digiart

digiart

Lives in Portugal Aveiro, Portugal
Works as a webdesigner
Has a website at -
Joined on Feb 13, 2006
About me:

Amateur photographer
Equipment:

Cameras:
-------------
Nikon D50
Panasonic Lumix FZ-20
Nikon Coolpix 4300
Pentax MZ-50

Lenses:
-----------
Nikon 50 f1.8 D
Tamron 11-17 Di - II
Tamron 70-300 Di - II
Sigma 18-50 f3.5 - f5.6
Sigma 55-200 f4 - f5.6
Sigma 28-200 f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 DL
Pentax FA 50 f/1.7

Comments

Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge article (732 comments in total)
In reply to:

InTheMist: I've been down on mirrorless because my first was an x100s which is a slow piece of junk.

Two years later, I tried a Nikon 1. All I can say is that if Nikon was able to use the same technology in a camera with a large sensor, that's not dog-ugly, they would be on to something special. It's QUICK!

Nikon (and Canon) can make such a camera today. The problem is, they are the market leaders and market leaders tend to innovate less. Also, the bigger the company the more new products decisions are dictated by the "bean counters". That's why most innovative cameras are not coming from Canon or Nikon but from Olympus, Pentax/Ricoh, Fuji, etc.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2015 at 19:54 UTC

If the protective glass over the sensor is coated (which it probably is) this may be caused by a problem in the coating process. This seems to me a more plausible explanation than a problem in the adhesives used to put the layers of glass together.

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 13:37 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
On Massive $33,500 2450mm f/8 NASA lens surfaces on eBay article (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

Erick L: Keeping my money for the Hubble auction.

I hope you don't mind "some" scorching :)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

Karroly: You forget to say that increasing the diameter of the "tubes" is like waiting longer under the rain : this will increase and make more equal the number of raindrops caught by each tube, thus reducing the "signal-to-noise" ratio. For sensors, it means, putting aside electronic noise, bigger pixels will catch more photons and average the random nature of light you are talking about here.

This is why, given the same resolution, a big sensor with big pixels will ALWAYS be better in (extremely ?) low light than a small sensor, even though there were no electronic (or thermal) noise at all...

However, in practice, the true question is, and your article does not give an answer, under which pixel size and scene brightness, does a pixel catch too few photons so that the difference between adjacent pixels becomes noticable ?
Is this "noise" greater or smaller than the electronic or thermal noise ?
In other terms, do we really have to care with the random nature of photons with today sensors ?

"But there are more of the smaller pixels, so they can be combined, thus negating the big pixel advantage as long as the noise is scaled adequately."

If pixels where combined, that would negate the advantage of increased pixel count as it would decrease resolution.

Also, each pixel is amplified individually in the sensor and it's this first amplification step that contributes the most to the sensors SNR. So, "combining" smaller pixels will always result in lower SNR than using a sensor with less but bigger pixels, assuming sensors are of same generation (same type, process).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 20:53 UTC
In reply to:

digiart: Very informative article. It explains very well what we know from experience. Thank you!

P.S.
It would be excellent if in the reviews DPR tested each camera to find out what is the ISO setting that gives you the best dynamic range.

@feraudy,
Because it's not always the lowest ISO setting, that is why testing (and sharing) that info in the reviews would be valuable.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 09:32 UTC
In reply to:

naththo: What about the sensor heating issue problem especially in Pentax and Sony Mirrorless? That would have increase noise significantly especially Australia is a hot country not a cold country at all.

I think it will be discussed in part 2. IMO this can be an issue in dim lit scenes when using Live View or right after using Live View for some time. Not tested though.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:18 UTC

Very informative article. It explains very well what we know from experience. Thank you!

P.S.
It would be excellent if in the reviews DPR tested each camera to find out what is the ISO setting that gives you the best dynamic range.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:12 UTC as 171st comment | 2 replies

I may be wrong but it looks like Apple is yet again copying other companies technology...

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 17:36 UTC as 19th comment | 12 replies
On A closer look at the Nikon Coolpix P900 megazoom article (193 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: Can somebody quick work out the arc angle visible at 2000mm as compared to what is expected camera shake at the maximum shutter speed of 1/4000 sec?

I know it would require a lot of light but maybe this thing could manage taking an actual image of THE SUN ON A CLEAR DAY hand held?

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but NEVER, EVER AIM YOUR CAMERA DIRECTLY AT THE SUN! It CAN BLIND YOU (through the OVF), and damage the camera.

If you want to take pictures of the Sun you must use an appropriate filter in front of the lens.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2015 at 21:19 UTC

If memory doesn't fail me Pentax have done this several years ago (in a APS-C). A bit late IMO, but well done Nikon!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 00:05 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

oselimg: As long as there are Brand/Gear slaves and cynical endorsing by websites some manufacturers won't give a penny for quality checks. Instead they will bring out anything to get their current financial shortcomings subsidized by the consumer then will pay it back interest free. That's called free market ethics.

@ Daniel,

«Today people want the perfect, flawless product of incredible complexity at a rock-bottom price, and that's just not realistic. Companies have to strike a balance.»

The D750 is not an entry level camera. Even if it were, it will cost Nikon a lot more (not even counting brand reputation) to recall and fix the problem than it would if the camera had been sufficiently tested before launch. I don't believe the testing procedure needed to detect the problem would be too expensive since it could be automated.

This problem is not even new, so IMO there is no excuse for it to go unnoticed by Nikon (or other camera manufacturers).

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2015 at 18:20 UTC
In reply to:

DenWil: Just goes to prove that camera enthusiasts will go to any lengths to generate a problem, even shooting directly into the sun.

In over a quarter century not one job I have been hired to shoot featured that scenario. Then again I have not seen one image posted from a D750 that was rejected by an editor or art director for flare.

Ok, that's your experience then. I don't own the D750 but I take lots of landscape photos where the problem scenario is present: the sun is just above (not in) the FOV.

D750 owners have all the right to complain if the camera has a flaw, specially since this a clear sign of insufficient QC from Nikon.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2015 at 18:47 UTC
In reply to:

Jintana: If I want to buy an FX or Full frame DSLR. I will make sure it is made in Japan. I've worked in Japan for few years and fully understand their quality culture. That's why you won't see this oil spots on Canon albeit the 6D is so so and 5DM3 is overpriced. Just check where your D750 or D600 is made? I guess for Nikon, only their bosses are Japanese but those folks making and checking their cameras had been sub-contracted to the 3rd world somewhere. Good luck!

Since this is probably a design issue, it believe it really doesn't matter where the camera is made or assembled. All Nikons are designed in Japan and then made in Japan and Thailand or some other cheap labor country.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 14:13 UTC

40mp is nice, but the camera must use a powerful processor to create such a huge file reasonably fast.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 23:34 UTC as 85th comment | 3 replies
On Consumer SLR Camera Roundup (2014) article (123 comments in total)
In reply to:

armandino: Unless you have an impelling need of a more compact camera DSLR is still a more compelling tool:
1) Ergonomics
2) Optics (choice, value)
3) OVF
This comes not as a surprise to me and I am glad that most people recognizes it still. The mirrorless class needs to cut down on the hype and slash their prices especially on the optics in order to make a solid impact.

Agree. Even so-called "excellent" lcd's are almost useless in bright sunlit locations. Try adjusting focus using Liveview outdoors on a sunny day and you realize you need either an DSLR or an (expensive) mirrorless with a very good EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 30, 2014 at 23:36 UTC
On Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df article (389 comments in total)

Ridiculous!! A camera made for Donald Trump & Friends.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 10:46 UTC as 106th comment | 1 reply
On Sony G Series XQD format v.2 memory cards introduced article (43 comments in total)

Just what the World needed... another memory card format!!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2014 at 13:42 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies
On Pentax launches K-S1 Sweets Collection article (231 comments in total)

Wow!, so many colors. Pentax is the Ben & Jerry's of DSLR's :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2014 at 12:32 UTC as 45th comment | 2 replies
On High Flyer? DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ Drone Review article (180 comments in total)

"the first time I ever stuck my camera out the window, the lens flew off"
Let me guess... did it have a plastic mount? :)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 13:35 UTC as 72nd comment
In reply to:

Jonathan Mac: Anyone not capable of getting good shots from a film camera should not be calling themselves a photographer. Many people choose digital because it's easier and cheaper, and many choose digital because they're not competent enough to get good images if they don't have auto-everything and the chance to take 20 photos and choose the best. Most of these people will never improve. Some choose digital because it's the best tool for the photography they want to do, and they can produce good results from it. However, many have used digital and become bored with it's often flat, dull look and have now gone back to film.

I use both, but I enjoy film more. The Ferrania re-start is good news, especially once they get around to producing print films.

It's not only "easier", faster and cheaper to shoot digital, it's also more reliable. I stopped using film because more often then not, the lab would screw up. And not everyone has a photo lab nearby. For those that have their own lab, that's a different story of course. And the dynamic range of film is still not matched by digital as we know.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 13:22 UTC
Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »