Tom Schum

Tom Schum

Lives in United States Washington DC area, AK, United States
Works as a Electronics
Joined on Aug 30, 2010
About me:

Photo hobbyist

Comments

Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Sigma sd Quattro H real world samples gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Schum: On my computer the samples gallery "100% details" delivers an enlargement of maybe 125%. This, plus the resizing that has to happen, causes one to think less of the images.
To get true pixel-level view I have to download the JPG and then look at that at 100%.
Perhaps this is working the same way for you?

Turns out it is a Windows problem (thanks to Bond, who suggested this):
I hit CTRL+, saw 150%, then hit CTRL- a couple times and saw 100%. Problem still there.
I hit CTRL+ and the little box had a place to "Reset to defaults" which I was able to click (you have to do this really fast because that little box is only there a second or so). Problem GONE!
Windows has too many little hooks squirrelled away!

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 18:14 UTC
On article Sigma sd Quattro H real world samples gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Strange. When downloaded and viewed at 100% on my computer, the images are smaller and as detailed as one expects from the foveon; which is to breath-takingly.

But here at 100% they appear uprezzed (to simulate 50MP?) with corresponding appearance of a loss of detail and more visible noise. I wouldn't have realised the issue had I not been familiar with the Foveon test images at dpreview, which are stunningly detailed.

I had everything set to 100% everywhere.
I hit CTRL+, saw 150%, then hit CTRL- a couple times and saw 100%. Problem still there.
I hit CTRL+ and the little box had a place to "Reset to defaults" which I was able to click (you have to do this really fast because that little box is only there a second or so). Problem GONE!
Thanks very much! Windows has too many little hooks squirrelled away!

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 18:07 UTC
On article Sigma sd Quattro H real world samples gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Strange. When downloaded and viewed at 100% on my computer, the images are smaller and as detailed as one expects from the foveon; which is to breath-takingly.

But here at 100% they appear uprezzed (to simulate 50MP?) with corresponding appearance of a loss of detail and more visible noise. I wouldn't have realised the issue had I not been familiar with the Foveon test images at dpreview, which are stunningly detailed.

I have a similar problem, also with Chrome. But I have my internet page zoom set to 100% and it still over-magnifies the "100% details" view. What exact Chrome setting did you find and fix?

The way I know for sure I have a problem is to download a JPG and then use a viewer such as Faststone to view that image at 100%.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 14:19 UTC
On article Sigma sd Quattro H real world samples gallery (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Schum: On my computer the samples gallery "100% details" delivers an enlargement of maybe 125%. This, plus the resizing that has to happen, causes one to think less of the images.
To get true pixel-level view I have to download the JPG and then look at that at 100%.
Perhaps this is working the same way for you?

Looks like it is a Chrome browser problem.
I tried Microsoft Edge browser, and it works just fine with "100% details". The problem is definitely there in my Chrome browser. I don't have other browsers so I can't report on any of them, unfortunately.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 14:13 UTC
On article Sigma sd Quattro H real world samples gallery (108 comments in total)

On my computer the samples gallery "100% details" delivers an enlargement of maybe 125%. This, plus the resizing that has to happen, causes one to think less of the images.
To get true pixel-level view I have to download the JPG and then look at that at 100%.
Perhaps this is working the same way for you?

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2017 at 13:49 UTC as 26th comment | 3 replies
On article Zeiss formally announces Batis 135mm F2.8 (181 comments in total)
In reply to:

PorscheDoc: I am sure that the IQ will be very high, but at $2k for a f/2.8 lens, I will wait to see how it compares to the Sigma 135 f/1.8 Art. I use multiple systems and routinely adapt Canon and Nikon lens to Sony E/FE.

I'm guessing Zeiss is embarrassed by the performance of the Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art lens, and they just decided that this would not happen again with the 135mm. My guess is that Sigma will deliver better image quality and bokeh.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2017 at 21:56 UTC

Brilliantly creative how you have come up with a way to present difficult data so that it can be immediately understood!
Sample variation is the hardest thing to track but extremely nice to know.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 00:02 UTC as 8th comment
On article Extremely dramatic video touts Canon's CMOS technology (196 comments in total)

Incredible, inspiring, and profound!
Will soon be getting rid of my Sigma equipment! Not.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 23:28 UTC as 7th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Minolta's prosumer DiMAGE 7 (202 comments in total)

You wrote "The Minolta GT apochromatic lens had a manual zoom ring (please, someone do this again)".
The Fujifilm X10/X20/X30 series had the manual zoom ring. I bought X10 and X30, and I can tell you it is a great feature.
The X30 vanished from the market so quickly though! I waited about 6 months after introduction, then bought one. It was off the market just a few months later.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 13:48 UTC as 101st comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm X100F pre-production sample gallery (235 comments in total)

Very nice when downsized to 1/4 original pixels (I looked at the brickwall shot). Full size tends to be blurry generally (no more so than other cameras of course), but realism and texture rendering is great when downsized.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2017 at 23:58 UTC as 15th comment

I just checked B&H. Price is $1999 and ship estimate is early Feb.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 13:18 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

sierranvin: This is precious info, and I'll be selling all my Sony gear and Zeiss lenses, esp. the Otus, so I can get Cannon for my cat photography work!

Cats deserve the best, of course.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 22:17 UTC
On photo sized__DSC3062-2 in ijsvogel's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

This is a spectacular shot! What was the original width in pixels before you downsized?

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 14:31 UTC as 1st comment
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Schum: 35mm rangefinder, Minolta Hi-Matic 9, 1968 vintage, bought new. Still available on the web, can be shot entirely manually without a battery, or use hearing aid zinc-air cell.

The Hi-Matic 9 was the same: the battery powered the light meter only. The camera would set either the shutter speed or the aperture automatically and if the battery was OK it worked great. When the battery fails at the end of its life, the shots get overexposed.

Link | Posted on Nov 5, 2016 at 14:40 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (766 comments in total)

35mm rangefinder, Minolta Hi-Matic 9, 1968 vintage, bought new. Still available on the web, can be shot entirely manually without a battery, or use hearing aid zinc-air cell.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 23:51 UTC as 305th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Tom Schum: The in-lens shutter is the wave of the future. Otherwise, a large focal plane shutter flapping around in front of a large high resolution sensor causes constant problems.
Sigma has a good idea to put a dust protector filter at the point where the lens attaches to the camera, except they still use the dust and oil-splatter producing focal plane shutter. But they're not doing large sensors either.
My guess is the Fuji medium format mirrorless product will be plagued by shutter-dust and oil-splatter problems.
Nobody other than the medium format guys wants to do in-lens shutters. Too much of a leap.
Now, if I could just get the Hassy for $1500 or less....

Leaf shutters in non-interchangeable lens cameras are pretty normal. The exception is the leaf shutter in an interchangeable lens camera. It doesn't seem like much of a leap to take such a lens out of a non-interchangeable lens camera and make it interchangeable. Shutter controls might be lacking in current lens mounts due to almost universal use of focal plane shutters. The lens mount might have to be enhanced with a couple more contacts (although the Hassy has only 9). The advantage is eliminating dust worries and of course no shutter shock.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2016 at 12:50 UTC

The in-lens shutter is the wave of the future. Otherwise, a large focal plane shutter flapping around in front of a large high resolution sensor causes constant problems.
Sigma has a good idea to put a dust protector filter at the point where the lens attaches to the camera, except they still use the dust and oil-splatter producing focal plane shutter. But they're not doing large sensors either.
My guess is the Fuji medium format mirrorless product will be plagued by shutter-dust and oil-splatter problems.
Nobody other than the medium format guys wants to do in-lens shutters. Too much of a leap.
Now, if I could just get the Hassy for $1500 or less....

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 13:04 UTC as 38th comment | 5 replies
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (151 comments in total)

Pretty good overview of the show, thanks for keeping it light but not too light.
Will we see a Sony trying to compete with Fuji and Hasselblad in the large format market?

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 13:20 UTC as 49th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Emadn13: one of the worst focals,come on samyang give us your magic the 85mm

The lens is a Samyang 85mm F1.4 in the Fuji X-mount version. I checked and it is not F1.2.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2016 at 00:41 UTC
In reply to:

Emadn13: one of the worst focals,come on samyang give us your magic the 85mm

i have the 85mm F1.4 for Fuji X. It's excellent!

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 23:41 UTC
Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »