Causio

Lives in Germany Offenbach, Germany
Works as a Programmer
Has a website at http://ducav2.smugmug.com
Joined on Jan 7, 2010

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

dansclic: It is largely exaggerated to say the M5 Is the body every Canon fan has been waiting for. First, maybe many people have been waiting for such a body. Second, I am afraid to say this is a very very disappointing product : No panorama fonction, no 4K, not weather resistant, no f1.8 prime lenses, poor battery life, poor standard zoom (longer end : f6.7 !!!!) far too expensive, shall I go further on ?

I didn't write "you can't pick ANY example". And there's also the expected image quality to consider (the bigger, given similar design and glass quality, the better?). Comparing pancake lenses with any other lens (pancake or not) is not much of a point...there's so much they can get smaller. You mention Sony: yes, they seem not to care about the size, and that's a factor to consider. Now compare canon to canon... EF-S vs EF-M.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 10:59 UTC
In reply to:

NDT0001: I don't need Lightroom as i read on the internet that Capture one is used by real photographers so thats what i want to use if i ever become a professional photographer. Oh, and the subscription model makes me disproportionately angry.

You can still download LR 6.7 stand alone. And anyway your claim about "real photographers" sounds very "disproportionate" too...

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 10:40 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

dansclic: It is largely exaggerated to say the M5 Is the body every Canon fan has been waiting for. First, maybe many people have been waiting for such a body. Second, I am afraid to say this is a very very disappointing product : No panorama fonction, no 4K, not weather resistant, no f1.8 prime lenses, poor battery life, poor standard zoom (longer end : f6.7 !!!!) far too expensive, shall I go further on ?

Yes, they are different because the flange distance from the sensor is smaller for mirrorless lenses. Hence the lenses are smaller (usually, apart from g lenses..). You can't pick a single example of mirrorless lenses that are as big as dslr's and make it the norm. If you have another explanation of why Leica lenses have a smaller glass diameter than any 35mm dslr cameras, you're welcome to expose it... (GLASS diameter, I mean the lack of AF motor has nothing to do with it. Pick any manual focus zeiss dslr lens and compare it with Leica's). You know, you can make a lens bigger than minimum necessary (sony G master), but not smaller...

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 08:46 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

dansclic: It is largely exaggerated to say the M5 Is the body every Canon fan has been waiting for. First, maybe many people have been waiting for such a body. Second, I am afraid to say this is a very very disappointing product : No panorama fonction, no 4K, not weather resistant, no f1.8 prime lenses, poor battery life, poor standard zoom (longer end : f6.7 !!!!) far too expensive, shall I go further on ?

And you keep missing the point. The 50 f.18 is one light lens. Not all of them are such... and they're build for mirror cameras hence they're pointlessly bigger than they should for a mirrorless. So Azathothh, can you explain in a few word what's the point of a mirrorless camera for you?

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 10:24 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

dansclic: It is largely exaggerated to say the M5 Is the body every Canon fan has been waiting for. First, maybe many people have been waiting for such a body. Second, I am afraid to say this is a very very disappointing product : No panorama fonction, no 4K, not weather resistant, no f1.8 prime lenses, poor battery life, poor standard zoom (longer end : f6.7 !!!!) far too expensive, shall I go further on ?

...EF lenses, yes. And that would mean a total missing the point of a mirrorless camera...

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 14:20 UTC
On article Apple unveils iPhone 7 and dual-cam iPhone 7 Plus (946 comments in total)
In reply to:

Danny: I know this is a camera site, but I think the loss of the headphone jack is a dramatic move from Apple. Like mentioned below, you can't listen to music while charging your phone (unless you are on blue tooth). That adapter is just a silly 90ies idea, I mean c'mon, like we don't have already enough crap to toss with us all day. I also think that very few headphone manufacturers will change the jack, as their headphones will become useless on any other device besides the iphone.

I guess they mean to shift the standard to Bluetooth headphones

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2016 at 09:13 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV added to studio scene comparison (363 comments in total)

What I see: predictably more detail than 5d3, 6D and (at low iso) d750, less than d810/A7rII. At high iso, it's interesting to compare it to d750: the latter is sharper, with more moire and edge color artefacts, and at least the written text is readable about at same detail for both cameras.
Excellent performance at high iso, amongst these cameras only d750 and 6D seems to do a comparable job. Then again, what you're interested in is the detail you can retain once you get rid of the noise, and my guess the A7IIr would be comparable again and probably "win" in that department.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 20:10 UTC as 68th comment
On article Updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV real-world sample gallery (485 comments in total)
In reply to:

TyphoonTW: Those are some fairly good ISO 32000 shots. It's nice to join the comment section before the dynamic range/4k nonsense starts.

Better DR makes totally sense for the type of photography that I chose. Very often I had to shoot HDR with my 5D3 in order to get the details and eye-like realism that I wanted

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2016 at 10:12 UTC

This camera's IQ should be compared with D5, its only real competitor. Results are what were to be expected: better dynamic range, slightly worse high iso performance (mostly the color noise, easily correctable in pp, and up to iso 6400 making a real difference only on flat gray surface).

Link | Posted on May 5, 2016 at 12:33 UTC as 46th comment

And now he'll have to provide a reason for the users to buy that, to compensate for the limit (which is a "con" by design)... seriously, how stupid a concept is that? And how can it be even implemented? I want to take a photo of my wife at the Tour Eiffel (yeah, the internet is full of photos of my wife at the Tour Eiffel), or an unusual wide angle shot from the bottom, or a detail of a rivet, and I can't?
This is the stupidest camera concept I've ever heard of. This guy doesn't deserve an article here.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2015 at 09:22 UTC as 105th comment | 1 reply
On article MIT proposes new approach to HDR with 'Modulo' camera (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

memau: It will not work out in the real world, even the co-author of the paper confirmed that modulo camera still comes short when the scene been captured just way too high-contrast. I guess to overcome the drawback the sensor coupled must employ something like overflowed counter that keeps the iteration counts of overflow. But think about it, why not just refines the conventional sensor?

Secondly, lots of people confuse the idea of "HDR", there are two components :
1) the ability to capture more dynamic range
2) tweaking for display medium, because monitor or print just can't handle the dynamic range been taken

Modern camera now can capture 14EV, which means about contrast of 16000:1, obviously it's very hard to represent in print, so there comes Tone-Mapping.

This paper covers both the first part and second part, the fancy trick is the first part, but I don't think it makes sense at all.

That's how I actually understood this technology works: counting the number of overflows. "Why not refining the conventional sensors": apart from the fact that the sensor manufacturers have been doing this endlessly, I don't see why some researcher should not try expanding the concept.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2015 at 14:45 UTC
On article MIT proposes new approach to HDR with 'Modulo' camera (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

memau: It will not work out in the real world, even the co-author of the paper confirmed that modulo camera still comes short when the scene been captured just way too high-contrast. I guess to overcome the drawback the sensor coupled must employ something like overflowed counter that keeps the iteration counts of overflow. But think about it, why not just refines the conventional sensor?

Secondly, lots of people confuse the idea of "HDR", there are two components :
1) the ability to capture more dynamic range
2) tweaking for display medium, because monitor or print just can't handle the dynamic range been taken

Modern camera now can capture 14EV, which means about contrast of 16000:1, obviously it's very hard to represent in print, so there comes Tone-Mapping.

This paper covers both the first part and second part, the fancy trick is the first part, but I don't think it makes sense at all.

Why should it? It would simply not "overflow" any pixel and the readout would be same as the current sensors. This research shows a proof of concept for a new technology, but it's not THE new technology itself; applied, that is. All the other factors (sensor quality, color fidelity, noise, base DR without overflow etc) are out of the scope of this research afaik.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2015 at 13:19 UTC
On article MIT proposes new approach to HDR with 'Modulo' camera (115 comments in total)
In reply to:

memau: It will not work out in the real world, even the co-author of the paper confirmed that modulo camera still comes short when the scene been captured just way too high-contrast. I guess to overcome the drawback the sensor coupled must employ something like overflowed counter that keeps the iteration counts of overflow. But think about it, why not just refines the conventional sensor?

Secondly, lots of people confuse the idea of "HDR", there are two components :
1) the ability to capture more dynamic range
2) tweaking for display medium, because monitor or print just can't handle the dynamic range been taken

Modern camera now can capture 14EV, which means about contrast of 16000:1, obviously it's very hard to represent in print, so there comes Tone-Mapping.

This paper covers both the first part and second part, the fancy trick is the first part, but I don't think it makes sense at all.

"Useless" is a big word, compare it to today's way to do HDR and I see a big difference there already. Then if you don't like the results, it's your own personal taste, which makes nothing "useless" anyway. The fact of having an image with better DR helps where another camera would have got flat out black-white in some unrecoverable areas. It doesn't mean the image will look all flat and with typical hdr-unrealism. You can do whatever you want with a HDR image.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2015 at 15:41 UTC
On article Week in Review: Sony FTW (302 comments in total)

Leica full frame compact is DEFINITELY NOT the most interesting news in the week, and by a vast margina I'd say...

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2015 at 13:20 UTC as 38th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Paul Grupp: Any serious hobbyist or professional who thinks that it's worth switching to another platform just because Adobe rents a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom for a measly $9.95/month is either just playing around or being flat-out unrealistic. I get it -- some of us would prefer to own the software. Well, that's not on the table. The question is, if you are serious, is $9.95 a month really burdensome? Not even close. And if you have invested hundreds, maybe thousands of hours in learning the ins and outs of Adobe products, switching to something else because you think $9.95 is too much to pay is being penny smart and pound foolish.

I'm in europe and for the photography package it asks 142 euro/year. First of all, I dont want PS, I want only LR. Two years of usage make 284 euro. I'm spending less with the full version and upgrades. End of discussion...

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 08:48 UTC
On article Sony Alpha 7S Review (496 comments in total)

About Exposure latitude comparison with A7R, the A7R wins hands down when iso is low. but for example iso 1600 + 2 stop or iso 3200 + 1 stop (much more common cases) the A7S looks better to me

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2015 at 11:34 UTC as 58th comment
In reply to:

Franka T.L.: Unless there's something magical about that sensor I fail to see a point here

The original post might be vague or no value for you, but I understood it like s/he didn't get the point of this camera and I provided a clear reply. The word "magic" was obviously referring to "I don't understand the value of this camera, unless it's a spectacular sensor" but you keep replying as s/he truly believes in magic and you're building a castle around it...

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

Franka T.L.: Unless there's something magical about that sensor I fail to see a point here

What a useless and arrogant answer, JDThomas... and 4 people liked that?..
Aaaanyway, the point here from the user perspective is to provide a rangefinder-like focusing system (overlapping images) but in a digital format seen on LCD. "Cheaper", according to them, due to the lack of mirror and prism inside the camera.
You can see an example here:
http://petapixel.com/2015/02/23/konost-hopes-to-launch-the-worlds-first-true-digital-rangefinder/

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 09:42 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2 Review (318 comments in total)
In reply to:

fuxicek: back in film days I used compact minolta http://www.amazon.com/Minolta-Freedom-Zoom-150-camera/dp/B0000AUFK7.. I wonder, how did they squeeze the full frame into tiny body with tiny lens and why its not possible with digital?

1. It's not a dslr (and is it that smaller than the sony a7)?
2. That lens: 37.5-150mm f/5.4 - 11.9, 6 element/6 group construction
Well... you get what you paid for I guess? :)

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2014 at 16:28 UTC
On photo DSCF0337 in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

It would be interesting to see some image at base iso 200

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2014 at 11:26 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »