liquidsquid

Lives in United States E Bloomfield, NY, United States
Works as a Analog Engineer
Joined on Dec 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ergo607: I don't know if it's me, but I have a hard time telling any supposed resolution upgrade on the 80MP high resolution mode...

@Ergo607 I understand now: a 20Mp lens + sensor shift will be able to resolve more information than a Bayer sensor alone due to the fact the Bayer array is information limited by nature since in a given space of a Bayer "Pixel". Only certain colors are resolved at a single location. Moving the sensor around allows a full RGB * 4 capture at each 20Mp site, rather than only a singe R,G,G, or B per site and interpolated up to 20Mp. The shift is essentially converting the Bayer to the Foveon on static images. That makes sense.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 15:12 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ergo607: I don't know if it's me, but I have a hard time telling any supposed resolution upgrade on the 80MP high resolution mode...

Wouldn't it also require a lens capable of the resolution you are trying to acquire? If the lens is soft, no sensor shift trickery in the world is going to gain more resolution. Finding the optimal aperture for sharpness for a particular lens will make a difference as well.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 16:30 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 first impressions (396 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: The body of the Panasonic G9 is bigger than a Canon SL2 DSLR.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#725,715

Now stick some equivalent walk-about quality zooms on each.
But yeah, definitely in the same size category of some more compact 'C' sensor sized cameras.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

liquidsquid: It is at the point now that most common display technologies cannot represent the image dynamics captured. The entire image pathway is great right up to the monitor or print medium, and then it is wasted (or limited). At that final point where it matters most, we have to compress the dynamic range for the limited display technologies and creatively present it to the observer. HDR monitors wont be hitting the mainstream anytime soon, and few print technologies can re-create the views (metallic is the best I have seen).
Sure is awesome to have this power and flexibility though. Wish I could justify owning one to get back into landscape photography, but I just can't do it. My Panasonic 4/3 is a small wart on the butt of this camera, especially for night shots. *sigh*.

I'm not talking 4K resolution, but the high-dynamic range content. I know projectors cannot do anything beyond what they have already done for years (not without some kind of variable iris gimmick which is scene by scene), so that only leaves flat panels with variable back-lights to do HDR, and even then, it is not at a per-pixel level. I have been running 4K+ for monitors at home and work for a few years, but not HDR content.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 15:03 UTC
In reply to:

liquidsquid: It is at the point now that most common display technologies cannot represent the image dynamics captured. The entire image pathway is great right up to the monitor or print medium, and then it is wasted (or limited). At that final point where it matters most, we have to compress the dynamic range for the limited display technologies and creatively present it to the observer. HDR monitors wont be hitting the mainstream anytime soon, and few print technologies can re-create the views (metallic is the best I have seen).
Sure is awesome to have this power and flexibility though. Wish I could justify owning one to get back into landscape photography, but I just can't do it. My Panasonic 4/3 is a small wart on the butt of this camera, especially for night shots. *sigh*.

I suppose that may be true, but I don't know anyone that has purchased one (I guess we are waiting for the old 1080p stuff to kick the bucket). Sure they are in the stores, and I am sure some people have them, but is there source material, or do you have to purchase a fancy camera or a new XBOX-X to make it work? Does the digital path actually function yet? I am suspicious that the technology isn't fully integrated yet.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 19:29 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix G9: What you need to know (244 comments in total)

Finally, an ideal upgrade path for my GH-2 that ticks off all of the boxes I care about.

Now I am curious what the RAW output from the sensor looks like for long night shots such as storm photography and possibly casual astronomy. Yes, I know I can get amazing results with larger sensors, but I cannot deal with taking large cameras around for casual fun hobby work. Should I expect the GH5 output to look the same, or will this look even better?

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 19:22 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies

It is at the point now that most common display technologies cannot represent the image dynamics captured. The entire image pathway is great right up to the monitor or print medium, and then it is wasted (or limited). At that final point where it matters most, we have to compress the dynamic range for the limited display technologies and creatively present it to the observer. HDR monitors wont be hitting the mainstream anytime soon, and few print technologies can re-create the views (metallic is the best I have seen).
Sure is awesome to have this power and flexibility though. Wish I could justify owning one to get back into landscape photography, but I just can't do it. My Panasonic 4/3 is a small wart on the butt of this camera, especially for night shots. *sigh*.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 12:34 UTC as 8th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: While the specs are great, probably 80% of people would never realize that power difference, or the 3TB of RAM. 48TB of storage might be a photographer's dream (for about 10-15 years maybe at least). But nobody (probably not even most CAD designers) would notice the difference between maybe 500GB and 3TB of RAM. I don't think there are any consumer-level programs that can utilize any more than perhaps 256GB of RAM at the moment that I can think of, except maybe if you're doing some REALLY SERIOUS video editing, like editing a full length 2 or 4 hour 4k video at the highest quality levels.

It is the multiple instances of said programs that wont thrash the drive, and the support of multiple desktop support that makes this interesting. Think of having everything loaded for multiple customers in Ram, and all you need to do is switch desktops for fast access.

For a hardware developer as myself, this is interesting on the level that creating FPGA images may occur fast enough to be useful now, among many other things. The price is right!

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 14:15 UTC
In reply to:

flip 21: another non-4k video crap, in almost 2018, from Canon... Maybe Canon should change their name to Crapon ;)

I simply don't get the fixation on 4K video. I have a 1080p 110" LCD projector that I am pretty darned certain I would only notice the jump to 4K when I first sat down to watch. After that, my brain would atrophy and not give a rat's patootie about fine details. In fact, I ran 4K video for a short while, but processing takes so long, that I went back to lower resolution just to speed things back up. Also, it is not like phones have gobs of storage space for 4K cat videos.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 20:39 UTC

Entertaining, but the thing that stands out to me: Would the common layman even notice? Only place we would see/pay attention to the difference is on a very large screen.
Yes, stark difference side-by-side, but really... $46K (and change) difference really doesn't buy a whole lot.
What would be more interesting is to understand what a latest micro 4/3 Panasonic can pull off vs. a Red. I think you would have a tough time telling them apart except for the bit depth tests.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 13:31 UTC as 63rd comment | 3 replies
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)

Wow, if they gave the user the ability to swap that filter out with other styles, that would allow for some really creative tools.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2017 at 16:14 UTC as 86th comment | 2 replies
On article Bang for the Buck: Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Review (720 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wedding photographer: Yesterday I bought an old Canon 5D body for 300$, I have 50 & 85mm lenses for it.
I'm reading about this new 4/3rd Olympus and can say that Olympus is better in every aspect than the old 5D, except photos.
Full Frame is amazing!!!

I had a very rude comment to make about cotton types and underpants, but instead I will just roll my eyes.

Really comparable with modern mobile phones? Really? There are tons of scenarios where 4/3 will lay the smack down on mobile phones, least of which is ease of manual control.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2015 at 20:24 UTC
In reply to:

Ribbit74: I know this must not be a new thing, but there's a huge difference in how Panasonic and Olympus JPG's handle the yellow colors (e.g. the yellow tubes of paint). Panasonic looks yellow-green. Olympus looks... yellow. RAW looks fine on both. Can the Panasonic JPG color shifts be tweaked?

In general it is shifted towards blue a bit. The yellows are "cold" by default. Yes, as in all Panasonic cameras you can tweak this. I go one step further and don't use in-camera processing any more as the color-cast was not to my liking. The old 16Mp sensor seemed a little IR sensitive, so us pasty northerners came out more red than expected or seen by the eye.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 21:01 UTC

Well, I was hoping for more in the high-ISO department, but this studio scene doesn't show me one important thing to me: Long exposure noise. Bulb-mode type stuff.

The reviews I have seen to date look very promising vs. the older 16Mp sensor.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2015 at 20:58 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony reportedly shifting focus to full-frame cameras (447 comments in total)
In reply to:

naththo: How about some people who use APS-C sensor size for birds and animals photography and for car race and sports shooting, using zoom length gets 1.5x the focal length has much better advantage over the FF which is no good due to not enough focal length and you end up having to buy RATHER expensive zoom lens to work well with FF. Like says for APS-C they might only need 200-400mm. But for FF you still have to end up getting 400-600mm which will cost you more. Its crazy. Please do not give up on APS-C.

If you have exactly the same pixel density per sensor, C vs. full frame makes no difference in "reach", only weight and size of the camera system. Just crop to zoom!
Of course this depends on the capability of the lens to achieve the resolution to allow a high quality crop. It also depends on you large your account is, and how strong your arm is to lift a fast FF zoom lens for long periods.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2015 at 13:32 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1562 comments in total)

Dang, this is going to make choosing the Panasonic GX8 a little tougher. This is like my long dead Sony R1, only much smaller, and I loved that camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2015 at 21:12 UTC as 203rd comment
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donald M Mackinnon: For £1069 you can buy a kit that would defeat the GX8 on every conceivable front.
The worrying aspect of this price is it puts the GX8 beyond the budget of possibly many current mft users. The price will inevitably drop but in two years time will it be down to £600?
Any camera shop in the UK will tell you right now that the "camera to have" is the Nikon D5500 - currently £599

Except for stuffing it in your bag with a telephoto zoom lens, walk-around lens, a few pancakes, etc. and still being able to hike. The equivalent size and weight of comparable reach lenses for a FF camera vs m4/3 is significantly larger and heavier (aperture differences between FF and m4/3 are understood).

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 21:23 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1290 comments in total)

Well, this may be the camera for me. I will wait to see what long-exposure low-light noise looks like, and if acceptable I will pay the $$$ for a camera that works well with my lens collection. The dust and moisture sealing are a bonus.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 18:28 UTC as 135th comment
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

FrankS009: Hope to purchase this camera in the next year. What is not to like?

How does it fit in the hand?

F.

Hmm, did not realize. Not up to speed on all models anymore, I haven't been in the gear-head mode in a bit.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 18:25 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

FrankS009: Hope to purchase this camera in the next year. What is not to like?

How does it fit in the hand?

F.

stabilization is on Panasonic lenses. They have no compelling reason to put it on the body and thus open up lens sales to competitors. Sure it is nice to have a freebie, but I doubt IBIS is coming to Pana micro 4/3 any time soon.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2015 at 15:05 UTC
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »