Chillbert

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Software designer
Joined on Oct 17, 2009

Comments

Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Chillbert: What is the practical difference between the Pentax Pixel-Shift mode and multi-exposure averaging such as Sony's "Hand-Held Twighlight" mode, which takes multiple shots in quick succession and averages them in-camera? I have a good old Sony NEX 5n and have used the Hand-Held twighlight mode very successfully for night-time shots, for example. But in principle it could also be used for landscape photography to oversample the scene with similar time lag to Pentax's Pixel-Shift mode. I'm not trying to say Sony is superior, just trying to understand how these approaches compare. (Similarly, presumably one could take multiple exposures in burst mode or manually on a high-end camera like the Nikon 810 if it doesn't have that built in.)

EDIT: Note: I understand the technical difference, I'm trying to understand the functional differences.

One minor "pro" for the Sony Nex approach is that it can be used without a tripod/hand-held (albeit for non-moving subjects).

Extrapolating... If you did multiple exposures RAW on a Nikon D810, e.g., manually, presumably you'd be able to reduce some noise, but would not be able to enhance the resolution.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2016 at 17:23 UTC
In reply to:

Chillbert: What is the practical difference between the Pentax Pixel-Shift mode and multi-exposure averaging such as Sony's "Hand-Held Twighlight" mode, which takes multiple shots in quick succession and averages them in-camera? I have a good old Sony NEX 5n and have used the Hand-Held twighlight mode very successfully for night-time shots, for example. But in principle it could also be used for landscape photography to oversample the scene with similar time lag to Pentax's Pixel-Shift mode. I'm not trying to say Sony is superior, just trying to understand how these approaches compare. (Similarly, presumably one could take multiple exposures in burst mode or manually on a high-end camera like the Nikon 810 if it doesn't have that built in.)

EDIT: Note: I understand the technical difference, I'm trying to understand the functional differences.

Great answers - thank you both. In sum, the Pentax method enhances resolution and supports RAW; the Sony (Nex 5) method should be able to achieve as good if not better signal-to-noise ratio, but JPEG only and with resolution not enhanced and possibly slightly reduced (owing to blurring at the pixel boundaries). Makes sense

Link | Posted on May 9, 2016 at 17:15 UTC

What is the practical difference between the Pentax Pixel-Shift mode and multi-exposure averaging such as Sony's "Hand-Held Twighlight" mode, which takes multiple shots in quick succession and averages them in-camera? I have a good old Sony NEX 5n and have used the Hand-Held twighlight mode very successfully for night-time shots, for example. But in principle it could also be used for landscape photography to oversample the scene with similar time lag to Pentax's Pixel-Shift mode. I'm not trying to say Sony is superior, just trying to understand how these approaches compare. (Similarly, presumably one could take multiple exposures in burst mode or manually on a high-end camera like the Nikon 810 if it doesn't have that built in.)

EDIT: Note: I understand the technical difference, I'm trying to understand the functional differences.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2016 at 14:57 UTC as 111th comment | 6 replies
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2083 comments in total)
In reply to:

akjos: Im here just for the reviews lol...
I did have nex 5n in the past. Enjoyed it but sold for horrible focus performance
Id go to sony again but at this price point sony should really revamp the menus add touchscreen and mostly importantly IBIS.
THAT would be a camera i would have no problem buying.
As it stands... market is very competitive nowadays and there seem to be better options overall

Such as?

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 20:50 UTC
On article PIX 2015: Chasing light with Joe McNally (38 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: (continued)

The inability to specialize is not the main factor behind becoming a "generalist".

It's the passion for the medium and, in a mostly preponderant way, something that Joe, himself, made a point about in this presentation: The knowledge that, being light the crux of it all, it has no "genre".

When light is perceived as special, it can be "read", interpreted and registered as a reflection of a beautifully serene face, a raw majestic natural scene or an elegantly streamlined architectural subject.

As he so aptly says: It is all about light and its ascribable narrative virtues.

And, perhaps, it's also a reflection of a broad curiosity and willingness to try lots of different things.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 04:49 UTC
On article CP+ 2016: Things we found that had been cut in half (135 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chris Noble: Here's a funny joke: lenses and bodies don't work well when they're cut in half! Wait... they already repeated that joke... on every slide...

Although I think it has a typo. Should be *64* elements in 36 groups, no?

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2016 at 15:38 UTC
On article Video: A quick look at the Sony a6300 (217 comments in total)

Lack of touchscreen (specifically, touch to select focus point) is a frustrating gap. Why Sony?

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 01:06 UTC as 47th comment
On article Field Test: Brad Puet and the Fujifilm X-T10 (120 comments in total)

Great video post! Really enjoyed it and learned a lot.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2015 at 05:34 UTC as 25th comment
On article Behind the Shot: Prince of the Night (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

SKPhoto12: This is not photography. It is design, which any good PS commercial designer could do. You don't have to go there, just buy a stock image and work on it. Pure nonsense, if you ask me. and people pay to go take pictures with this guy! Might as well just take a good PS course and save a lot of money, because his workshops are not cheap.
The "Emperors new cloths" never fails to impress the naive!

Yeah it really is photography. If you don't like it, do a better one - that's how art works: the only entirely credible critic is the artist who does surpassing work.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2015 at 03:58 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

FuhTeng: I've had my a6000 (my avatar looks just like my camera!) for a year and a half and it's been terrific. First lens (outside of the two kit zooms) was the 35 mm f1.8 SS and it its been great for family, travel, and baby pictures. I added the 50 mm f1.8 SS along with some fun old MF Canon lenses and its been great. Combined with my RX100M3 there's not much they can't do! I wanted the small size and I got it.

Except for wildlife shots (or sports, but I haven't shot sports yet). I rented a D7200 and the new 200-500 and I was completely smitten. I now own a D7100 and Tamron 150-600 (thanks honey!) and I'm very happy and fortunate that I have both.

I can't imagine mounting the 150-600 on the a6000 and the OVF has been wonderful. But at the tracking abilities of the a6000 (and the rare times I can use eye-AF with a subject who's not crawling constantly) have been perfect for catching my son as he explores the world and shots of the rest of my family.

I'm glad we have both!

I'm sorry, but a post this reasonable is unacceptable in this forum.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 03:38 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Cameras: I still think you get more bang for the buck with a DSLR, especially at the low price end of the range. And I hate the word "mirrorless": defining something by a feature it lacks. Surely there's a better term for describing such cameras.

Although I'm a mirrorless user, I would agree that a DSLR is a better all-rounder today, per dollar; i.e., wide range of affordable "native" lenses with great AF and low-light performance. But the price is as discussed in the article: more weight/size, modal mirror behaviors, etc. But the trend is clearly towards mirrorless.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 03:29 UTC
On article Primer: Why would I buy a mirrorless camera? (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Charlie Jin: Combined with Lenses and adaptors the mirrorless cameras have only very negligible advantage sacrificing other important factors. It is like comparing the two gun systems - one with 1 meter 30 centimetre long (DSLR) and another with 1 meter 25 centimetre long (ILC). After attaching accessaries on them, you just can't distinguish on the basis of original size and weight alone. If you really need the small and light, just carry a hand gun.

For this reason, I think that mirrorless is only a fad created by Sony and DPReview combined, and will disappear in the future - unless they come up with much smaller and lighter lenses - uhh -- "Glassless lens", that is ....

As 57even said, why would you even think of introducing a mirror into a modern digital camera? It seems much more likely that as EVFs will get more and more refined, the mirror gets more and more obsolete.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 03:22 UTC
In reply to:

Randy Veeman: Panasonic continues to be the most innovative and affordable ILC company.
4K ILCs under $1000, DFD that works better than most OSPDAF, 4K stills and now this.
While other companies are selling $3300 camera bodies and abandoning APSC, Panasonic is innovating in ways the masses can afford.

This is a really interesting point. The other vendors are getting really expensive and increasingly out of reach of the masses - e.g., Sony FE, Fuji, etc. I'm a big Sony fan but I am no longer their target customer as they go to the high end. Fuji as a system is also pretty expensive. And yet I really want at least APS-C in terms of light capture, DoF, etc.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2015 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

yahoo2u: ....."All three lenses will feature a Sony E-mount for use with full-frame Sony cameras sans an adapter."
.
It is "without an adapter"
.
If you want to throw in french expressions while writing english go to france.

"sans" is such a cliché.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2015 at 22:23 UTC
On article Recipe for 6S: iPhone 6S Real-world Sample Gallery (122 comments in total)

Some of the commenters here need to chill a little and get some perspective.

Writing as an "enthusiast" photographer... I recently upgraded from an iPhone 5 to 6S, and the jump in picture quality is significant. For a mundane but practical example, I frequently capture whiteboard discussions at work on my camera, so I can review or write up the content. The 6S shots are much sharper and more reliably in focus, too. It's not art photography, but it's extremely useful. I'm sure I'll take some nice outdoor shots with my phone, too.

Indoor, well, that's why I coughed up for a Sony NEX 5n a while back and a couple of nice lenses. And by the way, I'm in no hurry to upgrade that either. It's really a fine camera for what I need.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2015 at 03:43 UTC as 40th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Gazeomon: Use the NX500 since April as a travel camera and street shooter. Fantastic when paired with decent lenses like the 30mm f/2. On par or better with the best APSC cameras on the market. I also shoot Pentax and Nikon.

@FodgeandDurn... I'm in the market for mirrorless + great primes... I never had an SLR, but am a committed amateur photographer, and I get a ton of value out of a much smaller and lighter setup than an SLR - in my case a Sony NEX + 2-3 lenses on a typical trip.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2015 at 17:59 UTC
On article Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras (455 comments in total)

Ironically I just bought a new Sony lens (35/1.8) for my trusty NEX 5N on the same day as this announcement. I have been assuming that Sony was bound to produce a great next-generation "back" such as the alleged a7000... The article doesn't go so far as to say they will stop innovating in the APS-C line, but it does give me pause. Maybe I'll switch to Fuji after all, for the long haul.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 11:37 UTC as 35th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Dimitris Servis: Hydrophobic

No, hydrophilic, I think. Hydrophobic would make water bead, whereas this makes it spread thin.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 17:00 UTC
On article Apple reveals Photos beta for developers (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Squire: Just shows how much Apple has changed in the last 10 years.

Their business was built on niche markets, particularly media, creative and agencies. The creative users propped up their core Mac business, when everyone else was using Windows.

Today, their market is primarily kids downloading apps.

Right, including everyone on this thread, obviously

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2015 at 15:06 UTC
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »