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: 148, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
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 (656 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 (481 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 (481 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 (481 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
On Sony Alpha 7S Review preview (481 comments in total)

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.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2015 at 20:37 UTC as 92nd comment | 10 replies
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roman Korcek: It is really a pity that Olympus did not implement image stabilization with the 40 MPx mode. It should be quite easy from an algorithmic point of view.

Roman, sure it's still a 16MP sensor, but because of the shifting of half pixels to add detail, you still need to have sub (16MP) pixel detail. And, I think it's s a stretch to say that you get 16MP worth of details reliability at 1 second shutter, let alone 40MP.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 18:34 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: The high resolution mode appears to eliminate most moire, aliasing, and noise. It is too bad that they don't allow it to go above ISO 1600. This could be an outstanding feature for Astro Photography if the shutter duration was longer and the ISO could go higher.

If I understand it correctly, the shutter speed you pick, is used for each of the 8 shots, so really, your shutter speed is 8x's as long as selected (likely more since there will be minor gaps between exposures). How long would you want to go? I'm just seeing if we're in the ballpark.

I take it you'd have a tracking rig (whatever they're called), as you'll get some funky start trails otherwise.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 17:10 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThePhilips: Thinking about the suggested 4 shot mode.

I wonder what once can accomplish with 2 shot mode. In the RG/GB layout, shift by one horizontally or vertically would mean combining pixels on the same lane: R+G (yellow) and G+B (cyan). Shift by one diagonally: R+B (purple) and G+G. In other words, in addition to the original color of the pixel, bit of another color gets mixed in.

Another idea is to shift by two pixels to double the information in the (inherently noisy) blue channel.

Or no shifting, and just merging a short electronic exposure and long (the set exposure time), and merge for HDR, or just better highlight retention.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 17:08 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

PicOne: "Hi Res mode is limited to a maximum of ISO 1600 and a minimum aperture of F8 because beyond these points, the image becoming too blurred for the extra resolution to be particularly beneficial."

Huh? Is this a reference to diffraction and noise effects? If there's a reason for shooting in regular 16mp mode at over 1600 ISO or eg. f11, then not seeing why this reason goes away in hi res mode? For noise.. how would a 40mp downsampled shot (back to 16mp) compare?

If you're really concerned about noise, you should just drop the ISO and use a REALLY long shutter, similar to the time of the multi-shot, you'll actually get better results since motion will be blurred naturally.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 17:06 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roman Korcek: It is really a pity that Olympus did not implement image stabilization with the 40 MPx mode. It should be quite easy from an algorithmic point of view.

Sure they "could", but realize that image stabalization isn't a tripod, there is still potential for shifting. And with 40MP, every shift would be scrutinized (you'd have much more than 1 pixel shifts if not on a tripod), the results would for sure disappoint.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 17:05 UTC
In reply to:

ecm: I still wish there could be some older cameras added as comparison points - it would make the samples so much more relevant and useful if I had in hand any of the cameras in the list....

I would love to see some significant cameras in the past, such as the D700/5DmkII, it would help keep the current cameras performance in perspective.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 23, 2014 at 05:54 UTC

More cameras the better!

I kind of wish there was some legacy cameras in there just for a point of reference. It helps us keep things in perspective.

Perhaps significant legacy cameras like the D700/5DmkII :)

Whoops didn't see the post down below about this.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 23, 2014 at 05:52 UTC as 21st comment
On BPG image format aims to replace JPEGs article (205 comments in total)

The sad thing is, if you are a jpg shooter, and your camera manufacturer can't even take the time to give you a decent jpg option, what's the likelihood that they will adopt something like this?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 14:39 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

Shiranai: Whats the difference between using this or just using a normal LED video light from say Yongnuo with 291 more LEDs and at the same time 12 times cheaper?
And don't tell me the only difference is, that it "flashes" instead of being permanently on.

Sorry, but it "flashes". That's the key difference, how can you tell us not to tell you that?

It's all about "duration", how long the flash is on. A continuous light us always on, so the "duration" is how long your shutter speed is, probably maxing out at 1/8000th of a second. You will get motion blur with very fast objects.

A hot shoe flash has quicker durations if you reduce it's power setting (as flash duration depends on flash power, or vise versa, since as the text indicates, flashes get more "power" by making the duration longer. At low power you may get 1/40,000th duration, which is a huge amount better than a continuous light.

However, this one promises 1/2,000,000 which is even better.

So to answer your question, the difference is that it flashes, faster.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 16:00 UTC
On Canon PowerShot G7 X First Impressions Review preview (947 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sviz: It looks like the range and speed of this lens comes at a price. Optical quality not in the same league as RX100M3.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-g7x/canon-g7xGALLERY.HTM

Agreed, some of the wide shots look horrible with fringing, almost looks like lens decentering.

What is more apparent to me is the horrible JPG processing. The G series usually have RAW though, so that'll be what I'll be waiting to see.

Also to note, even with a crummy quality of the lens, this camera will still shine at night, with it's big sensor and bright lens, the soft images won't matter too much, at least the images will come out better than other compacts out there.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 19, 2014 at 15:21 UTC
On Nikon D750 First-impressions review preview (1418 comments in total)
In reply to:

astigmate: As a D700 owner, I feel...hum kinda betrayed by Nikon. So, this entry level, crippled camera is supposed to be the D700 successor ?! feel like an FF D5300 !! I'm tired of waiting for them. I'll keep my D700 until it dies and will look into fuji or sony stuff now on.

Oh, btw, the Sony Full-Frame A7 (24mpx also) cost HALF the price asked for the D750 and it has 1/8000s shutter, focus peaking, nice EVF etc

Thinking more about it, and looking at some of my bright sunlight photos, I could probably get by with 1/4000th, given the lower base ISO settings.... *tempting*

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2014 at 05:33 UTC
Total: 148, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »