Roland Karlsson

Roland Karlsson

Lives in Sweden Stockholm, Sweden
Works as a Programmer
Joined on Feb 23, 2002
About me:

Collector of K-mount and M42 stuff. Main camera K-5. Also interested in camera technology, e.g. Foveon. Also interested in computer based image analysis and transforms.

Comments

Total: 1094, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: How surprising! I like to be surprised. Hmmmmm ... you learn something new now and then.

Maybe do something about the noise though. I can imagine that it is quite annoying for the model and the photographer.

he he

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2014 at 18:48 UTC
On Mountain Magic: Shooting in the Lofoten Islands article (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

maikD: Dear DP, you need a website redesign. The width of the photogallery is 590px, the photos are too small. We are in 2014, not in 2004.

@Saman . I am not all that for Copyright. But ,,, I assume it might be a bad idea to announce here that you are using the images. It might even decrease the possibility for DPReview to get larger images on their site. Just a thought.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 20:07 UTC
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rage Joe: This is just Stupid. When one of the main points of moving while taking photographs is to have different lighting. Just stupid.

I can agree that this nervously moving around light is kind of annoying instead of helpful. But ... it is a kind of interesting idea that can be developed further.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 09:23 UTC
On Dronestagram contest winners announced article (116 comments in total)

Hmmmm ... not in particular good images. But ... interesting.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 21:51 UTC as 27th comment
On Drone lighting could be coming soon to your studio article (120 comments in total)

How surprising! I like to be surprised. Hmmmmm ... you learn something new now and then.

Maybe do something about the noise though. I can imagine that it is quite annoying for the model and the photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 21:48 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
On Mountain Magic: Shooting in the Lofoten Islands article (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

maikD: Dear DP, you need a website redesign. The width of the photogallery is 590px, the photos are too small. We are in 2014, not in 2004.

It sounds strange that the one holding the rights to the image demand that you show the images so small that they often get negative comments. That cannot benefit the rights holder. More than once I have told those complaining about the bad images to go to look at the source site where they are larger.

I assume bford means that the background of the images shall be dark grey. To use dark grey as background to text is generally a bad idea. Personally I am just fine with black though for the images.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2014 at 09:21 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Nice try to clear up some misunderstandings. Unfortunately it does not always help, as this thread shows.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53973560

The main irritating thing (for me) is that I do not have any problems with this whatsoever - still all the confusions pops up now and then. This seems to be hard stuff for many people - for some strange reason.

Sites, like this one, is very much about comparing and evaluating different cameras and lenses. What shall I buy? What is the best choice? How can I use this camera when I know how to use another one. Etc, etc, etc. This is hard enough when the sensor sizes are identical.

But today you can get several cameras with different sensor sizes, both system cameras and fixed lenses cameras. And it is then the real confusion starts.

Of course. We can do as you say - treat each sensor size as a different kind of creature, only knowing schematically how the differ. But, personally I find it helpful to understand on a more fundamental level how sensor size affects the result.

But, I am an engineer and I have no problems whatsoever with that. Many (most?) people do have problems though. And also opinions.

So, if you buy a fixed lens compact camera. What do you prefer? That you get 8-24 mm zoom or 24-72 mm FF eq zoom?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2014 at 09:29 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)
In reply to:

LingoDingo: For the past 150+ years of photographic history, "equivalence" meant EXPOSURE equivalence, where the ONLY variables that mattered were F-Stop / Shutter Speed / ISO...

Now we have a new religion called DOF Equivalence, which photographers and film-makers of the past 150+ years did not give a sh*t about.

I've shot professionally for 30+ years now, using everything from a Minox "spy" camera to the Polaroid 20×24 inch studio camera, and while DOF was always important, I was never concerned about matching the DOF between camera formats.

This new DOF Equivalance religion is very misguided in my opinion, as it appears to be all about matching camera formats, and not about getting the best performance out of each unique camera.

Nobody cares if your Minox shots match the look of your 8x10 Sinar shots, if the shots your are producing are mediocre.

@Bmoon. It actually depends. It depends on why you use the FF instead of the m43. If you use them for the same things, then you are right. But, if you get the FF because you want more resolution ,,,, then they are equally fast.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 22:24 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)
In reply to:

LingoDingo: For the past 150+ years of photographic history, "equivalence" meant EXPOSURE equivalence, where the ONLY variables that mattered were F-Stop / Shutter Speed / ISO...

Now we have a new religion called DOF Equivalence, which photographers and film-makers of the past 150+ years did not give a sh*t about.

I've shot professionally for 30+ years now, using everything from a Minox "spy" camera to the Polaroid 20×24 inch studio camera, and while DOF was always important, I was never concerned about matching the DOF between camera formats.

This new DOF Equivalance religion is very misguided in my opinion, as it appears to be all about matching camera formats, and not about getting the best performance out of each unique camera.

Nobody cares if your Minox shots match the look of your 8x10 Sinar shots, if the shots your are producing are mediocre.

@LingoDingo - you use strong words. I cannot really see why this is so very important for you. And - I cannot see why you refuse to see that other views might be fully reasonable - also.

I understand your view, it is also useful. Please do me the favour to accept mine.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 22:04 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)
In reply to:

LingoDingo: For the past 150+ years of photographic history, "equivalence" meant EXPOSURE equivalence, where the ONLY variables that mattered were F-Stop / Shutter Speed / ISO...

Now we have a new religion called DOF Equivalence, which photographers and film-makers of the past 150+ years did not give a sh*t about.

I've shot professionally for 30+ years now, using everything from a Minox "spy" camera to the Polaroid 20×24 inch studio camera, and while DOF was always important, I was never concerned about matching the DOF between camera formats.

This new DOF Equivalance religion is very misguided in my opinion, as it appears to be all about matching camera formats, and not about getting the best performance out of each unique camera.

Nobody cares if your Minox shots match the look of your 8x10 Sinar shots, if the shots your are producing are mediocre.

Good points @Timmbits. Yes, a F2.0 lens for APS-C is much, much faster than a F2.0 lens for 1/2.5". That is important for the buyers to understand.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 19:10 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)
In reply to:

LingoDingo: For the past 150+ years of photographic history, "equivalence" meant EXPOSURE equivalence, where the ONLY variables that mattered were F-Stop / Shutter Speed / ISO...

Now we have a new religion called DOF Equivalence, which photographers and film-makers of the past 150+ years did not give a sh*t about.

I've shot professionally for 30+ years now, using everything from a Minox "spy" camera to the Polaroid 20×24 inch studio camera, and while DOF was always important, I was never concerned about matching the DOF between camera formats.

This new DOF Equivalance religion is very misguided in my opinion, as it appears to be all about matching camera formats, and not about getting the best performance out of each unique camera.

Nobody cares if your Minox shots match the look of your 8x10 Sinar shots, if the shots your are producing are mediocre.

Calling something a religion does not make you right.

If you have an exposure meter and you know the ISO speed of the film, then to compute the exposure you need to know exposure time and F-stop. So, in this context you have a point.

But, for digital cameras you might change the ISO. And for bigger sensors you can use generally higher ISO for the same IQ. So, then things are a little different.

What then decides the properties of the camera is the FOV and the aperture diameter. Those parameters determine the DOF and the FOV and the sharpness due to diffraction. I.e. important system parameters. Important for making a choice.

Of course, it is not all that useful to compare a 1/2.5" inch compact camera with a medium format camera.

But, if it is 1", m43, APS-C or FF it might just work out just fine. That is the range of high quality and reasonable compact cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 15:39 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zdrasviti: pixel size is the most important thing in terms of image quality thats why 12 mp full frame ( d3-d700) sensor is still the lowest noise level on planet.

It depends on what you want. If you want very high ISO images, then you are right. But, if you want maximum image resolution, then more and smaller pixels is the way to go.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 08:20 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (1738 comments in total)

Nice try to clear up some misunderstandings. Unfortunately it does not always help, as this thread shows.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53973560

The main irritating thing (for me) is that I do not have any problems with this whatsoever - still all the confusions pops up now and then. This seems to be hard stuff for many people - for some strange reason.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 08:16 UTC as 29th comment | 5 replies
On Mountain Magic: Shooting in the Lofoten Islands article (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

maikD: Dear DP, you need a website redesign. The width of the photogallery is 590px, the photos are too small. We are in 2014, not in 2004.

Good to see that you are working on it. This is my major complaint regarding your photo galleries. Fantastic photos shown too small might destroy the impression.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2014 at 10:09 UTC

I am stunned. This is a product I would never had expected.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2014 at 07:01 UTC as 4th comment
On Beyond the ordinary: Tim Dodd's Everyday Astronaut article (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: He seem to have some fun. This high altitude suit does not really look like a space suit though. Maybe it does not matter.

At first it did for me. It said astronaut and it did say space suite - and I saw none. So - I got disappointed. Then I thought. He is just playing around having fun. And - photos of someone playing around having fun - no problems with that.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2014 at 16:01 UTC
On Beyond the ordinary: Tim Dodd's Everyday Astronaut article (102 comments in total)

He seem to have some fun. This high altitude suit does not really look like a space suit though. Maybe it does not matter.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 5, 2014 at 20:18 UTC as 34th comment | 2 replies
On Morning mist in the Sigma Challenge challenge (8 comments in total)

Vary nice. Looks like a well done water color painting. I could considering having such a print on my wall.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 11:49 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Surprising and innovative. Impressive result. But ... I see it only as a proof of concept really. The images do not have any interesting content, except the liquid. So - you look - wonder how they made it and then look at something else.

Yes, the image series the show almost always have too small images.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 17:17 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Surprising and innovative. Impressive result. But ... I see it only as a proof of concept really. The images do not have any interesting content, except the liquid. So - you look - wonder how they made it and then look at something else.

Actually, it looks much better if you look here http://www.flotowarner.com/71654-projects. There the images are larger, which makes a difference. And there is also lots more, which makes an impact and also shows other projects. The pair likes it when it is messy I assume. :)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 09:03 UTC
Total: 1094, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »