Rick Knepper

Rick Knepper

Lives in United States TX, United States
Joined on Oct 8, 2003

Comments

Total: 861, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

@Rick Evertsz The original statement was:

"a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

"Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate"."

If you read this statement in the context of me being a potential Sony customer who was disappointed with the A7r III resolution (not even an incremental increase from the A7r II and apparently less DR than the A7r II also) after having waited for a long time, it may cast me in a different light than the other fellows are trying portray me. In the meantime, I actually found a better camera ->for my needs <- than anything available in 35mm.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 22:09 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

@sirhawkeye64 This is why I asked the other fellow for his definition of the "real world" so I could understand why he/you fellows are unable to determine the difference that 8 additional MPs make.

You are right. Viewing distance is important maybe more so than size. I sit 18-24 inches away from a 32" monitor where I edit and enjoy the fruits of my efforts. This is my real world. I quit printing to paper in 2004 by the way.

Also, content is important to how much resolution (megapixels) is needed. I shoot landscape and I want the blades of grass at my feet in focus, sharp & resolved (if possible). A lot of guys believe that these kinds of details are unimportant. I don't.

Now, tell me what kind of subject matter you shoot where resolving fine detail isn't a priority. Magnar was too afraid to talk about it.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 19:38 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

Magnar, define "real world" for us. Perhaps you are correct within your small slice of the world.

If you want to see how wrong your statement is generally, pull a studio comparison from DPR and compare areas of the image where high resolution can manifest and you'll be able see the difference between 42 & 50 MP quite clearly unless of course your eye isn't trained for this.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 15:17 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

"Very few lenses can resolve 42 or 50Mpixel anyway. IBIS and DR and similar stuff are a lot more important..."

You are wrong about the number of lenses effective with high resolution cameras but for the sake of argument, I don't buy cr@p lenses to start with.

For critical photography, I don't handhold my cameras. By the way, this is way off-topic. My point was solely about the resolution of the A7r III being described as "ultimate". If Sony had broken the 50 MP barrier as SAR had been suggesting for a year before release, I might own one of those tiny cameras today. Instead, I bought a camera with a better Sony sensor, the Fuji GFX.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 13:48 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

rockjano, to someone with a trained eye, the difference is very noticeable. 8 MP is 2 more MPs than my first DSLR and 4x the resolution of my first digital camera. The difference is NOT inconsequential. Of course, it depends on your application. If you are downsizing every thing to a 4x6, then 24 MPs may be all you need.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 13:15 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

Vadims, obviously your friend is not using his 5DS correctly if he is complaining about the lack of IBIS.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 13:12 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: "a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

Tell Avatar he needs to understand the conversation first before he can contribute effectively.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

F Stop Fitzgerald: He could have composited these types of images in photoshop. But I appreciate that he actually used real e-waste, because it makes for a deeper artistic statement. I’ve felt the same way about Spencer Tunick’s use of hundreds of nude people in his street scenes. There’s much to be said for taking the difficult path with regard to fine art.

I was thinking along these same lines myself as in "how could an individual with no corporate backing or without a meaningful budget of any kind create images like these?" and the answer immediately was Photoshop!!

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 12:18 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony a7 III (584 comments in total)

"a7R III ('ultimate resolution')"

Somebody tell Sony they are in 3rd place in terms of sensor "resolution" in the FF marketplace and last place among all brands using high pixel Sony sensors. Only within the Sony orbit would 42 MPs be called "ultimate".

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 10:41 UTC as 36th comment | 25 replies
In reply to:

wed7: I have ample apsc lenses from Pentax and considering the K-1ii for the FF upgrade, but this Sony looks very interesting as their price point is somehow the same with sony advance features.

I have emphasized pixels in the past in forums where FF is the only sensor involved b/c using the largest sensor size available to the user goes without saying. Now, I have moved on to 44x33 for a large portion of my shooting so I do not see where we disagree on sensor size. Maybe your points should be directed at someone considering smaller sensors. Maybe you should consider medium format.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

wed7: I have ample apsc lenses from Pentax and considering the K-1ii for the FF upgrade, but this Sony looks very interesting as their price point is somehow the same with sony advance features.

I think you need to reread my post.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 15:24 UTC
In reply to:

wed7: I have ample apsc lenses from Pentax and considering the K-1ii for the FF upgrade, but this Sony looks very interesting as their price point is somehow the same with sony advance features.

Part 2

None of this opinion above should negate your opinion about the priority on sensor size. Why do you think I've been shooting MF for 3 years? Both considerations are important to IQ IMO.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 14:11 UTC
In reply to:

wed7: I have ample apsc lenses from Pentax and considering the K-1ii for the FF upgrade, but this Sony looks very interesting as their price point is somehow the same with sony advance features.

PW said: "What I said is that provided the difference in amount of pixels is not big enough".

If you capture the same scene with a 36 MP sensor vs. a 50 MP FF sensor, you will resolve more detail with the 50 MP sensor and retain much of that additional detail when downsizing both images to 8 MP images (for 4k monitors). That is due to the pixel density. I and others have proven this on the Canon forum with a variety of comparisons.

Regarding APS-C, there's probably a good reason why we haven't actually seen a 40 MP APS-C camera. A 24 MP APS-C sensor has a higher pixel density than the 30 MP FF sensor and this sensor should out-resolve the 30 MP sensor, but, its noise gets in the way.

Printing large is one advantage of higher pixel counts (back to same sensor size discussions) but detail resolution at capture is another (see example above) plus more pixels reduce moire and false detail (not a big deal for landscape normally).

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 14:10 UTC
In reply to:

wed7: I have ample apsc lenses from Pentax and considering the K-1ii for the FF upgrade, but this Sony looks very interesting as their price point is somehow the same with sony advance features.

PW, I don't know what to tell you. Sensor size without pixel density is meaningless. The fact that you personally can't tell the difference doesn't alter digital imaging principles. However, a 5k monitor may expose your 36 MP camera to the principle of diminishing returns. In a 5k environment, you may need 50 MP or even need to go to MF next year when the affordable 100 MP cameras start showing up.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 11:32 UTC

Cheapest in more ways than one.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 03:23 UTC as 56th comment
In reply to:

wed7: I have ample apsc lenses from Pentax and considering the K-1ii for the FF upgrade, but this Sony looks very interesting as their price point is somehow the same with sony advance features.

In digital imaging, "massive files" = massive IQ.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 03:21 UTC

Cheaper than an iphone.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 21:29 UTC as 96th comment | 1 reply

"...reward millions of like-minded creatives for their high-quality work." Reward? How so?

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 21:19 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies

The perfect sensor? So, it'll cost $9.99?

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2018 at 13:04 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

falconeyes: Too short.

Definitely.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2018 at 10:06 UTC
Total: 861, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »