Joseph S Wisniewski

Joseph S Wisniewski

Lives in United States Detroit, MI, United States
Works as a Speech and sensor scientist
Has a website at http://www.swissarmyfork.com
Joined on Jul 12, 2002
About me:

I've been in love with photography for over 40 years.

My favorite form of photography is macro, and much of my gear is of my own design.

I've done professional photography on and off for over 20 years.
Taught 8 years at Midwest Photography Workshops.
Designed 3 scientific digital cameras and 6 lenses.

Author of mImage and (coming soon to the App Store and Google Play) ColorForEveryone.

Comments

Total: 575, showing: 341 – 360
« First‹ Previous1617181920Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Oahu Kamaaina: Here's an interesting link about the Dycam Model 1 digital camera released in 1990. It had 320x 240 resolution, held 32 pictures, fixed focus lens, and cost $995. [That's 1990 dollars]

http://www.cameracuriosities.com/2012_02_01_archive.html

I'm sure there were lots of comments by film photographers putting down the new technology then, similar to the comments in this blog. The Lytro camera may well fail, it's largely a proof of concept, but I'm surprised that the photographers who don't buy one aren't at least cheering their innovation rather than dissing their attempt to improve the technology.

That is not "clarifying". You're either being deliberately deceptive or innocently incorrect. I'll assume the second for the time being.

The Lytro takes a rather small amount of data, less than a typical P&S. It destroys over half of the 11mp that it actually gathers. (without moving to a hexagonal array sensor, a square grid sampling of a circular light field loses 30%, and their lack of proper AA corrupts at least an additional 25%. I've analyzed some Lytro files).

Sales figures can be estimated by the number of people you can locate using the product. You simply use the ratio of observed users to sold product for products you can get sales figures for.

Best estimate, they've sold under 1000 units.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2012 at 19:31 UTC
In reply to:

Oahu Kamaaina: Here's an interesting link about the Dycam Model 1 digital camera released in 1990. It had 320x 240 resolution, held 32 pictures, fixed focus lens, and cost $995. [That's 1990 dollars]

http://www.cameracuriosities.com/2012_02_01_archive.html

I'm sure there were lots of comments by film photographers putting down the new technology then, similar to the comments in this blog. The Lytro camera may well fail, it's largely a proof of concept, but I'm surprised that the photographers who don't buy one aren't at least cheering their innovation rather than dissing their attempt to improve the technology.

I think you've nailed the problem.

"The Lytro is a one-trick pony but it's a trick that no other consumer camera does."

Now, from your comments, it is apparent that you enjoy this one trick. From the lack of positive comments here, and all over the net, it appears that you are part of a very, very small crowd.

1990s digital cameras filled a need that was pretty plain to see, even back then. There were already reporters who came to news events with a van that had a developing system, scanner, and transmitter so that they could get images back to the paper quickly. Those people adopted $40,000 Kodak DCS-100 and 200 units, because they filled a need. Kodak had trouble keeping up with orders.

Heck, Ansel Adams saw something in a lab in 1978 that wasn't even portable, and he said it was the future.

Right now, Lytro appears to have fizzled. Sales are practically non-existent. Look at eBay. I checked yesterday, 10 low-usage Lytros for sale. People get tired of the one trick, quick.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2012 at 12:46 UTC
In reply to:

Pentax_Prime: Anyone notice that this is the only site that 'updates' you on 'Lytro'? (A company that has never actually released a product - nor made any sort of actual business sense.) Is this company Amazon owned or what?

Actually, Lytros aren't available on Amazon, they only do direct sales. But they most definitely have been released. A local photographer has one and loaned it to me for a couple of days. I was not impressed. They've been around long enough for a few owners to get tired of them: there are currently 10 of them on eBay.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/?_nkw=lytro

I will grant you the "nor made any sort of actual business sense" part. I've been saying that about Ng for years.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 8, 2012 at 02:33 UTC
In reply to:

sesopenko: Great product, botched marketing campaign. The whole "we have to catch the social media bandwagon" attitude they had was very misinformed and you could tell from the adoption rate. I think shareholders were expecting something like this being announced.

Aside from social media, what is the market for this thing? What real-world problem is it actually going to solve?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2012 at 13:22 UTC
In reply to:

chadley_chad: There were rumours Steve Jobs was keen to get involved. I think this brand needs someone like Apple to make it succeed. Anyone else will just f**k it up (IMO) - only Apple have the vision and capability to take this thing and create the defining camera ... as they did with the iPod, iMac, iPad etc. As much as you might hate Apple, you have to admit, they know how to make a product! Lets hope soon they turn their hand to the camera market (and what better start than Lytro!)

NB if the Lytro was half the price I'd buy one despite the limitations ... you know us camera buffs, we'll try most new photographic technologies just for the hell of it!

I wouldn't characterize the technology as "stupid", but that might be an appropriate, if rude, word for the current attempts to market it.

It delivers the ability to refocus at a terrible penalty in resolution and low light ability. It's a product without a clear purpose. Once you "explore focus" in a couple of images, you're done.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2012 at 13:19 UTC
In reply to:

Hugo808: Why don't manafacturers finish their cameras before selling them?

They did finish it. They added something beyond what it was when it was finished, to accommodate a lens that didn't exist at that time.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2012 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

dholl: Thanks, but I see no mention of whether the D800E has the same moire issues as the D800 in video mode. There is a confused debate about whether there is any difference (obviously with stills there is).

Can you shed any light on this?

> The two cameras will exhibit different characteristics.

Of course they won't. The AA filter operates on fractional pixel distances, about 3 microns. The pixel pitch for the video decimation is 3.5 pixels, 17.5 microns. That's the pitch that causes severe aliasing on both the 800 and the 800E. Like the review said:

"Here, though, the D800 and D800E perform all-but identically in terms of the amount of moiré visible in the final footage."

CameraLabTester? Right...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 18:02 UTC

"This seems like an odd way of doing things; why not just remove the filter altogether?"

One of the two LiNbO3 filters serves as the sensor cover glass, it's not part of the stack. So, the only way to remove it is to make a change on the chip manufacturing line, which means new part numbers, validation, etc. for sensor and circuit board.

Altering the second LiNbO3 filter, the one in the stack, is much easier. You don't have to change as much stuff, stock two kinds of chip, rerun validation, etc.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 17:50 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

mapgraphs: Apparently the Equivalent magic wand works like this:

A 75mm f1.8 lens magically has different specs when placed on different camera bodies. You would think that this lens would remain a 75mm f1.8 lens when placed on an 8x10 view, 4x5, 645 or a 135 camera body. But it doesn’t. The Equivalents tell us that on a 135 camera body this lens is magically physically transformed into a 75mm f3.5 lens.

Does that mean a FF mount 75mm f1.8 lens become a 75mm f0.9 Equivalent when placed on a m4/3 body? I like the idea of magic Equivalent lenses.

Guys, a 2x crop factor doesn’t change the physical size of a lens or magically create an Equivalent aperture or Equivalent depth of field. The f1.8 maximum aperture is relative to the focal length of the lens, not the area of the film/sensor plane. The physical size of the glass or the aperture does not change. No matter where the lens goes, except perhaps in the Equivalent Space Time Continuum, this lens is and always will be a 75mm f1.8 lens.

Exactly. Equivalence is "all or nothing". If you apply it to the focal length, you have to apply it to the aperture and the ISO.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2012 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

Macx: Am I being a stickler for insisting that this is a constant f-ratio lens, not a "constant aperture"-lens? Either way, this looks like a great lens. Good price (if the optics work, and they seem to do) and great size for the system. I have to figure out if the advantages of the zoom outweighs the loss of 1 or 2 stops of depth of field control and exposure, but for people looking for an upgrade to their kit zoom this is a no-brainer. I expect Panasonic to sell a lot of these!

It's a "fly by wire" lens with a stepless (or at least something silly small, like 1/30 stop) electronic aperture. They could have made it f2 at the wide end, and had the aperture compensate in video mode. Set f2.8, and as you zoom, the aperture automatically adjusts to maintain f2.8.

So called "constant aperture" lenses are technological dinosaurs. (And I own three of the best, LOL).

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2012 at 12:56 UTC
In reply to:

dholl: I personally need more than 30 minutes continuous filming because i record myself demoing synthesizers....previously i've had to use cheapo camcorders...

but then again, like the article reminded us, we still have the issue of FAT32 and hot sensors.

@CC, your camera is fine. It's smart enough to shut down if the camera overheats.

The heat doesn't actually come from the sensor, anyway: it's mostly produced by the display and the processor.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 18:26 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph S Wisniewski: There are several cameras that seamlessly start new files every time a 4 gig file fills. That "concern" is a non-issue.

There really aren't any concerns about cameras overheating, either. Build it for liveview, and the heat producing display and processor pretty much run full time anyway.

@szlevi, thanks for the warning. NEX7 was on my short list for a "lightweight" interchangeable. I really like the little thing. But if Sony has screwed up the liveview system to the point where sustained use of the camera is difficult, I'll go back to looking at Panasonic.

I did say "build it for liveview", and if Sony didn't do this, well, that's Sony's fault, not any limit of the technology.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 18:24 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph S Wisniewski: There are several cameras that seamlessly start new files every time a 4 gig file fills. That "concern" is a non-issue.

There really aren't any concerns about cameras overheating, either. Build it for liveview, and the heat producing display and processor pretty much run full time anyway.

Mattia, it's mostly P&S that are acquiring this feature, but it is in the later model Panasonics EVILS. Unfortunately, the Canon 1D X is the only DSLR that comes immediately to mind.

Now, I'm normally on the DSLR side of the "you don't need a DSLR, get a camcorder" arguments, but just out of curiosity, why do you "need a DSLR for filming sit-down interviews"?

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 18:22 UTC
In reply to:

Donald Lam: Digicams are not designed to be a dedicated camcorder. The small battery will be hard pressed to record for more than 30 minutes. Heat sinking of the sensor and electronics is another issue.

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.

The reason digital cameras have such unusual shapes, including the common "clamp onto" the charger design, instead of sliding into it, is that they ARE camcorder batteries.

"Heat sinking" [sic] of the sensor is not an issue, at all. P&S cameras, cell phones, etc. run their electronics hard, providing full time liveview. DSLRs get bigger surface areas to dissipate even more heat.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 18:15 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: The solution would be easy, even without WTO doing anything.

Sell the camera with a 30-minute limit and make available an updated firmware that removes the limit.

"Making available" can be anything from an official download to accidentally "leaking" the firmware.

Not "easy", at all.

Official downloads that negate customs and tariff restrictions have been proved illegal in several cases, including cases pertaining to scanners and cell phones.

Even charges that the "leak" was "too convenient" could endanger a company.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 18:11 UTC
In reply to:

itsastickup: In the long run I would expect the duty to be applied to cameras also. This is a naive view of taxman behaviour. This is a bad move that is likely to cost us.

They would need a "new" tax. The tax on video recording equipment was a "reverse Robin Hood" tax, it was to take money from people who recorded movies off broadcast or cable, or copied video tapes or DVDs, and give that money to the "wronged" movie production and distribution companies.

Since you can't do this with a DSLR, P&S, Flip style recorder, cell phone, etc. they'd need a new reason for the tax. Actually, you can't really do it with a modern camcorder, either.

So, if you happen to have any idea for a good justification as to why DSLRs, P&S cameras, and cell phones are costing "innocent" European corporations billions of dollars of honest profits, I'm sure that there's people high up in the EU who would love to hear. That new French guy, for example...

I know, a tax to recover the money that municipalities are going to lose in police misconduct cases because there happened to be someone there with a camera...

I scare myself, sometimes.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 18:09 UTC
In reply to:

boothrp: So why doesn't my Olympus C770uz cut out after 30 minutes ??

keysmith, actually, neither of those criteria apply. Revenant got it right, it "is" a video recorder.

The tax folk don't care if it zooms, because the tariff was passed originally to make people pay for copying movies and TV shows.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 15:57 UTC
In reply to:

LaFonte: Ok rhetoric aside, one thing I don't understand, why there is actually a higher duty tax for video cameras? What is the purpose of this?

It comes from taxing "home video recorders" to make up for the money that movie companies are "losing" from people recording movies off broadcast or cable, or copying video tapes or DVDs. There's only two things wrong with that logic...

1) There is no meaningful way to use a DSLR, P&S camera, camera phone, or even a modern camcorder to pirate movies.

2) Study after study proves that the movie companies are not suffering losses due to end-user piracy, which is a lot different from distribution channel piracy.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 15:54 UTC

There are several cameras that seamlessly start new files every time a 4 gig file fills. That "concern" is a non-issue.

There really aren't any concerns about cameras overheating, either. Build it for liveview, and the heat producing display and processor pretty much run full time anyway.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 15:50 UTC as 24th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: I honestly dont know why anyone defends leica. there two latest inventions are an $8000 dollar camera body that can only take black and white pictures with lacklustre technology and 50mm f/2 prime lens that also cost $8000. You can buy them both for the cost the finest camera in the world and a selection of the finest lenses that would make most pros jealous and most any other photographic tools you could want and you could still probably throw in a reliable used car. Of course then you wouldnt have a camera that only took black and white pictures and 1 50mm prime lens.

the absolutely maddening thing is a bunch of people are gonna respond with how crappy traditional dslrs are and how it is absolutely worth it to forgo that dreamlist of gear in order to have this

Well, I hate to be a "censor", Mr. Kodachrome, but it is you that is delivering the nonsense.

The "sensor" is probably the most expensive FF "sensor" on the market. It's produced by a sensor operation that never learned how to supply large sensors to anyone other than aerospace customers.

Direct link | Posted on May 18, 2012 at 17:15 UTC
Total: 575, showing: 341 – 360
« First‹ Previous1617181920Next ›Last »