whyamihere

whyamihere

Lives in United States Philadelphia, United States
Works as a Higher Education IT
Joined on Apr 8, 2012

Comments

Total: 273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I have to wonder if the heat problem for processing 4K video or greater is partially the result of camera manufacturers putting too much emphasis on building up sensor technology and not enough on developing the processing pipeline.

As Richard alluded to below, Samsung got 4K into the NX1, sans overheating, years before anyone else, probably by leveraging their mastery of mobile processing and ownership of the entire manufacturing pipeline. All the big players in the camera space, then and now, borrow ARM SoC designs and program to the chips' generalized capabilities instead of rolling their own, which is less efficient and puts them at a disadvantage because they can't benefit from die/process shrinks that up the power efficiency and allow for more processing cores in the same thermal envelope.

I think 6K and 8K recording, at least externally, if not internally, is possible in a small form factor, but it requires camera manufacturers to put more R&D resources towards compute power.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2018 at 20:52 UTC as 76th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

whyamihere: I used Nikon DSLR's as I learned photography. I never considered them as a company that was quick to respond. "Upgrading a camera isn't easy," isn't confidence inspiring when other camera manufacturers do so without complaint.

I'm skeptical of the "computational photography and smartphones are our competition" argument. Much like upgrading the functionality of a camera after it's released, expanding functionality to follow the expectations set by phones should be baked into the engineering development process before release. Rather than being proactive, companies like Nikon are either being reactive or lamenting their inability to retroactively change their approach.

A forward-thinking company would look at the iPhone or Pixel 3 and say, "We can use stabilization tech to simulate the Brenizer Method, handheld, wiping out the need for medium format." That would be cool, but I don't think Nikon would dedicate the resources to do that. Instead, they'll just keep making mirrorless DSLRs.

I don't understand what lens correction profiles in Lightroom has to do with what I wrote. Please explain why something Adobe is doing has to do with Nikon's lack of foresight and proactive engineering.

I also think you're misunderstanding what computational computing is and/or how it's entirely optional if you don't like it or want to use it. It's like touch screens: I think every digital camera should have one, but it doesn't mean everyone has to use it even if they don't want to. I think it's better to be inventive with available technology rather than make it do the same boring things over and over again.

You're also underselling mobile photography. With a little effort, it can be pretty great. I have a colleague who published an art book of photos made with their iPhone 5. You should try using your phone as your only camera for a while. You might be surprised.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2018 at 17:27 UTC

I used Nikon DSLR's as I learned photography. I never considered them as a company that was quick to respond. "Upgrading a camera isn't easy," isn't confidence inspiring when other camera manufacturers do so without complaint.

I'm skeptical of the "computational photography and smartphones are our competition" argument. Much like upgrading the functionality of a camera after it's released, expanding functionality to follow the expectations set by phones should be baked into the engineering development process before release. Rather than being proactive, companies like Nikon are either being reactive or lamenting their inability to retroactively change their approach.

A forward-thinking company would look at the iPhone or Pixel 3 and say, "We can use stabilization tech to simulate the Brenizer Method, handheld, wiping out the need for medium format." That would be cool, but I don't think Nikon would dedicate the resources to do that. Instead, they'll just keep making mirrorless DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2018 at 18:58 UTC as 48th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

(unknown member): $5 for a frame of 35mm. Maybe I should go into the business of scanning film. That's just crazy.

Where does that say it's $5 only for a single 135 frame? And who would mail in a single frame of 135 film to develop and scan, and how would they do that without sending in at least a canister that had other frames attached to it? (Third Man clearly states they don't do scan-only jobs, so they would reject a single developed frame for a scan.)

Maybe read, research, and think for a moment before commenting?

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2018 at 21:33 UTC

"Maybe we should think about interchangeable lens Instax. One of the biggest features for mirrorless cameras are interchangeable lenses, so Instax is one of our opportunities."

As someone who "Immediately after [Fujifilm] released the 50S [was] asking ‘when is a rangefinder style 50S coming?'" I am now asking, "When is an interchangeable lens Instax camera coming?"

I love the square and wide formats for Instax. I would love an interchangeable lens Instax camera to go along with them, or at least conversion lenses. They don't have to go crazy with the optical designs. It would just be nice to have something other than a wide-angle lens to shoot with. If Fuji can make a Neo 90 Classic with conversion lenses & the square format, I would be the first in line to buy one.

And Fujifilm, please, please, please, make it an analog camera all the way. The SQ10 feels soulless, less spontaneous, and not as fun as even the Instax Mini 7S. Don't take the fun away from shooting.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2018 at 16:57 UTC as 110th comment

I have mixed feelings.

On one hand, I like that Zeiss is trying something different. Internal storage is something I feel that more cameras ought to be coming with as NAND becomes cheaper. OTA updates should be available for any camera with wifi. I also like the idea that a robust software is available for tone mapping & simple edits in camera. If your goal is to get a finished file out as quickly as possible, this is nice to have.

At the same time, I don't like using Lightroom on my 5.5-inch iPhone. It's fine for very quick edits, but it's cramped, fiddly & battery intensive, even with 12MP DNG files produced by iOS. I can't imagine doing the same work with 37MP DNG files on the back of a camera with a smaller screen will be any better. Plus, that hand grip seems to have been designed for looks and not long-term holding.

Again, some good ideas in there, but I'm wary of how well this will be executed.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2018 at 18:42 UTC as 441st comment
On article Fujifilm GFX 50R First Impressions Review (440 comments in total)

This is the camera I have been wanting since the GFX 50S was announced. While I wish it had an optical hybrid viewfinder, I’m certainly not complaining at US$4500 for a portable medium format camera.

I’m sure this will fan the flames of comment-section war, but this is almost the perfect camera for me. Sure, many will say, “But, but, equivalence!” when they probably mean, “But what about the bokeh? Shallow depth of field? You care about that right?!”

No. I don’t. I have two 6x6 film cameras that can “bokeh” all day long. I shoot them mainly at f/8-11 in daylight & in studio because I want more than a speck of dust in focus.

I also want a camera that is easy to operate. A shutter speed dial, an aperture ring, and ISO are all I need. Everything else is superfluous. You might say that I can get that with the X-Series, but my hunch is the G-system will be the more versatile camera line, in terms of image quality because of the sensor.

Have fun telling me how wrong I am.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2018 at 13:48 UTC as 102nd comment | 6 replies
On article Panasonic DC-LX100 II First Impressions Review (693 comments in total)

Based on some of the more popular comments I've read thus far, maybe I'm the only person who has a practical use in mind for this camera:

I do location shoots, and I tend to drag along a D500 with a set of lenses, flashes, etc. The max x-sync is 1/250th, so to get day-lit or flash-isolated subjects, I have to use ND filters to get shallow DoF or just live with the fact that everything will be in-focus at f/8 or f/11.

This is a $1,000 portable camera with a useful zoom/aperture range, a leaf shutter & hot shoe. I can dump at least 1-1.5kg of equipment, empty out most of my bag, x-sync with the entire shutter range, and get similar image quality (yeah, 17mp isn't 20mp, and Four Thirds isn't APS-C or full-frame, but wide open at f/2.8 vs f/8 or f/11 & excluding a ND filter makes up for a lot)...

People are too busy trying to pigeonhole this camera to think of it's potential instead. Enjoy comparing specs while I go out & get photos that earn money, I guess.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 17:33 UTC as 125th comment | 2 replies
On article What you need to know about Panasonic's LX100 Mark II (184 comments in total)

Hey DPR,

Unrelated to the camera itself, but related to these "What you need to know..." posts, would you mind adding an option to read the article as a single page? On just about every device I own, the paginated version is simply awkward to navigate. In most cases, I still have to do some scrolling to read the text below the image, which results in a 'click left/right, scroll down, scroll back up again to go to the next/previous page' mess. The "full screen" gallery navigation is only slightly less awkward, but comes with its own problems -- again, often related to the device I'm using.

Thanks!

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2018 at 16:06 UTC as 50th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

entoman: I think 4K Photo Mode will be a short-lived phenomenon.

A shot extracted from this only yields an 8MP image, which is pretty small by today's standards. It's perfectly usable for modest-sized uncropped prints, but there are plenty of cameras that can shoot at very fast burst speeds while retaining the full megapixel count.

The Sony a9 can already shoot 24MP stills at sustainable burst speeds of 20fps, and the Olympus OMD EM1Mkii can shoot 20MP stills at sustained 60fps bursts in single-AF mode, or 18fps in C-AF mode.

If someone can convince me that Panasonic's 4K Photo Mode is anything other than an ephemeral gimmick, please go ahead and try.

Entoman, regarding your original reply to mine:

This seems to be very much in the variety of civilly arguing "to each their own" between our respective points. However, I will point out that 'softness is a desired feature in fashion' falls into the same category of logic. I apprenticed with people who absolutely had to have all the resolution they could get. I also worked with an industry veteran who ditched their medium format & Canon 5DS cameras for a Sony RX100 V. I've seen 17x22" prints from a 10MP DSLR look sharp as a tack at nose-close distances. I've made 11x17" prints from severe crops of a Fujifilm X-T1.

If you gotta have high res, I'm not going to dissuade you. I just would curtail arguing in the opposite direction, that a 4K resolution JPEG is not good enough for large prints. It is. Very much so.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2018 at 18:46 UTC
In reply to:

whyamihere: Hey Chris & Jordan, nice video! I'd love to see this 4k/6k photo feature targeted at wildlife photographers more & for it to hopefully show up on other camera systems in general. I can only imagine what it would be like to use with Canon's DPAF or Sony's well-developed autofocus system.

If I could make a suggestion for a future video: Can you look into lens adapters for the medium format mirrorless cameras? Preferably anything on the market that allows for autofocus with full-frame lenses, or ones that might enable older leaf shutter lenses? I ask because I think your TCSTV episode on smart adapters for Sony was fair & very helpful, plus there seems to be no shortage of claims that full-frame lenses cover the 44x33mm sensor of the GFX 50S and X1D. Plus, some of us have old leaf-shutter lenses from film medium format cameras that might work on a newer digital mirrorless system.

Thanks for your efforts & your consideration!

Good call on waiting until after Photokina. Makes perfect sense. Again, thanks for considering my suggestion!

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2018 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: I think 4K Photo Mode will be a short-lived phenomenon.

A shot extracted from this only yields an 8MP image, which is pretty small by today's standards. It's perfectly usable for modest-sized uncropped prints, but there are plenty of cameras that can shoot at very fast burst speeds while retaining the full megapixel count.

The Sony a9 can already shoot 24MP stills at sustainable burst speeds of 20fps, and the Olympus OMD EM1Mkii can shoot 20MP stills at sustained 60fps bursts in single-AF mode, or 18fps in C-AF mode.

If someone can convince me that Panasonic's 4K Photo Mode is anything other than an ephemeral gimmick, please go ahead and try.

As someone who published a 11x14" printed fashion portfolio with 6-8MP images scanned from film to JPEG, some of them as double-page spreads, I think you're severely underestimating the versatility of lower MP images. Sure, it's nice to have more resolution, more color data, and more flexibility in post. But it's not necessary.

Plus, in wildlife photography, that pre-burst mode is nothing short of amazing, especially when trying to photograph small warblers who are not predisposed to staying still long enough for you to press the shutter button. I wish my D500 had that feature. (And if you must ask why I don't just use Micro 4/3 for wildlife, I'd respond by saying that it was cheaper to buy a $1,300 lens for a system I already own than to buy a $1,500-2,000 camera & $1,800+ for one lens just to do one thing. Asking why I don't just switch entirely... I'm just not a fan of Micro 4/3. Yes, I have used it for long periods of time.)

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2018 at 15:46 UTC

Hey Chris & Jordan, nice video! I'd love to see this 4k/6k photo feature targeted at wildlife photographers more & for it to hopefully show up on other camera systems in general. I can only imagine what it would be like to use with Canon's DPAF or Sony's well-developed autofocus system.

If I could make a suggestion for a future video: Can you look into lens adapters for the medium format mirrorless cameras? Preferably anything on the market that allows for autofocus with full-frame lenses, or ones that might enable older leaf shutter lenses? I ask because I think your TCSTV episode on smart adapters for Sony was fair & very helpful, plus there seems to be no shortage of claims that full-frame lenses cover the 44x33mm sensor of the GFX 50S and X1D. Plus, some of us have old leaf-shutter lenses from film medium format cameras that might work on a newer digital mirrorless system.

Thanks for your efforts & your consideration!

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2018 at 15:26 UTC as 28th comment | 2 replies
On article Fujifilm X-T100 review (343 comments in total)

DPReview:

For those of us who a.) are not terribly fond of the comments section, and/or b.) have seen the film "Office Space," and/or c.) have a piqued sense of self-awareness...

The review score and award followed by a link at the top of the page titled "jump to conclusion" feels a little too on-the-nose. Maybe even self-lamenting. Not sure which is correct.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2018 at 21:03 UTC as 89th comment
In reply to:

Ergo607: Did we really need confirmation?

The problem with the 1 series was not the quality as such, but Nikon not giving mirrorless the attention it deserved, just because they didn't want to canabalize on their DSLR line-up. Meanwhile Fuji and especially Sony have shown the way to do proper mirrorless and now Nikon has some catch up to do...

As Fuji is wont to point out, they didn't have another camera system they were afraid of overlapping. They just made good cameras while simultaneously acknowledging it's not their primary income. Sony is the same, where the SLT cameras are probably not their main source of revenue; they could afford to muck about until they finally produce a winner.

With that said, I think Canon and Nikon are finally realizing a lost sale is a lost sale, regardless of which product line someone purchases from versus another. Brand loyalty isn't what it used to be, and only those with a huge collection of lenses or work for an agency with pro support really care about the next big DSLR. If they want new customers or crossover appeal, they need a worthwhile product in a category that has room to grow. Mirrorless is probably still years away from saturation and reaching its fullest potential, and Canon and Nikon are waking up to that.

Now, if Pentax would wake up and make a mirrorless 645 camera...

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 18:11 UTC

As a photographer who also holds a degree in political sciences, I think it's worth highlighting the following phrase from Krages' quote: "As a case at the District Court level, the decision does not serve as precedent in other cases." Read: Don't panic.

With that said, it should also be acknowledged that "copyright" and "fair use" are eternally squishy concepts, politically speaking, both in the US and internationally. How far do you have to alter an original work to call it your own unique work? Who sets those standards, and how can you assure they're uniformly applied? Where can you exhibit design and art work without subjecting yourself to "fair use"? How do you properly delineate the difference between free speech and an imposition on personal economic gain and property rights?

I highly expect that people will argue in favor of the copyright holder, but I'm prone to accepting that it's relatively arbitrary, hence why these cases make it as far as they do in the first place.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2018 at 20:21 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Astrotripper: How hard would it be to mod one of them old TLR cameras to use Instax film?

A serious question.

You're in luck. Someone solved that problem about 5 years ago:

https://petapixel.com/2013/03/04/hacking-a-rolleiflex-tlr-to-shoot-fujifilm-instax-instant-photos/

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 21:12 UTC

There are so many better ways to do this:

Imagine a Rollei instant camera that uses the Instax Square format. It has a f/3.5 taking lens that can be stopped down to f/5.6, f/8, and f/16. It has a light meter, but you don't have to use it. If you don't use the meter, you don't need a battery. "But how does the camera eject the film?" you ask. A clever mechanism that resembles the film advance crank of a traditional Rolleiflex is on the side, which pushes the film out of the top.

*That* is worth US$400.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2018 at 21:09 UTC as 100th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

hypnotictortoise: Re the contention that converting to mono is cheating: regardless of medium, you are ultimately converting from colour to B&W. Converting in post is simply shifting where in the process the conversion takes place, and permits greater flexibility in that conversion process.

Is it cheating if I pre-visualise for B&W output, but convert in post?

I would also observe that colour photography only gives the illusion of reality, and similarly to the contention in the article, you could equally say something like 'if you are not acheiving your desired result in camera then you are cheating'.

Disclaimer: I mainly produce colour.

I have to agree here, at the very least, on a technical and philosophical level. All digital sensors are, essentially, converting color into greyscale tones, as none have the inherent ability to record color values. Arguably, one could consider putting a Bayer, Foveon, or X-Trans filter in front of it as "cheating" -- you're telling a sensor that it "sees" color that it really cannot. Putting in predetermined instructions into a camera's processing pipeline to interpret colors is "cheating" even further.

"Cheating" is just a way of avoiding the fact that photography and art, in general, is all about interpretation and abstraction. You like what you like, and that's fine, but that doesn't mean doing something different is bad or wrong. It's just different.

Link | Posted on Apr 3, 2018 at 20:25 UTC
In reply to:

whyamihere: Wondering out loud: Does anyone know what the target market is for the photo filter effects? As someone who lives in North America but follows photographers of various demographics and skill levels, I don't see these sorts of filters being used all that much. I mean, I'll see the occasional "selective color" or black & white conversion, but I've not seen anyone use things like "pinhole" or "tilt-shift" in a long while.

I ask not to criticize, and I'm not anti-filter (and, please, don't respond with a "this camera is for dummies who don't know any better, so why are you asking" statement -- that would be unnecessarily degrading and glib), but I ask because I wonder why Olympus keeps ladling on filters, when that ROM space and processing power could possibly go to something else.

dr.noise: I disagree. Even outside of the core photography market, using filters for IG has fallen out of style. I suspect the "filters are for the Instagram crowd" is a misconception that only photo enthusiasts hold to be true.

Jonathan F/2: Interesting, and it makes sense, based on what I know of Asian photography culture.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2018 at 14:44 UTC
Total: 273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »