keepreal

keepreal

Lives in United Kingdom Enfield, United Kingdom
Works as a Retired, was Information Technology Manager
Joined on Mar 24, 2007
About me:

Amateur with a passion for pictorial photography of more than fifty years. Likes to communicate and learn from others with expert knowledge, especially if they also live in the real world, have galleries or links to really good photos and put their camera to good use.

Comments

Total: 220, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article This camera is made of 32,000 drinking straws (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Cool. Truly creative.

Not digital though. DPR is losing its focus quite often.

"Some readers of this site do find the off topics interesting from time to time." So what's it doing here?

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 22:10 UTC
On article This camera is made of 32,000 drinking straws (178 comments in total)

Would anybody like to join crowd funding for my design with a cheese grater and a bag of onions? It is ideal when you want to get pictures of people crying or appearing to. There are several models in different sizes, depending upon the size of the tear drops desired. Also, if you do not have a camera, never mind, just use it anyway.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 20:53 UTC as 31st comment
On article This camera is made of 32,000 drinking straws (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

Wildbegonia: This is so amazing. Congratulations for an original project that shows the principle behind the pinhole camera. And it has an extra twist of ingenuity, its potential for recycling waste materials.

Wildbegonia, is the waste you are talk about DPR articles?

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 20:45 UTC
On article This camera is made of 32,000 drinking straws (178 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Cool. Truly creative.

Not digital though. DPR is losing its focus quite often.

landscaper1, so when there is no news any old rubbish will do.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 20:43 UTC

I shoot landscapes, mostly in good enough light that f/8 is my usual aperture and the 20mm f/1.8 is very good to the edges then. Panorama stitching, when the need arises, will involve only two frames vertical or four in two rows with the camera orientated horizontally, either benefiting from prime lens quality.

Very recently I traded up to the Nikon D610 from the D300 and bought the 20mm f/1.8 at the same time. I will use it most of the time instead of my Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM (MK I). Surprisingly, the edge definition of the latter is quite reasonable to the edges on the D610 whereas, when using film, I used not to be too happy about it. Unless I want my feet in the frame, I am not sure I will have too much need of the Sigma any more but I will keep it for the odd occasion.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2017 at 10:40 UTC as 20th comment
On article Close-up: Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 (127 comments in total)

Why on earth buy a MFT camera this size and weight? Crazy.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2017 at 13:39 UTC as 17th comment | 10 replies

Not going to buy this but would have been interested to see what images from it are like, ones you can judge the quality from, that is...

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 17:06 UTC as 89th comment

This lens at a monster price has no electronic connections with the camera. That is because it is designed for people without all the usual connections within their brains.

Maybe Donald will slap such a high tariff on Meyer that they cease trading with the US. He did say jobs at home first and that is one of the more sensible things he has said. I live across the pond but am equally against the global village wherever the fat cats reside.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 15:09 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)

I have completely lost interest after reading the review at http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/981-laowa12f28. The qualities of this lens appear to have been exaggerated in other reviews and the deficiencies played down. I'll stick to my Nikkor 20mm f/1.8 and panorama stitching when necessary. I now suspect that this Laowa may be another example of the photographic media hyping up to encourage sales when the quality of the item is not really in line with the price. People are so keen to part with their money, perhaps the view of industry is why bother.

I will also try out my Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM which I have not used with my Nikon D610 yet, only just having bought that camera. You never know it might be better than I expect. although on film I did notice less than ideal edge sharpness.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2016 at 23:39 UTC as 4th comment
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: See https://www.ephotozine.com/article/venus-laowa-12mm-f-2-8-review-29779 for a very favourable review and then ignore what it says, even though it appears to concur with the sample photos here.

"The lens had to be placed very close to the test chart, something that it is not really designed for."

IMO that review is garbage unless one is talking only about macro photography. As I have suspected for a long time, lens reviewers shoot charts set very near to test lenses and most have sharpness and distortion characteristics that differ considerably at distance.

I am not sure optically if it is feasible, but one needs a system to send a virtual image of an industry standard source as if at infinity, failing that at a considerable distance, into the lens, not a chart or near set up like DP Review and other reviewers use.

I imagine the set at the end of the samples of the same subject with a lot of detail in it to the edges at various apertures makes for a much more reliable "chart".

Regarding what I wrote above about the dubious quality of lens testing due to the use of charts placed near to the camera, I can now say that the use of a collimator to make a virtual object much farther away is perfectly feasible.

I had my eyes checked earlier this afternoon and there for distance vision they used to use letters of various sizes backlit on the other side of the room about 20 feet away. Now, they are using a collimator set much nearer, at about half the distance.

Of course, equipment of this nature for testing lenses would be very expensive and to be suitable for a very wide angle lens it would cost considerably more and be quite a bulky piece of apparatus. What they now use for testing eyes is child's play by comparison.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 20:33 UTC
On article The whole nine yards: Canon 35mm F1.4L II USM review (333 comments in total)

This lens clearly is sharp. This lens clearly is big, heavy and expensive. This lens clearly is insane. Is there no limit to what extreme lengths lens designers will go, sometimes quite literally?

In the days of 35mm film, cameras often were described as miniature. Now increasingly with digital, we have monsters. Apart from professionals needing to capture the back side of the moon, I see no point in it. Unless, that is, the exercise is merely intended to have wealthy people with muscles like Arnold Schwarzenegger part with their cash.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 09:55 UTC as 36th comment | 5 replies
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: This is making me nostalgic. A really wide lens without tons of barrel distortion. (This was the norm in the film era when there was no way to correct the distortion.)

Personally, I'd rather see more lenses with low distortion than more gold coatings and bubble-shaped bokeh, etc. And the bonus is when there is no distortion to correct, sharpness does not suffer from having to move all those pixels.

Fotopizza, not many lenses at fairly reasonable prices are good enough towards the edges and especially in the corners. So the end result after software correction for distortion is not particularly good. If not for that, I would be quite happy to use them. For example, with the Olympus M.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO "the auto-correction comes at the price of a bit of softness - it is simply not lossless". (photozone.de) But as joribama suggests, in time this may improve.

Most modern Zeiss lens for full frame or APSC suffer from very bad vignetting, quite a few also have a lot of distortion. It makes me wonder if they are based on designs from the film era. The Voigtlander Heliars also appear to be and while very good, suffer from severe vignetting. Correcting that can result in noise.

I was surprised through your comments to learn that Alpa is still in business along with Rodenstock lenses for their equipment. I last heard of Alpa nearly sixty years ago with their rather nice 35mm SLRs.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 02:36 UTC
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)

See https://www.ephotozine.com/article/venus-laowa-12mm-f-2-8-review-29779 for a very favourable review and then ignore what it says, even though it appears to concur with the sample photos here.

"The lens had to be placed very close to the test chart, something that it is not really designed for."

IMO that review is garbage unless one is talking only about macro photography. As I have suspected for a long time, lens reviewers shoot charts set very near to test lenses and most have sharpness and distortion characteristics that differ considerably at distance.

I am not sure optically if it is feasible, but one needs a system to send a virtual image of an industry standard source as if at infinity, failing that at a considerable distance, into the lens, not a chart or near set up like DP Review and other reviewers use.

I imagine the set at the end of the samples of the same subject with a lot of detail in it to the edges at various apertures makes for a much more reliable "chart".

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 20:58 UTC as 12th comment | 6 replies
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

aramgrg: Samyang redifined what a cheap lens is. Laowa shows how far it can go being reasonably priced. Go ahead, Canikon introduce one with $3000 price tag.

Not so sure about reasonable. Less unreasonable? Maybe.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 20:35 UTC
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: This is making me nostalgic. A really wide lens without tons of barrel distortion. (This was the norm in the film era when there was no way to correct the distortion.)

Personally, I'd rather see more lenses with low distortion than more gold coatings and bubble-shaped bokeh, etc. And the bonus is when there is no distortion to correct, sharpness does not suffer from having to move all those pixels.

Totally agree but surprised at the Likes. I have been arguing the toss over this and look for film-like attributes in a lens whenever possible, getting stick for it.

A less than obvious reason to add to your points is that shooting HDR, I insist on being free to choose my RAW developer. My preferences for tonal gradation and ease of use, Machinery HDR Effects, will not correct lens distortion.

Besides, no software will turn a sow's ear into a silk purse - take the m.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8 anything-but-a-genuine PRO. Useful for shots of beer by the gallon, though.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 20:33 UTC
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)

The price for this Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 lens is pretty steep. A similar lens which has both both auto focus and aperture linkage also would be, even with as good optical quality, except perhaps from one of the prime lens manufacturers - no pun intended.

I am beginning to wonder if the growing number of manufacturers whose lenses lack auto focus and aperture linkage to the camera body is because they do not know how to do the electronics. Samyang, as far as I am aware do provide AE on Canon but only for one of their lenses. But at least their lenses are often cheap in spite of good optics, which may be the reason.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 17:08 UTC as 22nd comment | 6 replies
On article Venus Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D sample gallery (124 comments in total)

I will wait more reviews of this lens, but so far the indications are very positive indeed, even at wider apertures. From the samples here, I am very impressed. Having just bought a Nikon D610 and Nikkor 20mm f1.8 I am loathe to spend any more but I dare say later on I might be tempted.

I have just migrated from my D300 mostly using the Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM for landscapes, rarely longer than 14mm. My sample of this lens is good but the D610 with 20mm will give much better IQ. If the 20mm is not wide enough on FF, then I'll stitch panoramas from 20mm frames, not needing many of course, One advantage as others discuss below is not having as much perspective distortion and a huge saving by doing that. On the other hand, panorama stitching is a chore and I do not always feel mentally energetic enough to make a really good job of difficult images. My aim always is to avoid obvious distortion so that the result looks natural. Happily, in landscapes one usually need not worry.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 16:53 UTC as 24th comment
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (244 comments in total)

For this size, weight and price this lens ought to be special but, quite clearly it is anything but. It is a pity DPR gave it a silver award. How much was that worth to them, then? People who spend this kind of money on second rate in my opinion are idiots or very rich. Or both.

I have the original 12-24mm and the lack of distortion at any focal length is amazing. Mine is one opf the good ones but the definition is nothing special, even on my APSC Nikon D300. On FX the edges suffer too much so, now, with my new D610 I bought the Nikkor 20mm f/1.8 which is nearly as wide on FX as 12mm on DX. I agree with CreeDo about stitiching together panoramas, so when 20mm on FX is not wide enough that is what I intend to do.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 17:48 UTC as 41st comment | 2 replies
On article DxO ViewPoint 3 adds automatic distortion correction (27 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: There is one serious shortcoming in Viewpoint, at least as I see it, but I have a way around it. Please tell me if you agree or not. Possibly, something I need to set I have not yet discovered, though I have looked high and low.

If you want to compress the edges in an image, which I occasionally want to do with an ultra-wide angle image or a panorama for a landscape, it crops the top and bottom to the same pixel height, so the end result, while having compressed edges, also loses part of the image top and bottom. Weird. I also found this in Viewpoint 1.

So what I have to do is extend the canvas size top and bottom, apply the Viewpoint transition, then remove the narrower redundant top and bottom afterwards. It works, but what a chore.

Very clever, scastle. Many, many thanks. You have contributed everything to my use of VP!

I changed the default in Crop from preserve aspect ratio to unconstrained and now it does exactly what I want, just compressing in one direction while leaving the other unchanged.

I think DxO should let you choose the defaults or at least warn you in Help to check them all. Strange that crop has an influence on other functions even if you never intended to use it. Not how I would have designed it.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 17:44 UTC
On article DxO ViewPoint 3 adds automatic distortion correction (27 comments in total)

There is one serious shortcoming in Viewpoint, at least as I see it, but I have a way around it. Please tell me if you agree or not. Possibly, something I need to set I have not yet discovered, though I have looked high and low.

If you want to compress the edges in an image, which I occasionally want to do with an ultra-wide angle image or a panorama for a landscape, it crops the top and bottom to the same pixel height, so the end result, while having compressed edges, also loses part of the image top and bottom. Weird. I also found this in Viewpoint 1.

So what I have to do is extend the canvas size top and bottom, apply the Viewpoint transition, then remove the narrower redundant top and bottom afterwards. It works, but what a chore.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 14:14 UTC as 4th comment | 2 replies
Total: 220, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »