texinwien

texinwien

Lives in Austria Vienna, Austria
Works as a Software Architect / Consultant
Joined on Apr 23, 2012
About me:

Started shooting OM-D E-M5 on April 28, 2012, after a ~4 year hiatus. Previously shot the Canon 300D, which I bought when it first came out.

Comments

Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

mosc: DPR, can you discuss the ETTR process you use as it relates to in-camera single shot dynamic modes found on modern cameras (not multi-shot HDR gimmics)? It seems like they do many of the same things and the complexity of raw processing and manually determining exposure is far less necessary if the camera's programmers already juggle much of this automatically. Perhaps these modes are not fully developed in your eyes yet and need significant improvement?

Wouldn't it be as simple as giving users a "1 EV pull", "2 EV pull", and "3 EV pull" metering modes? Seems like if the camera can accurately meter for mid-tones then it's a simple ISO change in most cases paired with basic scaling in the JPG creation to give these outputs.

It doesn't seem complexity wise more difficult than multi-shot HDR modes except that internally the camera adjusts brightness of each to match and writes them out independently.

"The point is that no camera I can think of gives you a meaningful way of telling when your Raw file is starting to clip"

What about the live view highlight overexposure warnings on recent Olympus models?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 09:38 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (522 comments in total)
In reply to:

badi: "This has two direct benefits: firstly it provides images with full color resolution, [...] Secondly, as a result of sampling the same point four times, the images will have greatly improved noise characteristics. The other benefits over the Olympus system is that it could be faster, as it only requires four exposures, rather than eight"

About the first two benefits... yes, they are true, but they are also true for olympus. Maybe you just rephrase, so that should be clear. The term "the other benefits over the olympus system" suggest that also the first two are "better" in pentax.

About the last one - it's not a benefit, it's a different approach - some will prefer the increased res, as taking 4 shots or 8 is usually about the same thing: it can only be applied to perfect static subjects.
Also here, i would rather say that both manufacturers just didn't want to go the full way and make both options available. At least in the case of olympus it's clearly only a matter of software.

Leandros S: I agree that if the Pentax method does require less time (time will tell), that would be an advantage. The problem with DPR's wording is that it suggests that some things that are not advantages to the Pentax method in comparison to the Olympus method actually are.

As an E-M5 II owner, I'd be happy if Olympus added the 4-shot method as an additional option. I can see advantages to both, but it's important to be clear about what those advantages are.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 10:57 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (522 comments in total)
In reply to:

badi: "This has two direct benefits: firstly it provides images with full color resolution, [...] Secondly, as a result of sampling the same point four times, the images will have greatly improved noise characteristics. The other benefits over the Olympus system is that it could be faster, as it only requires four exposures, rather than eight"

About the first two benefits... yes, they are true, but they are also true for olympus. Maybe you just rephrase, so that should be clear. The term "the other benefits over the olympus system" suggest that also the first two are "better" in pentax.

About the last one - it's not a benefit, it's a different approach - some will prefer the increased res, as taking 4 shots or 8 is usually about the same thing: it can only be applied to perfect static subjects.
Also here, i would rather say that both manufacturers just didn't want to go the full way and make both options available. At least in the case of olympus it's clearly only a matter of software.

Agreed - that's worded poorly and is guaranteed to lead to confusion (see earlier posts on this discussion for examples).

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 06:46 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (522 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Looks like Pentax's new FF camera will be having sensor shift tech. Thanks Ricoh for innovating when the two market leaders are just hanging loose.

fmian - my eyes are open. The Olympus shifts for color information and resolution, whereas the Pentax only shifts for color information.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 23:47 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (522 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Looks like Pentax's new FF camera will be having sensor shift tech. Thanks Ricoh for innovating when the two market leaders are just hanging loose.

solarider - The Olympus does that, as well, then it goes a step further.

The first 4 exposures are shifted just like the Pentax in order to kill false color (like foveon). Then four more exposures are shifted at the sub pixel level to increase linear resolution. So, no, the Pentax isn't doing something special that the Olympus isn't, as far as I can tell, and according to what IR and DPReview have written.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 23:45 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (522 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Looks like Pentax's new FF camera will be having sensor shift tech. Thanks Ricoh for innovating when the two market leaders are just hanging loose.

So the key difference, as I stated, and as confirmed by Imaging Resource and DPReview, is that the Olympus captures 8 exposures for a much larger boost in linear resolution, whereas the Pentax captures only 4 exposures.

That's what I thought. Thanks for confirming it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 23:25 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (522 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Looks like Pentax's new FF camera will be having sensor shift tech. Thanks Ricoh for innovating when the two market leaders are just hanging loose.

solarider - how is it different than the high resolution sensor shift mode on the recently released Olympus OMD E-M5 II, other than the fact that the K3 II only records 4 photos, while the E-M5 II records 8?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 23:09 UTC
In reply to:

Mssimo: Just confirmed that HDR images can also be merged into pano. Welcome the HDR Raw Pano.

I certainly hope they add some more projections for the pano stitcher. Spherical, Cylindrical and Rectilinear are really very limiting. Panini please.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 20:35 UTC
In reply to:

vadims: Standalone Lightroom 6 is still missing on adobe.ru... But one can, of course, conveniently buy Lightroom CC 6. (Yes, there is http://www.adobe.com/ru/products/photoshop-lightroom.html which has a "Lightroom 6 - Buy" link at the very bottom, but that leads to store selector that causes infinite page loop in Chrome and FF [and hangs browsers, eventually], and leads to Lightroom 5 in IE).

Their sales in Russia are handled by Softkey.ru. Their site does have LR6, but only full version, not upgrade. Just got off the call with their customer support, they confirmed -- no upgrades.

Now ignoramuses like David Rossberg would say that's whining... OK, Mr. Smarty Pants, tell me how I can upgrade LR5 to 6 w/o signing up to CC.

<sigh> That's monopoly for you...

If you run any ad-blockers, you should whitelist *.adobe.com . I had some trouble purchasing (from Austria) with Ghostery and AdBlock Plus running on adobe.com . Things got slightly better after I whitelisted the domain in both blockers.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 20:23 UTC
In reply to:

vermaden: So now Lightroom now comes with HUGIN plugin? :)
http://hugin.sourceforge.net/

Hugin and Enfuse plugins: http://photographers-toolbox.com/blog/category/lrenfuse/

Enfuse does exposure averaging In addition to hdr blending.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 10:29 UTC
In reply to:

achim k: Question about HDR pocessing in LR6:
have the different exposures to be taken from tripod, or ist it possible to take them hand-held? My 5D Mk.III is able to put the images together, even when they are slightly different in framing, but the HDR - JPGs out of the cam are not so much satisfying.

it works with handheld series.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 10:24 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

Indeed. The guy is obviously clueless about how to calculate SNR. Obvious case of the Dunning--Kruger effect: too clueless to realize his cluelessness.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2014 at 22:29 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

Indeed, it does - downsizing increases DR and SNR. Again, you're simply mistaken, and you don't know what you're talking about, or how SNR is calculated. I linked it above. Go read it and spend some time trying to understand it.

The simple rule is that the SNR of an image due to photon shot noise is sqrt(N), where N is the number of photons captured.

Can't argue with the laws of physics...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

I need to correct my previous post. "If we stitch or blend" should read "If we stitch and downsample or blend", and "and blending or stitching multiple exposures" should read "and blending or stitching and downsampling multiple exposures". I thought this would be clear from the context of the previous discussion, but re-reading suggests that it may not be.

The point is, if we combine multiple exposures, whether via stitching and downsizing or by blending, into a final image that is the same size as the original, individual captures, the resulting image will have higher SNR than any of the single captures.

That's just how SNR (due to photon shot noise) works.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 11:23 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

Sorry, Bjorn, but you're just completely confused about how SNR works. I suggest you take it to the Photographic Science and Technology forum, where you may end up learning a few things.

If we capture X photons in one exposure, we will capture 4X photons in four exposures. If we stitch or blend these together, the SNR of the resulting image will be 1 stop better than any of the single exposures. That's simple physics.

I'm not confusing this with HDR, either, since I do both HDR, blending (of equal as opposed to bracketed exposures) and stitching.

The bottom line is that SNR goes up with the number of photons captured, and blending or stitching multiple exposures obviously and logically means that the final image will have the benefit of having been created from more photons than any single capture, which, by the laws of physics means the final image will have a higher SNR than any of the individual exposures.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 10:38 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

Correction: "a blend of the four images will have the bedight of 4x as many photos as any of the single images, which will, in turn, give the blend a full so of improved SNR" SHOULD BE "a blend of the four images will have the benefit of 4x as many photons as any of the single images, which will, in turn, give the blend a full stop of improved SNR". Stupid autocorrect on my tablet.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 08:27 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

Wrong Bjorn. Totally wrong. SNR increases in quadrature. That is, noise increases at the square root of the increase in the number of photons captured. SNR = sqrt(N), where N on the right side equals number of photons captured when discussing photon slot noise. Of course, if we take 4 images of the same scene with the same settings, a blend of the four images will have the bedight of 4x as many photos as any of the single images, which will, in turn, give the blend a full so of improved SNR, compared to any of the single frames. I use this technique with excellent results where bracketing isn't practical. A blend of 16 photos of the same scene with the same settings quadruples SNR / increases it by two stops (compared to any of the single frames). Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_noise , Examples: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54799810

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 08:07 UTC
In reply to:

Terry Breedlove: Will this technology also help with Dynamic range and noise ?

You're right, Dheorl and Terry Breedlove, and Bjorn is just plain wrong. It's obvious that he doesn't understand how SNR works.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2014 at 22:30 UTC
On Autumn's Last Light in the Sony A6000 challenge (1 comment in total)

Fantastic shot!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 16:07 UTC as 1st comment
On Olympus PEN E-PL7 First Impressions Review preview (503 comments in total)
In reply to:

G1Houston: Does it still show banding when the Panasonic 20/1.7 is used at high ISO? Could someone please check to see if they have finally go this issue under control?

AFAIK this is no longer a problem in the newer Olympus m43 models. It's an issue on the E-M5 and may be an issue on some of the other Oly m43 cameras that use the Sony sensor, but it's not an issue on the E-M1 (Panasonic sensor), and I'm pretty sure they've figured out how to avoid the issue on their more recent camera models. I certainly haven't heard any complaints about it on later m43 models.

(E-M5 & Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 owner, here)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2014 at 09:41 UTC
Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »