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: 47, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On iPhone 5 vs. iPhone 4S: Image comparison news story (93 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 news story (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 news story (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
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?

I am unclear if this is advertising or just a repost of a press release that DPReview received. Lately I feel there have been several posts listed as news stories or articles (such as this listed as Misc. News) where I question if DPReview received compensation for posting it. It is clear that the banners and side ads are just that, ads that I assume were purchased. But if (and again, I'm not certain this is the case) companies are paying to have news stories written about them and the site doesn't clearly state that that is the case, it's a reduction of journalistic integrity and raises ethics questions.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2012 at 05:09 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images news story (645 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: No finder or finder choice, no hotshoe, no grip, no image stabilization, flat buttons, first things I think. I can't get around those much. Sure it has a bigger sensor and decent looking lens, but holding and using a camera makes more of an impact to me. Had it a front grip and I.S. I might give it a pass, but not in today's market and the year is still young. Surely Sony aren't the only ones that are going to make big sensor compacts. Just watch and wait.

It has stablization. Hotshoe, grip, viewfinder all make a larger camera... those cameras are available: dSLR and Mirrorless cameras like the Sony NEX line or Nikon's 1 series. Also if it's popular enough someone will likely make an accessory grip for this camera, if there is demand for it. I've seen people do it for cameras like the Leica X-1.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 21:39 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images news story (645 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If this camera was around the same price as a Canon S100, then it will be a huge hit.

But Sony is planning to sell it for around the same price as a Nikon D5100 with lens, or twice as much as an S100, and that price just won't fly. It's a nice little camera but it just doesn't offer enough value for the money.

The problem is with the sensor so much larger than the S100. The sensor alone costs drastically more. Add in the fact that a larger sensor needs a lens that can project a larger image circle and you're increasing cost further. If Sony sold this for $400 I'm certain they would be loosing quite a bit of money for every unit they sold.

...But I would think that Sony would be used to that by now.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 21:32 UTC
In reply to:

Michael49: Silly, Silly, Silly. Leica really has lost it.

Mescalamba, while you can remove the AA filter from many sensors, the CFA is very difficult to remove on most sensors and has to be manufactured without a CFA at the sensor foundry.

Direct link | Posted on May 10, 2012 at 22:38 UTC

Are we certain that this doesn't just take a JPG from the camera's API and save it as a TIFF? I'm not saying this is the case here but I'm curious because I though Apple locked down the camera API's and doesn't allow access to anything beyond a prepared JPG file.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 21, 2012 at 02:19 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply

Does it keep the tripod thread centered on either mount? I'm trying to visualize how it would work, but if I'm picturing it right it would be off center when mounted on a Manfrotto. Am I wrong?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2012 at 18:45 UTC as 15th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Miguel J Princz: I would offer the invention to Pentax, for once and all, it would solve the diverse focusing issues we had and still have...

Yes. But it will give you a low resolution issue. Let's take your 16MP K-5 and make it 0.09MP so that you can refocus it. Or better yet let's take the 40MP $10,000 645 and turn it into a 0.25MP camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2012 at 00:16 UTC
In reply to:

edgar83: Another interesting use of lytro technology could be to expand the DoF of a normal photograph, maybe loosing some resolution, just like some fuji cameras that expands dynamic range in change of resolution.

that wouldn't be just a toy...

Problem is the way light-field photography works, it causes a drastic reduction in resolution... a 16MP camera produces a 0.09MP image. For expanding DOF, light-field isn't the best option. It's a technology looking for an application, and Apple's good identifying problems and adapting solutions. I think apple would be interested just so they have it in their pocket incase they come across a problem that it would fix.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 25, 2012 at 00:13 UTC
On Phase One consolidates Mamiya and Leaf brands and lineups news story (23 comments in total)
In reply to:

Klaus H: You have to wonder how long these guys will survive... Phase and Hasselblad too. If Sony/Nikon/Canon release 35mm bodies at 32-36MP it will hurt them even harder too.

What are the mythical advantages of sensor size (or the often related larger pixels)? Less noise, better dynamic range, shallower depth of field. I work with an H4D every day, and have a feeling that both csdotam and AkinaC haven't ever, because they don't know what they're talking about. I can tell you this, at anything over 50 ISO it has worse noise than any 35mm "full-frame" digital I've seen. It has only slightly better dynamic range (and again, that's only at 50 ISO). Yes with the 120mm f/4 lens it will have a shallower depth of field than an 85mm lens on a full-frame at f/4, but you can get f/1.2 lenses for full-frame. Most MF lenses are f/2.8 or slower, there's a couple f/2.2 lenses... so there goes the DOF advantage. I use medium format every day and there are reasons for it: multi-shot uninterpolated images, no AA filter, and high megapixels. That's about it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2012 at 21:49 UTC
On Preview: Canon PowerShot G1X large sensor zoom compact news story (791 comments in total)
In reply to:

fuego6: Meh.. 2.8-5.8... 4x lens... ok with 4x - its an ok range.. but 5.8?!?

@JackM, then don't use it at the 112mm equivalent , as you get more telephoto the lens stops down more, so if you want you can only use it to the 70mm equivalent.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2012 at 14:53 UTC
On Preview: Canon PowerShot G1X large sensor zoom compact news story (791 comments in total)
In reply to:

joe galluzzi: Was hoping for 2.0 or faster lens, 24mm wide angle and a bit more zoom.

All 3 of those equate to either a MUCH heavier and bigger lens, or VERY VERY bad image quality. Would you rather have an f/2 24-80, and f/4 28-210, or an f/2 24-180 that weighs 4 lbs and won't collapse enough to fit in even the biggest of jacket pockets?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2012 at 14:49 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »