Matt

Matt

Lives in United States IN, United States
Works as a Retired :)
Joined on May 5, 2001

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

All the positive specs become ancillary if sharpness isn't nailed. His accounting and the MTF's aside, even the photos in the article reveal less than acceptable sharpness. I was so hoping for this ART to be 'the one'. The search continues .....

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2017 at 12:58 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

Matt: Nope doesn't work as advertised. I export a jpg from LR (original was raw) and include all exif date but this app only shows the exif data. Yes I'm auto saving data to XMP but that file is not being dropped onto his web-app, only the jpg file is. Note: none of the sliders in the basic setting panel are shown and only some of the sharpening sliders are shown. Work in progress at best.... but a cool idea if he ever gets it working.

Follow up, to be more clear. All sliders are shown in the basic panel but they are at their defaults vs actual settings. All sliders are shown in the sharpening section as well but only some of them are indicating their actual settings.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 12:25 UTC

Nope doesn't work as advertised. I export a jpg from LR (original was raw) and include all exif date but this app only shows the exif data. Yes I'm auto saving data to XMP but that file is not being dropped onto his web-app, only the jpg file is. Note: none of the sliders in the basic setting panel are shown and only some of the sharpening sliders are shown. Work in progress at best.... but a cool idea if he ever gets it working.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 21:59 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (767 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vettori: There's one point discussed in the article that I find particularly interesting and it relates also to the new 100-400 "slow" GM lens.
Why do we (still) need those big expensive fast super-tele lens ?

On a reflex camera, fast aperture means a better view through the viewfinder. But with mirrorless do we need that ? Probably not.

Fast aperture means fast AF, but that also is not really that true with recent cameras that can focus at smaller apertures on a wide portion of the frame. And it seems that Sony also prefer to focus stopped down (at least on some lenses).

Maybe we need faster apertures for image quality? But given the current high-iso performance of sensors, does one or one and half stop really count so much ?
And there's also a DOF argument, I mean if quality is comparable I think most will choose more DOF over less DOF on sports.

I'm really interested to find an argument why fast big super telephoto lens are still so important.

Light! ...High ISO has its place but with it comes noise at some level. What is acceptable obviously can be debated. F/4-5.6 lenses do not hack it in low light sporting events. There just isn't enough light to instantly acquire & maintain focus on a random moving target. I shoot pro-soccer and while the latest Canon 100-400 vII is up to the task for day games (use it regularly) it does not perform for evening/night games. For those venues it's the 400 2.8 & the 70-200 2.8. Note: even Canon's 200-400 f/4 struggles in low light which is unfortunate because its range would be ideal for the major portion of a match. DOF is another aspect. While in general I agree regarding comparable quality there still is a limit. F/4 DOF is workable (for me) and I choose to accept what f/5.6 delivers in order to enjoy the benefits of handling the light 100-400 vs the 400 2.8. It does provide sufficient isolation to be acceptable by my employer but the IQ from 2.8-3.5 in IMO is still superior. JMTC

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 12:32 UTC

There is only one proper way to deal with this idiot. Fine him, jail him and make him work to fix his damage. Also make sure the whole ordeal is widely publicized... Its way past time an example is made of totally inconsiderate individuals. Ignoring rules and signs has got to stop.. people must be held accountable for their actions. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 13:12 UTC as 54th comment
In reply to:

Matt: Same here, if someone can map the 5D3, 1DX & 1DX II. More than happy to pay a reasonable fee.

Aware of it. It does work but the short cut via Mac does not work. It applies the short cut to the greyed out name not the sublevel name.
Show Focus Point < applies it here vs below
....Show Focus Point

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 12:17 UTC

Same here, if someone can map the 5D3, 1DX & 1DX II. More than happy to pay a reasonable fee.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 21:26 UTC as 16th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Nobby2016: i pray to god they actually get jail time....

we have to send a strong message to such jerks.

people get sued for thousands of dollars for downloading ONE stupid MP3 file.

such vandals need a lesson.

it can´t be that the industry is protected but the nature is not, because there is no lobby behind it.

Thirsty, while I will commend you on your kinder approach this method will do nothing but show others they can get away with what ever they want. Some of the nation's areas are extremely fragile and once violated take take extensive periods of time to recoup, in some cases, never. Castration like alternatives are not needed but there has to be a swift and substantial penalty for this type of behavior. BTW I don't buy the 'ignoarance of the law' argument here either. Baretta had it right more than 40 years ago: If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2016 at 13:47 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (615 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: Why does anyone think they need exposure compensation in M mode? Think about it.....

But disabling it seems pedantic.

Why? It's essential on the soccer field especially at night where light fall off occurs. Thank goodness they didn't listen to you.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2016 at 12:59 UTC
In reply to:

Matt: Totally agree with Horshack, Dot-Tune is the way and if you haven't tried it you should. From a less technical side: once you have established the best focus on a target utilizing AF first, followed by Live View @10x fine adjustment, switch the lens to MF then simply go through the described process of determining the range of MA where the camera still says it's focused via either the green dot or beep. The true mid-point (key) of the range is then added or subtracted from the MA start point and logged into the camera's AFMA window. All done with just a target & your rig on a tripod. Literally takes less than 5 minutes.

Look at it this way: the body uses AF & indicates a target is in focus yet when you view the result on you computer it is not. Depending on the photo you might see that something either in front or behind the intended target is actually in focus. So an adjustment is required but just how foward or backward is it? The AF confirmation light will continue to show AF has been achieved for various MA amounts. Find the ends of that scale and you have the range. You then want to reset the MA to the middle. ex) range you determine is -5 to +13 or 18. Half of 18=9 but that is NOT what you punch in. The real MA is 4 (-5+9=4 OR 13-9=4) both get you to 4 which is the true middle of the AF range.

Horshack (snapsy over on FM) explains his method very clearly. It certainly is worth spending a few minutes reviewing the video. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1187247/0

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 14:07 UTC

Totally agree with Horshack, Dot-Tune is the way and if you haven't tried it you should. From a less technical side: once you have established the best focus on a target utilizing AF first, followed by Live View @10x fine adjustment, switch the lens to MF then simply go through the described process of determining the range of MA where the camera still says it's focused via either the green dot or beep. The true mid-point (key) of the range is then added or subtracted from the MA start point and logged into the camera's AFMA window. All done with just a target & your rig on a tripod. Literally takes less than 5 minutes.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2016 at 12:40 UTC as 6th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Horshack: The issue with traditional AFMA techniques like the one described in Joey's thoughtful article is that they rely on engaging the AF system to take images as part of the process of arriving at the optimal tuning value. The problem with this is that every AF cycle has the potential for shot-to-shot variation; these variations impact the user's evaluation for each tested AFMA tuning value (they affect the sharpness of each photo) yet they actually have no bearing on whether a given AFMA tuning value is correct or not.

This shot-to-shot AF variation occurs from two sources. The first source is variation in the precision of the phase-detection mechanism itself, ie the ability of the camera to correctly establish the optimal phase differential to know when focus is best. The second source is from mechanical variability of the AF system, be it the camera's in-body motor (older) or the motor inside the lens.

This is why I believe DotTune (and similar techniques) is the better AFMA solution.

Don't knock it before you earnestly try it. Dot-Tune works and it takes less than 5 minutes.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2016 at 12:36 UTC

Interesting approach, for the most part a worthy test. Despite the up front comments about the ease factor once actually into shooting you began to realize the true difficulty in capturing peak soccer action. The sport is not straight forward. It demands plenty from both equipment and the photog's skill. To start, none of the frames presented here are anywhere near being acceptably 'focus sharp'. Detail is lacking and the noise level highly visible. For example looking at the noise in the last photo, I can only come to the conclusion these were posted without processing, as ISO 500 should clean up far better than this. Additionally, this is far from being a sharp focused frame. The reader cannot determine whether this was the result of the equipment or the skill of the photographer. While it was not the intent, a good idea would have been for the pro to use the RX10 II for the second half so a comparison could have been made between the two rigs with a known skill set.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 11:11 UTC as 38th comment

Rishi, I get what was tested and reported. Thank btw! Now, turn the low light equation over to landscape in conditions like pre-dawn, twilight. Speed is not as important and I can argue a tad about the relevancy of AF vs MF. For us older guys, who's eyes are what they used to be, having AF getting a lock on a target under these conditions is quite important and we aren't shooting 1.4/2.0 lenses. With my a7R backup I go through the process of severely boosting the ISO in an attempt to see the intended target in order to manually focus then return the ISO. A follow up report on the a7R II ability in the low light landscape arena would be very useful information.

Matt

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2015 at 12:21 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

FantasticMrFox: Oh, great - I bought the stand-alone LR 6 (a program that's just two months old!) two days ago and now there's an update that the cloud version will get but I won't. Is that the kind of support I paid €129 for?! Pathetic.

Maybe DPR would mind picking this up for an article.

Sometimes you can't live your life under a rock. This was widely publicized.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2015 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

Matt: Ok a great camera with some excellent improvements. Two things are troublesome however. First, the lens selection is quite limited. They've put the cart before the horse again and some available are not top of the line. EX) the Zeiss 24-70 f/4. This USD$1k lens underperforms. Second Sony has continued with its disdain for existing customers. Here again their solution is to provide another model vs fixing existing. Case in point the lack of an electronic 1st curtain in ver 1 which could be resolved with a firmware update. I was truly hoping to make a platform switch as I do enjoy shooting with ver 1 but after seeing for myself Sony not holding themselves accountable for existing products + lack of top glass I will not spend anymore money on their products.

Ok guys, you jumped a bit too quick. I was referencing the slow AF with the ver 1 a7r not ver II, I never mentioned ver II AF capabilities but this was in reference to the Canon 2470f/4 vs the Sony/Zeiss comparison in capabilities and cost on the ver 1 a7r. Note: my lens comment was specifically directed to native FE lenses not A-mount versions which also require an adapter. Since I mentioned the desire to change out platforms the comparison that's important to me is Sony+Sony lenses vs Canon+Canon lenses. BTW where is the 24-105 or the TS-E equivalents for example? Lastly, Sony had indicated to me personally the fix via firmware was possible but never indicated their intent. Obviously it never materialized. As I stated, the new ver appears to be a great camera with many improvements. Like other things I guess, early adopters take a bigger risk which is what has occurred in my case. Lesson learned. Time to sell my ver 1.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

Matt: Ok a great camera with some excellent improvements. Two things are troublesome however. First, the lens selection is quite limited. They've put the cart before the horse again and some available are not top of the line. EX) the Zeiss 24-70 f/4. This USD$1k lens underperforms. Second Sony has continued with its disdain for existing customers. Here again their solution is to provide another model vs fixing existing. Case in point the lack of an electronic 1st curtain in ver 1 which could be resolved with a firmware update. I was truly hoping to make a platform switch as I do enjoy shooting with ver 1 but after seeing for myself Sony not holding themselves accountable for existing products + lack of top glass I will not spend anymore money on their products.

Agree the Canon f/4 version is similar but the issue is that the Canon is $800 vs Sony/Zeiss @ $1200 and you have to add an adapter to the Canon which only gives poor AF functionality to boot. Ergo, my continued position on marginality. From an engineering perspective adding a ms delay to esentially compensate for the lack of an electronic 1st curtain is possible and most likely would eliminate the long lens issue that is well documented regarding the ver 1 a7r.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 14:33 UTC

Ok a great camera with some excellent improvements. Two things are troublesome however. First, the lens selection is quite limited. They've put the cart before the horse again and some available are not top of the line. EX) the Zeiss 24-70 f/4. This USD$1k lens underperforms. Second Sony has continued with its disdain for existing customers. Here again their solution is to provide another model vs fixing existing. Case in point the lack of an electronic 1st curtain in ver 1 which could be resolved with a firmware update. I was truly hoping to make a platform switch as I do enjoy shooting with ver 1 but after seeing for myself Sony not holding themselves accountable for existing products + lack of top glass I will not spend anymore money on their products.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2015 at 12:23 UTC as 96th comment | 10 replies
On article Adobe Camera Raw 8.4 and Lightroom 5.4 now available (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

MadManAce: http://swupdl.adobe.com/updates/oobe/aam20/win/PhotoshopCameraRaw7-7.0/8.4.76/setup.zip

For those that keep their work computer of the internet.

ACR 8.4 for CS6 (Win)

It's 7:40 am East Coast time 4/9 - brought up LR 5.3 and the update screen for 5.4 has popped up. Still gonna wait a few days to see how the early adopters fare before diving in

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2014 at 11:42 UTC
In reply to:

WilliamJ: I'd like to tell something about the "unpatriotic" critic. First, do photographers from around the world have to be "american patriotic" and produce "patriotic pictures only" as if they worked for the Pravda ?
Second, where is gone the freedom of speech ? Do expression have to be "according to" the wishes of "flattering images" supposed to be a universal expectation ?

This has nothing to do with patriotism, american or other wise. Is has everything to do with respect for every athlete, their accomplishments and the Olympic ideals. Too many here are not seeing the total picture. Humanity and respect at certain times should be one, the Olympics are a great example of such a time.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2012 at 20:55 UTC
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »