kb2zuz

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: 58, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Preview:canon-eos-70d (1333 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jambsi: Just to prove we're paying attention -

In the Low light image quality section the 2 pictures of the girl in the black dress have all the same values except ISO6400 vs ISO25,600? Huh?

The 25,600 was shot at 1/100th of a second according to the Exif... looks like it's just a typo in the caption.

Posted on Aug 15, 2013 at 21:21 UTC
On First Impressions: Metabones Speed Booster article (357 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: hmmm... a $60 tele-converter on backwards and selling for $600.
interesting!

Worth pointing out Metabones makes 2 Canon lens to NEX adaptors: the Smart Adaptor that has no optic but just has the electronics to allow the NEX body to control the aperture, provide power to the IS system, and allow autofocus (though very slow)... that with no optic costs $400.

This adaptor does all that and then adds the anti-teleconverter optics (which is not the same as putting a teleconvert on backwards). Also where are you getting teleconverters for $60? Canons are $450 and even the cheap Kenko's are $150.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2013 at 14:02 UTC

My first concern would be that it might lead to color reproduction problems. Foveon has poor color reproduction with certain colors as it makes a hard delineation between where red stops and where green starts and where green stops and where blue starts. The human eye over-laps these colors so there's some green in many reds and some blue in many greens, bayer filters mimic this overlap and have fewer problems with color reproductions. Without seeing specifics I can't say for certain that this technology will have problems, but I have a feeling that it is quite a possible concern.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2013 at 18:14 UTC as 37th comment | 4 replies
On Adobe releases Lightroom 4.3 and Adobe Camera Raw 7.3 article (69 comments in total)
In reply to:

SigmaChrome: I find it truly amazing that Adobe still insists on NOT supporting current Foveon technology. Sigma maintains that it has made the all necessary information available - Adobe (for reasons best know to themselves) simply refuses to take it on board. Why? There is a tremendous rise in the number of people taking up the use of Sigma cameras like the DP2M and DP1M - and there would probably be a higher uptake of SD1M users if Adobe took up the challenge. What's stopping them?

It isn't just Foveon. Hasselblad multi-shot uninterpolated images are completely not supported.

They view RAW processing as only applying to demosaicing bayer CFA images. They need to make the system more robust to handle Fuji's more complex layouts (they currently accept the files but handle them poorly) and Foveon and Hasselblad's uninterpolated layouts.

Sigma could also improve things by allowing the camera to shoot uncompressed 16bit TIFF files or DNGs.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2012 at 18:01 UTC
In reply to:

NeilJones: And who would actually shoot video at 15fps?

1) Someone who was actually shooting for stills... at 4K that's 8.2 megapixels at 15 frames per second
2) Someone who's shooting video but plans on speeding it up anyway
3) Someone who plans on using something like twixtor to interpolate the frames
4) Security camera style usage
5) Someone who wants to play around with 4K but doesn't want to shell out for a much more expensive camera and set up.
Edit: keep in mind you can shoot 2.7K (a bit over 4MP images) at 30fps, or normal 1080p HD (over 2MP) even faster.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2012 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

wkay: is dpreview ever going to stop its obsession on toys and social networking? serious photography obviously does not fit into their business model.

I know several people who are making money with GoPros and similar cameras. Not their primary source of income, but offering time laps and "behind the scenes" videos of their main shoots has brought them a little extra cash.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2012 at 20:45 UTC
In reply to:

magneto shot: my heart stopped at "4k camera" but then i realized...whats the point of a 4k video that have no shallow DOF. next...

Smaller sensors do not mean they cannot have shallow DOF, you just need wider apertures, which can be made. You could make a f/0.75 lens which would make very shallow DOF (Maybe too shallow). Which is going to be more expensive. If you're dealing with shallow DOF, you want to have a lens that allows for a follow focus device and most of those lenses are expensive anyway because they're small market. I could see it happening. I think most people would be happy with f/1.4 lenses because any more shallow and AF will jump around too much and be distracting.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2012 at 13:54 UTC
On A sneak peek at our forthcoming camera test scene article (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

M Jesper: I like it. Should do well with the increasing resolutions ...
But what else does it do ?

A few suggestions:
- More shiny object like glass, metal and plastic.
- Everything is dull colored, any camera can handle that. Please add some bright vivid colors, or even better, something led illuminated. If there is another sensor blooming / fuji orbs debacle i want to know about it.
- A smooth dark grey (almost black) surface for shadow noise comparison. The one in the middle has too much texture which masks any real noise. ( in the old scene i always use that black bottle, when it was not too dusty )
- A stepless gradient to check banding. One grey to black, one blue to dark blue. As you can see the blue feather is already causing trouble.

Bottom line. Give those sensors something challenging already !

Bonus suggestion: Take the same picture simulating warm indoor lighting.

I agree there should be specular highlights to see how the camera deals with them.
Lights in the chart are also an interesting idea, unfortunately they also can cause problems with the lens, so if you're trying to separate the sensor problems from the lens problems, it is not the best test.
As far as a smooth dark area, the MacBeth Chart has you covered. Another option is to cut a hole in the table and have a receding box filled with black velvet to create a "black hole" if you want a pure black.
Gradients may have issues in the production that may appear problematic in reproduction. The feather and such are good "natural" tests.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2012 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

Petrogel: Unfortunately iPhone's, Samsung's S III or Nokia's PureView image quality CAN NOT justify the HIGH PRICES these products are sold, of course a photo is up to the photographers perspective, but i would agree with madeinlisboa these are toys, expensive toys for what they offer !!!!

You do not buy any of these just to have a camera. You buy these to be a Phone, a portable Web browser, a music player that can hold thousands of songs and play internet radio stations from around the world, a video player, an email/text messaging device, a video conferencing tool, a journal/notebook, a calenadar/reminder, a GPS/map, calculator, a price checker/comparer, gaming device, restaurant locator, etc... if you use if for some of those, then adding on the camera is a nice bonus. And if you're interested in photography and do need to upgrade your phone, it's not unreasonable to concider getting one with a decent camera. It's rediculous to buy a $200 (plus 2 year cellphone contract) camera with this quality, but if you already need a smartphone and will be paying for the contract, the nicer camera may be nice. Keep in mind the free (with contract) iPhone 4 had a decent camera, and the $99 (with contract) 4s has an almost-as-good as an iPhone 5 camera for $100 less.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2012 at 15:19 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: "To put these differences into perspective, before the release of the iPhone 5, we asked 50 non-photographers to compare 15" prints of a similar image from each of these cameras, to work out which were the cheap ones and which the expensive ones and which was the iPhone 4s. 15" prints aren't a stringent photographic test, but they're bigger than most iPhone photos will ever be printed. Over half of people placed the iPhone 4s above the Nikon D3. The picture quality from the iPhones is 'good enough' for most people."

This is the important finding. When light is good and your subject is not moving fast, don't fool yourself that you need an expensive equipment.

The iPhone is expensive if you're buying it just for a camera. And if you're buying it just for the camera, I think it's foolish. If however you need a smart phone for your cell, email, web browsing, and apps, a music player, having the camera is a nice bonus. I don't think the iPhone is the best camera in a cell phone (the PureView 808 I think has that title) but apple has been pretty good at making a well rounded phone that does everything well and seamlessly. If you want more controls though you're probably going to want to go to an Android base phone.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2012 at 14:57 UTC
In reply to:

AnHund: It is possible to take very nice images with camera phones in good light and in the right hands, not doubt about it. But unlike the iPhone there is a lot of camera control options in some Nokia phones like Lumia 800 etc., but don't expect miracles except maybe from the the new Nokia 808 PureView which seems to be a lot better than the rest.

Personally I would never be satisfied with a camera phone alone, due to bad ergonomics and limited use except in good light. But then again a lot of people are satisfied with phone images - probably the same type of people that were perfectly happy with a Kodak Instamatic in the 60s.

I don't think most photographers would be satisfied with just an iPhone, but there are several things to consider. Yes, for someone who was happy with Instamatics, Polaroids, cheap P&S 110 film cameras, and disposable 35mm cameras, it's a great thing, but for the photographer is can be a nice thing in that it's a camera that you always have with you (assuming you're the type of person who always carries their cell). I don't expect a phone to ever be as good as my Hasselblad H4D or Canon 5D, but if it can take decent shots, if I'm out somewhere and I see something, great. I remember my first cell phone that had a camera, it was a 0.3 or 1.3 MP motorola that took the noisiest pictures you've ever seen, even in decent lighting. Technology has come a long way in a short time.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2012 at 14:54 UTC
On iPhone 5 vs. iPhone 4S: Image comparison article (94 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prestidigitator: The camera on this crApple iFruitcake is not worth an article here in DPR. Write an article when the hypePhone finally manages to reach the level of the Nokia N82, Samsung Innov8 or Nokia N8. We can of course forget about it even reaching the level of the mighty Nokia PureView 808 given a decade. Why the iSheep would even line up in front of a store to get this model is really one of the greatest mysteries in the world. Are they too intellectually-challenged to order it online?

A couple counter agruments as to why it's relivant on this website: What is the most popular camera on Flickr? The iPhone 4s. What is the 2nd most popular camera on Flickr? The iPhone 4. Not saying this is why you should buy it, but I'm saying why it's relevant. I agree the PureView 808 is a lot more interesting to a photographer, but DPreview covered that even though few people will buy it compared to the iPhone and they're covering a camera that likely millions of people will buy. Covering both sides gives perspective. DPreview covers a range from consumer to pro and they have a range of viewers, many more are closer to consumers. You don't hear me complaining they haven't reviewed the Hasselblad H4D-200MS.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 20:28 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: "Apple execs said that LTE is 'potentially faster than a wi-fi connection,' which may be true, depending on your provider. "

Which is generally BS, given that iPhone 5 supports 150Mbps 802.11n, and LTE only goes to 100Mbps (if you are right there on the cell tower).

Potentially... in very specific circumstances like if you're at a coffeeshop with a 802.11b connection which is 11mb/sec or an 802.11a or g connection which is 54mb/s

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 13:18 UTC
On Nikon announces D600 24MP enthusiast full-frame DSLR article (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

ZAnton: I use digital cameras for like 6 years. From hundred of gigabytes of my photos I can probably find 2 or 3 with exposure time 1/2000s or faster. Nikon's lack of 1/8000 means nothing to me. Noone will ever use it unless he wants to shoot f/1.2 in midday in Sahara.

Technically anything faster than f/2 - f/2.8 in midday sun most places will need faster than 1/4000th at 100 ISO (sunny 16 rule) If you use a kit lens, polarizer, or ND filter this is not so much of a problem. Depends on who's buying it. If it's someone who's just going to use the kit lens: No problem. If it's someone who's advanced and knows about ND filters: Not much of a problem. If it's someone between who just knows they want shallow DOF or "Bokah-ey" photos and gets a prime lens, they may have some issues.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 13:08 UTC
On Nikon announces D600 24MP enthusiast full-frame DSLR article (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

williams359: At £700 pounds cheaper than a 5DMKIII and I'm sure that will drop by £200-£300 very soon nikon is on to a winner. I shoot canon but i love what Nikon are doing

Keep in mind Canon is still selling the 5D Mk II for about the same price as the D600. And the Mk II does have some feature this does not like micro focus adjust. This is not competing with the Mk III, it's competing with the Mk II.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 13:00 UTC
On Panasonic DMC FZ200 preview (155 comments in total)

Is my math correct that with f/2.8 on that sensor size, the DOF would be equivalent to an f/16 lens on a full-frame camera (at equivalent focal length, of course)?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2012 at 20:42 UTC as 49th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

historianx: what's next, Exapixels?

I'm holding off for a Yotapixel camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 12:07 UTC
In reply to:

W Sanders: Question: Is it cheaper than an M9?

If it was developed for the US DoD, the price tag should be around $5 million.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2012 at 12:04 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: Simon and DPR... as I wrote before, I feel this is the best photography site in the world and find unwarranted and insulting the questions raised in this comments thread about your editorial integrity.

I also believe that the helping hand you gave Intel imposing such bullying copyright dispositions for their promotion stems from the fact that you did not take due notice of the mentioned dispositions (...I had also not noticed it initially, myself).

I have now an idea that would allow you to help the photographic community stand against such abuses ( I know people are free to participate or not to participate but it is a know fact that many people do not read the fine print and the marketeers and lawyers at Intel know that).

With your well-earned clout in the photo world why not take an active editorial role and ask Intel why they feel they have to plunder the rights of ALL entries and not just retain the justifiable rights over the winning ones?

PK

Cy Cheze,
The rules basically say if you submit they can use your content pretty much however they want. You don't loose a submission fee, but you could win nothing and Intel could then use your work in Ads, as product packaging, heck they could make it the new Intel logo if they wanted... so some people might feel they're loosing the money they could have made by selling them the work. From the contest rules:
By uploading your Videos and Photos, you irrevocably grant us a worldwide non-exclusive, royalty free license (where relevant, by way of present license of present and future copyright) to: (i) copy, reproduce, adapt, translate, alter, rearrange, edit, cut, dub or subtitle in any language, and add to or delete from your Video (including without limitation the right to extract audio only or picture only content from your Video) and Photo, in any way whatsoever...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2012 at 15:13 UTC
In reply to:

Sam Carriere: Does anyone else think this is beyond ridiculous? Is anyone else wondering more and more how DPreview choses articles? Does anyone know a good photography site that is not dependent on advertising from the industry?

Thank you Simon for the clarity. As I said in my comment "I am unclear" and "again, I am uncertain if this is the case." As I said there have been several news stories that could simply just be repostings of press releases. DPreview has more recently been publishing a wider range articles and news stories beyond the traditional reviews lately, which is fine, but for those used to one type of content the change simply raises questions as to why. I doubted that this was the case, but uncertainty is unsettling and it's comforting to "hear it from the horses mouth" that it is not the case. Yes it was speculative, but it was a speculative inquiry, not meant as speculative accusation. The wider range of stories covered could be construed by some to be a change in tone, so I would not say my request for clarity had no use. If you have a mission statement or list of ethical guidelines posted on this site providing such clarity that I was unaware of, then I apologies for being redundant.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2012 at 15:01 UTC
Total: 58, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »