Joesiv

Joesiv

Lives in Canada Cloverdale, BC, Canada, Canada
Works as a Software Quality
Has a website at www.joesiv.com
Joined on Aug 11, 2006

Comments

Total: 160, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Average User: So the one question that arises for me. I have the sigma dx f1.8 18-35. It is a remarkable lens...but on my full frame d 750, it has dark corners from 18-24 mm. However, from 24 to 35 it has full coverage of the ff sensor. So at a much lower price...why not buy that lens for ff?

Average User, I was considering the same thing (using the 18-35mm instead), but judging from these results:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1279757/1

You're wrong, severe vignetting even at 31mm. With 1.2x crop, yeah, it's reasonable at 24mm, but not without.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 15:52 UTC
In reply to:

Joesiv: Not bad... I wonder about the AF though, perhaps it's the 5DS, but the portraits all seem to have missed the eye slightly and focused instead on the mouth, which has decent detail though.

Tempting.... I'll wait for more samples. I'd like to see some more wide open with more in focus (not so close to your subjects).

And on a D810 if possible, it'd give me a better sense of color, I'm so used to Nikon's colors these colors seem way overcooked and warm. Not sure if it's exacerbated by the lens or not.

I was only looking at the 100% files :)

But yeah, no worries. I'm not used to looking at 50MP files either, could have been subject movement and compression leading to softness.

I think I've decided the lens could be a very valuable tool in my bag, I've never owned a sigma though, I just hope the AF will be reliable, I'd like to not have to fidget with all the configurations that lens' dock provides.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2015 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

Joesiv: Not bad... I wonder about the AF though, perhaps it's the 5DS, but the portraits all seem to have missed the eye slightly and focused instead on the mouth, which has decent detail though.

Tempting.... I'll wait for more samples. I'd like to see some more wide open with more in focus (not so close to your subjects).

And on a D810 if possible, it'd give me a better sense of color, I'm so used to Nikon's colors these colors seem way overcooked and warm. Not sure if it's exacerbated by the lens or not.

perhaps it's jpg compression that I'm not used to seeing. but specifically the first portrait at 24mm, the eyes don't show much detail at first glance. But you can see a vein so maybe it's in focus, but the details are just mushy due to compression.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 20:03 UTC

Not bad... I wonder about the AF though, perhaps it's the 5DS, but the portraits all seem to have missed the eye slightly and focused instead on the mouth, which has decent detail though.

Tempting.... I'll wait for more samples. I'd like to see some more wide open with more in focus (not so close to your subjects).

And on a D810 if possible, it'd give me a better sense of color, I'm so used to Nikon's colors these colors seem way overcooked and warm. Not sure if it's exacerbated by the lens or not.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 14:34 UTC as 54th comment | 4 replies
On 1C3A5532 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Griffin: Can't work out what's happened here. Eyelashes in focus. Eyebrows drift out of focus on left and right. Hair as top of forehead way out of focus BUT hair at rear of head in focus.

The same reason the bokeh balls are "in focus", they're not in focus, but it's the way detail can appear when in the way of a point light. Zoom in, you'll see patterns around the hair, I believe this is the airy disk effect.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 20:45 UTC
On photo in sample gallery (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Griffin: Can't work out what's happened here. Eyelashes in focus. Eyebrows drift out of focus on left and right. Hair as top of forehead way out of focus BUT hair at rear of head in focus.

The same reason the bokeh balls are "in focus", they're not in focus, but it's the way detail can appear when in the way of a point light. Zoom in, you'll see patterns around the hair, I believe this is the airy disk effect.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 20:45 UTC
On 1C3A5532 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Griffin: Can't work out what's happened here. Eyelashes in focus. Eyebrows drift out of focus on left and right. Hair as top of forehead way out of focus BUT hair at rear of head in focus.

I think the bokeh balls are playing games with your mind. They aren't "in focus", but they have a sharp appearance. You can see the airy disks actually if you view the origional.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 15:13 UTC
On photo in sample gallery (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Griffin: Can't work out what's happened here. Eyelashes in focus. Eyebrows drift out of focus on left and right. Hair as top of forehead way out of focus BUT hair at rear of head in focus.

I think the bokeh balls are playing games with your mind. They aren't "in focus", but they have a sharp appearance. You can see the airy disks actually if you view the origional.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 15:13 UTC
In reply to:

Joesiv: Doesn't the moon rotate around the earth? seems like a strange heading for the story. Perhaps, "p900 shows the moon moving across the sky..." Would be more accurate, and probably less exciting (to match the video)

I guess I was wrong :D lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2015 at 17:42 UTC

Doesn't the moon rotate around the earth? seems like a strange heading for the story. Perhaps, "p900 shows the moon moving across the sky..." Would be more accurate, and probably less exciting (to match the video)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2015 at 12:18 UTC as 24th comment | 6 replies

I dig it... Of course I would have liked miracles, and have it smaller and lighter, but I'm in for anything F2 or faster. If they produce a 50-105 f2 or something like that, I think I'd have a dream setup. Leave the 1.4 glass for really special cases.

I'd like to know the price though.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 15:09 UTC as 68th comment
In reply to:

Franz Weber: Why did they use a 400mm lens with 2x teleconverter instead of a 800mm lens in first place?

or weight, that's a big hike to get up there

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2015 at 15:49 UTC
In reply to:

GaryJP: They might be assuring us they are going to keep Lightroom as a standalone product, but it is a nightmare to get through their site without being signed up to a Creative Cloud you don't want. They are just pushing the standalone right to the periphery.

Liars. As we always knew.

I was logged in, and was able to find the stand alone. Though, it WAS a bit of a journey. I had to NOT go to the lightroom area of the website as that's mated to the creative cloud area (look at the URL). I had to go to www.adobe.com, which still kept me logged in, then find it under photoshop family products, which it was found.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 14:38 UTC
On Fujifilm X100T Review preview (671 comments in total)
In reply to:

McQuestion: One of the stats that I find misleading is the "maximum" electronic shutter speed, listed at 1/32,000 sec. That is the maximum exposure rate per scanned line of pixels. However, the actual scan rate per frame is more like 1/10 sec. This hinders any functionality that people usually associate with high shutter speed, freezing action.

I tried this with the XT1, which boasts an even faster electronic shutter speed, any motion registers as a slur across the sensor.

I do find it strange that dpreview doesn't delve into this issue on cameras that have electronic shutters. It's going to be more and more of an issue, and cameras that have "global shutters" will not have the issue, so it'd be good to get the readership on board with the benefits of the global shutter.

I'd love to see examples of motion when using the global shutter, not just panning, but perhaps a subject moving across the frame, to see how distorted it is. A more reproducible test could be a pendulum panning across the frame (portrait), you could even calculate how long the scan is.

The Em5-II as well could have had this test done for it's fancy high res mode, I'd love to see how long the scans are, and the time between scans, to see where future cameras could improve.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 25, 2015 at 16:28 UTC

If you want drama in your photos, it's often best to avoid "sunny" for photography, but instead wait for the bad weather to be approaching, but even better, wait for the transition from bad weather to good, then you get the dramatic sky's and colors!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 15:20 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

HSway: The Tamron might have less complex field curvature. It has better CA control, the scene tests this nicely. Differences here and there aside, the Tamron is equal player and gets you lens even bulkier than not exactly small Nikkor and narrower angle for a much better price. And gives you VC which may be that decisive feature for some. In other words Tamron again comes with an excellent option.

Rishi, it's a zoom, the consumer wants both ends of the zoom to perform, if it's only optimized for the wide, then that's a negative to the lens.

CA, yes, it could probably be removed with the Raw editor, though this that is sometimes over stated, it also depends on the content of the image, as lightroom from my experience does a desaturation of those colors on edge lines, in some cases reducing saturation of similar colors of legit colors. It's best to not have to do the correction (obviously).

But to be fair to the nikon, point lights on the Tamron seem to have diamond shapes on the edges of the frame @ 2.8, minor I suppose, is that astigmatism? For example, look at the rivets on the wood stripped roof on the bottom right. Nikon they're round, Tamron they're diamonds @2.8, but circular at 5.6.

I'm such a pixel peeper lol.

Strong performance from both len's though @ 36mp

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 16:17 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7S Review preview (488 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joesiv: I think the dynamic range test needs to have a similarily pulled back exposure test to be anything close to conclusive.

Over expose by 3 stops, and see what they look like. Perhaps the A7S would be better than the rest, thus meeting Sony's claims, or perhaps it wouldn't.

In the past Dpreview did the wedge test, and showed raw pulling and pushing, as the dynamic range representation. This test, would be if they only extended the shadow range, somewhat half baked.

I agree, I love the 8MP compare option, if I recall correctly I made the suggestion a long while back when dpreview switched over to this new comparison tool. :) I'm sure I wasn't the first to suggest it though. I think it was worth the effort you guys have put in!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 04:50 UTC
In reply to:

HSway: The Tamron might have less complex field curvature. It has better CA control, the scene tests this nicely. Differences here and there aside, the Tamron is equal player and gets you lens even bulkier than not exactly small Nikkor and narrower angle for a much better price. And gives you VC which may be that decisive feature for some. In other words Tamron again comes with an excellent option.

Rishi, at the longer settings the nikon really has bad CA, at 24mm for example, and it's seemingly equally bad at 5.6 as it is at 2.8. Look at the buildings at the lower rightish.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2015 at 04:43 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7S Review preview (488 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joesiv: I think the dynamic range test needs to have a similarily pulled back exposure test to be anything close to conclusive.

Over expose by 3 stops, and see what they look like. Perhaps the A7S would be better than the rest, thus meeting Sony's claims, or perhaps it wouldn't.

In the past Dpreview did the wedge test, and showed raw pulling and pushing, as the dynamic range representation. This test, would be if they only extended the shadow range, somewhat half baked.

Thanks guys, I wasn't aware that you were looking at the actual raw data while setting up the exposures, knowing how many absolute values are in 14bit, you would know how close you are to the "ETTR", and you're right middle grey becomes in-consequential.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 3, 2015 at 05:06 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7S Review preview (488 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joesiv: I think the dynamic range test needs to have a similarily pulled back exposure test to be anything close to conclusive.

Over expose by 3 stops, and see what they look like. Perhaps the A7S would be better than the rest, thus meeting Sony's claims, or perhaps it wouldn't.

In the past Dpreview did the wedge test, and showed raw pulling and pushing, as the dynamic range representation. This test, would be if they only extended the shadow range, somewhat half baked.

I don't really care so much about JPG's. But where that breaking point is, in RAW is what I'm interested in. And not only that, what it looks like. I found the shadow pushing to be quite interesting, comparing what it looks like between cameras (thanks). I figured it would also be interesting to see what the highlight retention looked like.

You say you exposed to the right, what did you base that exposure on? Hopefully not the on-camera histogram, because that is typically based off the internal JPG processing. Unless you take the RAW file into an editor, and pull back to see where the actual breaking point (highlight leeway), "exposing to the right" could potentially be limiting your dynamic range potential.

I find that my cameras typically will have another 1.5 stops of highlight potential, with full color retention, beyond what my in-camera histogram shows me (I can't wait to try out the D750's raw histogram, soon).

Perhaps, we would find nothing in the test, but maybe not.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2015 at 21:30 UTC
Total: 160, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »