Marcelobtp

Lives in Brazil Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Works as a Student/photographer
Joined on Nov 26, 2010

Comments

Total: 370, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Sony's apparent spatial filtering algorithm is not intended as Long Exposure NR (LENR) specifically

but rather intended to kick in to blank out Long Exposure Hot Pixels (LEHP)

unfortunately, they used the wrong kind of "dumb" algorithm on "all tiny bright dots"
instead of a "smarter" algorithm specifically at "hot pixels" alone, apart from "all tiny bright dots"

everyone familiar with real "hot pixels", especially over longer exposures, recognize such affected pixels are extremely SYMMETRICAL no matter which color pixel is affected

real stars are never so uniquely symmetrical like hot pixels

symmetrical like
▒▓▒
▓█▓
▒▓▒
browser darkmode

not asymmetrical
and Sony's fix "all bright dots" algorithm, will bludgeon even asymmetrical ones, not just the symmetrical ones that should be the only targets, iff "appropriately analyzed"

this is BETTER done in post, as a smarter algorithm would take more time, as greater finesse is required, than the dumber algorithm used for expediency sake

they probably do this because they need a quick, energy efficient solution.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:45 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

FelixCatana: So RAW is not so raw?

Raw is not raw, and some lenses are probably not as good as they seems to be...

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:40 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (384 comments in total)

The Sony defenders comment section!
Now the only missing discovery is that all of the top of the line SONY lenses receive PRE-Corrected profiles, even when you turn off all of the corrections! =D
Sharpening, CA, Geometric Distortion, etc...
I'm sure someone will find this sooner or later!
But people will say they don't care,
overpriced lenses.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:39 UTC as 5th comment
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Hey, the drop in frequency response between 0 and fs/2 is only 1.5 dB (15% decrease in amplitude), which is easily reversible by post-processing filtering if desired.

Another point, it seems you're forgetting that camera sensors are based on the Bayer filter, which by itself makes the response around fs/2 a little pointless.

Isn't a case of making a mountain out of a molehill?

So consumers that are overly dramatic! Thats the answer! Very nice!
GENIUS!

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:29 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

rgwaller1: The question for me is "Why buy a camera that does not meet your needs?" If astrophotography is your main focus buy the camera that will make your experience the most pleasurable for you. I do mostly wildlife and landscapes so I buy the camera that meets most of my needs. No camera is perfect and can meet everyone's expectations at any price.

Nice, this should come in the box, then, should be a Sony decision to say guys, if you shoot stars don't buy our mirrorless cameras...
This should never happen to begin with...

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

Marcelobtp: Btw, dpreview why not use the 55mm 1.8 zeiss as on all other studio tests?
Maybe because the 55 1.8 would not showcase as much difference???
Sincerely it does not make any sense, please re-do the tests with the 55, or redo all other tests with 85.

What about re-doing it at least with the A7r2?
It's not that much effort, and it's a very important camera to compare with.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 15:13 UTC

Btw, dpreview why not use the 55mm 1.8 zeiss as on all other studio tests?
Maybe because the 55 1.8 would not showcase as much difference???
Sincerely it does not make any sense, please re-do the tests with the 55, or redo all other tests with 85.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 14:41 UTC as 31st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

just someone: The D850 still outputs a better image!!

Well, the d850 colors and overall rendering could be the reason why he says better, and not necessarily sharper image.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 14:34 UTC
In reply to:

Marcelobtp: I sincerely don't know why all the praising of the lens, in the studio scene is clear that the lens has a very bad CA, the raw files is far from raw, even then, it couldn't handle the CA reduction as effectively, the eyes of the woman in the left has terribly bad CA, not seen in any of the competitors.

Btw, just take a look at the chinese woman on the right to look how Sony is still terribly bad processing skin tones. It's ridiculous. The overprocessing Sony is doing to hide some problems externalize as other problems.

Well, first, i'm not looking at the lens flaws only, i'm comparing it to the competitors lenses...
To use such a feature i think it's quite obvious that a superb lens is needed.
High resolution lenses are needed, but CA should not be this intrusive, and no not all CA can be gone with post processing, and generally is visible when the CA was removed as any other post processing.
My problem is with the praising that DPreview gave to the lens.
The K1 for example does not exibhit nearly as much CA.
If you are not pixel peeping the image, sorry, there is not much reason to have this feature as well, the main feature is that, the other is the added color, which will be really visible zoomed in anyway.
Not sure why i bother to respond this...

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 14:33 UTC
In reply to:

Marcelobtp: I sincerely don't know why all the praising of the lens, in the studio scene is clear that the lens has a very bad CA, the raw files is far from raw, even then, it couldn't handle the CA reduction as effectively, the eyes of the woman in the left has terribly bad CA, not seen in any of the competitors.

Btw, just take a look at the chinese woman on the right to look how Sony is still terribly bad processing skin tones. It's ridiculous. The overprocessing Sony is doing to hide some problems externalize as other problems.

They are praising the 85mm lens, are you blind, or what, didn't care to read the text, but care to read the comments? What's your problem?

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 12:51 UTC

I sincerely don't know why all the praising of the lens, in the studio scene is clear that the lens has a very bad CA, the raw files is far from raw, even then, it couldn't handle the CA reduction as effectively, the eyes of the woman in the left has terribly bad CA, not seen in any of the competitors.

Btw, just take a look at the chinese woman on the right to look how Sony is still terribly bad processing skin tones. It's ridiculous. The overprocessing Sony is doing to hide some problems externalize as other problems.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 12:11 UTC as 34th comment | 6 replies

I have to say, the pixel shifted image seems to have a little bit more of dynamic range, it's perceptible on the left side of the image in shadowed area.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 11:52 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

Great Bustard: If I may, I'd like to help Ted out understanding why there is relatively little noise at ISO 12800.

It's not because of pixel size, processing, or even sensor size. It's because an RGB CFA, on average, lets through only 1/3 of the light falling on it, whereas a monochrome sensor will let all of that light through.

Thus, 3x as much light, on average, reaches the sensor for a monochrome sensor for the same scene and exposure time, and that, all by itself, explains why ISO 12800 gives the same noise as the ISO 3200 - ISO 6400 range he is accustomed to for the same noise levels (the amount of light recorded at ISO 12800 without the CFA will be the same as at ISO 5100 with 3x the exposure time on sensors with a Bayer CFA, to be exact).

In other words, no magic -- simply a need to understand that the primary source of noise in a photo is the [lack of] light that makes up the photo.

Sorry, but i would llike to help you to understand that everything he said about easier noise reduction, post processing, pixel size, and sensor size are factors to this conclusion added to that the lack of RGB CFA as you said.
This is not solely because of the lack of RGB CFA.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

Widdldo: I think I’m going to discontinue watching Ted’s videos. Too often they contain very low signal to noise ratio aka information to bla-bla ratio. My impression of him is somebody who likes to hear himself talk. And not in an entertaining or inspiring kind of way. Very tiring.

He acts like an egomaniac. He lacks depth, his photos aren't anything worth to talk about.
He does not know the technical stuff as well...

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 14:39 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9: What you need to know (244 comments in total)

The only quirk i see in this camera is the usb 3 Micro-B-type interface.
ahhh, and the price...

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 13:34 UTC as 47th comment
On a photo in the Sony Alpha 7R II Samples Gallery sample gallery (1 comment in total)

This is only ISO 6400? That noise reduction is just killing the image.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:11 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Sony Alpha 7R II Samples Gallery sample gallery (1 comment in total)

What happened here with this ultraprocessed face?

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:04 UTC as 2nd comment
On a photo in the Sony Alpha 7R II Samples Gallery sample gallery (1 comment in total)

skin tones looks a bit better, but overprocessed...

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:03 UTC as 1st comment
On a photo in the Sony Alpha 7R II Samples Gallery sample gallery (6 comments in total)

Seems a repetition, i was hopping to be surprised by the "newer refined color processing etc...
Same strange color casts. the type of noise, very muddy obtrusive.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:01 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

ShaiKhulud: Amazing update. As expected Sony is adapting A9 tech on a less extreme cameras, which is very nice.

Now it's time to update common A7 and A7S line. The latter will be my instant upgrade.

There is obvious reasons to think that the A7 standard line is dead.
A7mk2 still is the cheapest FF mirrorless, maybe the cheapest FF of all, it became a camera that has nothing major to offer over the S and the R series, and with A9 it can't go too far either with the AF and high fps, since it was one of the few point it had over it's current siblings. A7mk3 will be only launched if the competition comes with a better camera than A7mk2 at a better IQ/price ratio. BUT, A7r2 will have an obvious price cut, which as you said is already happening, and it will have the second hand used cameras too, so the space to compete in the price gap is too little to have a need of a new A7 camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 13:14 UTC
Total: 370, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »