Richard Murdey

Richard Murdey

Lives in Japan Kyoto, Japan
Joined on Aug 21, 2002

Comments

Total: 932, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm X-T10 Review preview (81 comments in total)
In reply to:

sensibill: Disappointing to see emphasis placed on point and shoot OOC JPEGs and little mention of true RAW IQ potential, operational speed and street pricing. Not to mention the substantial resolution discrepancy, which will mitigate 'pleasing JPEGs'.

Lack of proper RAW support in Lightroom, demosaicing problems with X-Trans and the fact that the A6000 has a $100-250 street price advantage seem rather important to go mostly ignored in this article, IMO. As is the obvious chroma (and some luma) NR being applied to their higher ISO RAWs. The detail discrepancy between the Fuji and Nikon or Sony 24MP models is substantial, yet goes totally unmentioned in context of comparing RAW DR and higher ISO.

The 16 MP Fuji sensor will be deemed perfectly good enough until the day Fuji come out with a 20 MP version, whereupon everyone will immediately declare that 16 MP is no good at all (and that's what they though all along, natch).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 22:06 UTC
In reply to:

Retzius: on another note... Nikon going to very large front elements and 'E' models with electronic aperture motors is an obvious attempt to do everything they can to innovate without changing the F mount.

they would be better off creating a new mount like Canon did with a larger throat and more contacts. it would give them more versatility as they migrated to the inevitable mirrorless models

Nothing wrong with F mount just as long as you are building reflex cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 04:59 UTC
On Fujifilm announces X-T1 IR for infrared photography article (169 comments in total)
In reply to:

PinPoint: DON'T WASTE TIME POINT AT THE STARS, IT IS STILL ONLY 16 MP

"When was the last time you blew up your photos to movie theater size?"

The last time I looked at them from movie theater distance! :D :D :D

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 22:51 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: The language of the post is so imprecise as to make it meaningless. Lars, did you really write that?

The module has a thickness of under 5 mm. The pixel "size" has been reduced from 1.12 micron to 1 micron. "The slimming is achieved by reducing the size of each individual pixel." Wha-------t?

Size is x-y dimensions, thickness is z. On the face of it the pixel density has absolutely no bearing on module thickness, which is more about the total thickness of lens, AA filter, packaging, sensor, substrate and electronics.

I doubt the sensor size is smaller (that would put it at a competitive disadvantage). Instead, it seems a thinner substrate led to a thinner module. And, *in an unrelated but still impressive technical feat of fabrication*, the pixel pitch is now down to 1 micron.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 15:31 UTC
On Fujifilm announces X-T1 IR for infrared photography article (169 comments in total)

How is the EVF colors mapped to allow you to "see" the NIR and NUV ranges? If it shows IR as false color "red" how does the photographer distinguish between actual red and IR?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 13:40 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply

The language of the post is so imprecise as to make it meaningless. Lars, did you really write that?

The module has a thickness of under 5 mm. The pixel "size" has been reduced from 1.12 micron to 1 micron. "The slimming is achieved by reducing the size of each individual pixel." Wha-------t?

Size is x-y dimensions, thickness is z. On the face of it the pixel density has absolutely no bearing on module thickness, which is more about the total thickness of lens, AA filter, packaging, sensor, substrate and electronics.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2015 at 01:16 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies
On Google to phase out Google+ Photos post (33 comments in total)

The search/auto-tagging/face recognition//image analysis functionality is pretty darn impressive.

(ok, sometimes it gets it wrong spectacularly, but in the main it works well)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 08:08 UTC as 15th comment
On Google to phase out Google+ Photos post (33 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: How can you trust a company who abandons platforms, instead of improving it?

.

Nobody abandons platforms as well as Microsoft.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2015 at 08:02 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: Dear Damien Demolder,
is there a good reason why you don't revise this article and remove the following incorrect statement: "for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system".

It is not. In the Full Frame world there are lenses like the EF24mm f/1.4 which both perform significantly better, and have much shallower DoF + much higher total light transmission than this lens.

(Before the I-don't-understand-equivalence-so-you-must-be-an-idiot-brigade trolls in, let me just remind you that because FF has 4 times the sensor area of m43, then the noise over image area, given similar sensor technologies, are similar when FF uses ISO 400 and m43 ISO 100. ISO is just a number without any real, physical dependence. When equivalent aperture (e.g. f/1.9 vs f/0.95) and ISO (e.g. ISO 1600 vs ISO 400) is used, then noise over image area, DoF, exposure time (or in a word: everything) is equivalent.)

@philosomatographer

Close, but 16mm is 24mm eff. I should have said 14mm F1.4 not 15mm F1.4 above. Sorry to get your hopes up.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2015 at 02:37 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1233 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: All this technology. But it seems that when they try to get the best quality from a compact camera it still ends up pretty big.

Quality has nothing to do with it. It's all about the controls. If you want a bunch of advanced features and the controls to access them conveniently, you are either going to want a larger body or you are going to be pecking at the thing with a toothpick.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 03:20 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1233 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kissel: I like the dedicated exposure compensation dial.

I tend to view it as "EV for dummies". A big dial right up on the top plate where even a clueless amateur can't possibly miss it, to remind them that they dialled in -1 last evening and forgot to reset it...

Most dSLRs don't have this feature, even professional ones. In fact most "non retro" cameras don't. As long as the EV button is conveniently positioned the button + dial implementation is a perfectly acceptable substitute.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 03:12 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 makes leap to 20MP article (168 comments in total)
In reply to:

johnsmith404: Calling a resolution increase of just around 12% a 'leap' is pushing it a bit.

The math says ... 12%. Resolution. 25% moar pixels though!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 01:08 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: So it's basically an f/5.6 lens, then? Kthxbye.

I see. Well, some lenses are better than others wide open. For an ultrafast-ultrawide like this lens I would not have expected to see sharp/high contrast images at max aperture, and it being an MFT optic doesn't really have any impact on expectation one way or the other.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 12:18 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: "The lens is neither especially small nor light, though for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system."

Hmmh... 10.5mm f/0.95 lets in as much total light and has the same DoF as a FF 21mm f/1.9 lens. Canon's EF 24/1.4L II is both lighter and shorter, and lets in more than double the amount of total light. So what are the "similar lenses" that is won by this lens being "a good deal more compact"?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Voigtlander isn't a useful lens. But I do believe that this article begins with an incorrect statement.

How so? After (too much) thinking about it some while ago I convinced myself that a 50/2 on FF and 35/1.4 on ASPC were to all intents and purposes the same thing.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 05:15 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: "The lens is neither especially small nor light, though for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system."

Hmmh... 10.5mm f/0.95 lets in as much total light and has the same DoF as a FF 21mm f/1.9 lens. Canon's EF 24/1.4L II is both lighter and shorter, and lets in more than double the amount of total light. So what are the "similar lenses" that is won by this lens being "a good deal more compact"?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Voigtlander isn't a useful lens. But I do believe that this article begins with an incorrect statement.

Carry on folks, just lets leave 24mm out of this and compare it to 20 or 21 mm lenses. 'cause 24mm isn't 21mm, any more than 28mm is 35mm.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 00:34 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: So it's basically an f/5.6 lens, then? Kthxbye.

"The expectation with MFT has always been that lenses are usable straight from the max aperture."

Eh? Where did *that* come from!?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 00:08 UTC
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: Dear Damien Demolder,
is there a good reason why you don't revise this article and remove the following incorrect statement: "for the specification it is a good deal more compact than a similar lens for a full-frame or even APS-C system".

It is not. In the Full Frame world there are lenses like the EF24mm f/1.4 which both perform significantly better, and have much shallower DoF + much higher total light transmission than this lens.

(Before the I-don't-understand-equivalence-so-you-must-be-an-idiot-brigade trolls in, let me just remind you that because FF has 4 times the sensor area of m43, then the noise over image area, given similar sensor technologies, are similar when FF uses ISO 400 and m43 ISO 100. ISO is just a number without any real, physical dependence. When equivalent aperture (e.g. f/1.9 vs f/0.95) and ISO (e.g. ISO 1600 vs ISO 400) is used, then noise over image area, DoF, exposure time (or in a word: everything) is equivalent.)

In round numbers it "competes" with a 21mm F1.9 or a 15mm F1.4 on APSC.

The only lenses that come to mind is the new Nikkor 20mm F1.8G and the old Sigma 20mm F1.8. There is nothing close to a 15mm F1.4. Eye-balling it seems the lenses are similar but a bit bigger than this MFT lens. So Damien is more-or-less correct and you are definitely nit-picking.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: I don't understand the monomaniacal fixation on dynamic range as the be-all and end-all of a camera's image quality.

The staff at DPR has already proven that you can get gorgeous images out of the new 5D and pros and amateurs will be taking jaw-dropping photos with them for years to come despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the internet, so could we please move on?

Normally I'd agree with you and add that you should hardly need to rely dpreview to find examples of great photos taken with lower performing sensors....

.... still 15 dB S/N at low ISO is nothing to sneeze at. It's something worth considering when buying a new camera. Nikon/Sony still have Canon at a tremendous advantage here, and if I had to choose between +15 dB S/N or +18% more resolution, I'd tend to spring for the former.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 05:43 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: Just look what you can do with this thing!
http://photorumors.com/2015/04/03/olympus-air-a01-camera-module-rocket-launcher-style-setup-can-probably-get-you-arrested/

@BarnET

In principle there's no reason why it has to be wireless. USB-C between the monitor/control unit and the sensor/mount unit would solve any lag issues, and allow power re-distribution as well (so the smartphone/tablet battery would not drain).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 6, 2015 at 00:42 UTC
In reply to:

Craig from Nevada: Looks like Olympus got the memo. You don't need what we traditionally think of as a camera to take pictures anymore.

A move by Olympus from the camera market to the taking picture market. The product is priced to move.

I love the concept for macro and product photos. As a general-purpose camera maybe not so much.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 09:15 UTC
Total: 932, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »