Franz Kerschbaum

Lives in Austria Austria
Works as a Astronomer
Joined on Apr 2, 2001

Comments

Total: 76, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Another abandoned design that I really miss is the swivel body of the nikon coolpix 990 to 4500 cameras. They where my entry to the digital world and I still miss the great functionality at times....

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 23:41 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

Franz Kerschbaum: For those on fb - I have also produced a short video from my pics! https://www.facebook.com/franz.kerschbaum.9/videos/1102941153061985/?l=1494659078903947445

Better link maybe: https://www.facebook.com/franz.kerschbaum.9/videos/1102941153061985/?hc_location=ufi

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 11:59 UTC
In reply to:

iTrax: very cool.....
would use of Astrotracer ( like in Pentax K-1 ) make this project easier / better?

No since Astrotracer is using the GPS and cam orientation to counterrotate the earth rotation and that is not what is neede here ...

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 08:12 UTC

For those on fb - I have also produced a short video from my pics! https://www.facebook.com/franz.kerschbaum.9/videos/1102941153061985/?l=1494659078903947445

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 08:11 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply

I did the same very recently during a fantastic Aurora display! http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/0055445271/photos/3470133/aurora-over-the-atlantic

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 08:09 UTC as 11th comment
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

wjansen: I have version 10 and wonder must I pay to upgrade to 11?

I have a commercial licence so this is before tax! I purchased it via my dxo account and that was the offer ...

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2016 at 09:09 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

joe6pack: Can I install DXO 11 along with older version without interfering with earlier installation?

Yes you can. Checked it yestreday. But there is not reason to do so. All other settings and attachments are taken over ...

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2016 at 08:12 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

wjansen: I have version 10 and wonder must I pay to upgrade to 11?

I paid 57 euros yesterday ....

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2016 at 08:11 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)

Just downloaded the DXO 11upgrade to my DXO 10 elite installation for 57 euro. Could not be happier after testing it on my two notebooks (a dell mobile workstation and a MS surface 4 pro). The new prime NR is really faster (which is very good since the old one was quite slow on my surface) and in high ISO cases better. The new quick look full screen sorting is also quite nice and more time efficient. The new face recognition features sound interesting but had not chance to test this.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2016 at 08:10 UTC as 8th comment

Thats a fantastic add. In the meantime I do most of my macro work with the m3 (having also a 7d2 and a 5d3!) because of its convenient screen and handling with the 135/2.8 IS macro. I was really missing a short focal length alternative in some cases. Not have to use my mt-14ex2 flash is also nice ...

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 17:19 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

Leonp: Insects have eyes like this camera. How would they compute their data?

The ESA Integral IBIS camera even has a very similar mask! Scroll down! http://www.isdc.unige.ch/integral/outreach/integral

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2016 at 16:17 UTC
In reply to:

Leonp: Insects have eyes like this camera. How would they compute their data?

Nothing to do with insect eye . It works like the coded mask systems that we use for years in gamma ray astrophysics. But there it is much easier since we register individual photon events and head for relatively small spatial resolutions and very low "pixel" counts". Here a nice illustration how the principle works: http://sci.esa.int/science-e-media/img/d0/Figure_11_SPI_coded_mask.jpg

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2016 at 16:14 UTC

We used coded mask systems for years in gamma ray astrophysics. But there it is much easier since we register individual photon events and head for relatively small spatial resolutions and very low "pixel" counts". Here a nice illustration how the principle works: http://sci.esa.int/science-e-media/img/d0/Figure_11_SPI_coded_mask.jpg

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2016 at 08:43 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
On article Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Franz Kerschbaum: Why can RAW be not RAW? Its really bad for some application like Astronomy when such corrections (e.g. vignetting) are already applied. We have our own, controled measures to do it. This tendency is really fustrating

We use IRAF, MIDAS, and typically Phyton based pipelines directly developed for our ground (e.g. ESO VLT) or space based instrumentation (e.g. ESA Herschel). For Acquisition and some quick look analysis on our smaller student project telescopes (60, 80 and 150cm) we have MaximDL with the different SBIG cameras. (concerning flats for camera lenses, I just recently saw that more and more amateurs use these flatfield boxes they have for the telescopes - not so expensive and complex. Sensor dust flat fielding is a must for most of them outside the ideal world!)

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 11:12 UTC
On article Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Franz Kerschbaum: Why can RAW be not RAW? Its really bad for some application like Astronomy when such corrections (e.g. vignetting) are already applied. We have our own, controled measures to do it. This tendency is really fustrating

Great AstroStan! What product do you offer? We get often requests by amateurs for such products. Besides our day/nighttime business there is not much to argue or fight. I only mentioned my profession in order to avoid getting too much answers telling me the very basics of astronomical image processing (something I do for space telescopes in real-time on board systems). Its not that I need to use DSLR/MILC cameras for my astro work but its a wonderful reality that amateur astronomy has these widespread multi-purpose tools which allow them to enjoy their hobby. For this a wider choice of raw processing levels would be beneficial. You gave the old Nikon problem yourself. It does not cost a fortune for the camera company. This is nothing against Sony but I am allergic against this tendency to reduce the freedom of the user. Yes, do the best "cooking" adopted to lenses and whatever when the customer demands it but at least for the more professional cameras allow us to choose!

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2016 at 18:34 UTC
On article Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots (350 comments in total)
In reply to:

Franz Kerschbaum: Why can RAW be not RAW? Its really bad for some application like Astronomy when such corrections (e.g. vignetting) are already applied. We have our own, controled measures to do it. This tendency is really fustrating

Only to make it clear, I am professional astronomer and space instrumentation developer. I know the compromises the manufactorers have to make. Nevertheless, the less brewing they do they easier it is for e.g. amateur astronomers to use the DSLRs for their work (the early Nikons as a bad and Canons as a good example). It would be so easy for them to include a "rawer" mode but they are too afraid of exposing they unprocessed data for testing. (and I know its a small market)

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2016 at 15:24 UTC
On article Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots (350 comments in total)

Why can RAW be not RAW? Its really bad for some application like Astronomy when such corrections (e.g. vignetting) are already applied. We have our own, controled measures to do it. This tendency is really fustrating

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 16:59 UTC as 51st comment | 10 replies
On article Sigma 20mm F1.4 'Art' lens real-world sample gallery (137 comments in total)

Have the lens now for some weeks and quite happy with it on my 5D3. Fantastic light sucker especially in the x-mas time. Did a very consistent MFA with the dock and had -6- -8 which is in line with my other two art lenses (35 and 50). It focuses quite fast even in low light. As an astronomer I tested it already at stars and it is flawless at 4 and good at 2.8 which is really an achivement. DXO pro 10 already has a good profile to correct for the aberrations.
Here are a few RAW images at 1.4, 2.0, 2.8 and 4.0 (with corresponding exposure times to have same exposure level).
https://db.tt/eOEUWMS8

At 1.4 vignetting is very strong and visible when having high background as in my foggy urban case). There is no significant field curvature where focusing at the edges would help. The pics where focused typically halfway from the centre using liveview. The second zip contains dxo developed (only optics correction and vignetting) jpgs:

https://db.tt/kG7o3XXV

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2016 at 09:00 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

Franz Kerschbaum: Everybody who did under waterphotography knows that you have to position the flash as far as possible away from the optical axis to reduce light scatter from particles in the water. Lets hope there is a connector for external ones and not only this hump on the lens...

You are right. The title says only "underwater compact". What a waste of time and effort.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2016 at 09:19 UTC
In reply to:

Franz Kerschbaum: Everybody who did under waterphotography knows that you have to position the flash as far as possible away from the optical axis to reduce light scatter from particles in the water. Lets hope there is a connector for external ones and not only this hump on the lens...

"Audi Design" as they wrote ...

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 17:09 UTC
Total: 76, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »