BorisK1

Lives in United States MI, United States
Works as a Software engineer
Joined on May 7, 2004

Comments

Total: 362, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1188 comments in total)
In reply to:

windmillgolfer: I guess this will appeal to those with a specialist, professional interest but, as ogl has already commented. This is of academic/technology interest only to most.

I think you're vastly underestimating the market. A tonne of people works out to about twelve of them (eleven, if it's US males). I'd say, it could easily be twice that number!

Sorry, couldn't resist :)

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 16:09 UTC
On article Bolt-on 21: Fujifilm WCL-X70 sample images (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Everybody's saying the quality is great. But look at the photo above, the one before you click on the 'View our gallery...' Look at the extreme distortion of the house and telephone pole. They're both literally leaning over!

Ah, I see what you mean now. Yes, a thorough test will use a test target, or it might miss something. And the target would need to be photographed at various zoom settings and at various distances - so you'd end up needing a bunch of targets, printed in various sizes.

Good thing I'm not a camera lab! :)

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 21:59 UTC
On article Bolt-on 21: Fujifilm WCL-X70 sample images (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Everybody's saying the quality is great. But look at the photo above, the one before you click on the 'View our gallery...' Look at the extreme distortion of the house and telephone pole. They're both literally leaning over!

Yes, some zoom lenses have complex distortion:
http://static.bhphotovideo.com/explora/sites/default/files/mustache_0.jpg
But if a straight line remains straight, you're good, there's no distortion.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 01:06 UTC
On article Bolt-on 21: Fujifilm WCL-X70 sample images (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Everybody's saying the quality is great. But look at the photo above, the one before you click on the 'View our gallery...' Look at the extreme distortion of the house and telephone pole. They're both literally leaning over!

"If it is very important for you and if you will buy the product only if it doesn't have distortion,then my advice is to search for a real distortion test of the product.Or you will never be sure by analyzing these samples."
The only distortion here that can be the lense's fault is if the straight lines look curved. Things rotated or leaning over are the photographer's fault, not the lense's. This image has straight lines, enough to judge the amount of distortion - very little.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2016 at 21:01 UTC

Now, are there any other muscles that clench at dramatic moments that GoPro is supposed to capture? Something that wouldn't interfere with hanging on for dear life? People would pay money to see an IndieGoGo campaign video...

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2016 at 00:40 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Sdaniella: finally!
a native 43d AF lens that has fov (12mm) and dof (f1.4) with appeal to make 43sys an genuine option ...
it may not be what I have hoped for: 12mm f0.7 (FF: 24mm F1.4) to maximize shallow dof flexibility to match FF capabilities, but it's better than nothing
bonus: rectilinear WA, too
... even though it may be too late in coming (it's 2016 June)

now all that needs improvement
are 43-sys camera sensors...

UWA close-up portraits are more like caricature than "interesting and excellent". A bit of a niche, to say the least. But I guess, to each his own...

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2016 at 00:47 UTC
In reply to:

Sdaniella: finally!
a native 43d AF lens that has fov (12mm) and dof (f1.4) with appeal to make 43sys an genuine option ...
it may not be what I have hoped for: 12mm f0.7 (FF: 24mm F1.4) to maximize shallow dof flexibility to match FF capabilities, but it's better than nothing
bonus: rectilinear WA, too
... even though it may be too late in coming (it's 2016 June)

now all that needs improvement
are 43-sys camera sensors...

Just out of curiosity, what kind of wide-angle shots would call for shallow DOF?

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 16:02 UTC
On article Bolt-on 21: Fujifilm WCL-X70 sample images (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Everybody's saying the quality is great. But look at the photo above, the one before you click on the 'View our gallery...' Look at the extreme distortion of the house and telephone pole. They're both literally leaning over!

Perspective distortion has a very distinctive look, easily recognizable here. Fisheye distortion has its own look, not present in this image.
Perspective distortion is not caused by a lens defect, unless it's a tilt-shift lens.
Now, about the horizon line being "almost" at the center: Remember, this is an UWA lens. If you're looking at the image at normal viewing distance, the angle of view is severely compressed compared to what the lens actually saw. If the camera was leaning 20 degrees, it will look like a (roughly) 12 degrees lean.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2016 at 14:55 UTC
On article Bolt-on 21: Fujifilm WCL-X70 sample images (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

GabrielZ: Everybody's saying the quality is great. But look at the photo above, the one before you click on the 'View our gallery...' Look at the extreme distortion of the house and telephone pole. They're both literally leaning over!

House and pole "leaning over" is perspective distortion. It's literally what the lens saw from its position and angle.

The reason it looks distorted is that you're looking at the scene at a narrower angle than what the lens saw. Try leaning closer to the monitor, and you'll see the house and the pole straightening up.

Now, if the pole or the corner of the wall weren't straight, that would've been the lense's fault.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2016 at 15:47 UTC
In reply to:

MarioV: This is awesome.
Imagine, aberration-free lightweight lenses for cameras.
Tamron can use this to make an optically perfect 16-500mm lens.

pwilly

"But it can't focus or change focal length. You would need a different metamaterial for each focal length and focus distance."

Same thing with lenses made out of ground glass. You need multiple elements to zoom and focus. But if those elements are flat, aren't constrained by the refractive index, and don't introduce aberrations (so no need for correction), you still end up with a nice optic.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2016 at 17:21 UTC
In reply to:

TomasT: I never understood why wide angle distortion is "by design" with this kind of camera's.
Really do not like this "feature". Camera and features looks great btw

With ultrawide lenses, there's always distortion. Rectilinear lenses preserve off-center straight lines, but they stretch and squeeze humans into weird shapes. Fisheye makes humans look more natural, but butchers the architecture.
My guess is that the action cams use fisheye designs because they are cheaper to build and are a better fit for the typical subject matter. Not many straight lines in the mountains.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 23:15 UTC
In reply to:

iAPX: Sony and the patent system are inventing a new definition of vaporware...

They can't patent the *idea* of vaporware because of widespread prior art. But a specific implementation - sure, why not!

Link | Posted on May 1, 2016 at 15:30 UTC
In reply to:

LWanTeD: Less is more (expensive).

The price is usually based on the expected sales volume, so no surprise there.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 19:49 UTC

Reminds me of mountaineering "by fair means".

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 19:47 UTC as 261st comment
In reply to:

Ribbit74: I wish car manufacturers would do the same thing. Wouldn't it be great to buy a brand new Lamborghini with manual transmission, no synchros (gotta double-clutch and rev match!), no power steering, drum brakes, hand-crank windows, no A/C, no instrument panel, and a hand-crank starter?

True automotive aficionados would appreciate it.

And a floor pump. Must not forget the floor pump.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 19:45 UTC
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chris Page: The focus point still cannot easily be selected manually. That is the killer for me.

@Androole: Well, touchscreens can be both a blessing and a curse. You're 100% right - many tasks are much easier with touchscreen. For example, the "lock AF and recompose" technique won't work on a tripod.

On the other hand, as soon as you get a stray drop of water on that touchscreen, using it becomes an exercise in frustration. It also prompts the photog to constantly touch the screen, causing smearing and even scratching. Sun lotion? Bug spray? Rock dust? Sometimes it's hard to keep your hands clean.

Unfortunately, when the touchscreen *is* available, the camera designers don't necessarily make sure you can easily do everything you need through the mechanical controls.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 17:17 UTC
On article Hands on with Sony's a6300 and G Master lenses (306 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chris Page: The focus point still cannot easily be selected manually. That is the killer for me.

Based on a quick web search, what used to be "focus and recompose", now is "lock AF tracking and recompose". Just as simple as before (when AF tracking is enabled, you engage it with a shutter half-press), and no need to mess with AF point selection.
If, that is, the AF tracking works as advertised. Which it should.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 16:50 UTC
In reply to:

D135ima: Теперь "Лейку" можно утопить в лейке.

It's a pun. "Leica" in Russian is normally pronounced identically to the word "Лейка", which means "watering can". Lakes are not involved.
Amusingly, the English pronunciation of Leica sounds closer to Russian word "лайка" ("Laika"), which is a Northern sled dog breed also known as Siberian Husky.
A Russian dog by the name Laika (though not the breed) made history in the 1960s as the first dog in space.

A waterproof camera Laika
Was made in the city of Wetzler.
It did not fly to space,
it did not pull a sled,
And was way too expensive to like it.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 03:55 UTC
On article JPEG Committee contemplates adding DRM to image format (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Steven R. Rochlin: Am a longtime journalist in the field of CE, with that said DRM has worked pretty much never.

'DRM' video tape was easy to defeat

DRM CD was easily defeated

DRM video discs also defeated

DRM'ing anything you put on the Internet is a waste of time.

And yes there is Watermarking and only way that works is to broadly watermark the image so as to make it hard to alter said image to remove the watermark.

Encryption is the way to go, yet, ummm, good luck encrypting images to then have it freely displayed online. Even then, once someone has the key, they can easily find a way to copy said file in an unencrypted manner. DRM JPG images online... what is to keep either a screen capture or getting the image file from your browser's cache and then using software to defeat the DRM?

While I like the DRM concept if you insist on such things, it'll never work in the real world. Strong encryption with no back-door access is the only way to go at this time if you desire security.

Encryption, no matter how strong, won't guard against somebody saving a screenshot, or (if the images can only be seen through a signed app that disables screen capture) photographing the screen.
They'd also have to lobby the camera companies to detect the © symbol in the field of view, and disable the shutter button :)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2015 at 20:07 UTC
Total: 362, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »