PIX 2015
Tonio Loewald

Tonio Loewald

Lives in United States Arlington, VA, United States
Works as a Consultant
Has a website at http://loewald.com/
Joined on Jul 25, 2005

Comments

Total: 273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

falconeyes: combined with an RGBW array (as pointed at in the patent), the polarizingfilters could be used underneath the W pixels, thereby providing both polarizing information (at a 4x lower resolution, of course) and increased highlight sensitivity for improved dynamic range (because of course, the sensel polarizing filters will eat just as much light as do lens polarizing filters).

What's interesting then is that polarizing filtering can be applied in post, as can added highlight recovery.

However, while interesting in a patent, all the extra complication may simply not be worth it.

The diagrams show a standard RGGB 2x2 grid with a 2x2 grid of rotated polarizing filters underneath it. Now they're going to lose some amount of sensitivity via transmission — let's say they absorb 50% of photons in the first layer and then 50% (of the remaining 50%) of photons via polarization in the second layer. Now on the upside, with unpolarized light, they've got a full resolution white channel getting 25% of the light. With polarized light it's a bit weirder (you could even imagine polarization moire, e.g. from metal louvres or wire meshes). So basically they're giving up one stop (bit?) of color sensitivity, and gaining a full resolution white channel that's two stops worse, and a (roughly) half resolution polarization channel that's two stops worse (but that's almost certainly more than enough).

They could probably capture 90% of the light in the color layer and toss the full resolution benefit and have plenty of polarization data. Better than SLT, say.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2015 at 15:55 UTC
In reply to:

jtan163: Interesting - B&H is listing the 200-500 as Nano Crystal and SIC.
With 3ED that sounds like a real bargain.

This really interests me even if B&H is wrong.
I've been eyeing off second hand orignal versions of the 80-400, but this is kinda sounding decent.

Have to see the test shots, but mmmmm....

It's not nano. B&H made a mistake.

The old 80-400 won't touch this (but it does get down to 80mm). The MTFs for this lens look outrageous.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 16:04 UTC
In reply to:

disraeli demon: Still no affordable, compact 24mm f2 lens for APS-C - I guess if you're into primes, Nikon (and Canon) expect you to upgrade to full frame.

@kewlguy. What f2 24mm affordable lens does Fuji make? Is it the $1000 f4 zoom?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 16:00 UTC
On Going solo: DxO introduces 20MP 'ONE' connected camera article (127 comments in total)

The Olympus A01 is a better implementation of the same basic concept (also better than the Sony options). Heck, it's even cheaper (including the bundled zoom lens or, say, the Olympus 17mm f2.8 or Panasonic 20mm f1.7).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2015 at 00:51 UTC as 2nd comment
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardly: Canon and Nikon are sleeping and Sony is going to EAT their lunch!

Exactly. Not only that but Kodak actually invented the CCD, shipped the first DSLR (with Nikon), and with Apple released some of the first consumer digital cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2015 at 00:44 UTC
In reply to:

lacikuss: Why the mormalization wasn't done by upscalling the d810 samples from 36mp to 50mp and then comparing DR?

Since DR has nothing to do with sharpness this would be worse for the Canon.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 20:45 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardly: Canon and Nikon are sleeping and Sony is going to EAT their lunch!

Well yeah, but I was trying to be open-minded.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 22:55 UTC

Given that the original post includes the text of the agreement, you can't really accuse him of being misleading. And yes, Firefly Entertainment has perpetual global rights to the images (it's in the text of the agreement) and the artist requires Firefly's permission to make more than one use of the image. So, while technically the artist still retains some rights (i.e. the right to republish the image given Firefly's permission) that's about it.

Oh, and I love the reference to "film" in the contract.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 01:43 UTC as 52nd comment
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardly: Canon and Nikon are sleeping and Sony is going to EAT their lunch!

@mmitch I didn't say Canon or Nikon were going anywhere, so you're labeling a statement you invented as stupid. It may be that Canon and Nikon stay around forever as niche players.

Religious/brand wars come from the fact that buying into religion/brand is expensive and the cost of switching religions/brands is high, so the zealots try to convince themselves they made the "right" decision. (It's also why no-one preaches like a convert.)

Nikon and Canon may well be around forever, but they'll likely become niche players like Leica. (Canon makes a lot of money on other stuff, not all of which will disappear.)

My main point is that cameras are first and foremost computers and camera companies suck at software (they suck at computer hardware too). Eventually this is going to kill them. I'm sure Blackberry and Nokia seemed eternal five years ago; now Blackberry is barely in business and Nokia is out of the phone business.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 01:21 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngularJS: That's funny the A7r2 is not even out yet, but 15 people already own it!

This is true of pretty much every camera announcement on dpreview.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 18:14 UTC
On Opinion: Did Sony just do the impossible? article (1085 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardly: Canon and Nikon are sleeping and Sony is going to EAT their lunch!

Basically cameras used to be mechanical / optical devices but have morphed into computers where the differentiating factors are (still) optics and software. The camera companies aren't sleeping, they just can't turn themselves into software companies. Sony and Samsung will only be transitional — neither of them has really succeeded with computers beyond selling commodity hardware with someone else's software (although Samsung learns fast). In the end there'll be Apple / Google / Facebook / whatever and a few niche camera makers serving professional photographers. (Red and Black Magic are examples of what future camera companies will likely look like.)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 18:03 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1273 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tonio Loewald: OK. Sony wins.

This is basically everything I've ever wanted in a digital camera. I'll wait for the price to come down a bit but — barring some ridiculous unforeseen flaw — this hits all the right buttons.

Now — telephoto and macro lenses please Sony.

I like autofocus (especially for shooting kids and wildlife) so third party lenses don't solve the lack of good telephoto lenses. But yeah, aside from what's not to love?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 23:38 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1273 comments in total)
In reply to:

sunnycal: Proof is in the pudding and the success of this camera will be determined by real life AF test (including AF-tracking and AF with Canon lenses), low light performance, and video quality.

It still looks like that Sony has not changed its Raw format thus constraining its still quality a bit (which is not good for such high-end camera).

Yes, stupid RAW files could still be a deal-breaker. Sigh.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 22:20 UTC
On Sony a7R II has 42.4MP on full frame BSI CMOS sensor article (1273 comments in total)

OK. Sony wins.

This is basically everything I've ever wanted in a digital camera. I'll wait for the price to come down a bit but — barring some ridiculous unforeseen flaw — this hits all the right buttons.

Now — telephoto and macro lenses please Sony.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 22:17 UTC as 189th comment | 4 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 sample gallery updated article (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: Shame they removed IBIS.

Isn't the GX7 the only Panasonic with IBIS? (And — at least based on reviews — it's not very good compared with Olympus.)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2015 at 15:40 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: I think a lot of modern "hipster" users forgot why so many people stuck with black and white all the way to the end of the film era.

Speaking as a person who is himself a computer programmer, I have no problems looking at another damn monitor, and I suspect your friend is in a minuscule minority of computer programmers. (Love what you do!)

I used to love developing my own film and making my own prints when I was a kid (also, it saved money!), and one day I might do it again for fun (I think my kids might enjoy it and find it educational too), but I don't really see any real advantages to doing it any more.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

noflashplease: I think a lot of modern "hipster" users forgot why so many people stuck with black and white all the way to the end of the film era.

Early color reproduction was pretty awful. A lot of photographers, such as my father, preferred black and white to lousy color.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 2, 2015 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

Tonio Loewald: It seems to me that "shoot to the right" was more useful in the film era — film has ludicrous (almost infinite) over-exposure latitude (it's not practical to recover it without some kind of high tech enlarger, but I read somewhere it's in the neighborhood of 22-stops). These days, certainly at lower ISOs, it's often advisable to somewhat under-expose lest you accidentally blow out small highlights that aren't apparent in your histogram.

Jos — yes you're absolutely right. You need to learn how to read a histogram (including knowing when not to trust it), but I'd say that — especially given today's sensors — ETTR is actually a really, really bad practice.

Direct link | Posted on May 17, 2015 at 20:35 UTC
In reply to:

Tonio Loewald: I'm very skeptical about Leica's pricing, but found this very compelling article:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20120209_4-ReaderComments-LeicaLenses.html

Summary — it's not the Leica bodies, which kind of suck, but the glass, which is better made to finer tolerances etc. it's not that Nikon and Canon don't know how to make glass this good (nikon makes lenses for IC masking) they're just targeting a mass market.

Plenty of photographers I respect produce fantastic work with Canon and Nikon gear. Even if what you say is true, gear only matters a tiny bit — it's the mind behind the viewfinder that makes the difference. I think I'm a decent photographer, but there are people making images with their phones that blow anything I can produce with my gear out of the water.

Personally, I think Leica gear is for poseurs. The advantages of Leica glass are swallowed by inferior sensors and ergonomics. But they're beautiful, and if I had the money to burn I'd certainly own them.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2015 at 01:13 UTC
In reply to:

WadeMedia: Now they need an Apple phone that shoots raw. They are making others look better.

You're right, they're not true RAW images, but they're certainly not "completely useless".

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2015 at 15:23 UTC
Total: 273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »