olstrup

Lives in Denmark Denmark
Joined on Jun 5, 2007

Comments

Total: 63, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Michel Savage: Just tried the new 2022 software. Unlike the 2021 version, I cannot see files in subfolders under Manage. And the software froze on me. Back to Adobe Bridge.

@Michael Savage: I'm still not quite sure what you mean. But when I search for something, there's various options for grouping the search result, also included ungrouped. With ungrouped chosen, all the files show up from beginning to last subdirectory. I checked with my copy of the 2021 version, and it's the same there. But whatever, if what you need to do is not possible in ACDSee, you must choose another program.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2021 at 07:47 UTC
In reply to:

Michel Savage: Just tried the new 2022 software. Unlike the 2021 version, I cannot see files in subfolders under Manage. And the software froze on me. Back to Adobe Bridge.

@Michael Savage: Clicking any folder shows its subfolders in the panel to the right and when clicking on these, they open and show their files (and sub-subfolders if there are any). Just the same as in the 2021 version (and 2020, 2019 and 2018 and maybe older than that). Actually, the same as in most other file managing tools like Windows file explorer.
But maybe we are not talking about the same thing (?)-

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2021 at 19:03 UTC
In reply to:

Michel Savage: Just tried the new 2022 software. Unlike the 2021 version, I cannot see files in subfolders under Manage. And the software froze on me. Back to Adobe Bridge.

Works fine for me - just like the 2021 version. It shows me all the subfolders including files.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2021 at 12:57 UTC
In reply to:

IamJF: I'm useing ACDSee since last year and while I like it for fast photo organisation and development it's not 100% stable. There are lags (like I move the mouse and it's slow - in 2021!), from day to day different. Once froze completely.

Accaptable for my hobby use, but for daily work it would bother me.

It's been perfectly stable for me - more stable than LR was. Never frozen.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2021 at 12:54 UTC
In reply to:

hjoseph7: I love it and use it way more than LightRoom and Photoshop for that matter, although Photoshop has features that ACDSee does not have and that are more intuitive and efficient. The only thing I don't like about this software package, is that it does not Save and Replace an image. You have to keep renaming the image every time you make changes to it. I'm guessing that's a "Nanny" way of keeping you from inadvertently deleting one of your prize images,but it sure is inconvenient !

When saving, there are both "save" and "save as" options. The "save" option opens a conformation box, but it can be switched off by the usual "don't show again" check box.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2021 at 12:52 UTC

The 2022 version is now out.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2021 at 08:06 UTC as 5th comment

The NR in ACDSee is not automatical like say DXO Pure Raw and it is a bit peculiar but I don't find it as bad as its reputation. The color noise slider usually has to be put all the way to the right and the luminance slider work in a very narrow interval 40- 50. Below that, not much happens and above that details smear out. But knowing that, satisfactory results can be achieved.

The sharpening tool is fine and has an edge mask slider which is useful for avoiding sharpening uniform areas like the sky. I use a two pass sharpening workflow with preset sharpening at import and a second output sharpening when everything including resizing etc. is done.

With the combination of the built in NR and my sharpening procedure, I get better results than with say DXO Pure Raw (which indeed removes noise but also blurs details more than I like and sometimes adds halos).

I look forward to se what the promised improvements the 2022 version of ACDSee can bring in the NR department.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2021 at 08:37 UTC as 15th comment

As for noise reduction, ACDSee claims it to be improved in the 2022 version which is to come out by the end of this month. We'll see how much better it is.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2021 at 15:15 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

olstrup: I just checked the Danish version of Craigslist. There's one of these up for sale with an asking price of ~ $4000 (DKr. 25000). IMHO the 2.8 Rolleiflex is the most beautiful camera ever made. It makes me smile every time I see one. I have an old Rolleicord on my "museum shelf" but it's nowhere as pretty as this one.

@sirVir: Well, the camera in question is the much sought for "white face" variant which comes at a premium. And BTW, the price is an asking price - and the camera has been for sale since juli, so maybe the asking price is too high after all.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2021 at 21:28 UTC

I just checked the Danish version of Craigslist. There's one of these up for sale with an asking price of ~ $4000 (DKr. 25000). IMHO the 2.8 Rolleiflex is the most beautiful camera ever made. It makes me smile every time I see one. I have an old Rolleicord on my "museum shelf" but it's nowhere as pretty as this one.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2021 at 20:47 UTC as 27th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Mac McCreery: I wonder how may digital togs have held onto their vinyl records?

I have. All 400 of them. I even have a phonograph to play them on.

On the other hand, I haven't shot one frame on film since getting my first digital camera in 2002, though I have kept three Leicas and a Rolleiflex for sentimental reasons. My Leitz Focomat is packed down in my basement. It is unsellable these days.

As for using film again, thanks but no thanks. Been there, done that.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2021 at 20:38 UTC
In reply to:

Picmad: I think I'm about to give up trying to find a tripod for my 300mmf2.8, there is no way to immobilise a 2.5kg lens
+1kg camera ,other than a cradle in metal or wood with 4 legs .it's just nonsense to tyy to do it with a ball head

Just two examples:

https://www.novoflex.de/en/products-637/camera-support-systems/triopod-pro75-3-bein/triopod-pro75-products/triopod-pro75-kits.html

https://www.berlebach.de/en/?bereich=details&id=225 with suitable head like for example ArcaSwiss Z1 (load capacity 59kg).

If that is not solid enough, how about this one: https://www.berlebach.de/en/?bereich=details&id=593

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2021 at 22:45 UTC

Also worth mentioning are The Berlebach wooden tripods. Despite the antique looks they can not be condemmed out of hand. They are actually very stable and vibration resistant. The weight is about the double of equivalent modern carbon tripods, but if one doesn't need to carry it around a lot, one gets a lot of stability for resonable money. They are easy to clean if they have been used in dirt or water. The astro people like the heavier versions (they even have a version especially designed for that). https://www.berlebach.de/de/?bereich=details&id=8&sprache=english

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2021 at 07:36 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply

As an earlier poster said, it's worth mentioning the Novoflex Tripod system: https://www.novoflex.de/en/products-637/camera-support-systems/triopod.html
It's designed as a modular system, where three different base units can be combined with a number of leg sets ranging from large and solid over shorter and lighter legs for travelling to short mini legs (like on a table top tripod). All legs can be unscrewed and replaced with another one. One leg can be used separately as a monopod. 50 cm screw in leg extensions are available. Check out the several YouTube videos showing the various options and combinations. Of course, its not cheap , but it's beautiful German engineering at its best - very well thought out - and it will last a lifetime.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2021 at 07:33 UTC as 11th comment
On article Nikon Z7 II review (1508 comments in total)
In reply to:

roblumba: It would be nice to judge skin tones in the Dpreview gallery from skin that's not partially frozen. I can't tell if the skin is just pale and red because of the cold or because of the color science / lens.

Your post goes to show that many variables affect skin tones. Ambient temperature is just one of many. Even in constant and standardized outer conditions, skin tones of different individuals will vary. Also skin tones of the same individual will vary, depending on whether the person is tired, is ill etc. So, IMHO, searching for the camera with "the best skin tones" is like when a blind man in a dark room is searching for a black cat which isn't there. There are simply too many variables not related to the camera.

Skin tones debate only refers to ooc JPEGs with default settings. However, the settings can be adjusted in camera. With RAW, what you se is the RAW converters color rendering, not the cameras.

When I was young, I had blue eyes and red chins. Now I have red eyes and blue chins. Not exactly good skin tones. ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2021 at 09:03 UTC
In reply to:

Steppenw0lf: I actually laugh about this report. It is only marketing (disguised in a report).
Summary: The differences are tiny. (Some would say not worth the time to talk about it). And medium format is still slightly better.
And does it matter in reality ? Not at all. The only thing which is now obvious: The a9 cameras were not as good as everyone here said. It is clearly visible now, but before that nobody of the experts talked about it. And so will it be with the next camera. Sony is always best. Has the best marketing. The most experts to confirm it. And how bad it is in reality will only be visible with the next generation of best cameras.
An old game. Just amazing how many readers still fall for it ...

@Steppenwolf:

"The only thing which is now obvious: The a9 cameras were not as good as everyone here said. It is clearly visible now, "

Do you really mean that the A9 cameras performs worse now? Which functionalities have stopped to work after the introduction af the A1?

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2021 at 13:41 UTC
In reply to:

KLO82: So can the capture rate of the electronic shutter be varied? I mean, is it possible to select different frame rates when using electronic shutter? That would be cool. If a sensor has a readout speed of 1/250, but you can vary the frames per second of the e-shutter - that would practically eliminate the mechanical shutter. We need variable FPS because we always don't need super high FPS. To vary FPS, if we have to use the mechanical shutter, we will be back to the square one.

The FPS can be varied but the readout speed is independent on the choice of FPS. FPS can also be varied (though not as high as 30 FPS) on the A7III, A9 and A9II with electronic shutter (others too?). So you don't have to buy an A1 to get variable FPS.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2021 at 13:27 UTC
On article Leica announces APO-Summicron-M 35mm F2 ASPH (419 comments in total)
In reply to:

marcio_napoli: It's amazing when you go past the point price has to be justified by common market laws, it literally reinvents the rules, and you can charge literally random numbers.

I mean, this price tag is not there because it has a ton of glass into it (like a f2 telephoto) or a large DMF lens having to cover a big image circle, etc.

Despite the quality being probably amazing, this price is probably selected by picking up small pieces of paper inside a jar. There was another paper with a 6k tag, another with 11k tag.

It just happens someone randomly picked the piece of paper with 8.200 USD.

No other explanation justifies that cash for a 35mm f-TWO lens besides the jar thing, and this being LEICA doing its thing for a market with infinite pockets.

BTW, I'm a super proud M8 owner, with a cheap Voigtlander 28mm f2, which I'm also super proud.

One of the reasons (but not the only one) for the high price of the Leica lenses is the very thorough quality control at many stages of production, not just after completion. Th y also don't hesitate to throw away lens elements which are not up to the highest standards. That cost in materials and manpower. These lenses are produced in very small numbers which will also make the price go up.

But $8,195.- ! Of course one also pays for that red plastic dot.

I had a 40 years old Summicron M 35/2 type IV overhauled by Leica in Wetzlar some months ago and and they charged me around $500 - including disassembly, cleaning, relubing and a quite painstaking adjusting and QC during reassembly. The lens is like new now.

But as always, the right price is the price the market will bear and it's no doubt a most excellent lens.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2021 at 20:28 UTC
On article Sony a1 review (2596 comments in total)
In reply to:

Funny Valentine: You can clearly see the sensor edges are covered.
https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/sample_galleries/6775962929/6393102946.jpg
Don't take my words, just look at it.

@Funny Valentine:

"Please let's not get too arrogant."

Huh? Does that mean that we should not contaminate the debate with factual knowledge?

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2021 at 14:40 UTC
In reply to:

Gil Aegerter: How about the Nikkor 105mm f2.5 for portraits? You could compare the non-Ai version with an Ai-S.

The optical design changed at a point from a Sonnar type to a Gauss type and the later AI and AI-S versions are generally considered superior to the pre-AI versions but all are good. The AI and AI-S versions were highly regarded as one of the best portrait/short tele lenses - across brands - before the AF days and they are still great lenses to day. Excellent ergonomy. Silky smooth focusing. I have an AI-S. Wonderful lens.

https://casualphotophile.com/2015/07/08/noteworthy-lenses-nikon-nikkor-105mm-%C6%922-5/

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2021 at 11:11 UTC
Total: 63, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »