kb2zuz

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Digital Imaging Techician
Joined on Jun 6, 2006
About me:

Specializing in Fine Art reproduction, color management, retouching, printing, and
digital asset management.

Other jobs I've held in past lives, in no particular order:

Studio and Location Shoot Photo Assistant
Digital Tech
Equipment Rental
Photographer
Photo Lab Technician (Dip & Dunk Film processing)
Durst Lambda and wide format inkjet operator
Retoucher
Design/Layout
Educator
Inkjet Printing R&D

Comments

Total: 71, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

jonny1976: then pentax will come out with a 100 million camera 645z2 that will cost 8000 euro.

Due to the change in the masking on the sensor, they get a lot more noise (those masked pixels are used to reduce noise). As a result the pentax as a much higher noise floor, and the darkest couple stops is just noise and not useable information. The article states that DXO has not tested it, but having talked to people who've used it, it does not have the same useable dynamic range as the Hasselblad or Phase cameras.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Why is this still not implemented by default into every single camera by now? I mean seriously? I can get a FREE Android or iOS device that has FAR MORE functionality than a dSLR that costs hundreds or thousands... Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, 3G, 4G, LTE, full functioning software, apps galore, etc. etc. Why are cameras still hobbled ???

<rant mode off />

The comments about freezing were more the comparisons to phones having "apps galore." Phase and Hasselblad does have Wifi in some cameras. But they are not perfect implementations and do sometimes need the connections reset.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 18:29 UTC
In reply to:

gonzalu: Why is this still not implemented by default into every single camera by now? I mean seriously? I can get a FREE Android or iOS device that has FAR MORE functionality than a dSLR that costs hundreds or thousands... Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, 3G, 4G, LTE, full functioning software, apps galore, etc. etc. Why are cameras still hobbled ???

<rant mode off />

Because some photography jobs/gigs actually will not let you bring a radio transmitter into the shoot.

Because adding wifi makes the camera significantly more expensive not due to the electronics but because of the regulatory hoops a company has to jump through to get a radio transmitting device approved for every country they want to sell it in.

Because the same reason car electronic systems are always years behind smart phones... it's ok if your phone freezes up for 5 seconds, it's not cool if your car does. Many photographers (including myself) would be more upset if their camera froze up as often as their Android or iOS phone. So features are limited and over engineered for maximum uptime.

Because in the end most people with wifi enabled cameras never use the feature, and those that do only play with it little here or there.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 22:20 UTC

Could you guys do a shootout/comparison between this and the CamRanger?

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 22:15 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply
On article DJI Phantom 3 Standard photography drone unveiled (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

pdussart: The marketing of this drone is a shame.

The acquisition cost is 30% higher in Europe than in the US. Same product. This is a DJI decision. A cost of ownership of more than 1200+ USD instead of 799 in the USD.

A rip-off.

Let's wait for a Chinese copy

US does not have VAT. Individual states (and some cities) can have sales tax, but that is not reflected in the MSRP as the rate varies.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 19:02 UTC
On article DJI Phantom 3 Standard photography drone unveiled (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sarge_: I was so hoping this would be a unit with ability to control better cameras, like the Sony RX100 units. As an architectural photographer I've been waiting for an affordable way to get a decent camera in the air, but this is still no improvement on a GoPro rig, or their other proprietary Vision cameras.

If you're reading, Phantom, I need a larger sensor for low light (dusk use) and the ability to zoom between 24mm-70mm equivalent. The camera technology and the flight tech are all there, we just need a real-time interface and controller.

I would think Phantom could sell a lot of these in the $1,500 range. Ideally they'd be software upgradable so you could fit better cameras as they become available.

I won't invest in a drone, which should work for many years, that comes with a camera that is out of date in a year or so, and which doesn't measure up to professional standards on any level.

This is not the drone you're looking for. The Inspire is a much more professional drone in terms of controls. But if you want something where you can use your own camera, you're looking for the DJI Spreading Wings line... modular design and customizability do not come cheap.

There are other drones out there by other companies and designs you can make yourself that will accept different cameras.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2015 at 18:58 UTC
On article Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path (1586 comments in total)
In reply to:

VikingPhotographer: Please stop using "Full frame" it do not give any meaning ! There are larger sensors than "Full frame"/24x36, just call it 24x36 :) Thank you very much !
If anything "new" to be made in photographic terms it´s about Lenses, it do not give any good meaning anymore to only use focal length in millimeter, far better would be angle degrees :) Then it is much easier to compare Lenses for different formats :)
Happy New Year :D

I prefer the term "135 format" as it's closer in logic and nomenclature to "APS-C format"

I have had some issues with the term full frame when I'm trying to describe a "full frame" 645 sensor vs a slightly smaller crop when comparing 40MP vs 80MP sensors.

However the bigger problem with the term "full-frame" is it implies it's an end-state... full. That's not the case. Bigger isn't always better and even if it was there's medium format and large format.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2015 at 21:31 UTC
On article BPG image format aims to replace JPEGs (204 comments in total)
In reply to:

kb2zuz: Why is someone making yet another standard, we already have JPEG2000 which can save 16-bit files and no one uses outside of server applications where you want tiling and JP2 is better than a pyramidal tiff. We already have WebP which seems very similar to this standard and already works with at least some web browsers has and no one uses it.

The JPEG2000 standard isn't. There is fear that some of the libraries that leverage JP2 might have submarine patents... or at least that's how members of the JPEG2000 committee described it to me.

Edit also the patent argument is Something that has been said for 15 years... that argument may be moot at this point if the concerned patents predated it by a couple years.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2014 at 00:36 UTC
On article BPG image format aims to replace JPEGs (204 comments in total)

Why is someone making yet another standard, we already have JPEG2000 which can save 16-bit files and no one uses outside of server applications where you want tiling and JP2 is better than a pyramidal tiff. We already have WebP which seems very similar to this standard and already works with at least some web browsers has and no one uses it.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 22:08 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
On article Pentax 645Z added to studio comparison database (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

Flashback: Please, please, please put this sumptuous sensor into a compact mirror-less body.

I really don't care how much it costs!

Depends on the lens and the design. A longer focal length lens will not be as much a problem, and wider angle lenses won't have as much issue if they use a retrofocal design. However a non-retrofocal ultra wide angle may have some issues (some of which can be corrected for light light fall of and color shift) but softness may well be an issue (though some people will be find with that).

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 17:13 UTC
On article Pentax 645Z added to studio comparison database (141 comments in total)
In reply to:

Flashback: Please, please, please put this sumptuous sensor into a compact mirror-less body.

I really don't care how much it costs!

As and you shall receive: http://www.digitaltransitions.com/page/phase-one-a-series

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 18:05 UTC
In reply to:

nerd2: Color filter in digital era? We still need polarizing filter because the sensor does not record polarized information of rays but we can simply change WB (or apply a color filter) to get the same effect.

Just a Photographer, read the description. It's a Polarizer and a Warm-Up filter in one: A spokesman for Lee told DP Review that the warm-up element of the Landscape Polariser is the equivalent to adding an 81A warm-up filter. They were asking about COLOR filters, not ND.

Yes ND and polarizers are still useful filters, but that's not the question being asked here.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2014 at 16:11 UTC
In reply to:

ScottRH: The D810 looks like the body D700 users may go for since the FPS is up. It should not take long to see if all of the D800/E issues are fixed.
But then again, a D710? !

I'd more expect a D900 in a year or two… a baby D4 like the D700 was a baby D3.

The reality is that only a handful of people will buy a $3,000 camera every 3 years. Which is why Nikon and canon flip-flopped between markets. The 5D Mk II was aimed more a studio and landscape photographers while the D700 was a sports/wildlife photographer's dream. This generation the 5D Mk III is a sports/wildlife camera and the D800 is more suited for studio/landscape. The D810 just says Nikon isn't ready yet to make a completely new camera, but they can make some improvements to the D810 that might satisfy some of those who are now waiting for a replacement of their 5 year old D700 (and can't drop $6,500 on a D4s)

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 15:30 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1940 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: Nice camera. However, I must say the latest releases of digital cameras are getting awfully expensive. Even for an admittedly pricey hobby, the cameras and lenses released within the last couple of years really are pushing the boundaries of "affordability" for the amateur or hobbyist.

Cliff, I disagree with ruggedness as being the standard indicator of what is "professional." By that definition A $600 Pentax K-50 is more professional than the Hasselblads we use in the studio here. Not every photographer has the same needs.

I find that the controls tend to be more consistently what a seasoned professional shooter will point to when comparing a camera they feel is "less professional." Many cases ruggedness is needed by a professional and the camera that is more rugged will feel more professional. Obviously their are several factors in the decision and ruggedness can be one for certain people, but it's hardly a consistent one.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 16:20 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1940 comments in total)
In reply to:

Falko: While Nikon's traditional fan base may not be bothered by the lack of wireless, 4k video, 1080p at high frame rates, focus peaking or an articulated touch-screen, I think it makes the D810 look old fashioned before it's even out the gates.

And if it looks dated now, how's it going to look in two or more years during the typical lifespan of this product? Remember this is not a cheap camera and even now you can buy a Sony A7r with the same sensor size and resolution, Wifi, focus peaking and a tilting screen for two thirds the price...

Different cameras for different users. For many people the A7r is a much better camera. For me my D800 is a better camera.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 16:36 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1940 comments in total)
In reply to:

ipecaca: Wich of these improvements couldn't be implemented in a firmware update?

Physically rebalancing the mirror, physically removing the optical low pass filter, and upgrading the processing chip are physical changes. The processor upgrade definitely is needed for the higher FPS. It also allows for more complex noise reduction for higher ISO without slowing down the FPS.

Some features like zebra striping in the video and the highlight priority metering probably could have been able to be implemented in firmware, but there is a chance that they needed the speed or features in the new processor to implement them (or these features might be designed into the processor so it makes it easier to do than it would with a firmware update). These probably could have been done in firmware.

sRAW probably needs the faster speed to crunch the numbers quickly without slowing down the FPS. Maybe the could have implemented it via a firmware update, but I'm betting there would have been compromises if they did. But I can't say for certain.… I'd say 50/50 chance.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 16:35 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (1940 comments in total)
In reply to:

lensberg: Looks like an incremental augmentation of the D800 / 800E ... Whether its worth it or not is anybody's guess... At least it seems like a better thought out product line implementation compared to the mockery of the D610 ...

And coming to think about it... why is there no 4K video capability...?! May not be used all the time, but considering the price point, it would be nice to be somewhat future-proofed in the video specs department...

Why can't Nikon introduce a new model with a brand new sensor altogether...? Or have Sony not licensed one out to them as yet...? I'll bet when the 5D Mark IV is out, it will incorporate a new sensor, image processor, AF module and 99.99% sure it will have 4K video under its belt...

Yes, it's an incremental change. You're crazy to think that Nikon is aiming for D800 and D800E users to sell their cameras and replace them with this. There will be a few, but the target are the people who've been holding out on the D800 because the fps was too slow or they wanted a few more video features (because Canon has the Magic Lantern hack), or maybe they were holding on to their Medium format digital a little longer. This will not sell as well as the D800 did initially, but it will allow Nikon to keep selling the camera and stay relevant until the next generation is set.

Link | Posted on Jun 26, 2014 at 16:25 UTC
Total: 71, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »