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

QuarterToDoom: Wow its like a shark feeding frenzy and Canon and Nikon are the ones who are bleeding in water. I don't think there has ever been so much going on in the consumer camera equipment world like in the last 3 years.

Bleeding in the water?

http://www.strata-gee.com/2013/11/12/jvc-kenwood-dramatically-revises-fiscal-forecast-now-says-will-lose-money-year/

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 03:29 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: "The Micro Four Thirds system, originally developed by Olympus and Panasonic, now lists Carl Zeiss, Astro Design, SVS-Vistek, Kenko Tokina, Cosina, Schneider-Kreuznach, JK Imaging, Tamron, View Plus, Photron and Blackmagic Designs as members. Sigma also makes lenses for the system."

I thought Kodak is a part of the consortium too. They have their own m4/3 out now too.

There is no "consortium". It's more like "licensees". That's why there's always so many weasel words in these "somebody has joined four thirds" announcements.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 03:16 UTC

Wonder how many uFT lenses will cover the 25.3mm Super35 image circle.

Weird. If Panasonic hadn't recently dumped all their JVC Kenwood stock (they were JVC's largest single investor for half a century) I'd say "oh look, a Panasonic subsidiary has joined four thirds".

But right now, it makes no sense.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 03:13 UTC as 18th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

SDPharm: Here's my question: take an identical scene with this new Hassy and a Nikon D800, process them to the best one can, then print each to a reasonable size, say, 5 ft wide. Then hang them in a gallery with controlled lighting. Will I be able to tell which one is which when viewing them from a comfortable viewing distance of 3-5 ft?

Indeed. I've seen gallery work done with 6-25 shot panoramas on FF, 100-1000mp, and they were simply stunning.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2014 at 02:14 UTC

I can hardly wait to try this on the Linhoff M679. That little gem of a view camera just cries out for a medium format back with liveview. Now, granted the M679 is a little long for the lenses that make good normals and wides on a 55mm diagonal sensor, but there are still a few tolerable offerings. For product, this thing should be a killer.

You can keep the Fuji 645 lenses and body that the vultures slap a "Hassleblad" label on.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2014 at 02:10 UTC as 17th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

citrontokyo: The price is okay, but let's just say it's no Lunar in the looks department.
Pass.

" let's just say it's no Lunar in the looks department."

That's the best thing about it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2014 at 02:04 UTC
In reply to:

fenceSitter: "50 Mpixel CMOS sensor with almost twice the physical size of the largest 35 mm DSLR sensor."

On which planet are 1.67 "almost 2"?

I was going to correct you and point out that it has a sensor around 37x49mm, like any other medium format in the $25,000 range, but I checked the specs, and danged if it didn't have a dinky little 33x44mm, a 1.27x crop factor relative to an actual 645.

This camera represents an enormous price jump, first non-Leica 55mm diagonal "economy" tweener sensor to pass the $15k mark. In other words, they went to a lower cost CMOS sensor, and jacked the price of the 55mm diagonal class cameras up by a factor of two.

Jingle all the way, Hasselblad. Cha-ching!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2014 at 01:58 UTC
In reply to:

SDPharm: Here's my question: take an identical scene with this new Hassy and a Nikon D800, process them to the best one can, then print each to a reasonable size, say, 5 ft wide. Then hang them in a gallery with controlled lighting. Will I be able to tell which one is which when viewing them from a comfortable viewing distance of 3-5 ft?

"No, print one like 30 feet wide and you will see" how much nicer FF is at that aspect, after you crop the blad down to 41.6mp.

"Imagine how a highway billboard 60 feet wide will look" at 8mp, because a billboard may be big, but it's seen from a distance similar to a 4x6 at arm's length.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2014 at 01:49 UTC
In reply to:

pdelux: Only Hassleblad could make this thing uglier, I hope they don't get their hands on this... the humanity.

Funny you should mention that. Remember, Hasselblad was the first to give the Foveon a ride, even before Sigma.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2014 at 23:35 UTC
On Sony DSC-RX10 preview (725 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: Well, huge apologies, NOT! Do you really mean to say that a 1" sensor is NOT 1" at all? The sensor is only 13.8mm x8.8mm. This means that it has an area merely of 12,244 sq. mm. Well in the UK and I am sure elsewhere it is against the Sale of Goods Act and the Trade Descriptions Act to state that the sensor is a 1" sensor.
A 1" sensor has an area of 64,516 sq.mm, and that's more than four times the area of this tinsy nail-clipping bodie sized chip, so the image quality will be absolutely no improvement on what the 7800 Nikon can already do, and Sony are plain daft here, unfortunately. I apologize from my previous post, as I believed a 1" sensor to meet that description.
Surely Sony need to produce the R2, with the same abilities and a genuine APS-C sensor, to dare to charge this kind of money. I had a DSC-828 with a similar sensor but the Zeiss lens (28-200mm) was unusably beset by blue fringing, and I returned it to the store.

That use of the "tube diameter" has been the standard in video cameras for eight decades and has been used in P&S digital cameras (which had their origins in video cameras) for two decades.

No consumer protection organization anywhere in the world has had a problem with it, so what you are "sure" of is completely wrong.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 12:04 UTC
On Pentax K-3 preview (959 comments in total)

Nice to see my ideas in use...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/40566081

Direct link | Posted on Oct 10, 2013 at 21:21 UTC as 174th comment | 3 replies
On Zeiss announces 'no compromise' Otus 55mm F1.4 article (488 comments in total)

You would think that a company with Zeiss's history would actually have a sense of history.

Back in the early days of 35mm SLRs, all the camera makers tried their hands at 55-58mm f1.4 lenses. It's a focal length that lends itself to better optical design at f1.4 than a "true" 43mm normal. Photographers around the world rejected them, and pushed for a less "flat" normal, something closer to 43mm.

The end result was a "meet you half way" compromise, the 50mm that ruled for decades.

I think Zeiss is about to relearn history, as compromising the focal length to get "uncompromised" optical quality isn't going to work any better now than it did 50 years ago.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2013 at 13:55 UTC as 92nd comment | 3 replies
On Zeiss announces 'no compromise' Otus 55mm F1.4 article (488 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: Most people are missing the long-term picture. Today's FF optics are not even resolving the 36mp of the Nikon D800... in 10 years, we will have 80mp FF DSLRs; there will definitely a need for these types of lens in the long run.

With Otus, Zeiss is setting themselves up to be the premium choice once 36+ mp become the norm (sooner, than later).

Some of today's optics. There are a lot of lenses, today, that resolve at 100mp levels, without the insane prices, compromised focal lengths, hideous styling, or silly names.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2013 at 13:45 UTC
On Nikon 1 AW1 preview (588 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photoexposition: Come on, give me break.
Rebirth of the mythical Nikonos ? Nikonos were slr cameras, designed at the beginning for Commandant Cousteau so he could take pictures under the sea. This Nikon 1 is merely an hybrid with some waterproof features. It's like comparing apples with tomatoes.
Let's cut the marketing crap once and for all.

No, they weren't SLRs at all (except for that psychotic junk pile the Nikonos RS, which used an entirely different lens family).

There, I cut some of your crap. Now, put up or shut up, and tell us what an original, Nikonoos was, if not a "hybrid with some waterproof features".

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2013 at 21:05 UTC
On Did Sigma design the Olympus M.Zuiko 75mm F1.8? article (200 comments in total)

Makes a lot of sense to me. The thing I don't get is why Oly?

75mm is a bit of an odd duck on four thirds, 3.5x the "normal" focal length for four thirds (a 150mm equivalent). The classic portrait lenses are 85, 105, and 135mm, 2x, 2.5x, and 3x normal.

75mm is the portrait lens that everyone wants on APS-C, where it's 2.5x normal, but quite awkward on four thirds.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 11:16 UTC as 55th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Pheonix: Was a bit expensive, the old model, in the UK, and as a Pentax shooter, unlikely to fit. At £99 its a bit more of an impulse purchase.

Tempted to see how well it works for Dance Photography on location... isolation of head/shoulders from the rest of the scene, when Bounce is not available (dark ceilings etc.

Just need to find out when the UK distro will be getting them in stock!

It would look pretty flat. The "fun" part of ring lights is a distinctive "edged" shape outlining the head when your subject is close to a light colored background. Take away the light background, and the light falls off on the sides of the face just in time to feather off into darkness.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2013 at 01:51 UTC
In reply to:

KariIceland: For those ripping on the ray flash my question is simply this: do you want QUALITY or a piece of human excrements?

And flashes and lenses cost more than this beside the 50mm 1.8 you are willing to spend 1000$ on a lens, so why do you complain about this price?

Does it matter who does you in the backside hole when it comes to camera gear? Sure looks like it if we read all the negative comments here.

Reading all the stories in this thread, and on dpReview in general, about the Ray Flash being misassembled, or falling apart, I'm not sure you have a good handle on the difference between QUALITY and human whatever.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2013 at 01:46 UTC
In reply to:

SushiEater: I think it is stupid idea to begin with.
1. Loss of light.
2. Since it uses your flash and power (since there is loss of light you would not be able to take as many flashes) what is the point.
3. For 1/2 the price (and this is expensive version, there are other much cheaper versions) why not get
MRC-232 LED Ring Adjustable Hotshoe Light Video Lighting Lamp 6000K for DSLR
from Ebay?
It uses Sony battery included (cheaper versions use AA just like your flash), allows to use it as video light, adjustable light too.
Some versions can be used as flash or video.

Because LEDs run a constant power, and pictures are produced by energy, power x time. A speed light has about 60 watt-seconds of energy. You have to run a common 10 watt LED ring light for 6 seconds to get 60 watt-seconds.

How many subjects can hold still for 6 seconds? How many photographers can shoot 6 seconds handheld?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2013 at 01:43 UTC
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: Give it 3 months and every Chinese me-too shop will have this for $19.99 with free shipping from Shenzhen. Just wait, you know it's going to happen.

Grock, there are many knockoffs of the original Ray Flash. They came out a few months after it was launched, and perform virtually identically.

The new Ray Flash addresses (we hope) the serious flaws of the old one, by borrowing from some existing fiber-optic products. Give the cloners a chance: we'll be seeing knockoffs in a couple of months.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2013 at 10:27 UTC
In reply to:

Pierre Daigneault: Now what about an aluminium foil plate with a hole cut in it (crumpled to defuse) put onto the front of the lens. Then direct the regular flash at the plate and use the reflected light with the main light as back lighting......
...voila....$0.20.....

The plate surrounds the lens, right?

So, how do you direct a flash at the plate without directing it at the lens?

Are you familiar with "veiling flare"?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2013 at 10:23 UTC
Total: 558, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »