Karroly

Lives in France Grenoble, France
Joined on Jan 13, 2009

Comments

Total: 2124, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

SmoothOperator: I was think inking about this today. I haven't been able to find a decent 35mm full frame prime to adapt to my aps-c, and I think I know why. For a full frame this is a wide angle so they probably need to use a retro-focus design, to compensate for the image circle size. Which increases the cost and reduces the speed. As it turns out though, there are plenty of cheap fast c-mount 35mm lenses, that will work on aps-c, because they don't need to use retrofocus designs, and aps-c doesn't need retro-focus until 28mm.

If the focal length of a non retro-focus lens is too short compared to the flange distance, the lens just cannot focus at infinity. It is not only a matter of sensor size versus lens image circle, as you say.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2018 at 18:23 UTC

My main concern is what would cost and weight a mere nifty fifty for that sensor ? No longer nifty, I am afraid...

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2018 at 18:06 UTC as 5th comment
On article Samyang releases 85mm F1.4 AF lens for Canon DSLRs (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

ikan154: the original 85/1.4 (manual focus) is actually good..
lacks IS but hey it's a fast glass

loeonche64,
Who said it was a lens issue ?

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2018 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

SmoothOperator: I was think inking about this today. I haven't been able to find a decent 35mm full frame prime to adapt to my aps-c, and I think I know why. For a full frame this is a wide angle so they probably need to use a retro-focus design, to compensate for the image circle size. Which increases the cost and reduces the speed. As it turns out though, there are plenty of cheap fast c-mount 35mm lenses, that will work on aps-c, because they don't need to use retrofocus designs, and aps-c doesn't need retro-focus until 28mm.

You are confusing things. Retro-focus design has few to do with APC-S or FF but with the distance between the lens mount and the sensor.
APC-S does not mean mirrorless. An APS-C DSLR has the same flange distance than an FF DSLR with the same mount... Except that, as the mirror in the APS-C DSLR is smaller, the rear of the lens can be a little bit closer to the sensor, lowering a little bit the focal length threshold where a retro-focus design is mandatory. Also, a Sony FF MILC has a flange distance as short as an APC-S MILC...

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2018 at 21:25 UTC
On article Nikon D850 sensor confirmed as Sony-made (503 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hyper111: Why does this not surprise me. Looking at sample photos of many cameras, the colour often looks slightly off. So if these cameras are all using the same sensors, they end up with the same look.

No wonder I am struggling to find a replacement camera.... all just clones of each other.

Do not expect any sensor to produce accurate "RAW" colors. The colors in the final image is the result of post-processing. So, if colors are "slightly off", this is because the algorithm used by the camera manufacturer is not perfect.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2018 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

Mistral75: Not that, due to using a (single) mirror, all images will be reversed (left-right).

Ok, this accessory creates a flipped image. I do not know what there is inside to project the image on the film. But all I said before is true. If you do the experiment that I suggested, you can check it. I have done it myself, so I know what I am talking about... Another experiment : grab an SLR, open the back and put a focusing screen, or a transluscent piece of paper, in lieu of the film, focus. In order to see a correct image from the back, you have to turn your head upside down. It means that the image on the inner side is flipped. In order to get a correct image on the inner side, it must be "unflipped" by a reflection in a mirror. Another example are SLRs with waist-level viewfinder : the image you can see is flipped because it goes through a mirror. Could you look at the image on the inner side of the focusing screen, you could see a correct, unflipped, image.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2018 at 20:43 UTC
In reply to:

Mistral75: Not that, due to using a (single) mirror, all images will be reversed (left-right).

MIstral75,
"When you look at a negative film you look at the front side of it, not through the backside, and it's correctly oriented."
I am sorry but you are wrong. Try this : project the image of your window on a wall though a lens. The image is upside down, but if you look at the wall, you will see that the right side of the image is the right side of the window when you look at the window. So, in order to see the picture on the wall correctly, rotating the image by 180 degrees is not the way to go : the top and the bottom will be OK, but the left and right sides will be inverted. So, to see the right image, it must be flipped by a mirror. Or you must go on the other side of the wall (assuming it is transluscent), and then you rotate the image by 180 degrees. This is the way you must look at a negative : from the back of the camera with a rotation of 180 degrees...

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2018 at 23:48 UTC
In reply to:

Mistral75: Not that, due to using a (single) mirror, all images will be reversed (left-right).

And this is the right thing to do when the image is projected directly onto a positive film... instead of a film you look through.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2018 at 23:49 UTC
On article €80K Oskar Barnack Award finalists announced (94 comments in total)
In reply to:

milkod2001: We got to the point where even the cheapest cameras from bargain bins can deliver well exposed good pictures and that has spoiled us. It is very hard to see actually good photography theses days all seems like random clicks without a single thought, composition etc.

There is nothing in this gallery what caught my attention for more than half sec. maybe picture with horses at best. The rest is just super average. 1st picture from holiday is a joke so is the one with dog. The whole gallery looks like random selection from Flickr.

biza43,
"One thing is saying "I don't like it", one different thing is saying that the photos have no single thought, composition, are random clicks, or are a joke"
For sure, but did you notice that the OP did not abruptly say "the photos have no...etc" but "SEEMS like random clicks..." ? It gives some relativeness to his/her opinion.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2018 at 12:01 UTC
On article €80K Oskar Barnack Award finalists announced (94 comments in total)
In reply to:

milkod2001: We got to the point where even the cheapest cameras from bargain bins can deliver well exposed good pictures and that has spoiled us. It is very hard to see actually good photography theses days all seems like random clicks without a single thought, composition etc.

There is nothing in this gallery what caught my attention for more than half sec. maybe picture with horses at best. The rest is just super average. 1st picture from holiday is a joke so is the one with dog. The whole gallery looks like random selection from Flickr.

"Perhaps you can enter next year's contest and wow everybody with your fantastic photography."
This kind of comment, very common here on DPR as soon as someone does not like some pictures and expresses it, is somewhat intolerant.
In the same vein :
- do not criticize a meal if you are not a master cook,
- do not criticize music if you are not a musician,
- do not criticize a movie if you are not a movie director,
- etc, etc...
In other words, if you are not an "expert" you cannot have any taste, so accept everything and shut your mouth.

milkod2001,
I totaly agree with you, including about the pictures you do, or do not, like ;-)

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2018 at 11:12 UTC
On article Kodak teases first sample photos of Ektachrome (197 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tower: Film comes to be a toy now. It too cost and a lot hassle. For job that is NOT right way at all. Have been photographer more then 30 years, I will never look back.

ewelch,
Producing electronic devices is not very good for the environment too... And very few of them are fully recycled...

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2018 at 16:36 UTC
On article Canon launches updated EF 70-200mm F4L IS II (236 comments in total)
In reply to:

TareqPhoto: GOD saved me from these new releases or lenses or cameras or whatever by giving my difficult/bad situations in my life and also getting into Astronomy last year, with those it became pointless of me to keep upgrading or think for something newer, i upgraded from 70-200 2.8 IS mk1 to mkII and i really didn't use that mk1 much and even with mkII it was less and less, and in fact i don't do photography since 2 years and with astronomy last year i don't shoot with DSLR anymore, only using DSLR to shoot packages of astronomy gear i buy.

I won't upgrade much or often as before because i found out that i do upgrade only to impress people on forums like here or there more than impressing myself, and at the end it will continue without benefit to me, so i decided i won't upgrade until i first get good budget and then good/serious reasons to upgrade, or buy new stuff if i don't have older versions anyway.

Mi fili, vade in pace...

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2018 at 16:04 UTC
On article Sony reveals faster, higher-res OLED viewfinder display (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

dylanear: Call me when they have DCI-P3 color gamut and 4K resolution. Even the best EVFs still look horrible to me compared to a good OVF. That's not to say they aren't quite usable, can make for a nice mirroless camera. But they simply do a poor job of showing the color, contract and resolution that'll be in the final file.

"Even the best EVFs still look horrible to me compared to a good OVF"
A "feature" I really do not care about as an amateur photographer. EVFs have many advantages over OVFs that really HELP me when framing/focusing.

"But they simply do a poor job of showing the color, contract and resolution that'll be in the final file."
You can check resolution through magnification, either in record or playback modes.
But EVFs do all these better and better over time, and OVFs cannot do these job at all. So I prefer the limited WYSIWYG feature of EVFs than the total lack of it with OVFs.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2018 at 07:36 UTC
On article Sony reveals faster, higher-res OLED viewfinder display (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: Anyway hard to reach OVF.

shigzeo,
"AF issues have nothing to do with EVFs and OVFs. They are functions of the sensor and AF chips or overlays. "
"Those issues are because of mis-alignment between the sensor plane and the AF module. They have nothing at all to do with the OVF."
Right...and wrong. OVF IMPLIES the use of a dedicated PDAF sensor which, if not properly aligned, may be the cause of focusing issue. This is why the OVF is, INDIRECTLY, the cause of these issues. No one here said the OVF is the DIRECT cause of AF issues... Replacing the OVF by an EVF allows to get rid of the dedicated PDAF sensor.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2018 at 09:28 UTC
On article Sony reveals faster, higher-res OLED viewfinder display (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: Anyway hard to reach OVF.

Whatever the benefits of an OVF, it is slowly dying. Future is for electronic global shutter with on-sensor PDAF. No mirror, no mechanical shutter, no vibrations, no noise, no black-out, no more back/front focus issues caused by mirrors/focusingscreen/PDAF sensor inaccurately positionned.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2018 at 01:36 UTC
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (756 comments in total)
In reply to:

sceneIt: Wayyyy overpriced. I’ll take the canon m50 instead for that money.

^ try Google Translate ;-)

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2018 at 01:20 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI: Video overview (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

esmufotografija: The lack of touch screen is the achilles heel when one uses Software like filmic etc on a smartphone it really makes things pretty seamless

"The lack of touch screen"
Which camera are you talking about ?

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 09:52 UTC
On article Sony announces Cyber-shot RX100 VI with 24-200mm zoom (756 comments in total)
In reply to:

sceneIt: Wayyyy overpriced. I’ll take the canon m50 instead for that money.

Collapsible, superzoom (but fixed), small, etc... Those features are not everyone's graal... :-)

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 09:44 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot RX100 VI sample gallery (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

NCB: Impressed. Would like some landscape / out-in-the-wilds shots as well.

And some night shots @ 1600/3200 ISO too, please...

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 05:31 UTC
On SampleImage:0868520758 (3 comments in total)

How did you manage to get the vertical lines parallel ? Any particular in-camera processing ?

Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 05:24 UTC as 2nd comment | 1 reply
Total: 2124, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »