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
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.


Total: 530, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

budi0251: Back in the day when we could get date back replacement upgrade for our camera; I suppose it'd still be possible with such data backs, thus having enough room for electronics (with some problem for nose area, photog needs to breath as well)
About electromechanical control/sensor, now that's another engineering problem.

2nd hand 6MP APS-C sized sensor DSLR can be bought for about 150 bucks, coupled with some basic lens.
If this device wish to compete with that, it should cost less than 100 bucks and still no more easier than that relic DSLR (and worse IQ).

I think that's what killed the Leica Modul-R. The day I first tried it, the unusually thick "digital back" and the limited eye-relief meant my nose was squashed painfully against the back of the camera. Even though the 1.3x crop added eye-relief, it still wasn't enough.

That same day, back in July of 2005, I tried the Nikon D2X. That experience totally convinced me that the whole idea of a modular DSLR was dead. (Although I subsequently tried to revive it. Long story).

An opportunity a few months later to spend a week with the Modul-R reinforced that conclusion. The R9 with a Modul-R was a thoroughly obnoxious camera.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2013 at 21:43 UTC
In reply to:

photoholiko: Didn't Leica have something like this for their R-System?

By September 2011, the Modul-R was long discontinued.

Leica announced development with Imacon almost a decade earlier, back in June 2003.

They shipped in June 2005.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2013 at 19:58 UTC
In reply to:

VadymA: A sad story of creating a product that nobody needs. Hope their patents will find the way in some industry, if not in consumer photography. And I have a feel that all this talk about exciting new products is just a smokescreen to save their faces in front of investors...

I don't think I've ever seen anyone use "raytrix" and "success" in the same paragraph before.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:19 UTC
In reply to:

Artak Hambarian: Rallyfan mention something very interesting. Why Lytro does not advertise the capability of creating a one shot stacked focus pictures? That is an amazing feature. It may be realised both in camera and via post processing. One shot means that you have perfect set of pictures to focus stack.

Because it can't focus stack beyond the DOF of the decimated image, and you can get that same DOF in a conventional camera simply by stopping down to that DOF.

If you have an f2 Lytro with 4:1 decimation, the best deep DOF you can get is f8. You'd get the same thing just by stopping down to f8.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 13, 2013 at 15:16 UTC
In reply to:

Leandros S: Under what terms are you using these images? You're a commercial site, and commercial use is not permitted by the copyright holder (Val Klavans for the retouched versions). Your versions are on the rather large side to be claiming fair use.

Hadn't thought of that. Leandros referred to the images as "too large to qualify as fair use", but that's just insane. 500 pixels is less than 1/3 the width of my laptop screen. It's not big enough to use in an article (which would be fair use) or project for a lecture (also fair use). Printed at an industry standard 300dpi, it's not even 2 inches square, so it's not even a threat to the refrigerator magnet market, let alone the fine art market.

I think Leandros may have some agenda that goes way beyond a legitimate complaint.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 27, 2013 at 01:57 UTC
In reply to:

hydrospanner: I've been looking for this exact piece of metal ever since I got a good tripod and head over a year ago. Now I realize that I couldn't find it because it wasn't there.

Gotta get one...

That exact piece? Why? Does the Manfrotto name mean so much to you that you've ignored 20 other makers, all of which appear to do it better than Manfrotto (100% machined clamps and plates, no cast or extruded aluminum)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2013 at 16:51 UTC
In reply to:

lmtfa: Manfrotto manufactures good reliable products. I have a bunch of their products that make your camera feel safe on your tripod. Their not pretty, take a look at the 808RC4 3 Way Pan and Tilt. But attached to your tripod and the camera to it, it's like the USS New Jersey, steaming off the coast of some country ready to dish out sme hurt.

The limiting factor like the battleship it was not up to date. No Arca-Swiss compatibility but its reliability and price made up in a way for that. No upgrade for me, I don't throw good money after bad.

Funny. I've formed the opposite opinion, and I formed that low opinion using RC4. I've had their aluminum screws break, dumping equipment, and the lock arm on the clamp fail, also resulting in dumped equipment.

I've also modified Manfrotto plates and clamps, and have seen voids in their castings when sawing or milling them. Scary stuff...

At this point, I only use Manfrotto clamps for very lightweight gear, on a bench top so it can't fall more than 6 inches.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2013 at 16:49 UTC

Seriously, $32 US for single way (sideways on the camera) generic extruded plate, when the same money will get you a Sunway or Benro fully machined plate with a square biridectional ARCA tenon and a top that's machined for a specific camera.

And $130 for a low tolerance cast clamp bundled with that extruded plate? Subtract the plate, and that means they want $98 for a cast clamp, when Acratech, Kirk, RRS will sell you the best fully machined clamps in the world for that, and Sunway or Benro will get you a basic machined clamp for $40.

Manfrotto has totally lost the plot, here.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 20:07 UTC as 29th comment | 4 replies

Technically, she didn't "add color". The Cassini photos have much more color than the average photographer is used to dealing with. She actually took a lot of the color away.

There are multiple images per view, taken by a monochrome sensor with a filter wheel that includes multiple IR wavelengths, visible red (a couple of differ wavelengths) green, blue, violet, and UV. Pick three (red, green, and blue, if you want true colors, or any three if you want false colors) drop them into the channel mixer, and viola.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 14:01 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Leandros S: Under what terms are you using these images? You're a commercial site, and commercial use is not permitted by the copyright holder (Val Klavans for the retouched versions). Your versions are on the rather large side to be claiming fair use.

According to the comments on Valerie's Flickr stream, she's been aware that the pictures are here on dpReview for 36 hours. So, unless you're her legal representative (in which case, it's disingenous for you not to admit so) you're fighting a battle for another adult who did not ask for your help.

Oh, and as far as your notion that processing a raw file qualifies as creating a "derivative work", you have a lot to learn about IP law.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 13:38 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Your sample images presume the width of a square and a 16:9 display would be the same. However, generally monitors are priced per area, so a square monitor with the same area as a 16:9 monitor would be 75% as wide, but 133% taller. So your horizontally displayed photos get smaller, but your vertical images get larger. It's a nice compromise, but it also ensures nearly every photo wastes about 1/3 of the screen space instead of half of your photos wasting half the screen space.

The other issue is that movies just look better on a wide format screen. It's not even really a debate. Companies are saving lots of money by converting to all one aspect ratio and that's looking to be 16:9 all the way.

A consumer grade (or even image processing professional grade) 1:1 screen will never be built. The photographers who want one are too small a number. Most people want a general purpose web browsing, word processing, video watching, image viewing computer, not a specific "slide show" workstation.

As you decrease quantity, prices soar. So much so that it's cheaper to simply mask a 24 inch (that's 21x12 inches) LCD down to 12 inch square. A lot of image viewers can do that already.

Again, you cite an incorrect example of why something was done, in order to support your arguments. The e-reader was created for a multitude of reasons, including cost, size, weight, and battery life. It's no more "glare free" indoors than an emissive display.

Oh, and once again, humans have an oblong visual field, so no, "consistent image size" is not "important to shutterbugs" at all. Maybe on some other planet, but here on Earth, pretty much everything that has eyes scans an oblong field.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2013 at 14:14 UTC

Your assumptions are fatally flawed.

It is natural for vertical artwork to be smaller than horizontal artwork because the human visual system (eyes, positioning muscles, and the brain running it all) works on a basically rectangular field. The larger the display, the more applicable this is.

You talk about the broadcast industry designing things systematically. That's also incorrect. The broadcast industry adopted their near square 3:4 format because of physics: it was easy to mask onto round CRT displays and vidicon camera tubes. Once they had the freedom to cut glass in any shape they wanted, aspect ratios increased.

144 square inches of LCD weights about the same and costs about the same whether it's a 12 inch square or a 16x9 rectangle. Which do users prefer? The market already voted 3:4 and 4:5 off the island.

Oh, and I have enough experience with IP to know that your comment about manufacturers not looking at your "invention" is also incorrect.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2013 at 13:59 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

justmeMN: "a non-camera consumer product." I know, Nikon brand guns and ammunition. (grin)

Advertisement: "Whatever you shoot, make it a Nikon."

Actually, Nikon makes some of the finest spotting scopes on the market, advertises heavily in hunting magazines, and even sponsors hunting contests.

Personally, I think Oly's endoscope and camera operations could achieve synergy. Imagine the campaign "shoot the ...."

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 01:38 UTC
In reply to:

RoweLee: I hope Nikon would wisen up and do something different-- How about something that has more appeal than that joke 1 system? Nikon used to have a cool rangefinder lineup. What happened to that? A real rangefinder camera at a sensible price would be nice. I'd prefer that over the 1 system any day. Fuji has the X series, Olympus has the PEN system, why isn't Nikon reviving their old S-mount? I'd pick a leica M for its simplicity over any DSLR too bad it costs several DSLR's! What I'd give to see a Digital Nikon S3 or SP...

The rangefinder died (except as a multi-thousand-dollar fashion accessory) because an SLR is a Swiss Army Knife, working with wide angles that require aux finders on a rangefinder, telephotos that you can't even focus on a rangefinder, and macros.

Despite being louder, bigger, louder, heavier, louder, and requiring compromises in the lens design, the versatility of the SLR took the market by storm.

Well, you asked...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 01:34 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: This is the inevitable result of cameras becoming electronic gadgets. I see name brand point and shoots, blister packed at Target. Not saying this is Nikon's fault but it is what it is. For now, they can still make some money on interchangeable lenses and overpriced accessories.

So, how do you explain that 15 years ago, over 50% of pictures were taken with disposable cameras and simple, fixed lens P&S cameras? It's not "electronic gadgets" that are the problem, it's that the high cost of digital temporarily delayed the ubiquitous cheap alternatives, so the camera makers got used to selling $200 boxes, when the masses clamored for the return of the $15 blister pack P&S and the $5 disposable.

The ship has sailed on the camera makers getting that ubiquitous market back, because now "everyone" has a phone that came with a "free" camera in their pocket or purse. Even the $40 blister packed, card fueled phones have cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 01:29 UTC
In reply to:

JPR.lda: No need to change the concept, just implement properly a few things:
1- built in WIFI across the full Nikon camera range, without limitations
2- make Nikon 1, ergonomically compatible with D4, D800
3- make Nikon 1 compatible with CLS flash system
4- make a Nikon 1 top of the line, with a 6Mpx Hi ISO sensor V#x and V#h
5- Articulated LCD

I explain what I mean by the above requests:
1- communications are important, just build WIFI inside the camera, not a stupid adapter at silly prices. In a shoot I need to show the customer the photos on a tablet, or post them i
Immediately for approval.

2- I am a Pro using D3s and V2, each one for different jobs. It's crazy to memorize all the different ways to set the camera. V2 and lens are priced at pro level, so make it easier for a pro to use it

3- I want to be able to Nikon flash and Pocket Wizards

4- there is a D3s and a D3x, I would love a V3s, with better ISO then standard V# and 6Mpx is enough for most jobs

1 - fine.

2a - you're talking about trying to counter smart phone models that sell in the 10s of millions. That's not Nikon 1 territory, and a few hundred thousand 1's won't make back losing 10 million compacts. That's "crazy".

2b - the steep learning curve UI of a pro DSLR will kill them in the 10s of millions markets. Nikon even changes the UI between the D3200 and the D800 class. Trying for an "ergonomically compatible" product line is also "crazy".

3 - not possible with current technology. CLS pulse messages use flashes in the 5 microsecond range. You need the discrete metering cells up in an SLR prism to read that, the main sensor on a mirrorless isn't fast enough.

4 - There "was" a D3s and D3x. There "is" a D4. Lower pixel count only improves high ISO performance when you pixel peep. Higher MP counts are the future. Look at the Nokia 40mp phone on today's front page.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 01:24 UTC
On Hands-on with Eye-Fi Mobi post (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim Moynihan: Special thanks to Dave Rubin ( for letting me borrow his Nikon D800E for this piece.

Ziv, that's not entirely true.

Sure, the Android and iOS operating systems don't support raw, unlike the marginal and useless token support in desktop OS's like Windows and OS-X, but...

Just like on desktops and laptops, what really defines "support" is the apps that process raw files. Multiple raw decoders, including the popular LibRaw, have been ported to both IOS and Android, and there are several apps in the App Store and Google Play that use LibRaw.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 01:11 UTC
On Hands-on with Eye-Fi Mobi post (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peiasdf: That's why camera with wi-fi is a great idea. Save us $50 and we can use any card. Hear that Nikon, Canon, SONY, Pentax and Fuji?

@Reg, Use an 8 gig card on "any camera"? There are six 24mp APS DSLRs and mirrorless on the market, today. Tomorrow, this card will be scrap.

@Teru, you missed the disadvantages of the metal shrouds that half-surround the SD card slots in most cameras, the lack of power available in the SD card slot, and the size and orientation of the antenna. Like others commented, this thing has a range on the order of 2 feet. Nikon's smaller external WiFi unit goes 10-20 times farther. Oh, and if a camera maker integrates it into a camera, then there's a UI to set it up.

@Pieasdf, artificial price differences abound. There's one right here: AFAIK the Mobi and the more expensive X2 share the same hardware, the only difference is the stripped down software.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 01:04 UTC
In reply to:

Reactive: With something like a Canon EOS 700D, he could have changed exposure settings using a smart phone app, I believe.

I believe you're unfamiliar with the smartphone apps that do the same thing for a D800, like DSLR Dashboard or Helicon Remote.

Although the overall experience is a bit different from using such software on a Canon. For example, the D800 doesn't lose its OTG connections constantly, the way the 5D II does.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 00:48 UTC
On Poppy turns iPhones into 3D cameras post (8 comments in total)
In reply to:

gbainbridge: One small thing worries me. Does it allow you to plug in headphones so that you can hear sound with the video? It looks to me as if it blocks the iPhone's mic and speaker.

Yes, the pictures show access to the headphone jack.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2013 at 05:04 UTC
Total: 530, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »