dbm305

dbm305

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Academic Philosopher
Has a website at www.dbm305.smugmug.com
Joined on Feb 24, 2008

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Sources of noise part two: Electronic Noise article (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photato: Any mention of Readout Rate as a Noise Source ?

And what about Angle of Incidence which makes some sensors especially those with smaller pixels less sensitive (noisier) at the edges of the frame ?

Ultimately Pixel Count do have an impact on Noise. Otherwise Sony wouldn't bother making a A7S, nor Apple would be making that official statement "Less pixels is more"

Most test for these assertions are based on steady subjects with camera stabilized on a tripod. But all that methodology is flawed when Camera Shake and Subject Motion are introduced.

I would kindly ask DPReview or others to point me to comparison test done when camera and/or subjects have even the slightest motion or not perfect focus.
I am sure results will be different.

A lot of people imagine that the A7s has astonishing still low light capability because it really does have astonishing low light video capability. But that's just because all the pixels are used in the video, rather than line skipped etc, not because of their size,

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2015 at 23:42 UTC
In reply to:

bombeeney: Doesn't work in bulb mode for my A7r which was mainly what I wanted it for. Would have been nice to ditch the remote for backpacking night shots.

A previous poster pointed out it seems to work only on A7s and A7II in bulb. I'm hoping when it's out of beta....

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 23:05 UTC
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: I bought a remote control from China, it works good with at least 5m range (didn't try any longer distance so maybe it's even better than I thought) and also support T mode. The only shortcoming is that you can only trigger your camera from the front side, I guess that's where the IR receiver is.

Oh...and it cost only 1 dollar.

Pity the bulb doesn't work on the A7r. Maybe when it's out of beta?

But yes Brendon's point is right. It's an emergency back up release. I'd rather a remote, and often use the smart remote on my phone as well as a cheat IR one, but sometimes you may not have them ...

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 23:03 UTC

Hmm....bulb?
Normally, in manual you go down the sutter speeds and BULB is before 30s.

But with the app on on the A7r (FW1.21) I scroll down and it won't go below 30s

Anyone else with better luck? Did you guys at DPR try it out?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 12:00 UTC as 62nd comment | 1 reply

In theory you can download it directly from your computer with the camera plugged in. But I get stuck in an endless loop of being asked to confirm the connection, so I had to use WiFi. A little googling tells me I'm not the only one. (OSX10.10)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 11:42 UTC as 64th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

LincolnB: I'd like it if focus distance could be stored in EXIF. That would be a huge boon in forensic analysis, among other uses. It would help answer the question of "How far away WAS I when I took that shot?"

Canon and Olympus, at least. I wish Sony would do this.
The other thing Canon does is write in a field where the AF point is; I *really* wish Sony would do that..

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 23:43 UTC
In reply to:

Timbukto: I find the OLED display gimmicky and think it should be data fed through EVF. Lenses should be designed for light capture...oh great now we have lenses that emit light too...time for some sensational light leak horror stories in long exposure low light conditions.

And while I'd like to have accurate focussing distance in the EVF Sony would need to support it, which they don't. Also, even if it were there, when you are manual focusing it's nice to be able to set approx focus before you lift the camera to your eye. I think it's a great idea..

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 23:41 UTC
On Datacolor offers Spyder5 with redesigned calibrator article (113 comments in total)

Wonder if this will calibrate an iMac? Had terrible callibrations with Spyder; switched to Colormunki and it's just fine.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 8, 2015 at 08:04 UTC as 22nd comment

Presumably they mean 99.5% transmittance of the light polarised in the appropriate direction in the case of the polariser, rather than 99.5% of all the light...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2015 at 22:08 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

TristanW: f1.4 /F2 sharpness looks a little bit soft. Can any one help to comment that?

it seem not as sharp as my 50/1.4ZA @f1.4, but MTF shows should be a lot better.

@rishi
Are you basing your view about the sharnpess centrally of the Sigma and the Zony on your tests or published MTF?

The problem with published MTF is that Sigma publishes 10lp/mm and 30lp/mm, whereas Sony publishes 10, 20 and 40. The Sigma at 30 is better centrally than the Sony at 40, but the Sony at 20 is better than the Sigma at 30. So Sigma and Sony might be very similar at 30....but we have no published data for Sony at 30. And the Sony is indeed very uniform...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2015 at 10:48 UTC

Thoughtful candid interviews like this almost make me want to buy a Fuji...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 12:00 UTC as 82nd comment

The 90mm macro is smaller than the Canon short tele macro plus adapter. If you want internal focus and 1:1 macro I can't see how it could be any smaller...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 11:05 UTC as 91st comment

I fear the tough e mount could make disaster more likely with large lenses not being carefully supported: the lens or body could break. Sony's two piece metal and plastic arrangement can't be cheaper to make than a one piece affair like the replacement. I'm pretty sure it's there for a reason: the plastic layer will snap off in an emergency, leaving lens and body relatively unscathed and easy to repair. A small amount of play (so long as it's all in the same plane) is a small amount to pay for that...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2014 at 10:38 UTC as 78th comment | 1 reply
On Inside RA001: World's first Boeing 747 'Jumbo Jet' article (127 comments in total)

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2014 at 23:21 UTC as 40th comment
On Hasselblad unveils pixel-shifting 200MP H5D-200c MS article (230 comments in total)
In reply to:

John TF: How close would GigaPan + DSLR approximate these images?

For critical work when stiching have lots of overlap, and then use masks in PTgui to mask out the corners and extreme edges; that way you get not only extra pixels but are effectively using only the best part of the lens.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2014 at 22:10 UTC
On Zeiss announces Compact Zoom CZ.2 15-30mm T2.9 lens article (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

dbm305: Hmm. What are the chances of ZE/ZF versions? a 15-30F2 right? It covers the full frame. And he hugely expensive 'compact' primes are the same optics as the ZE/ZF lenses....

F2.8? That makes T2.9 pretty impressive given how many elements there are in it (my guess was actually F2.5; F2 was a typo..)
Well the compact primes well for about five times the price of the same stills versions here, so that would make it $US5K if the same ratio held. So about the price of a relatively fancy Leica M rangefinder lens. I think some might pay.... Not me!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 28, 2014 at 08:17 UTC
On Zeiss announces Compact Zoom CZ.2 15-30mm T2.9 lens article (62 comments in total)

Hmm. What are the chances of ZE/ZF versions? a 15-30F2 right? It covers the full frame. And he hugely expensive 'compact' primes are the same optics as the ZE/ZF lenses....

Direct link | Posted on Mar 28, 2014 at 02:45 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Review preview (490 comments in total)
In reply to:

Garth Wood: Maybe I've missed it somewhere in the review, but can anyone tell me definitively what the raw image bit-depth is? Discussion around the Intertubes seems to waver between 12-bit (which I expected) and 14-bit (a surprise), with at least one commenter claiming to have heard directly from Sony that it's 14-bit depth.

I own this little gem, and it's wonderful. But I don't have a solid idea of how much post-processing I can do before the image starts to break down or posterize; and the manual that came with the camera (and other official docs from Sony) is/are strangely silent on image bit-depth.

It'll be the usual Sony cRAW; it's very slightly lossily compressed, so it's hard to say what the bit depth really is: in practice it varies from area to area of the image. If I were to say average 12 that might be a bit meaningless, but maybe it helps. But it starts with 14 before compression. If you mess around with RAW digger or similar tools you might be directed to bits of the image at 100% where you can see the effects, but at the whole image level you get a smaller file size for no visible loss.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2014 at 23:16 UTC
On Sony plans March firmware update for Alpha 7 and 7R article (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

dbm305: What does "support for fast AF mean"? Is it something separate from support for the new 70-200? Could it be a general AF speed upgrade, or perhaps enabling AF in the faster burst mode?

Perhaps then it's support for the focus limiting buttons. But are you sure? I know it was listed in the same line as mention of support for the 70-200, but it seemed pretty ambiguous to me and the translations are not that terrific!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2014 at 06:11 UTC
On Sony plans March firmware update for Alpha 7 and 7R article (120 comments in total)

What does "support for fast AF mean"? Is it something separate from support for the new 70-200? Could it be a general AF speed upgrade, or perhaps enabling AF in the faster burst mode?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2014 at 04:17 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »