Optical vs Software Photography ?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
kiwi2
kiwi2 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,023
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?
1

Bobthearch wrote:

kiwi2 wrote:

I loved reading some of those posts from 15 years ago.

Like this one...

www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10970120

... "Imaging being able to drive a car where the engine doesn't make a sound. Nice, but its not going to happen, so why worry about it"

It was a bad idea, so they now add sound artificially if the engine is too quiet.

Perhaps the poster back then should have used bullet points.

That could have helped to elevate their opinions to 'facts'. Then maybe electric car engines would have never been invented since.

-- hide signature --
 kiwi2's gear list:kiwi2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T100 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +4 more
biza43 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,730
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?

Antti Roine wrote:

Some 16 years ago I wrote directly to Canon and Nikon R&D that "please replace mechanical mirror, pentaprism and shutter with the digital solutions". They gave polite answers that they will make the inventions by them selves. Now they have finally made these inventions in Canon EOS R and Nikon Z7.

I was also knocked out in these forums:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10760390

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10970000

Was that back in 2004? Still hold a grudge?

My wishes have finally came true. However, Canon and Nikon bet on the wrong horses again: They are investing on the optical photography instead of the software photography.

There is a lot of computer design into designing and producing lenses. There is also a lot of computer power in software correction for some lens' designs compromises.

This is not wise because:

1) With tiny phone camera sensors we can get a long depth of field and very sharp photos, but also beautiful bokeh with the software photography even in dark conditions.

Not really. It depends on how large you view them, from what distance. Compact cameras with tiny sensors still do a lot better.

2) With full-frame sensor and wide aperature lens you can get beautiful bokeh

Bokeh is not the same thing as amount of background defocus.

, but with software photography it is impossible to convert the unsharp background to sharp one.

You can actually mitigate against that by using focus stacking.

3) Full-frame sensors makes the mirrorless cameras large and heavy.

Not really. There are FF mirrorless cameras that are actually small.

If Canon and Nikon directors are wise, they will invest on smaller APC-C size sensors and inteligent software photography integrated to the camera - like the mobile phone manufacturers do.

Perhaps you should try and write to them again. Told them how they were wrong 15 years ago.

Most of the users do not want to edit raw files in the Photoshop.

Right...

The latest small mobile phone cameras gives us the prelude of the possiblities of the software photography with the small sensors and automatic GPS location data.

This is so old... if you want to really know what "software photography" can do, look into how NASA acquires and processes their images.

-- hide signature --

www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

 biza43's gear list:biza43's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 16mm F2.8 +1 more
Dennis Forum Pro • Posts: 19,376
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?
6

Antti Roine wrote:

However, Canon and Nikon bet on the wrong horses again: They are investing on the optical photography instead of the software photography.

What's your basis for this claim ?

First, are smartphone makers NOT investing in optical photography ?

Second, why do you believe that Canon and Nikon are not investing in "software photography" ?

Yes, yes, we all know phone cameras are the greatest thing since sliced bread and anyone who still shoots with a real camera is just a dinosaur in denial because they're doomed, etc. and so forth.

But regardless of the worship worthy merits of smart phones, the premise of this thread sounds false. Smartphone companies invest in optics and camera companies invest in software.

Or are you merely complaining that no current cameras do fake DOF ?

- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

Jonsi
Jonsi Veteran Member • Posts: 5,229
Re: Bloke, we've been begging for stickies for years,
1

Ron Poelman wrote:

for a range of reasons; they seem to be totally beyond the capabilities of this place.

They could if user requests were of interest. Simply remove max post count and stick the thread at the top of the forum.

But... it's a business. Separate threads of the same stupid argument drive more traffic. For 2 reasons. Things are worded differently to disguise the intent of the thread, thus showing up in more search results, and because no one is interested in reading a 1,000 page thread about phones.

Short of that they should have a mobile photography forum that those threads could all be moved to.

Oh... They do. Yet they aren't.

sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 16,198
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?

Antti Roine wrote:

Some 16 years ago I wrote directly to Canon and Nikon R&D that "please replace mechanical mirror, pentaprism and shutter with the digital solutions". They gave polite answers that they will make the inventions by them selves. Now they have finally made these inventions in Canon EOS R and Nikon Z7.

I was also knocked out in these forums:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10760390

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10970000

My wishes have finally came true. However, Canon and Nikon bet on the wrong horses again: They are investing on the optical photography instead of the software photography. This is not wise because:

1) With tiny phone camera sensors we can get a long depth of field and very sharp photos, but also beautiful bokeh with the software photography even in dark conditions.

No, fake bokeh is still terrible.

2) With full-frame sensor and wide aperature lens you can get beautiful bokeh, but with software photography it is impossible to convert the unsharp background to sharp one.

As a photographer, you have to know what settings to use to get the photo you want.

3) Full-frame sensors makes the mirrorless cameras large and heavy.

If Canon and Nikon directors are wise, they will invest on smaller APC-C size sensors and inteligent software photography integrated to the camera - like the mobile phone manufacturers do. Most of the users do not want to edit raw files in the Photoshop.

The latest small mobile phone cameras gives us the prelude of the possiblities of the software photography with the small sensors and automatic GPS location data.

If you want a smartphone- buy one

But FF cameras are pretty much the only ILCs still selling. And APS-C bodies/lenses are not that much smaller than FF.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM Canon 70-200 F2.8L III Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +1 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Veteran Member • Posts: 5,229
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?
2

sportyaccordy wrote:

But FF cameras are pretty much the only ILCs still selling.

Nikon's best selling cameras are it's APS-C DSLRs.

Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 55,384
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?

Bobthearch wrote:

kiwi2 wrote:

Antti Roine wrote:

Some 16 years ago I wrote directly to Canon and Nikon R&D that "please replace mechanical mirror, pentaprism and shutter with the digital solutions". They gave polite answers that they will make the inventions by them selves. Now they have finally made these inventions in Canon EOS R and Nikon Z7.

I was also knocked out in these forums:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10760390

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10970000

My wishes have finally came true. However, Canon and Nikon bet on the wrong horses again: They are investing on the optical photography instead of the software photography. This is not wise because:

I loved reading some of those posts from 15 years ago.

Like this one...

www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10970120

... "Imaging being able to drive a car where the engine doesn't make a sound. Nice, but its not going to happen, so why worry about it"

It was a bad idea, so they now add sound artificially if the engine is too quiet.

Only at low speed and only to warn visually impaired pedestrians.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM +23 more
sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 16,198
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

But FF cameras are pretty much the only ILCs still selling.

Nikon's best selling cameras are it's APS-C DSLRs.

Yes, today. I don't think that will be the case in a few years, and I think Nikon agrees... which is why they put as little money as possible into the DX DSLR system over the last 5 or so years.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM Canon 70-200 F2.8L III Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +1 more
stevo23 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,537
Re: Optical vs Software Photography ?

Antti Roine wrote:

Some 16 years ago I wrote directly to Canon and Nikon R&D that "please replace mechanical mirror, pentaprism and shutter with the digital solutions". They gave polite answers that they will make the inventions by them selves. Now they have finally made these inventions in Canon EOS R and Nikon Z7.

I was also knocked out in these forums:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10760390

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/10970000

My wishes have finally came true. However, Canon and Nikon bet on the wrong horses again: They are investing on the optical photography instead of the software photography. This is not wise because:

1) With tiny phone camera sensors we can get a long depth of field and very sharp photos, but also beautiful bokeh with the software photography even in dark conditions.

2) With full-frame sensor and wide aperature lens you can get beautiful bokeh, but with software photography it is impossible to convert the unsharp background to sharp one.

3) Full-frame sensors makes the mirrorless cameras large and heavy.

If Canon and Nikon directors are wise, they will invest on smaller APC-C size sensors and inteligent software photography integrated to the camera - like the mobile phone manufacturers do. Most of the users do not want to edit raw files in the Photoshop.

This is the part I'm not sure of. "Most of the users" - how does anyone know this? Which users? It's a difficult sample to find. I think "most dedicated camera users" wouldn't not agree. But "most iPhone users" would agree.

 stevo23's gear list:stevo23's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +3 more
Ron Poelman
Ron Poelman Veteran Member • Posts: 7,823
Yeah, but I think we've achieved peak repetion.

Jonsi wrote:

They could if user requests were of interest. Simply remove max post count and stick the thread at the top of the forum.

But... it's a business. Separate threads of the same stupid argument drive more traffic. For 2 reasons. Things are worded differently to disguise the intent of the thread, thus showing up in more search results, and because no one is interested in reading a 1,000 page thread about phones.

Short of that they should have a mobile photography forum that those threads could all be moved to.

Oh... They do. Yet they aren't.

Day after day, the same trolls and compulsives roll out the same old using another of their stored handles. The difference now is, as a percentage of Forum traffic it's getting to be the majority of posts and those of us gullible/trusting enough to have been sucked in yet again are starting not to respond at all. Sites die like that.
DPR is a lot further down that track than they realise, the recent age polls bear that out.

-- hide signature --

Ron.
Volunteer, what could possibly go wrong ?

 Ron Poelman's gear list:Ron Poelman's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H2 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Sony SLT-A57 NEX5R A3000 +26 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads