC has this in addition to a Clarity and Saturation slider.

Also sharpness, noise, moire´and defringe.

It's the same engine.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2015 at 06:56 UTC
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

DavidsfotosDotCom: Just go diving with it & you can get 2-4 atmospheres of compression ;-)

@tim: I think it depends of the depth one dives.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 18:48 UTC
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (618 comments in total)
In reply to:

DavidsfotosDotCom: Just go diving with it & you can get 2-4 atmospheres of compression ;-)

Yeah. The images in this article took my breath away.

What if their left side appeared BEFORE users "complain", and BEFORE Sony's latest developments regarding their raw files?!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 18:47 UTC
On Connect post Sony Xperia Z5's 4K display shows most content at 1080p (88 comments in total)

I think all the reviewers will tell us how 12Mp iPhone 6s images/video will be far ahead 23Mp Sony's 4K. Let me tell you I won't believe those.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2015 at 03:19 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On article Ricoh teases spring 2016 full-frame Pentax DSLR debut (528 comments in total)

Let's forget about legacy lenses. I know they were exceptional, but... who cares?!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2015 at 03:12 UTC as 58th comment | 3 replies
On article Ricoh teases spring 2016 full-frame Pentax DSLR debut (528 comments in total)
In reply to:

iudex: To all you guys that don´t know much about Pentax and wonder about what lenses will the FF use: Pentax already has 9 fullframe lenses in it´s recent lineup; 3 FF lenses are in the roadmap for 2015 or later (I guess they will be introduced at the same time with the FF), not mentioning dozens of discontinued FF lenses and current DA lenses, that are oficially APSC only, but are proved to cover FF.
So compared to any other new camera system (Fuji X-mount, Sony FE etc) the FF Pentax will have the most lenses available already upon introduction.

If an APS-C lens happens to cover FF, that does not imply it's calculated for FF. So I wouldn't count those.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2015 at 02:54 UTC
On article Ricoh teases spring 2016 full-frame Pentax DSLR debut (528 comments in total)

Zeiss waited and waited, then they discontinued ZK.
Isn't FF a little bit late for Pentax? I know that pentaxians waited for a FF before Sony's A7 or even RX.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2015 at 02:48 UTC as 60th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

luigibozi: Congrats for Sony.
Next step, if they want to be in the so-called professional range, would be to have the TTL wi-fi trigger from Profoto designed for Sony cameras. This will be the true cherry on pie.

There's the other option too: Sony to reverse engineer profoto's wi-fi signals :)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 15:02 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)

Congrats for Sony.
Next step, if they want to be in the so-called professional range, would be to have the TTL wi-fi trigger from Profoto designed for Sony cameras. This will be the true cherry on pie.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 01:55 UTC as 48th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leandros S: The RX100 is the model I might buy if it had this option.

I had a rx100 and the pincusion is like extreme. So you'll have a dilemma: you either trust sony's pre-cooking to their raw format or you trust your raw files processor. I think better accept sony's pre in the rx100's case. But for interchangeable lens family is the right thing to have real raw files.
They should bring this to a6000 too.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 23:05 UTC
In reply to:

PVCdroid: There is manipulation of data off the sensor by all the camera makers before a file is written as raw. The question is that of efficiency in the camera's processing of images not what file is the purest in terms of untouched data. You can have a Nikon raw file written as 70+mb or a smaller more processed one in the 30+mb range. The difference is literally garbage that is thrown out which is only used by those engineers and statisticians looking at data, not images. Sony elected to save us all the headache of extra and wasted storage space. Nikon and Canon users will claim that their raw formats are the best and untouched by the manufacturers but it's just not true.

Here is an article from one of the best analyzing what Nikon does to their so called non lossy raw files. Note when reading how similar this process is to the article written about Sony's process by DPR.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6783

@Iliah Borg: Are you talking bits or bytes?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2015 at 23:18 UTC
In reply to:

PVCdroid: There is manipulation of data off the sensor by all the camera makers before a file is written as raw. The question is that of efficiency in the camera's processing of images not what file is the purest in terms of untouched data. You can have a Nikon raw file written as 70+mb or a smaller more processed one in the 30+mb range. The difference is literally garbage that is thrown out which is only used by those engineers and statisticians looking at data, not images. Sony elected to save us all the headache of extra and wasted storage space. Nikon and Canon users will claim that their raw formats are the best and untouched by the manufacturers but it's just not true.

Here is an article from one of the best analyzing what Nikon does to their so called non lossy raw files. Note when reading how similar this process is to the article written about Sony's process by DPR.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6783

@Rishi: "you drew those particular 12 bit quotes from the section where he analyzes high ISO". Thanks for your opinion about my misunderstanding. Rest assured I'll continue to understand that a bit is a bit and raw is raw.
By the way, could you share what do you feel about the truth value of the statement "A raw image file is a raw image file"? Please use only 0(zero) and 1, as I will not understand what half of a bit is.
@Iliah Borg: Agree, but that's information theory. I'm sure you were aware that we're talking applied information theory.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2015 at 22:44 UTC
In reply to:

PVCdroid: There is manipulation of data off the sensor by all the camera makers before a file is written as raw. The question is that of efficiency in the camera's processing of images not what file is the purest in terms of untouched data. You can have a Nikon raw file written as 70+mb or a smaller more processed one in the 30+mb range. The difference is literally garbage that is thrown out which is only used by those engineers and statisticians looking at data, not images. Sony elected to save us all the headache of extra and wasted storage space. Nikon and Canon users will claim that their raw formats are the best and untouched by the manufacturers but it's just not true.

Here is an article from one of the best analyzing what Nikon does to their so called non lossy raw files. Note when reading how similar this process is to the article written about Sony's process by DPR.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6783

Sorry, but a statement like this...
"The D800E is a 12 bit camera. I’d call the D810 12 and a half."
doesn't look like understanding even what a bit is.
I doubt "12 bit and a half" is a metaphor.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2015 at 21:31 UTC

Could somebody push Sony to explain technically (NOT marketing-ly) what are they doing with the bits from the sensor to the file delivered on the memory card?
It would save a lot of people's time having the available info in their tech specs.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2015 at 20:45 UTC as 235th comment | 3 replies
On article BSI Boss? Sony Alpha 7R II added to studio scene (535 comments in total)
In reply to:

Boris M: Ok, I am not paid by or working for any brand of camera, and I really have nothing against Sony or whoever it is.
However I am a bit puzzled by the comments here from you guys.
I'll try to make me understandable and sure I do not want to provoque anyone. But are you guys producing pictures to be shown only on the internet or on any type of display and not to be printed?
I check really a lot of comparisons (but always with Phase One IQ180 as ref) and clearly it seems that the image is crispier and sharper (however in my eyes a bit artificially, compare for ex. the CYMK at the top you'll see below the black line a kind of white line in the Sony, not the IQ180, not even the Leica Q). But all this at minimum ISO (and I prefer the IQ colours). I would not use for professional purpose images at above ISO 1600 (the same from a Canon, or Nikon or whoever).

Same impression here when choosing Leica Q vs. SonyA7RII. Leica seems better.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 1, 2015 at 19:46 UTC
Total: 123, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »