Henrik Herranen

Henrik Herranen

Lives in Finland Tampere, Finland
Works as a Digital Signal Processing Software Engineer, MSc
Joined on Oct 6, 2005
About me:

Plan: To baldly shoot what everyone has shot before.

Comments

Total: 181, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (93 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: Does anyone know why the AF module only covers "only" a relatively small part of the frame? Would it be prohibitively expensive to implement a larger module? Presumably bird/sports/etc photographers would appreciate the ability to track objects outside that central part of the frame.

On a related note, if every pixel is split into two separate photodiodes, does anyone know why "only" 80% of the frame is available for focus using DP AF?

Rishi, yes, I think you made perfect sense.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 23:19 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (580 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: 4K video with an OVF ? I would much prefer a high resolution 2.3-4.4 mp EVF. but this looks like the best DSLR for video so far.

KAllen: how you would shoot 4K video with a "real image in the viewfinder" using this camera is beyond me. Can't be done.

kangoo1707: The OVF can give you black in video mode, and not much else.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 14:49 UTC
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (93 comments in total)
In reply to:

RPJG: Does anyone know why the AF module only covers "only" a relatively small part of the frame? Would it be prohibitively expensive to implement a larger module? Presumably bird/sports/etc photographers would appreciate the ability to track objects outside that central part of the frame.

On a related note, if every pixel is split into two separate photodiodes, does anyone know why "only" 80% of the frame is available for focus using DP AF?

Focusing using the corners may not be accurate because of lens aberrations, so they have probably disabled the remaining 20% on purpose.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 13:01 UTC

Hello DPReview gang,
it would perhaps be a good idea to mention right away in the first sentence or in the subject line that this is an interchangeable lens camera. I follow this site regularly, but there are so many similarly looking cameras that for me this being an ILC was far from clear until I read much further.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 27, 2016 at 07:05 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EOS 20D Review (3 comments in total)
In reply to:

BobFoster: The main thing I want from camera performance is to not notice it, and the Canon EOS 20D passed that test. It shot when I wanted to shoot, focused when I wanted something sharp, and let me look through images quickly when it was time for a break. With the 20D, I never had to waste time and miss shots waiting for the camera.

"let me look through images quickly when it was time for a break"

No, that's not the 20D. Scrolling through images was painfully slow like on the 300D/350D. This was corrected with Canon's next enthusiastic models, the legendary 5D, and the soon-to-follow 30D. Thay had larger screens and MUCH faster image playback (in the order of 3x-5x faster).

Why do I know it? "I was there, at the dawn of the third age of mankind..."

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 21:39 UTC

Wow.

Just wow.

Not for me, but still...
Respect!
Impressive!
Wow!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 4, 2016 at 01:09 UTC as 74th comment | 1 reply

Good article.

Nevertheless, let me remind you as great as the Sony RX100 IV is, it is over 40% heavier and almost 40% larger by volume than Canon's G9 X. So, if you look for a really small camera with 1" sensor, you should at least consider the Canon.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 11:42 UTC as 51st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

brazzy: Oh, nice to see someone reminded that there's a country named China out there... ^^
This Casio has been very popular among second generation's rich Chinese girls. Given such a demand, no wonder that price got that high.
Congratulations to Casio for the marketing. If people could open more their eyes, there are plenty of chances like this.

While I'm totally against the selfie culture, I have nothing but the highest respect for Casio for finding this intriguing niche. This is marketing genius.

The goal for a limited company is not to be a benefactor for the humankind but to gain profit to the shareholders. Regardless of what I personally think of this product, Casio is clearly doing something very right.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2015 at 09:02 UTC
On article Inching forward? Canon PowerShot G5 X review posted (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

Catalin Stavaru: I actually think that the more interesting camera (outside this enthusiast forum) from the Canon 1" sensor offerings is the G9X. It has only 80% of the volume of the *original* Sony RX100, and 70% or less of the volume of the recent RX100 versions. There is no point in making a large, sophisticated camera with small sensor, unless reading these forums too much. A large camera is a waste without la large sensor.

Right on, Catalin!

I am inkling for a successor to my good old Canon S110 which some time ago replaced my S90. Bigger alternatives have little interest to me: if I can't fit it into my jacket pocket easily, I may just as well take my 5DII with me. After all, no P&S can touch what that camera can do with a 50/1.4 or 135/2.

However, an S110-sized option with a triple-size sensor, _that_ is interesting. I have considered both the S90 and S110 as fixed focal length cameras in low light and as zoom cameras in better light. This philosophy has worked well in the past, and applying it to the G9X is unlikely to disappoint. Plus, because of its size, the camera doesn't look imposing in the slightest.

Plus, to finish this rant: anyone complaining of the lens aperture at the long end and not taking into account the G9X's truly pocketable size: enjoy your bigger camera.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2015 at 22:07 UTC
On article Luna is 'world's smallest' 360-degree camera (26 comments in total)

The title says: "Luna is 'world's smallest' 360-degree camera". But then the text says: "The team behind Luna is seeking funding on Indiegogo to cover design and production costs." So, according to the text, there is no Luna. It isn't being manufactured. It is not even being designed at the moment. Thus the title is misleading. "People looking for money to design world's smallest 360-degree camera" would be more accurate, though less clickbaity.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 07:37 UTC as 12th comment
On Connect post Apple iPhone 6s Plus camera review (159 comments in total)

Come on guys, AGAIN sensor size is not in the "Key Photographic / Video Specifications" list.

There really are just two things that specify the upper limit of the performance of a digital imaging system: aperture and sensor size. All the marketing terms: BSI, MP, CMOS vs CCD (and all the BS without I), etc, come after that. Marketing blah-blah-jargon agains real, tangible numbers.

I refuse to believe that you, who are pretty much the definitive guys regarding digital photography, don't know this. So please explain why, WHY do you not think sensor size is something that should be presented just along with maximum aperture. I honestly want to know!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 2, 2015 at 20:46 UTC as 30th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

exapixel: The "Read Review" link button is missing from the D810's page.

It will be released right after the Canon EOS 1D Mark III review.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2015 at 06:07 UTC
On article 2015 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $1200-2000 (325 comments in total)

The title for the last page is: "Which camera should I buy?"

Regardless of how good a camera is, how can you with clear conscience recommend putting money into a system that the manufacturer has abandoned, without even mentioning the fact? Yes, Samsung NX1, It's you I'm talking about!

Having zero consideration of a manufacturer's commitment to the camera system and lens selection they sell is doing a great disservice to Canon and Nikon, who have built camera systems and wonderful lenses for decades, and who will be there long after the little charlatans of the 2010's have disappeared.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 12:35 UTC as 31st comment | 2 replies
On article 4K video: What you need to know (285 comments in total)

Hmmh, 4K article with text size fit for 480p... :-)

Anyhow, I read page 1; found some errors:
1) Blu-Ray, not Blue Ray.
2) The first two duck images images are not even remotely to scale. 480p is demonstrated by an image 90 pixels high, while the 720p image is 240 pixels high. 480/90 = 5.3, and 720/240 = 3. Stopped reading there.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 06:38 UTC as 24th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

RichRMA: It's a tiny smart phone sensor so who cares how it performs? It was like BSI sensors, that took forever to reach a decent size. Come back in five years.

Why would they be interested in the dwindling niche market that the larger-than-phone sensors is? Mobile phone sensors is where the money is.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2015 at 08:11 UTC
On article 2015 Roundups: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (222 comments in total)

"It captures a full, 19.6 million pixel resolution image in the top layer, with the lower two layers capturing 4.9MP of information each. Sigma touts Foveon as the only image sensor that captures full color at every point in the captured image; a first in digital photography since color film."

I wonder how they can capture full colour at every point when they don't have more than a quarter of photosites on two layers of the three. Either Sigma is lying or the author is confused with the Foveon sensors of old that actually _did_ have an equal amount of photosites on each layer.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2015 at 11:17 UTC as 27th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Bene Placito: I hope it performs better than the 30mm f1.4 DC Art lens. That lens is a shocker for edge and corner sharpness.

Thermidor:
there is at least one special case where corner sharpness and low coma wide open would be beneficial: aurora (Northern lights) photography.

Currently the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 - which is remarkably free of coma even wide open - is the best tool I have for auroras. Still, from time to time, I'd be willing to give up 6 mm if I could get two stops more light in. Sometimes auroras move so fast that you really need split-second exposures to get details. (And often they move a lot slower, but that's another story.) At the same time, I'd like the stars in the sky to be dots, not seagull-shaped energy creatures. :-)

For quite some time, I've been considering a 24mm f/1.4 for aurora photography. But now I'll wait and see how this one turns out. The difference between 20 and 24 mm is, after all, pretty significant.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2015 at 12:02 UTC
In reply to:

GlobalGuyUSA: SWEET!! I hope this means that SIGMA is going to make the auto-focusing 28mm/1.4 ART lens that Nikon should have made!!!

Can't wait! :-D

Actually, and as unbelievable as it sounds, it looks like Sigma is going in all new and unknown territories by very soon releasing a 20mm f/1.4(!!!) Art lens... If only the following holds true:
http://www.canonrumors.com/sigma-20mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-art-appears/

If at all affordable, that would be my dream lens.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 15, 2015 at 08:22 UTC

Nice review!

There is one thing, though. The test has been done with a Canon APS-C DSLR, so there should be at least one mention that this lens isn't the equivalent of a 24-450 on Canon cameras, but rather 26-480. It's a surprisingly significant difference on the wide end. I suggest putting that mention in the page 1 Headline Features, something like this:
- Class-leading 16-300mm focal length range (approx 24-450mm equivalent, 26-480 on Canon cameras)
... and perhaps in Conclusions - Pros on page 4:
- 24mm equivalent wide-angle (26 on Canon)

(For those who think 1.6*16 is 25.6 and not 26: yes it is, but the focal lengths of zooms are rounded anyways to benefit the lens manufacturer, so 26 is very likely more correct than 25.6.)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 06:05 UTC as 24th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

BorisK1: Part of the problem is the intended use. In most common scenarios, if the image is purely for the web, a dedicated camera is overkill.

If you're making a 400x320 thumbnail, a $2000 lens will not do any better than a $20 software-corrected chunk of plexiglass. And it will be heavy and clunky.

BorisK1: Quite the opposite. The smaller the resulting image is, the better pictures taken with shallow depth-of-field optics look.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2015 at 15:46 UTC
Total: 181, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »