tt321

tt321

Joined on Nov 12, 2011

Comments

Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ChrisH37: What happened to the Panasonic 150mm 2.8? Killed off due to the Olympus 40-150 2.8?

The lack of fast-ish telephotos is puzzling, if ever a system was ready made for it then you would think M4/3 would be it, particularly as there are now a number of DSLR style bodies with decent grips.

A 200mm f4 would be nice, for example.

One day there will be an FF 800/13 zoom, or an APSC equivalent both of which of similar weight and size to this lens. Then we will have multiple choices to work with. Until then, these arguments are academic.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 11:14 UTC
In reply to:

ThirstyDursty: The DFD feature could be good for automating macro image stacks. Rather then using a macro slider or manually moving focus...it could do it automatically with no gaps...then choose the start and finish frame and stack in post.

Assuming no focus breathing, which at macro distances could be a problem.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 13:31 UTC
In reply to:

ChrisH37: What happened to the Panasonic 150mm 2.8? Killed off due to the Olympus 40-150 2.8?

The lack of fast-ish telephotos is puzzling, if ever a system was ready made for it then you would think M4/3 would be it, particularly as there are now a number of DSLR style bodies with decent grips.

A 200mm f4 would be nice, for example.

You kill my 150/2.8. I kill your 300/4 back.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

Zeisschen: It sounds like a much more simple but at the same time higher resolution approach compared to the Lytro. The difference is, it won't capture just one shot but a short video sequence. That might matter for moving subjects.

Rolling shutter could also be an issue there, but eventually Panasonic sensors are als fast enough like Sony stacked ones to eliminate it.

Good point. And you cannot just make exposures with the lens in continuous focus motion. The lens has to stop at each point to expose a frame, then move to the next point and expose a frame, etc. CDAF lenses are good for this king of thing, but good enough to which point?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 09:56 UTC
In reply to:

CrashMaster: The way technology is going the photographer will be in danger of being made redundant.

This could have been said when almost every technological development was made in cameras and lenses, and yet we still have photographers today, more of them than ever. Specific skills become redundant, but hopefully not the artist.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 09:47 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Heckert2: This might be the end of PDAF and mirror technology.

Not necessarily, the focus distance sweep might miss a moving subject, i.e. it ends up chasing the subject a few paces behind always throughout all the individual images with the subject never in focus.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

Shiranai: So far this technology as well as light field technology is still inferior to real bokeh captured by a lens.
Afterward bokeh calculations always struggle when it comes to difficult and detailed objects like branches or semi-transparent objects. Light field bokeh has still problems with artifacts, resolution and IQ is rather low.

I'm looking forward to Panasonics approach but I think there has yet to flow a lot of water down the river till we see any major breaktroughs. And even then, people will still prefer lenses for their analogue and retro look.

I don't know about Lytro, but this technology of sweeping through the focus range with a number of individual shots does give 'real bokeh' caused by the analogue properties of lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 09:44 UTC
In reply to:

The Straw Man: Well looks like 711 people figured out that a stupid law like that could put a dent in big money businesses like tourism. It would really put a damper on vacationers not being able to actually post photos of where they're traveling.

No you don't need to nab everyone, or anyone. Just go knocking on the doors of 'American giants' like Google, Facebook and Wikipedia which this law is ostensibly targeting. Amazon, and by extension DPR, probably also qualify. Much simpler solution. However these giants have 'the people' on their side this time...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2015 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

Don Finch: So does this mean I can go to Paris France in September and not have to worry about being thrown in prison for taking pictures of my favorite place on earth?
Just looking for clarification from a Paris resident on what to expect.

In many cases taking pictures is not illegal but using them commercially without the agreement of the copyright holder might be. So arrest in real time is extremely unlikely.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2015 at 15:52 UTC
On Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II article (1058 comments in total)
In reply to:

DavidKennard: Pretty good, but still missing a few things:
Fully articulated LCD
USB3
Global shutter
Built in teasmade

You forgot uncompressed real RAW.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 19:55 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: The new G was worth waiting for!

This looks like a lot of MILC camera for the money. I hope they sell a ton of them.

Very promising to those waiting for the GX8...

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Verhoeven: Do they preannounce the firmware 1.5 months ahead to prevent people from jumping to E-M1 or NX1?

Right. Was unfamiliar with Fuji practices. The other examples cited were all cameras, and not FW. For cameras, there may be a case for trying to estimate the market - announce something and then get dealer feedback and even pre-order data so as to tune/plan production etc. FW does not seem to have this motivation.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 19:37 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Verhoeven: Do they preannounce the firmware 1.5 months ahead to prevent people from jumping to E-M1 or NX1?

Nothing wrong with improving, but announcing an FW update this long ahead of time is rare. So asking why and finding a sensible answer is normal.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 17:32 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Verhoeven: Do they preannounce the firmware 1.5 months ahead to prevent people from jumping to E-M1 or NX1?

Yes.

Direct link | Posted on May 11, 2015 at 17:13 UTC
On Metz mecablitz 26 AF-1 Quick Review article (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

wetracy: A flash unit is not a gun. Stop calling it that!

It's remarkable what can get called guns. At airport security once they confiscated a laser pointer from me calling it a laser gun.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2015 at 19:24 UTC
On Metz mecablitz 26 AF-1 Quick Review article (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: Did I miss the test of the cycle time? I would have thought that would be included in a review. Surely I read past it without noticing it.

I did not remember seeing it either. That makes the two of us.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2015 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

Mark Alan Thomas: Here’s the link to the Lightroom 6 Standalone version which Adobe has basically hidden from customers:

https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/store/handlers/elicensing/trialconversion.cfm?productId=160&platform=Mac/Win&locale=en_us&marketSegment=com&skuType=FULL

Click “edit” to switch to upgrade pricing.

Yes - I can confirm that this works.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 21, 2015 at 19:05 UTC
On 000_Dan_11mm_f5.6 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (10 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: That lens looks great. However, the picture looks fairly noisy for ISO 400.

Exposure +0.35 and shadows +50 in post. Noise is probably from trying to compress the dynamic range when the shot was taken to preserve highlights as much as possible. The original scene must be extremely contrasty and, for any ISO, noise would be unavoidable in such circumstances unless you stack.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2015 at 16:24 UTC
On photo in sample gallery (10 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: That lens looks great. However, the picture looks fairly noisy for ISO 400.

Exposure +0.35 and shadows +50 in post. Noise is probably from trying to compress the dynamic range when the shot was taken to preserve highlights as much as possible. The original scene must be extremely contrasty and, for any ISO, noise would be unavoidable in such circumstances unless you stack.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 19, 2015 at 16:24 UTC

How could banning it to be sold to a foreigner and leave the country provide additional time for study? The seller, whose financial interest is being negatively affected by this ban, is more likely to open it up for studies by an organization that proposed the ban? If they were this cooperative to begin with, surely a ban like this is completely unnecessary, and only unnecessarily puts them in a mock-enemy position? I thought state robbery of private interests were completely opposite to what this government stands for. So much of this does not add up. But of course government decisions are not required to be logical.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 27, 2015 at 09:39 UTC as 19th comment
Total: 101, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »