katastrofa

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Feb 17, 2017

Comments

Total: 350, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

katastrofa: Any hope for better performance at high ISO? (> 2000).

@TorsteinH It depends in my experience, some ISO 6400 photos come out really good from DxO treatment, some look very plastic-y.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2021 at 17:41 UTC

Any hope for better performance at high ISO? (> 2000).

Link | Posted on Jul 15, 2021 at 08:52 UTC as 14th comment | 9 replies

As an amateur bird photographer, I can see the benefits for shooting BIF. For stationary birds, I'd stay with single-point AF or manual focussing.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2021 at 19:42 UTC as 6th comment

Took you a loooong time to review this baby, guys :)

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2021 at 19:37 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Raist3d: Just upgraded and tried in a few images. Wow- amazing. Be warned- DeepPRIME is a bit slower than PRIME which is already slow, but to my surprise selecting Intel Inside this time (626 GPU on Mac 2018 13'' model) slashed from 1 minute ~45 secs to ~53 seconds on an export. Quite a change.

Anyway, I am seeing better quality and less PRIME "guess" artifacts. I am sure there will be some other artifacts on this approach but so far, so very good.

And DXO finally added Watermarks. They have really come a long way.

I have a PC with a GPU, but it's in a box right now :)

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 11:54 UTC
In reply to:

Rosember: DeepPRIME works fantastically. I bought PL4 just today out of an instinct (maybe because I had some denoising problems recently). But - what has already been said here: unfortunately, the effect is not visible at full screen but just in a small 'loupe' (or in exported files, of course).
Does anybody know whether there is a method (even if time consuming) how a more realistic/closer to the export version preview of the image under development is possible? - And please note that I am talking about the high resolving 5k screen of an iMac retina - as this problem might be limited to these screens, as I have learned. This is the most serious criticism I have concerning DxO's software - and I loved to learn that i just forgot to get some settings right ... Anybody?

Another annoying thing: not caching the effects of image processing. If you switch from image 1 to image 2 and back to image 1 again, it's reprocessed from scratch.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

Raist3d: Just upgraded and tried in a few images. Wow- amazing. Be warned- DeepPRIME is a bit slower than PRIME which is already slow, but to my surprise selecting Intel Inside this time (626 GPU on Mac 2018 13'' model) slashed from 1 minute ~45 secs to ~53 seconds on an export. Quite a change.

Anyway, I am seeing better quality and less PRIME "guess" artifacts. I am sure there will be some other artifacts on this approach but so far, so very good.

And DXO finally added Watermarks. They have really come a long way.

Is it usable without a GPU?

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 09:39 UTC
In reply to:

page3: Yet another company concentrating on the wrong things. The market is full of great editors, however still sparse in integrated DAM.

Some of us ex-Aperture users are still waiting for something better. It’s ridiculous.

When they started adding DAM features, they got quite a lot of feedback "don't try to be a DAM, be a good and fast editor" on their user forum.

You can't please everyone.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2020 at 09:38 UTC
In reply to:

photographytragic: Would like to see full definition examples.
But shooting the moon is old hat! On a cruise ship we had a Canon photographer with an 800mm lens. I persuaded him to add a 2X, go wide-open, and set to underexpose, Then we had a competition of doing handheld shots of the bands of Jupiter.
Had to pixel-peep of course, and nothing I would frame, but fun even so!

Cruise ships move.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2020 at 07:44 UTC
In reply to:

Pascal F: My favorite thing!

Lots of idiots saying you can do a 2x crop on FF camera images and get FF IQ that is better than an EM1.2.
Hint: At most ISOs it will be slightly worse and unless you have an 80mp camera resolution will be a lot less.

Or from experience?

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2020 at 07:44 UTC
In reply to:

Craig from Nevada: This lens would have been ideal for Chris and Jordan's recent junket to Costa Rica related to the release of the E-M1 Mark III.

The 150-400mm and the 12-100 and a fast prime would cover just about everything, particularly for the birders on such a trip.

Alternatively, one could leave the prime at home and bring the 12-40 and 40-150.

Some interesting possibilities for a travel kit.

A true birder keeps their telephoto lens on the camera all the time ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2020 at 07:43 UTC

Didn't exactly blow me away.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2020 at 22:20 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III review (1719 comments in total)
In reply to:

Serenity Now: I love my EM1. What a beautifully made jewel of a camera. That said, times have changed and portability is not the all consuming advantage it once was given the ability of current smart phones. I hope Olympus can feature seriously upgraded sensor in the very near future with better resolution and dynamic range because the build quality and lenses are so good. Interestingly I also prefer the original tilt screen to the fully articulated as it keeps the form factor discreet, one of the Oly’s true advantages.

Portability is an issue for me. I can take my E-M1 II and the 300mm prime lens in carry-on luggage on the plane. I wouldn't be able to do that with a full-frame equivalent.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 23:54 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III review (1719 comments in total)
In reply to:

katastrofa: I would love to know if there has been an improvement in AF performance.

Thanks!

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 23:52 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III review (1719 comments in total)

I would love to know if there has been an improvement in AF performance.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 08:22 UTC as 215th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

fredmason: I sure see a lot of young people walking around my city with film cameras such as Canon AE-1's (way too many), Olympus Epic Stylus's, Contax G's, etc., but I wonder how much film they go through. They never seem to actually shoot anything. I suspect many of these cameras are being carried around as fashion accessories!

Sounds like a great way to ruin a family trip.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 13:29 UTC
In reply to:

fredmason: I sure see a lot of young people walking around my city with film cameras such as Canon AE-1's (way too many), Olympus Epic Stylus's, Contax G's, etc., but I wonder how much film they go through. They never seem to actually shoot anything. I suspect many of these cameras are being carried around as fashion accessories!

The true cost of digital includes the time spent culling the photos.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 11:50 UTC
In reply to:

katastrofa: "Marketers have all manner of theories about how to price their goods, and different strategies for maximizing the amount of profit they can make from a specific product. Very few of these have much to do with the costs involved in developing, manufacturing, distributing and supporting that product. Most strategies set the price high enough to make this money back, but there are exceptions even to that.

So there's little point looking at a product and saying 'they've removed 'x,' so it should be cheaper,'"

I disagree. I understand the logic from the manufacturer's point of view, but I'm equally allowed to have my own point of view. I don't have to care about the manufacturer's pricing strategy, I can be concerned by what I care about (product features), and from my point of view, a product with LESS features should cost me LESS.

If mine and manufacturer's views on what is an appropriate price for a product do not overlap, I'm not going to make the purchase. Simple as that.

It's equally illogical to expect me to pay more for less features ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2020 at 18:12 UTC
In reply to:

Toni K: There are some good points above, but the topic on country specific prices is completely off the rails (the only good point is to consider different tax policies in different countries).
One example with Sony a7r IV with official price of $3500,
with US taxes (~7.85%) it'll be about $3772
In EU taxes are typically ~20% so it becomes $4199
Do you know what's the price in Bulgaria?
$4518 ie about 9% markup ON TOP of EU-tax-inclusive price.
And since we're talking about expensive products in the first place, prices in the range of $3500~5000 are much less elastic than prices under $1000, so a markup of 9% is huge!
And situation across rest of Europe isn't much better if at all price of this camera in Germany or Ireland if you will is 4000 eur, ie $4418
So what are we paying these extra hundreds of $ for?

That's nothing. Try buying a camera in Costa Rica!

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2020 at 09:11 UTC

"Marketers have all manner of theories about how to price their goods, and different strategies for maximizing the amount of profit they can make from a specific product. Very few of these have much to do with the costs involved in developing, manufacturing, distributing and supporting that product. Most strategies set the price high enough to make this money back, but there are exceptions even to that.

So there's little point looking at a product and saying 'they've removed 'x,' so it should be cheaper,'"

I disagree. I understand the logic from the manufacturer's point of view, but I'm equally allowed to have my own point of view. I don't have to care about the manufacturer's pricing strategy, I can be concerned by what I care about (product features), and from my point of view, a product with LESS features should cost me LESS.

If mine and manufacturer's views on what is an appropriate price for a product do not overlap, I'm not going to make the purchase. Simple as that.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2020 at 09:09 UTC as 31st comment | 4 replies
Total: 350, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »