Causio

Lives in Germany Offenbach, Germany
Works as a Programmer
Has a website at http://ducav2.smugmug.com
Joined on Jan 7, 2010

Comments

Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20

And now he'll have to provide a reason for the users to buy that, to compensate for the limit (which is a "con" by design)... seriously, how stupid a concept is that? And how can it be even implemented? I want to take a photo of my wife at the Tour Eiffel (yeah, the internet is full of photos of my wife at the Tour Eiffel), or an unusual wide angle shot from the bottom, or a detail of a rivet, and I can't?
This is the stupidest camera concept I've ever heard of. This guy doesn't deserve an article here.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2015 at 09:22 UTC as 105th comment | 1 reply
On article MIT proposes new approach to HDR with 'Modulo' camera (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

memau: It will not work out in the real world, even the co-author of the paper confirmed that modulo camera still comes short when the scene been captured just way too high-contrast. I guess to overcome the drawback the sensor coupled must employ something like overflowed counter that keeps the iteration counts of overflow. But think about it, why not just refines the conventional sensor?

Secondly, lots of people confuse the idea of "HDR", there are two components :
1) the ability to capture more dynamic range
2) tweaking for display medium, because monitor or print just can't handle the dynamic range been taken

Modern camera now can capture 14EV, which means about contrast of 16000:1, obviously it's very hard to represent in print, so there comes Tone-Mapping.

This paper covers both the first part and second part, the fancy trick is the first part, but I don't think it makes sense at all.

That's how I actually understood this technology works: counting the number of overflows. "Why not refining the conventional sensors": apart from the fact that the sensor manufacturers have been doing this endlessly, I don't see why some researcher should not try expanding the concept.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2015 at 14:45 UTC
On article MIT proposes new approach to HDR with 'Modulo' camera (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

memau: It will not work out in the real world, even the co-author of the paper confirmed that modulo camera still comes short when the scene been captured just way too high-contrast. I guess to overcome the drawback the sensor coupled must employ something like overflowed counter that keeps the iteration counts of overflow. But think about it, why not just refines the conventional sensor?

Secondly, lots of people confuse the idea of "HDR", there are two components :
1) the ability to capture more dynamic range
2) tweaking for display medium, because monitor or print just can't handle the dynamic range been taken

Modern camera now can capture 14EV, which means about contrast of 16000:1, obviously it's very hard to represent in print, so there comes Tone-Mapping.

This paper covers both the first part and second part, the fancy trick is the first part, but I don't think it makes sense at all.

Why should it? It would simply not "overflow" any pixel and the readout would be same as the current sensors. This research shows a proof of concept for a new technology, but it's not THE new technology itself; applied, that is. All the other factors (sensor quality, color fidelity, noise, base DR without overflow etc) are out of the scope of this research afaik.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2015 at 13:19 UTC
On article MIT proposes new approach to HDR with 'Modulo' camera (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

memau: It will not work out in the real world, even the co-author of the paper confirmed that modulo camera still comes short when the scene been captured just way too high-contrast. I guess to overcome the drawback the sensor coupled must employ something like overflowed counter that keeps the iteration counts of overflow. But think about it, why not just refines the conventional sensor?

Secondly, lots of people confuse the idea of "HDR", there are two components :
1) the ability to capture more dynamic range
2) tweaking for display medium, because monitor or print just can't handle the dynamic range been taken

Modern camera now can capture 14EV, which means about contrast of 16000:1, obviously it's very hard to represent in print, so there comes Tone-Mapping.

This paper covers both the first part and second part, the fancy trick is the first part, but I don't think it makes sense at all.

"Useless" is a big word, compare it to today's way to do HDR and I see a big difference there already. Then if you don't like the results, it's your own personal taste, which makes nothing "useless" anyway. The fact of having an image with better DR helps where another camera would have got flat out black-white in some unrecoverable areas. It doesn't mean the image will look all flat and with typical hdr-unrealism. You can do whatever you want with a HDR image.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2015 at 15:41 UTC
On article Week in Review: Sony FTW (302 comments in total)

Leica full frame compact is DEFINITELY NOT the most interesting news in the week, and by a vast margina I'd say...

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 13:20 UTC as 38th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Paul Grupp: Any serious hobbyist or professional who thinks that it's worth switching to another platform just because Adobe rents a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom for a measly $9.95/month is either just playing around or being flat-out unrealistic. I get it -- some of us would prefer to own the software. Well, that's not on the table. The question is, if you are serious, is $9.95 a month really burdensome? Not even close. And if you have invested hundreds, maybe thousands of hours in learning the ins and outs of Adobe products, switching to something else because you think $9.95 is too much to pay is being penny smart and pound foolish.

I'm in europe and for the photography package it asks 142 euro/year. First of all, I dont want PS, I want only LR. Two years of usage make 284 euro. I'm spending less with the full version and upgrades. End of discussion...

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 08:48 UTC
On article Sony Alpha 7S Review (495 comments in total)

About Exposure latitude comparison with A7R, the A7R wins hands down when iso is low. but for example iso 1600 + 2 stop or iso 3200 + 1 stop (much more common cases) the A7S looks better to me

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2015 at 11:34 UTC as 57th comment
In reply to:

Franka T.L.: Unless there's something magical about that sensor I fail to see a point here

The original post might be vague or no value for you, but I understood it like s/he didn't get the point of this camera and I provided a clear reply. The word "magic" was obviously referring to "I don't understand the value of this camera, unless it's a spectacular sensor" but you keep replying as s/he truly believes in magic and you're building a castle around it...

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

Franka T.L.: Unless there's something magical about that sensor I fail to see a point here

What a useless and arrogant answer, JDThomas... and 4 people liked that?..
Aaaanyway, the point here from the user perspective is to provide a rangefinder-like focusing system (overlapping images) but in a digital format seen on LCD. "Cheaper", according to them, due to the lack of mirror and prism inside the camera.
You can see an example here:
http://petapixel.com/2015/02/23/konost-hopes-to-launch-the-worlds-first-true-digital-rangefinder/

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 09:42 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2 Review (317 comments in total)
In reply to:

fuxicek: back in film days I used compact minolta http://www.amazon.com/Minolta-Freedom-Zoom-150-camera/dp/B0000AUFK7.. I wonder, how did they squeeze the full frame into tiny body with tiny lens and why its not possible with digital?

1. It's not a dslr (and is it that smaller than the sony a7)?
2. That lens: 37.5-150mm f/5.4 - 11.9, 6 element/6 group construction
Well... you get what you paid for I guess? :)

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2014 at 16:28 UTC
On photo DSCF0337 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

It would be interesting to see some image at base iso 200

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 11:26 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Fujifilm X-T1 Sample Images sample gallery (1 comment in total)

It would be interesting to see some image at base iso 200

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 11:26 UTC as 1st comment
On article CES 2014: Fujifilm Stand Report (13 comments in total)

The link to the 10-24mm is broken:}
http://www.dpreview.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf10_24mmf4_r_ois/

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2014 at 09:41 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Review (517 comments in total)
In reply to:

StephenTee: It was recently commented that at a given ISO of 3200, a longer exposure was needed for the Sony RX-100 II than the Fuji x20 (1/8s vs 1/15s for roughly the same f-stop).

However, since the RX-100 II "base ISO" is 160 vs the Fuji's 100, you could claim that it's expected for the ISO or exposure values to be about 2/3 different in the exact same light/exposure conditions.

Again, not really. If you set the iso 3200 on both cameras, what the "base iso" is doesn't matter. It's just 3200 for both sony and fuji. My observation was that you can't compare them on the same ISO value when the other values (F, speed) turn out to imply that sony needs to get more time, hence possibly needing a further ISO increment

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 14:00 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Review (517 comments in total)
In reply to:

Causio: I just noticed that the RX100 II overestimates ISO to the point where - being iso the same - it shoots at half speed as the Fuji X20. You can download the night shots at iso 3200 for both and check yourself: Sony is 1/8 sec f5, Fuji 1/15 f4.5. Sony shot at iso 6400 brings it at 1/15 sec (f5). Even considering the tighter aperture, sony overestimates iso more than Fuji does (2/3 stops?). In real world, this would translate as shooting at lower iso with Fuji, being the desired speed and aperture the same.
It would be nice if dpReview made people notice in an OBVIOUS way on their comparison pages, that there is some iso overestimation going on for all cameras, and varying from model to model.

Doesn't make much sense, at least explained that way. I can reply that it needs more light because the sensor is bigger... if you put the same light received at the same time by a smaller sensor, distribute that amount of photons all over the bigger sensor and the photo will be darker. Hence, it captures more light because it is physically necessary for achieving the same exposure. And guess what? The sony needs in fact LONGER...

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 13:48 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Review (517 comments in total)

I just noticed that the RX100 II overestimates ISO to the point where - being iso the same - it shoots at half speed as the Fuji X20. You can download the night shots at iso 3200 for both and check yourself: Sony is 1/8 sec f5, Fuji 1/15 f4.5. Sony shot at iso 6400 brings it at 1/15 sec (f5). Even considering the tighter aperture, sony overestimates iso more than Fuji does (2/3 stops?). In real world, this would translate as shooting at lower iso with Fuji, being the desired speed and aperture the same.
It would be nice if dpReview made people notice in an OBVIOUS way on their comparison pages, that there is some iso overestimation going on for all cameras, and varying from model to model.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2013 at 17:32 UTC as 37th comment | 3 replies
On article Canon Powershot N first impressions (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

JohnMatrix: Does the screen flip past 90 degrees? i.e. can the social media slave who uses this camera easily take a picture of themselves?

I think you can use your phone for that, with the canon app

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2013 at 15:33 UTC
On article Canon Powershot N first impressions (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

tommy leong: can this do self portraits?
the entitlement generations MUST have....

I think you can use the phone app to use it as a remote - including framing.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2013 at 15:31 UTC
On article Pentax K-01 Hands-on Preview (376 comments in total)
In reply to:

Charlie Jin: I don't think that DPR really understood the purpose of the
weight of K01. It was intended for "professional feel". ;-)

So what's the point of a mirrorless camera then? The decision of making this camera compatible with slr lenses defies the whole mirrorless idea. Except for Pentax's marketing department very personal idea of product design, the only thing they achieved here is lower price. So basically they invested a lot of money in defining the Q standard (with new lenses etc) and couldn't afford to define another mirrorless standard with other lenses. And about the design, this is gadget-thinking (even the designer's signature is there... good for his reputation isn't it? :D), not camera thinking, yet with pro-quality expectations (including buying more "serious" lenses for it). Weird to say the least

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2012 at 05:13 UTC
On article Lightroom 4 Review (469 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dave Peters: Not compatible with Lightroom 3 ? So I can't load my existing catalogues and even if I re-import the photos to a new catalogue they will appear different and require reprocessing. I think forward compatibility is an essential feature. They should have kept all the old processing routines so that the program could detect old files and show the images correctly.

The release version can now import LR3 (and older) catalogs.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2012 at 09:34 UTC
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20