Entropius

Entropius

Lives in United States Tucson, AZ, United States
Works as a Physics PhD Candidate
Joined on Jul 17, 2006

Comments

Total: 148, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Ricoh announces Pentax XG-1 superzoom article (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

W5JCK: Super yawn....Another camera with a small sensor and little to offer. Putting a long zoom on a lackluster camera doesn't make it good or make it worthy of being on this site. This kind of cheap camera is going to be bought by people who don't read sites like this, or they would know better. I'm not sure why DPReview still brings us information on these little sensor cameras or for that matter smartphone cameras. Maybe their newest members have been dumbed down to that level. This used to be a site for enthusiasts and professionals, not so much now...

I have a 20" print on my wall taken with an eight-year-old small-sensor superzoom (Panasonic FZ50) that looks *fantastic*. I shoot Nikon DX now so I know what modern large sensors can do, but these small sensor cameras -- at base ISO -- can deliver some very impressive results.

Don't insult someone else's tools because they aren't as expensive as others; look at the results. Are there limitations to small sensors? Certainly. Can they be worked around? Sometimes, they sure can, and the results are not half bad.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2014 at 15:50 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1825 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: There must be an professor of imaging science out there somewhere who can be hired by DPR to write a nice counterpoint article that will untangle this topic and bring sanity to what is essentially a holy war between two under-informed camps. I would start at http://www.rit.edu/cos/optics-rit and work westward from there.

@Bustard, it really is that simple -- I don't know why people try to overcomplicate this beyond what you have just described.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 17:23 UTC
In reply to:

dzukela: copy, steal, copy, pilfer, copy, filch, purloin, stealing...
That's google android.

Android and OSX both "copied" a real operating system to get their start: Unix.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 14:52 UTC
In reply to:

sdh: Does RAW actually offer benefit in smartphone-size sensors?
RAW has real benefit with DSLRs and regular point-and-shoot type cameras because the image sensor can capture a larger range of information than the jpg format can store.
But the margin decreases as sensor size decreases (decreasing dynamic range).
Do smartphone sensors actually have headroom beyond what jpg can store?

And separately I can't help thinking that if you're fussy enough about your images to manually post-process RAWs (because there's no point shooting RAW if you don't) then you probably should be doing photography on a device with a proper handgrip and shutter button (ie a real camera even if only a compact and not a smartphone).

Yes.

Noise reduction is crucial on data coming from a tiny sensor, and that can be better done by a 35-watt Core i5 in a few seconds than by a smartphone CPU running on a few hundred milliwatts in a few tens of milliseconds.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 14:52 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeStern: I returned my A7r for the oly em1. And I am sooo pleased with this decision.

Some here talking about m4/3 vs. apsc vs. full frame. I would rather concentrate on olympus rather than m4/3 in general. Because 5 axis ibs is out of this world. 3 axis is also very good. And it's not just my opinion, everybody who try it will agree with me.

I have not taking a single blurry picture yet. Including 1/3 of a second exposures.

It's 300 f/4, isn't it? That's what I'd rather have anyway.

If I'm able to sell my D7100 + 80-400G for E-M1 + 300 f/4 + 1.4x TC, I will definitely consider it.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 20:29 UTC
On Just Breathe: Portraits of adults with Cystic Fibrosis article (13 comments in total)

I have a close friend with CF who is an excellent photographer -- and, thanks to modern treatment, lives a pretty normal life. He's even a good singer, something that would be unthinkable not too long ago.

Direct link | Posted on May 9, 2014 at 18:15 UTC as 7th comment
On Updated: Creating the Leica T article (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

LWW: Spin

Of course it's spin; wouldn't an actual design document be written in, say, German?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 24, 2014 at 13:17 UTC
On Ricoh to offer limited edition Pentax Q7 Premium Kit article (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smokymtnhiker: Check out the Studio scene for the Q7 before ragging on it.

Look at the page of text lying under the bottle of Baileys. You can actually read the text on the Q7 shot which is something you can't say for either the D7100 or Fuji X-Pro1. Text does look better on the X-100s though.

So the Q7 isn't bad for an over-priced little toy after all.

Shooting a D7100 at f/32 will degrade the image due to diffraction exactly as much as shooting a Q7 at the aperture that achieves the same depth of field.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2014 at 05:26 UTC
On Ricoh to offer limited edition Pentax Q7 Premium Kit article (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smokymtnhiker: Check out the Studio scene for the Q7 before ragging on it.

Look at the page of text lying under the bottle of Baileys. You can actually read the text on the Q7 shot which is something you can't say for either the D7100 or Fuji X-Pro1. Text does look better on the X-100s though.

So the Q7 isn't bad for an over-priced little toy after all.

That's because the Q7 has so much more depth of field at the same f/number because of the bigger sensor. A D7100 can be shot at f/32 to get the same effect.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 3, 2014 at 01:48 UTC
On Apple applies for dual-sensor camera patent post (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

joyclick: Apple likes to put its name on everything under the sun and make money from it.Android is the answer.

Samsung will be sued no matter what. If Apple can sue over rounded rectangles, it can sue over anything.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 28, 2014 at 02:30 UTC
On Pentax K-3 preview (961 comments in total)
In reply to:

jon404: I am shocked at the low pricing for this excellent camera -- and for those from other mfgrs -- and also how fast the value depreciates. Scary, scary business. Great times for the consumer, but you wonder how much longer this can go on.

If Pentax made the lens I wanted (a 400 f/5.6) I'd have gotten one in a heartbeat. When it comes to the camera itself they seem to consistently get all the features right.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2014 at 04:52 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

techmine: Don't Samsung/Fuji/Sony (MILC line) provide better alternatives?

Perhaps they make better cameras. Olympus makes great lenses, and that's sort of the draw of Micro Four Thirds. Just off the top of my head, the lenses that are known to be quite good:

7-14/4, 9-18/4-5.6, 12/2, 14/2.5, 20/1.7, 25/1.8, 25/1.4, 12-40/2.8, 45/1.8, 45/1.2, 60/2.8 macro, 75/1.8, 35-100/2.8, 100-300/4-5.6, 75-300/x-6.7, exotic f/0.95 MF things, upcoming 300/4 and 150/2.8...

If you want to do it, there's probably a lens for it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 20:12 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Jacal: For any body who feels like whining about bokeh, or in case others may be taken in by the shills here, look at this:

http://admiringlight.com/blog/fuji-56mm-f1-2-vs-panasonic-leica-42-5mm-f1-2-nocticron/

Admittedly, a cople of high end lenses, but the same difference is the same at all levels between the two formats.

The go-to affordable portrait lens on m4/3 is the Olympus 45/1.8, which is a few hundred bucks. It is wicked sharp wide open and gives nice bokeh.

What else do you want?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 19:38 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 Review preview (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeStern: I returned my A7r for the oly em1. And I am sooo pleased with this decision.

Some here talking about m4/3 vs. apsc vs. full frame. I would rather concentrate on olympus rather than m4/3 in general. Because 5 axis ibs is out of this world. 3 axis is also very good. And it's not just my opinion, everybody who try it will agree with me.

I have not taking a single blurry picture yet. Including 1/3 of a second exposures.

Olympus IBIS has always been quite good (all the way back to my first DSLR, the E-510). I agree with your assessment of the E-M5; I rented one once and was blown away, and would probably have one if Olympus made the telephoto options that I wanted. It just does so many things right.

Nikon VR has caught up, though: I can handhold 1/30s at 400mm with the 80-400.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 19:36 UTC
In reply to:

photofan1986: 1000 bucks for a 70-300 4.5-5.6 lens? What exactly do they smoke at Nikon's? I might be interested...in what they smoke, that is :D

Smaller format lenses are only easier to make if they're wideangle. Making a 300mm for CX is not much easier than making a 300mm for FX. (Actually, it's harder, if you want the same resolution in lp/ph; compare the size, weight, and cost of the Olympus 300/2.8, designed for 4/3, to the Nikon one for FX. Both are stellar lenses; the 4/3 one is a bit bigger and pricier, since it's got to be more highly corrected.)

A 70-300 f/2.8 is a beast for any system; you'll need an aperture diameter of 107mm, for instance.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

oeriies: The sample images from this lens posted by Nikon are soft to my eye:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Nikon1-Lenses/3345/1-NIKKOR-VR-70-300-f%252F4.5-5.6.html#!/media:image:3345_sample-photo_01.jpg

So if you're not going to close the door because of the price the question is going to be how much of a hit in IQ you're going to be willing to accept in exchange for great portability in the super telephoto range..

The Olympus lens is also substantially slower (f/6.7, isn't it?)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 16:39 UTC
In reply to:

slncezgsi: Interesting lens, but I am wondering whether -in spite of the IS - the lens will be handhold-able. The magnification at the long end will be very hard to keep pointed towards the subject.

Nikon is very very good at making IS systems. I have the 80-400 AFS. Used on a 24MP DX body, the pixel-level magnification is nuts -- yet I can handhold shots down to 1/50 at 400mm consistently.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 16, 2014 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

lacikuss: What is Mr. Olympus going to do when Full frame dslr becomes small and cheap?

it is happening already...

It's not the full frame DSLR's that need to be small and cheap; it's the lenses that feed those huge sensors. Olympus makes some incredibly good, reasonably priced, and pretty small lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2014 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

Mahmoud Mousef: Dear Olympus engineers
Thanks for Pixel Mapping.

I first used Pixel Mapping about 15 years ago and I say thanks for giving this to the public so early in the digital camera revolution. I can't believe I bought a Nikon DSLR last year that didn't have it. What's worse, it came with bad pixels from the factory. I feel like I have been transported to some prehistoric place.

Thanks for dropping SmartMedia too :)
I have some great memories of Olympus cameras (C-4000 and E-520, which I still use)....so thank you to all involved.

Thanks for this too :)
http://www.olympus.com.au/Products/Digital-SLR/Lenses/Standard/35mm-f3-5-Macro.aspx

Another 35 f/3.5 fan!

It's one of the sharpest lenses I've used; it's still incredibly sharp with a 2x teleconverter, wide open (at f/7), at any focus distance; it's small and light and does precisely what it says on the tin.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2014 at 23:50 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M10 First Impressions Review preview (622 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: I know all the Olympus shooters think they have something to complain about but you don't. At least Olympus actually creates lenses, announces them, release them, and continues to provide you with usable products.

Meanwhile, in Nikon land, we have been waiting for a wide angle DX prime lens for about 10 years or so. That right, not an improved lens or a better lens, just A LENS period.

Meanwhile, in Nikon land, we have been waiting for the D300 to be updated for about 6 years or so. Thats right, SIX YEARS.

Meanwhile, in Nikon land, this years updated camera bodies are the same ones from last year just without a OPF filter. The Liveview still focuses slower than an 80s camera, there is no live view histogram, you can't change aperture while shooting video because that would require a new part, and the viewfinders on the low and midrange bodies are like tiny tunnels.

If you want the right to complain, come to Nikon land. There is much to actually complain about :)

Meanwhile I switched from Olympus to Nikon waiting on a proper telephoto... if Olympus made a 300 f/4 I'd be using m4/3.

Olympus, for all of its marketing bloopers, has always made nice equipment.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2014 at 17:24 UTC
Total: 148, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »