HumanTarget

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jan 11, 2011

Comments

Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8&feature=youtu.be

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2018 at 16:51 UTC as 29th comment
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

Clearly you're not interested in facts and you refuse to offer any evidence at all to back up your ridiculous claims, so I'm done here. Happy shooting!

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 19:57 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

"Ya gotta stop with this bogus claim. You've posted nothing to back it up."
I've posted plenty to back it up, all of which you dismiss as nonsense. You, however, have posted nothing more than what boils down to "I say so."

"Having actually tried and used gear is hardly "no evidence"."

Saying you've used gear is not evidence, particularly because I don't think you know what you're doing with it.

"Why would you assume I can't run extraction software? "
I'm assuming you don't know how to compare images from different cameras, and you've done/said nothing to convince me otherwise.

"You really need to look up "binning" before further embarrassing yourself with that link."

Do you know what binning is? Did you read to the end of the link? The part where it concludes "Rather than having strong dependence on the pixel size, the noise performance instead depends quite strongly on sensor size -- bigger sensors yield higher quality images, by capturing more signal (photons). "

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 19:43 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

"And the D5's pixels are also almost twice as large as those in the D500."

Irrelevant. It's the sensor size that matters, not pixel size. I defy you to find a reliable source that confirms otherwise.

"Trying gear, and shooting photos, and extracting raws.
All your posts say is you're not real familiar with digital photo gear."

In other words, you have no evidence whatsoever. I can just as easily say that I've tried gear and shot photos and extracted raws (which I have) and have come to the opposite conclusion. Your words are meaningless without a way to back them up. And you have no way to back them up, because your claims are untrue.

"Still confused by the phrasing "I have hundreds of raws" I see."

No, I'm confused by how you compare images. You apparently don't know how you do it, either.

"Yes, I did read that link when you originally posted it. And it doesn't say anything like what you claim. You need to look up "binning"."

Re-read it and try to get what it means this time.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 18:56 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

"You mean your links to charts?"

No, this:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Emil%20Martinec/noise-p3.html#pixelsize

"That is simply untrue given generally the same era sensor development. "
No, it's not. Please read the provided link.

"All that says is you don't know what raw file is yourself, and you wish I lived under the same ignorance."
I know what a raw file is. I'm not sure you know how to compare them.

"Then you can look into the best higher ISO bodies in 2018, for APSC and full framed: The Nikon D500 and D5."
Okay, I did. The D5 performs about twice as well, which is to be expected considering its sensor is twice as large.

So how do you arrive at a very different conclusion from those who study (and engineer) image sensors? What is your method for comparing cameras that leads to such ludicrous conclusions?

Seriously, please describe your method for comparing cameras. Otherwise all your talk is meaningless.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 15:06 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

I was referring to the link regarding the sources of image noise (which I clearly stated above). Did you read that?

And pixel density does not really tell you anything about a sensor's performance, though sensor size will, as most of the noise in photos is photon shot noise, which is not dependent on pixel size.

Can you provide any evidence to the contrary, aside from just making wild claims? I can only presume you have no idea what you're doing (my guess would be comparing 100% crops?).

So I'd love to see any evidence at all that shows pixel size is more important than sensor size when it comes to low light.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 14:42 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

And just to show you how little the dual pixel AF affects noise performance, here's the graph showing the 80D vs the T5i; notice the 80D has lower read noise:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm#Canon%20EOS%20700D_14,Canon%20EOS%2080D_14

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 14:15 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

You're right, the 5DS R does not have dual pixel AF. My bad. But the second link is NOT the 70D. It is the T5i (also known as the 700D).

And what's wrong with using RAW files to compare high ISO performance/noise? Did you even look at the link I sent regarding the source(s) of image noise? I'm not sure you know how to compare images.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 14:08 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

If you cannot tell the difference between the T5i and 5DS R at high ISO, I suggest you get your eyes checked. Look:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos700d&attr13_1=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_2=apple_iphonex&attr13_3=apple_iphonex&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=32&attr16_3=32&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=0&y=0

And in fact, the T5i has more read noise than the 5DS R, despite the latter's dual pixel architecture:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm#Canon%20EOS%205DS%20R_14,Canon%20EOS%20700D_14

Get your facts straight.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2018 at 12:17 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

The difference in read noise is negligible in terms of explaining the difference in performance.

Photography is all about light; more light=less noise. Bigger sensor means more light for a given exposure.

Please read this:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Emil%20Martinec/noise-p3.html#pixelsize

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 21:35 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

The 70D was the first released with the dual-pixel architecture. How does that have a history?

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 13:09 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

Compare the Canon 5DS to the Canon 70D. Pretty much same generation of tech, pixel size is near identical. 5DS produces cleaner images.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2018 at 11:45 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-H1 Review (540 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: lakkot:

I usually call the full framed format "full framed". The reason I used "so called above" is to indicate there's a reference to film sizing.

"it doesn't influence the quality of an image because your words are not spells and do not influence reality."

Couple things, as a general rule bigger pixels produce lower noise, as in by way of example a 20MP full framed sensor will be less noisy than a 20MP APSC sensor, of the same generation.

Also generally, yes language used does influence outcomes, and outcomes are reality often.

You were/are grossly in error about my original comment, and now are trying to dress up your error as a protest about something I simply didn't do. Your words don't make reality. Ironical that.

It's the size of the sensor that matters, not so much the size of the pixels. A FF sensor will produce a cleaner image than an APS-C even if its pixels are no bigger.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2018 at 02:06 UTC
On article Video: Canon shows off its new 120MP APS-H CMOS sensor (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoMEETING: With a pixel pitch like this, diffraction may become visible at F/4.5 (and higher F-numbers, of course).

That said, the range of application is very limited.

I have neither a D700 nor a D850, so that would be difficult for me to do.

I do know I've seen demonstrations and research (which I'm unfortunately having trouble finding at the moment) showing an increase in perceived resolution even beyond the theoretical limit (might just be that diffraction takes to sharpening well).

At any rate, I'd prefer my resolution to be limited by diffraction than anything else.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2018 at 02:19 UTC
On article Video: Canon shows off its new 120MP APS-H CMOS sensor (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoMEETING: With a pixel pitch like this, diffraction may become visible at F/4.5 (and higher F-numbers, of course).

That said, the range of application is very limited.

MikeRan, the diffraction "limit" does not "move closer." Diffraction reduces the improvement in resolution, but diminishing returns is not the same thing as a limit. Hard limit calculations oversimplify the situation, as has been shown by oversampled sensors.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2018 at 19:57 UTC
On article Video: Canon shows off its new 120MP APS-H CMOS sensor (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoMEETING: With a pixel pitch like this, diffraction may become visible at F/4.5 (and higher F-numbers, of course).

That said, the range of application is very limited.

Pixel pitch has no effect on diffraction. Besides, you want diffraction to "become visible." Ideally, the sensor ought to be out-resolving the lens.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2018 at 16:14 UTC
In reply to:

cityboy: Am I the only person who doesn't care about the video capabilities of my DSLR? I would much prefer that the expense of adding video be redirected to still camera features I would actually use.

Including video actually decreases the cost of DSLRs, as it widens the target market. More volume means lower cost per unit.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2018 at 02:37 UTC
In reply to:

Lars V: Sounds like capturing individual photons means much smaller sample size, which introduces sampling error. Fascinating but perhaps not applicable to general photography.

If every photon is counted accurately, where's the sampling error?

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2018 at 22:05 UTC

Reminds me a little of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBX2QQHlQ_I

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2018 at 16:26 UTC as 10th comment
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (647 comments in total)
In reply to:

Amnon G: What I don't get is the quickly degrading high ISO performance. Is the sensor itself (or the layers) not up to par with other manufacturer sensors (like the ubiquitous Sony sensors, for example) or is it an inherent problem in layering the RGB sensors?
Just look at ISO 1600 and it's a mess. 3200 and 6400? Forget about it.
Great SNR in good light is becoming less and less a worthy trick, no matter what the sensor size is. At least for me as much as I like the idea of losing the demosaic algorithms of all other sensors I cherish the flexibility of taking photos in less than ideal light without setting up lights, which I suspect most people appreciate higher ISO performance over ideal-light performance.

A big limitation of the Foveon design is that it can't do correlated double sampling, which can really help reduce system noise.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 21:34 UTC
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »