JensR

Lives in United Kingdom Bath, United Kingdom
Works as a Mechanical Engineer
Joined on Nov 23, 2003
About me:

Hi,

thanks for stopping by!
If you want to see what I'm up to, send me a message :)

My 'plan':
Talk Pentax into a digital Electro-Spotmatic! (This needs some work...)

-------------

Older Signatures:

'LBA knows no bounds, and seeks no justification...' (Jim King, 2005)
http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/index.html - Photography, Tech and Geek stuff :}

'Why is everyone answering rhetorical questions?' (Me, 2005)

'Well, 'Zooming with your feet' is usually a stupid thing as zoom rings are designed for hands.' (Me, 2006)

'I only trust those photos I have faked myself.' (Me, 2007)
http://www.jensroesner.de/

--=! Condemning proprietary batteries since 1976 !=--

'I don't want them to believe me, I just want them to think.'
Marshall McLuhan

Comments

Total: 78, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Rupert Bottomsworth: Why would anyone buy this over a Sony RX100?

Elaka, noise at same output size is almost independent from sensor resolution. If you look at it at 100%, the pic with more MP will be also larger, so the noise appears worse (per pixel noise vs. per image noise).

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 09:21 UTC
In reply to:

roy5051: UGLY, UGLY, UGLY! Why on Earth have that bl**dy great lump on the top? Surely it is not beyond the bounds of the designers to build the viewfinder and flash into the body? Looks like it was designed by a committee!!!!!

I think you mean abomination, not abortion.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 09:17 UTC

I hope the rating algorithm will be smart enough to detect mob behaviour and people voting multiple times through different accounts and punish those accordingly.
Also, there are cases where a post was criticised (or praised) a lot and then it turns out that the post was actually correct (or wrong) - would a voting be reversed in such a case? I don't see how it would be done.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2012 at 13:38 UTC as 68th comment
On article Photokina 2012: Hasselblad Stand Report (47 comments in total)

So Sony themselves are switching to a normal hot shoe and Hasselblad "inherits" a hot shoe that does not match any of their previous cameras?!
They have enough money to design a crocodile hand grip, but fail to make the flash system compatible with their system?!
Oh boy...

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 14:30 UTC as 23rd comment

Right now someone at Sony is seriously mad that they didn't go for the NEX fullframe and instead did the RX1. Ah well, there's always next year.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 19:26 UTC as 116th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

increments: Given the quality of some of the existing AF wide angle zooms, this is either going to have to be stellar in terms of IQ, or be very affordable...

Is it greedy to want both? ;)

> Sigma 10-20mm £326, Tokina 11-16mm £500, Canon 10-22mm £540, Tamron 10-24mm £350.
> Samyang 14mm £330

The Samyan g is a FF lens. While this is maybe of no relevance to an APS-C user, it does explain some of the price. (Pentax's APS-C 14/2.8 is also more expensive.)

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

Jan Kritzinger: I can't believe there are people on this forum who say no to f/2.8.
You will always run into situations where you don't have enough light. ALWAYS.

It's nice, but being able to mount a filter and size are also important. I can understand people preferring one over the other.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

toughluck: In terms of DOF, it's a 50/9 equivalent, so good luck trying to get meaningful defocusing. It should have been f/1.2 or f/0.9 for the size -- while it would still have poor defocusing control, it would have been much better.

Also: Why is the lens and the bodies so huge? Sony just released RX1 which, lens included, is thinner than this lens is long. Not to mention huge N1 bodies.

> So 50mm F/4.5 in terms of angle of view and depth of field. BUT NO that does not mean light transmission changes, it's still the same intensity of light regardless of crop.

Intensity of light doesn't really matter, because it ignores the area over which this intensity is applied.
Better way to look at it:
This lens lets through to the sensor as many photons per unit of time as a 50/4.5 would on 24x36. These lenses would be equivalent and their images would be indistinguishable.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 14:19 UTC
In reply to:

jaycob: First off let me just say that I am no expert in photography so please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject.
My question about this camera is; Why would Sony develop such an great camera at a premium price yet slap a fixed lens on it? You would think that if they were to put a full frame sensor in any kind of camera they would want to open the doors to additional lenses.
Am I missing something? Please educate me.

I think it's testing the water for a future FF "NEX deluxe" (I call dibs on the name NEXluxe :D )

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 20:57 UTC
In reply to:

liquidsquid: Sheesh, if you separated the body from the glass, and made separate purchases, many of you who don't want to shell out $2800 would be singing a different tune.

How much good glass out there goes for over $1K? How many FF bodies go over $1K?

Not that I am going to get one any time soon.

You are right. If this was a camera with interchangeable lenses, many here would be prepared to pay more than 2800USD. But it's not. And I think that's why several people are a bit unhappy.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 20:55 UTC
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: So Pentax finally dropped the ball and introduced in-lens stabilisation. Oh dear, I can still hear fanboys explaining how much better it is to have sensor IS vs. lens IS.

I'm sure my sarcasm meter must be broken, but just in case you are serious:
1) Pentax has had IBIS in their APS-C cameras for years
2) This SR lens is for their medium format camera
I think there is not a single other stabilised MF system and if there is, it's not from Sony.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2012 at 15:42 UTC
On article Lightroom Photo Import (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gregm61: Last thing I'm gonna waste my time doing is importing all my photos "into" Lightroom so it can see them. If a program can't just "see" the dang photo where I have it in my computer (like Photoshop can), I have no use for it as a catalog system.

I tried Lightroom 4 while waiting for the CS6 update. Since getting CS6, Lightroom has just sat on my desktop, and I doubt it gets used again.

Hi LJ
First: LR uses a cache for the previews as well. So I am not sure where you are going with this.

Second: I don't want my RAW processor to keep track of my images. With RSE I could simply move or rename the folders and it would always have the settings to the files. I have never run into this "choosing" problem. Third: I don't want my RAW converter to be a file utility. I am disappointed at how bad a file utility LR is. It's gotten better, admittedly, and maybe 4 is decent, but I cannot run it (yet?).

Fourth: That is the one advantage to LR's catalogue system that _I_ like. It would be difficult to shoehorn a browser architecture like RSE's into allowing this.

Fifth: I want to be able to right-click a RAW file and edit it in my then-opening converter.

The benefits LR brings to the rest of my workflow outweigh my catalogue criticism, but it's obvious that the we have different ideas of how we want to manage our files. I'm sure yours is right for you and I am happy with mine.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2012 at 21:26 UTC
On article Lightroom Photo Import (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gregm61: Last thing I'm gonna waste my time doing is importing all my photos "into" Lightroom so it can see them. If a program can't just "see" the dang photo where I have it in my computer (like Photoshop can), I have no use for it as a catalog system.

I tried Lightroom 4 while waiting for the CS6 update. Since getting CS6, Lightroom has just sat on my desktop, and I doubt it gets used again.

Absolutely. I find that extremely annoying. I much preferred RawShooter's approach - sad that they did not carry that over when Adobe bought and killed it.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2012 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: Actually, running a top end DSLR or mirrorless on Android would make a lot more sense. Huge potential for customisation by the open source community, and potentially, an end to interfaces that some don't like. IE, user could customise the interface using Android 'skins'. Low end phones like this don't need this, but pros love to customise their toys.

I completely agree with you (toys and tools, I would say ;) ) - but at the same time, I think it's not realistic: I just don't think manufacturers are ready to embrace open-source user-interfaces, let alone open-source functions.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2012 at 17:49 UTC
On article Compositional Rules (120 comments in total)

The rule of thirds is just a simple way to do a rough golden ratio, with the benefit of being able to map the whole frame in one go, whereas golden ratio will give different intersections, depending on which side you start from.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2012 at 23:08 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

EasyClick: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt NASA supposed to have technology decades ahead of what's available on the market? They're the guys inventing the science and breakthrough technology...By the same reasoning they should have a photo sensor that would only be available today on the market. I understand the article but I just thought otherwise... Maybe someone should send an iPhone to Mars??

This is the real world, not Hollywood.
An iphone would not make it past the moon before radiation kills it.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2012 at 15:46 UTC
In reply to:

Scott Eaton: I'm not by any means a NASA engineer, but I am an Engineer on the IT side of things. I realize we're working with extreme data management constraints and 2004 technology curves.

My issue is why we're using a bayer based sensor when we want the most discrete data to come from our hardware. Why waste data pathing with all that interpolated nonsese just because somebody is more familiar with Kodak. We're taking pictures of other worlds, not snaphots of your kids.

Here's to hoping Kodak is out of business so they are forced to use better hardware the next time around.

I guess using three 0.7MP sensors, one for each colour would be better than using one 2MP sensor, but the alignment problems during the rough entry of the spacecraft might have been problematic.
I hope you were not suggesting a Foveon chip as a way to discrete data :)

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2012 at 15:45 UTC
On article Evolution of an image (123 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Schillings: Really nice shot. I find the image a little too HDR-ish. I think the foreground is too bright, and there are no distinctive shadows so maybe up the blacks.

No Bossa, it is clear to see that the foreground shadow brightness was increased a lot, robbing it of natural depth. And yes, it is a 3-shot HDR image, as stated underneath each picture.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2012 at 12:54 UTC
On article Evolution of an image (123 comments in total)
In reply to:

JensR: ISO 400, f22, from a tripod.
Why?

Danke Carsten! But f/22 seems a bit extreme. Why did you not use tilt? At f/22 you are losing resolution and extending the exposure time needlessly, introducing extra noise because of the increased ISO. f/11 and a slight tilt at ISO 100 seems like the better option?

Emmanuel - the question was not just why Carsten used a tripod. The exposure-merging alone would explain that. The question was primarily why Carsten went for ISO 400 despite using a tripod.

Mark: While we are at it, might we want to ask the f/64 group about the Scheimpflug effect and camera movements?

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2012 at 00:22 UTC
On article Evolution of an image (123 comments in total)

ISO 400, f22, from a tripod.
Why?

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2012 at 18:09 UTC as 60th comment | 9 replies
Total: 78, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »