Dotes

Dotes

Joined on Apr 19, 2012

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Readers' Showcase: Documentary and Street photography article (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jurka: Those pics are empty.

Generalizing much?
There are certainly some excellent images in the gallery.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2014 at 12:05 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: A real density of 4 on a flatbedscanner? Would be awesome. I can't believe real optical 6400 dpi eighter.

Please let it be at a good price..

Reviews measured the true resolution of v700/v750 at around 2300-2400dpi. I'd expect similar results with these new scanners. Maybe a bit better because the adjustable height holders and the included pressure glass should help achieve optimal focus and flatness.

Technically Epson can claim the higher resolution because that's the number of pixels the scanner can output. But it is probably further limited by the optical resolution of the system.

There is also a test on Silverfast's website, which measures the max density of the v700 at 3.11 (Epson also claimed 4.0 for v700). That 4.0 is probably some theoretical value. An ADC pipeline limit or whatever.

Edit:
Here's the link: http://www.silverfast.com/PDF/TestReport_ME_DWueller.pdf

Direct link | Posted on Sep 27, 2014 at 10:49 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: A real density of 4 on a flatbedscanner? Would be awesome. I can't believe real optical 6400 dpi eighter.

Please let it be at a good price..

Of course it is neither true 6400dpi, nor true 4.0 density. Don't be silly. :)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 26, 2014 at 17:22 UTC

One big problem is that this looks like a camera from the camera side. And one significant advantage of smartphones is that they don't look like camears.

I wish that it didn't have a shiny big lens ring and the lens was more subdued into the body.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 15, 2014 at 20:38 UTC as 77th comment
In reply to:

xtoph: I am somewhat curious as to the basis of the editorializing characterization of these cameras as "popular".
I know people doing professional work on cheaper cameras, and i know people doing projects on arri and red systems, but i don't personally know anyone working with these.
Which doesnt mean much, but as i said, popular according to whom?

Check some rental houses stats.
The c300 might as well be the most used camera in the video world...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2014 at 10:00 UTC

The A7s can actually limit luminance range, but the option is gamma specific. You'd need to select Cine2 which is a legal safe gamma (16-235).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 01:05 UTC as 153rd comment | 1 reply
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III First Impressions Review preview (2970 comments in total)

I wish this had prefocus.
*sigh*

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 17:03 UTC as 594th comment
On Red Giant offers subscription to video editing tools article (26 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorg14: I think Adobe is the bellwether. If they succeed, it will open the floodgates and all companies will be asking for a subscription. It's basically apartment renting and car leasing on a smaller scale. Good for business and bad for the consumer.

Good point.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 12:45 UTC
On Red Giant offers subscription to video editing tools article (26 comments in total)
In reply to:

jorg14: I think Adobe is the bellwether. If they succeed, it will open the floodgates and all companies will be asking for a subscription. It's basically apartment renting and car leasing on a smaller scale. Good for business and bad for the consumer.

I disagree.
I am shooting narrative as a hobby. I need access to high end video tools 2 months in the year. If I had to by Adobe Production Premium this would set me back ten times the sum I pay for subscription and I would be stuck with the version I've purchased.

Bootom line, good for the consumer in my book.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 09:58 UTC

Who do I need to bribe for a 38mm eqv. GR?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2013 at 11:37 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply

The Zeiss has a distance scale (can't see it in the picture?). Aaand suddenly I am interested.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 27, 2013 at 09:25 UTC as 27th comment
On Fujifilm X100S Review preview (489 comments in total)
In reply to:

aris14: Ι find it extremely difficult to see the use of these cams anyway...
All these about street photography which needs some peculiar cams is IMO rather a philology.
Street photography as a term/art does not need a certain cam with certain abilities or whatsoever, just something handy and reliable, top IQ is not its main quest.
The only positive thing in these cams is that they explore miniaturization.

@IchiroCameraGuy:

I don't think you truly understand the problem. You don't have 5 seconds to pre-focus when out on the streets. Distance calibation should be possible to accomplish in a moment, whenever I want, preferably without the need to raise the camera to my face.

Besides, there is not always an object available around you at the required distance so that you use it to AF/manual prefocus. So, on top of raising the camera to eye level, you need to move around to get something in this distance. No, thanks. I'll just stick to manual focus lenses with scales.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2013 at 09:03 UTC
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (591 comments in total)

Welcome to the club.
I don't even own a DSLR anymore.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 23:33 UTC as 172nd comment | 2 replies
On Fujifilm X100S Review preview (489 comments in total)
In reply to:

aris14: Ι find it extremely difficult to see the use of these cams anyway...
All these about street photography which needs some peculiar cams is IMO rather a philology.
Street photography as a term/art does not need a certain cam with certain abilities or whatsoever, just something handy and reliable, top IQ is not its main quest.
The only positive thing in these cams is that they explore miniaturization.

Take the Sony NEX series as an example. There are NO distance scales on the E-mount lenses, not even on the Zeiss e-mount lenses. And there is NO electronic distance scale in software (Fuji's do have one). This means you can't set focus to a predetermined distance, a feature which is needed for shooting without looking at the screen or through the viewfinder, i. e. for waist or hip shooting. Manual focus is not the same as distance pre-focus. Manual focus can't help you if you are not looking thorugh the viewfinder/screen.

The only way to use a NEX camera as a zone focus camera is to use adapted lenses with distance scales on them.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 23:30 UTC
On Fujifilm X100S Review preview (489 comments in total)
In reply to:

aris14: Ι find it extremely difficult to see the use of these cams anyway...
All these about street photography which needs some peculiar cams is IMO rather a philology.
Street photography as a term/art does not need a certain cam with certain abilities or whatsoever, just something handy and reliable, top IQ is not its main quest.
The only positive thing in these cams is that they explore miniaturization.

Cameras actually DO need certain features for optimal street. Prefocus abilities, auto low limits for shutter speeds, bigger than the frame viewfinders, etc. Many street photographers find one or more of these mandatory for their process. You will be surprised how many otherwise excellent and ergonomic cameras can't be prefocused which makes them useless for hip or waist level shooting.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2013 at 10:39 UTC
In reply to:

Alejandro del Pielago: ... One of the longest and most boring and most snobbish advertising about Fuji and Ricoh cameras...

Might have something to do with Fuji and Ricoh cameras actually being suited for street shooting.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 16:11 UTC

Wish there was a 35mm eq. Ricoh GR.
*sigh*

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 13:15 UTC as 27th comment
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 review article (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dotes: Andrew certainly meant tonal precision and NOT tonal range here: "This can be used to extract maximum dynamic range at the time of recording, at the expense of tonal range."

It is about time reviews start MEASURING the rolling shutter effect and not just demonstrating it. It is not even hard to measure. Also, I fail to see how a clean and almost moire free camera like the d7100 has worse image quality compared to the gh3.

Hello Andrew, nice to have you here.
Here is another moire test of the gh3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VAfRO0yIic&feature=youtu.be

I am sure the gh3 is a much more video oriented camera (I actually used one last month for a shoot). It is a true hybrid. But we are discussing image quality here, not features. For me, moire is the most distracting video image element. It might be ok in a still image, but completeley draws attention to itself in a moving image and destroys shots. Neither rolling shutter, nor "electronic" noise, nor low DR, nor FPN ruin shots in the way moire ruins them.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2013 at 12:26 UTC
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 review article (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dotes: Andrew certainly meant tonal precision and NOT tonal range here: "This can be used to extract maximum dynamic range at the time of recording, at the expense of tonal range."

It is about time reviews start MEASURING the rolling shutter effect and not just demonstrating it. It is not even hard to measure. Also, I fail to see how a clean and almost moire free camera like the d7100 has worse image quality compared to the gh3.

I don't think you know what you are talking about. I cherry picked a moire test video because we are discussing moire. If we were discussing porn I would cherry pick a porn video for you, geez.

Moire occurs in situations involving fine-line and human made structures, which incidentally are all around us. If you did have any idea about what we were talking about you would know that moire and aliasing artefacts are the single most annoying and (hard to fix in post) problem for low budget/indie filmmakers.

Neither the Nikons d5200 and d7100, nor the Canon 5d Mark 3 exhibit aliasing artefacts comparable to this moire-fest.

Being a property of the unifrom sequency sampling it is actually possible theoretically to fully remove this if your OLPF and downsampling are optimized for the sampling rate of your camera.

And finally, learn to do a proper argument. Your posts are full of fallacies.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2013 at 12:10 UTC
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 review article (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dotes: Andrew certainly meant tonal precision and NOT tonal range here: "This can be used to extract maximum dynamic range at the time of recording, at the expense of tonal range."

It is about time reviews start MEASURING the rolling shutter effect and not just demonstrating it. It is not even hard to measure. Also, I fail to see how a clean and almost moire free camera like the d7100 has worse image quality compared to the gh3.

Seems pretty moire ridden to me...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcbNJUDMEPY

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2013 at 11:47 UTC
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »