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: 519, showing: 361 – 380
« First‹ Previous1718192021Next ›Last »
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

"we surely can make d-SLRs that don't have a YouTube mode."

No DSLR has a "YouYube" mode. Most have a video mode, though.

We surely can make DSLRs (capital "D" and no hyphen, btw) that don't have mirror lockup. We surely can make them that don't have the large motors needed to sustain 7 frames/sec on a midline camera like D7000 or 12 frames/sec on a high end camera like D4. We surely can make DSLRs that don't have autofocus, or ones that lack autoexposure. That's four attributes: mirror lockup, motor size, AF, and AE. Video makes five.

2^5 = 32

So, that's over 200 cameras: 32 possible cameras in each of Nikon's seven DSLR lines. They're not going do do that. They're just going to offer all 5 attributes in all the seven DSLRs in the line.

Simple, really. Sorry you're having so much trouble with it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2012 at 16:36 UTC
In reply to:

Ruy Penalva: Zeiss is priced 2 to 3 times over any brand in any product from lens to microscope till lens cleaning microfiber. Zeiss utilize kriptonite cristals to make its lens.

Nikon, as one of the world's premier microscope makers, has been melting their own fluorite glass formulas for decades. Their customers for certain exotic glasses include Canon.

Most people don't appreciate that Nikon and Canon have been cross-pollinating each other for decades. First time I read about it was back in the 70s, how Canon farmed out rangefinder lenses to Nikon, and Nikon used Canon shutters and pellical mirrors in one of their high speed F body variations.

I think fluorite glass lost its "marketing halo" two years ago when Sigma started using it. ;)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

Joseph S Wisniewski: You folks have no idea how much "wow" is in a T2.9 zoom like that.

70-200 parfocal (no focus shift when zooming) and hopefully no breathing (coverage shift when focusing). It's got to be at least as complex as any Nikon or Canon 70-200 f2.8. You're taking 20-something elements, and a light loss of 0.1 stops (weird coincidence, log2((2.8/2.8)^2) = 0.10)

Most elements in a modern lens aren't cemented, but let's do worst-case and guess that some are, so there's 30 air-glass interfaces (surfaces, LOL). That's 0.0033 stops per surface. Or under 0.8% reflection per surface.

That's some serious coating.

In addition to what Alec said (which is a valid point, btw) what's the T stop of the Canon? Probably comparable to my Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 AF-S VR, which I measured at T 3.05. Normally, I wouldn't quibble about 0.15 stops, but you figure that the light that doesn't reach the sensor has to go somewhere, like into flare (blobby or veiling) or ghosting.

The other thing that the Zeiss buys you is absolutely repeatable focus. Yes, you can bolt a focus gear onto the focus rings of a Nikon or Canon lens, but their focusing mechanisms "freeewheel" at the limits of their focusing range. which means, suddenly your follow focus is set to an entirely different value than when you marked it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 13:36 UTC
In reply to:

djmm: The HUGE "70-200 Compact Zoom" Wording is real tacky....

The manual focus Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 Ai-S weighed in at 1.9kg. Add in the optical design to make this thing parfocal and (hopefully) eliminate focus breathing, and add integrated metal focus, aperture, and zoom gears, and yeah, 2.8kg really is "compact", by cine standards.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 13:28 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

NineFace: doesn't look ergonomic

@SeeRoy, good point. I had this bizarre idea about helping my Goddaughter start her own business. I sketched up a mostly PVC "glidecam" style rig that even she could build for under $30 parts cost. Then she shows up at her highschool sporting events and the local soccer clubs with one, shoots a bit, and when the soccer moms ask what it is, she shows them, and racks up some orders at $100 a pop.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 13:21 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

KAllen: Oh yes, it just gets better. I'm hopeing with things like this Canon might up their game on the spec price ratio.
As this camera stands now it could be what I'm looking for.
2.5k is more than I most likely need but the extra will be nice to have, I can shoot aerials wider than I need then apply more aggresive post stabilising when it's needed and crop then output 1080.
I hope it performs as they say!

Actually, Ash, readout speed has little to do with the "smallish chip", and if it's the chip I'm thinking of, the readout is horrible, and the Jell-O is going to be a throwback to Nikon D90.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 13:13 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

DarkShift: Interesting, but I can't understand why this thing uses EF-mount?

MFT mount would be more suited for small sensor and still allow other lenses through adapters.

It's not micro four thirds for four reasons.

1) You won't have aperture control of an EF lens on an MFT adapter. Or the ability to use an electronic focus puller (Of course, I don't know if Blackmagic has that, but it's cool on a Red).

2) The micro four thirds mount is highly proprietary, protected by patents that are still in force, and not likely to be licensed by Panasonic to a competing product. The patents expired about 6 years ago on the EF mount: it's an open standard now.

3) The EF mount is a lot stronger than the micro four thirds mount. Cine lenses tend to be in very heavy mounts, a kg for a normal 2-3kg for a tele.

4) It's targeted at cine users, and that's more normal to tele than wide, so everything you need is available in EF.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 13:11 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

jmmgarza: Show me the video at high rez. That is all I ask.

1) Night club bar scene
2) Wedding reception
3) Football game (day and night)
4) At a sunny beach
5) A studio interview one and two shot

Thanks...

It's a digital movie camera. You don't take it to 1,2, 3, or 5, unless you light number 1 and 2 yourself, and do them with actors and rehearsals.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 04:36 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

NineFace: doesn't look ergonomic

It's a cine camera. It's going to spend its life on a twin rail rig. The most ergonomic shape for such a camera is a small, rectangular box. The people who keep dissing DSLR "ergonomics" for movie shooters make the same mistake: on a rig, a DSLR is much more ergonomic than traditional digital cinema camera, simply because it's smaller.

The only thing wrong with the ergonomics of this unit is that the touch screen should have been a separate box.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 04:34 UTC

You folks have no idea how much "wow" is in a T2.9 zoom like that.

70-200 parfocal (no focus shift when zooming) and hopefully no breathing (coverage shift when focusing). It's got to be at least as complex as any Nikon or Canon 70-200 f2.8. You're taking 20-something elements, and a light loss of 0.1 stops (weird coincidence, log2((2.8/2.8)^2) = 0.10)

Most elements in a modern lens aren't cemented, but let's do worst-case and guess that some are, so there's 30 air-glass interfaces (surfaces, LOL). That's 0.0033 stops per surface. Or under 0.8% reflection per surface.

That's some serious coating.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2012 at 04:28 UTC as 20th comment | 8 replies
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedValley: One advantage of SD1 mentioned plenty of times is "smaller and lighter". Really?
D800: 146 x 123 x 82 mm; 900g
SD1: 146 × 114 × 80 mm; 790g
I see they have the same width (which is the biggest of the 3 dimensions) and basically the same height.
The weight factor is true considering the lens.
SD1+ 17-50 = 1355g
D800 + 24-70 = 1800g

I like normals.

SD1+30mm f1.4 = 1190g
D800+50mm f1.4 = 1180g

But don't forget, any if you're using an f2.8 lens on an APS camera, at the same field of view, a FF sensor camera achieves the same DOF with a lens a full stop slower. (With equivalent sensor technology, it also takes the same shot at an ISO a stop faster). So...

SD1+30mm f1.4 = 1190g
D800+50mm f1.8 = 1085g

Or...

SD1+ 17-50 = 1355g
D800 + 28-85/3.5-4.5 = 1440g

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2012 at 17:15 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joseph S Wisniewski: I find it very ironic that the review emphasizes the lack of liveview, referring to it with the definite article "the missing feature".

I cannot fathom why, after a decade and five generations of Sigma DSLRs, there is no liveview. I've designed Foveon based industrial cameras: the on-chip "VPS" binning makes liveview easier to implement than any other sensor. They've been building Foveon P&S cameras for six years, and those have liveview. Why not the DSLRs?

There are no mirrorless cameras ("no" is different from "plenty") that have resolution comparable to a Sigma SD1. Cameras with such high resolution require perfect focusing technique to achieve that resolution.

In this rarefied territory, SD1, D800, 645D, the Nikon is the only one with liveview.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2012 at 17:00 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Filipowicz: If you upsize the Sd1 photos to Nikon D800 size. its very close in detail. surprising actually

@cinefeel,

* not susceptible to moire (very important for fashion work)

The Sigmas are not susceptible to COLOR moire. They are susceptible to LUMINANCE moire, and that's a problem in fashion.

They are also susceptible to failures of observer metamerism, and that's a problem in fashion that the competitors don't have.

* foveon image feel (better edge rendering and texture)

The edge rendering is only "better" pixel peeping at 1:1. Printed at the same size, the edges are no better than a D800,and probably a bit worse. As far as "texture", define it so we can discuss it.

* smaller and lighter camera with smaller and lighter lenses

Yes, that is a big D800 advantage. Why did you bring it up if you're advocating Sigma?

I like Sigmas, and there are situations where I recommend them. Fashion is not one of those, because of the color issues, the lens lineup, and the handling speed.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2012 at 16:55 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Filipowicz: If you upsize the Sd1 photos to Nikon D800 size. its very close in detail. surprising actually

@Frits, it's not like you to do something tacky like cutting the Sigma manual size in half and doubling the Nikon one. Leave the wild exaggeration to people like rawmeister and cinefeel.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2012 at 16:46 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Filipowicz: If you upsize the Sd1 photos to Nikon D800 size. its very close in detail. surprising actually

Not that surprising, actually. One of the things that most rational folk, whether or not they qualify as "Foveon fans" agree on is that the Foveon sensors resolve about the same as a "conventionally set up" Bayer with about twice the pixel count. So, it's very hard to tell the difference between a 15mp Foveon and a 36mp Bayer: the D800 only looks like it resolves about 10% higher, and that's near impossible to see in a print.

D800e will do closer to 25% better, and that's quite visible.

Basically, the game isn't about resolution, it's that the D800 is pretty much in the same price range as the SD1, but it has:
* a full frame sensor
* liveview
* a lot more speed
* a more robust case
* better low light ability
* liveview
* a wider range of lenses

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 16:42 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joseph S Wisniewski: I find it very ironic that the review emphasizes the lack of liveview, referring to it with the definite article "the missing feature".

I cannot fathom why, after a decade and five generations of Sigma DSLRs, there is no liveview. I've designed Foveon based industrial cameras: the on-chip "VPS" binning makes liveview easier to implement than any other sensor. They've been building Foveon P&S cameras for six years, and those have liveview. Why not the DSLRs?

@How, the "obsession with live view on a DSLR" is by the folks who shoot macro, landscape, architecture, and product (and some more "off the wall" stuff like astrophotography and microscopy). Any place where you've got time to focus and the inclination to really nail it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 15:27 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rawmeister: I am a pro architectural photographer.
Been using Sigma cameras for many years and now use an SD1.
Most of the people leaving comments here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
They are just making uninformed deductions from stuff in the review.
And - if the guys who did the review had any idea how to process the raw files properly and knew how to upsize them properly (ie: not in SPP) and knew how to use 3rd party noise reduction software, then they would see what I see and make money from.
Again - 95% of comments here have wrong ideas about this camera and about Sigma as a company.
Same old fake play that so many do after reading a few paragrahs.
Take it from guys (me) with experience and many hours using the excellent software that has lately been improved.

You can continue shooting using the buffer, so 15 seconds write time is no problem at all.
So unless you are doing shotgun sports there is no problem
unless you need interpolated colour data and AA filters.

You're projecting, I think.

I've never seen you be other than confrontational. I first encountered you in this thread.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=40949895

Everyone was getting along fine, even Kendal and I were having a pleasant discussion and mending some fences, and it was you who charged in and told multiple people that they were doing things all wrong.

Even in this discussion, it wasn't a case that you "provided valuable information". You charged in, as usual, and insulted both "most of the people leaving comments" and "the guys who did the review".

The "guys who did the review" caught stuff that blew right by you. You commented "You can continue shooting using the buffer, so 15 seconds write time is no problem at all."

But not in the face of this: "Extremely slow file write speeds, with erratic control behaviour while writing". 15 seconds of "erratic control behavior" sort of defines "problem", at least here in the real world.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 14:51 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rawmeister: I am a pro architectural photographer.
Been using Sigma cameras for many years and now use an SD1.
Most of the people leaving comments here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
They are just making uninformed deductions from stuff in the review.
And - if the guys who did the review had any idea how to process the raw files properly and knew how to upsize them properly (ie: not in SPP) and knew how to use 3rd party noise reduction software, then they would see what I see and make money from.
Again - 95% of comments here have wrong ideas about this camera and about Sigma as a company.
Same old fake play that so many do after reading a few paragrahs.
Take it from guys (me) with experience and many hours using the excellent software that has lately been improved.

You can continue shooting using the buffer, so 15 seconds write time is no problem at all.
So unless you are doing shotgun sports there is no problem
unless you need interpolated colour data and AA filters.

@cinefeel, that is true. However, if someone makes mostly technical comments, that's pretty much what we have to judge him by. But when he does make posts about shooting advice or procedures, I find those to be just as flawed. I've pretty much filed him into the "anonymous troll" bin.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 14:13 UTC
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)

I find it very ironic that the review emphasizes the lack of liveview, referring to it with the definite article "the missing feature".

I cannot fathom why, after a decade and five generations of Sigma DSLRs, there is no liveview. I've designed Foveon based industrial cameras: the on-chip "VPS" binning makes liveview easier to implement than any other sensor. They've been building Foveon P&S cameras for six years, and those have liveview. Why not the DSLRs?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 14:10 UTC as 39th comment | 13 replies
On Just Posted: Sigma SD1 / SD1 Merrill review article (388 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rawmeister: I am a pro architectural photographer.
Been using Sigma cameras for many years and now use an SD1.
Most of the people leaving comments here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
They are just making uninformed deductions from stuff in the review.
And - if the guys who did the review had any idea how to process the raw files properly and knew how to upsize them properly (ie: not in SPP) and knew how to use 3rd party noise reduction software, then they would see what I see and make money from.
Again - 95% of comments here have wrong ideas about this camera and about Sigma as a company.
Same old fake play that so many do after reading a few paragrahs.
Take it from guys (me) with experience and many hours using the excellent software that has lately been improved.

You can continue shooting using the buffer, so 15 seconds write time is no problem at all.
So unless you are doing shotgun sports there is no problem
unless you need interpolated colour data and AA filters.

You can judge his experience in two ways.

By "Crawford's rule", that people with pretentious sounding aliases seldom have anything useful to say.

And by the general lack of technical knowledge in most of his posts.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2012 at 14:00 UTC
Total: 519, showing: 361 – 380
« First‹ Previous1718192021Next ›Last »