Karl Gnter Wnsch

Karl Gnter Wnsch

Lives in United States AK, United States
Works as a software developer
Joined on Jun 24, 2002

Comments

Total: 89, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Karl Gnter Wnsch: What a pity that such a crutch is needed at all in a modern camera - this truly is sign of a warped sense of design vs. functionality by the manufacturer.

Not quite. Adding a wireless transfer unit to the camera will make the camera more expensive, put constraints on the design of the hull (see the Apple iPhone antenna debacle) and - most importantly - would make the camera unfeasible for some as Wifi is not legal everywhere in the world without extensive unit testing - which can take up to 3/4 of a year to complete in some areas!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 09:12 UTC

What a pity that such a crutch is needed at all in a modern camera - this truly is sign of a warped sense of design vs. functionality by the manufacturer.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2012 at 09:55 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

sh10453: Dang it!!
Can Sigma go back to the original price for a day so I can buy one and get the $4,800 worth of more Sigma stuff?

I guess not. Too late for me. I'll just have to go to a corner and pout.

OK, seriously, I think it is an unusual kind of support to the customer. Thumbs up to such an initiative.

I agree that a lens adapter would be a great idea. Many people already have the expensive Canon or Nikon lenses (and a dozen people or less have Leica's, j/k).

Good job, Sigma. Now go make the adapter & watch the SD1 sales graph shooting up rapidly!!

@Andy: You got it the wrong way around. The Mount is similar to Pentax K, the Protocol is the Canon EOS protocol...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2012 at 06:56 UTC
On Composition Basics in Macro Photography article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

eurotramp: What i fail to understand is that how are these rules "specific" to macro photography? These are general rules that can be applied to any kind of photography. Though i must admit the example photographs are very well done

They are not specific to macro photography but it serves well to remind oneself of them and not let the amazement about the details of the subject completely rule your mind...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2012 at 22:30 UTC
On Composition Basics in Macro Photography article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

paolopan83: How was the last picture made? I guess it is almost impossible to get the fly in the reght posiyion, spry it with water and capture it.

Easy, the droplets are morning dew - insects need external sources of heat so get out in the dead of night and identify suiting subjects before sunrise and get cracking at the first decent light...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2012 at 22:29 UTC
On Composition Basics in Macro Photography article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

bokane: Great photos and useful tips - but I'm still waiting for the killer (if that is the right word, maybe stunning instead?) post on how you get insects in the wild to stay still long enough to photograph them.

@bokane, the trick is to know what kind of behavior will trigger the skedaddle reflex of the insects - it's not the distance as such! It's the kind of movement, if you move directly and linearly towards the insect they will stay until you practically touch their eyes. But move perpendicular to their sitting position and they are gone from any distance. So hand holding the camera is an exceedingly bad idea as your normal movement contains such perpendicular movement components if you want or not.
Another thing you should bear in mind is that many insects will return to their last position or if a certain sitting position is well suited to their lifestyle they will often accept one provided by you - this applies to many of the carnivorous species such as dragonflies and hunting flies.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2012 at 18:08 UTC
On Composition Basics in Macro Photography article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vladilena: I am a novice in macro photography, and one thing I'd like to ask is : How do you keep the frog from jumping away while you are setting the shot?

@glonislav: Insects are mostly scared by movement perpendicular to their sitting position - like a swooping bird. This will invariably trigger their reflex to skedaddle. A photographer knowing his stuff thus will do anything to avoid this trigger - which means he will not be using the camera hand held but on a tripod with macro focusing rail which allows a straight closing movement. This then allows to use 100mm, or less focal length which will yield more of an impression of depth.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2012 at 17:55 UTC
On Depth of Field in Macro Photography article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daniel Lowe: I have had excellent results from bridge cameras, specifically the Fuji HS20 superzoom. The manual lens on this camera enables fine zoom control like a DSLR and is capable of fantastic tele macro results with nice blurred backgrounds.

Others have mentioned cameras like the Panasonic LX5 (which I also own) but I don't find this anywhere near as good as the HS20. With a close up lens the results become quite spectacular for a small sensor camera.

Others have mentioned diffraction problems with small sensor cameras but this is rarely a problem because you don't have to use apertures where diffraction issues start to materialise.

@_sem_: You have no way of separating the subject from the background - which ruins 99.999% of small camera macro shots! I used to think the same way (more DOF and thus easier) until I switched to a DSLR - the macro capabilities of small sensor cameras are rubbish in comparison, the drawbacks far far far outweigh the perceived minute advantage.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 17, 2012 at 09:51 UTC
On Depth of Field in Macro Photography article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daniel Lowe: I have had excellent results from bridge cameras, specifically the Fuji HS20 superzoom. The manual lens on this camera enables fine zoom control like a DSLR and is capable of fantastic tele macro results with nice blurred backgrounds.

Others have mentioned cameras like the Panasonic LX5 (which I also own) but I don't find this anywhere near as good as the HS20. With a close up lens the results become quite spectacular for a small sensor camera.

Others have mentioned diffraction problems with small sensor cameras but this is rarely a problem because you don't have to use apertures where diffraction issues start to materialise.

The problem with small sensor cameras is that the background is much much harder to control. In fact you have much too much DOF in this regard even with the lens wide open.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2012 at 15:58 UTC
On Depth of Field in Macro Photography article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Griffin: It is my experience that small sensor cameras give superior depth of field for macro photography. I don't buy the diffraction argument. You may have to stop down to f:16 and beyond to get acceptable depth of field with a DSLR and suffer from diffraction limitations but a compact that is diffraction limited at f:4 has great depth of field at f:2.8.
This article explores the argument further.
http://www.eos-magazine-forum.com/showthread.php?4538-Small-sensor-macro

The problem of small sensor cameras is that there are no viable choices for macro lenses and that the gift of higher DOF comes at quite a price because the background usually will be unappealing cluttered and busy...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2012 at 15:56 UTC
On Depth of Field in Macro Photography article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lng0004: I have a question with focus stacking. Do I have to move the camera accordingly (like on rail) if the lens focuses by extension?

In my experience it is better to keep the focus of the lens fixed and indeed move the camera via an external focusing rail. It makes life easier for both helicon focus as well as CombineZM - which are the two most popular choices of focus stacking software...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2012 at 15:53 UTC
On Depth of Field in Macro Photography article (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

kff: combining the images above via focus - it would do camera these days by a special function moving AF point (I say "AF macro bracketing":) and a final composition of result picture in the camera (or in the computer) ... I think, it is a simply software function :)

For it is better camera (tablet with camera module like GXR) with min.10'' display, for better select of AF point etc.

You are quite wrong. Focus stacking is a highly processor intensive business and most of the time you not only have to stack two or three images, I have seen stacks of several hundered images and myself have shot series of up to 50 images to be combined into a single image with this technique.
The problem most of the time when refocusing a lens is that all lenses in closeup photography change not only focus distance but focal length as well (a 180mm macro lens can be just a 100mm lens when focused at 1:1). This focus breathing (which is more developed in zoom lenses) makes stacking a much more tedious process as you have to deal with artifacts due to the change in focal length.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2012 at 15:52 UTC
In reply to:

Karl Gnter Wnsch: Unless they manage to produce sensors that can convey the *full* dynamic range of the scene (not just 6-7 EV in video mode like today, which is at least 20 stops short of the required range) and the EVF would manage to show the same dynamic range (the OLED is limited to about 5-6 EV) and that without lag and without heating up the sensor and without draining the battery... EVF is a solution to a non existing problem, OVF is and always will be superior, it's just hapless NOOBs which crave for the EVF solution as they lack the knowledge (and with an EVF they will never acquire this knowledge) to judge a scene.
EVF are incapable of showing the vital aspects in any high contrast scene - so they are a deal breaker for many!

@Sousa: That's a misconception. It is not WISIXYG - as the dynamic range of a sensor video feed is lower than the captured still photo and the EVF can't manage to reproduce even this limited dynamic range properly. So you rather have a limited view of what you certainly capture but won't see what you may have captured inadvertently? Put yourself into the place of someone using flash to manage the subject lighting against a bright background - what will you see in the EVF? Nothing worthwhile, not a chance you can make out the subject or the background at the same time but yet both will be clearly seen in the photo taken! To manage photography like this you need to control the complete dynamic range of the scene to fall within the severely limited dynamic range the EVF will be able to convey - so instead of flash you need several thousand watts in terms of permanent lighting just like film crews carry around.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2012 at 08:47 UTC
In reply to:

GSD_ZA: I would like to be among the first to applaud the end of tricks with mirrors and levers. The mechanical nonsense that goes on inside an SLR has no right to persist into the near future.

@mzillich, I resent the tone of your post and no matter how much the EVF will be enhanced there are simple laws of physics they can never avoid and which limit the usefulness. The medical problems that come from messing one eye up in terms of adaptation are real and a real threat to the photographers health.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2012 at 20:11 UTC
In reply to:

GSD_ZA: I would like to be among the first to applaud the end of tricks with mirrors and levers. The mechanical nonsense that goes on inside an SLR has no right to persist into the near future.

That "mechanical nonsense" is still and always will be far superior to a lagging video feed with limited dynamic rance, high power consumption, overheating issues and higher eyestrain which can easily lead to head aces and even more severe problems...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2012 at 14:44 UTC
In reply to:

Karl Gnter Wnsch: Unless they manage to produce sensors that can convey the *full* dynamic range of the scene (not just 6-7 EV in video mode like today, which is at least 20 stops short of the required range) and the EVF would manage to show the same dynamic range (the OLED is limited to about 5-6 EV) and that without lag and without heating up the sensor and without draining the battery... EVF is a solution to a non existing problem, OVF is and always will be superior, it's just hapless NOOBs which crave for the EVF solution as they lack the knowledge (and with an EVF they will never acquire this knowledge) to judge a scene.
EVF are incapable of showing the vital aspects in any high contrast scene - so they are a deal breaker for many!

@oselimg - such as? It's always those that have no viable argument that resort to inappropriate name calling without providing any arguments to sustain their position.
@SteB - yes an OVF is limiting in some circumstances but to photograph in these situations you can apply different remedies which all are readily available - with the exception of video. But photographic tools are not about video, they are about photography. For video an EVF is indispensable. If you don't have an OVF anymore I'd challenge you to properly take back lit portraits - as in every circumstance where the contrast of the scene while viewing exceeds the strongly limited EVF you are at a loss. And these circumstances are present far more often than those that may require an EVF - so by mandating an EVF you are favoring the worse solution to the problem of delivering a viewfinder. There is no reason not to have a live view solution as well but to only have a live view solution is unacceptable!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2012 at 14:00 UTC

Unless they manage to produce sensors that can convey the *full* dynamic range of the scene (not just 6-7 EV in video mode like today, which is at least 20 stops short of the required range) and the EVF would manage to show the same dynamic range (the OLED is limited to about 5-6 EV) and that without lag and without heating up the sensor and without draining the battery... EVF is a solution to a non existing problem, OVF is and always will be superior, it's just hapless NOOBs which crave for the EVF solution as they lack the knowledge (and with an EVF they will never acquire this knowledge) to judge a scene.
EVF are incapable of showing the vital aspects in any high contrast scene - so they are a deal breaker for many!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2012 at 10:50 UTC as 38th comment | 12 replies
On Nikon announces D4 'multi-media' DSLR news story (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: Great, now I gotta get new EN-EL18 batteries!

It seems that Nikons hands were forced as there is a new law in Japan regarding the contacts on high capacity batteries to prevent short circuits and their aftermath.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2012 at 08:38 UTC
On Nikon announces D4 'multi-media' DSLR news story (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

tuckerfx98: I like the idea of a new improved memory card. The idea of a CF and tiny SD card in the same camera was silly.
Some of you may not work under cold winter conditions where handling an SD card is more than just a little awkward. Believe me SD should be buried for just that reason.
Well, may keep it around for "Granny" and her "PHD Camera" when she's on vacation in Hawaii.

The second slot is for the CF-Card successor, not a fiddly SD card with it's far inferior performance!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2012 at 08:36 UTC
On Olympus raided over accounting scandal news story (83 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hide Takahashi: According to news at yahoo Japan, Sony,Panasonic and Fuji Film are fiercely
fighting to take over Olympus. Olympus medical equipments are already well known in the industry and now Sony is seriously considering to enter medical equipments business. Whoever succeeds in taking over Olympus,they will be in good hand.

"Whoever succeeds in taking over Olympus,they will be in good hand."
The only company of those that you claim are queuing on their doorstep for a takeover that would keep the camera business alive would be Panasonic. Sony would bury it (eliminating internal competition against their NEX line) and FujiFilm has lost the plot a long time back... The DSLR line would anyways be dead with any of the three.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 22, 2011 at 09:15 UTC
Total: 89, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »