Dr_Jon

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Jul 2, 2011

Comments

Total: 1089, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Rock Solid: Canon 1D X Mark II Review (300 comments in total)

One question - on sharpening presumably you just turned up the sharpening :-) but did you try using the fine detail picture style instead, which BTW is what I'd do. If you have a better option why not use it, rather than say others have better sharpening?

Go here and scroll down for more:
http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/eos_1dx_mark_ii/image_quality/

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 10:29 UTC as 23rd comment
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jon Stern: Sensor performance is all about area, so a 1/4-inch sensor isn't really, "a bit smaller than the sensor likely found in your smartphone", it's a lot smaller. Half the area of those in mid-tier phones, smaller still than the sensors that are being used in current flagship phones.

For cost reasons, and probably depth of field, it's clear why they'd go for 1/4-inch, but it's a disappointment when it comes to image quality.

Oops, used the diagonal and horizontal rather than horizontal and vertical. I did have a train to catch though... ho hum (and thanks) :-)
Isn't it 3.2 x 2.4 though (7.68 sq mm)?
Oh and I'm really John, the Jon is from an ancient forum (I'm not sure which, I had a look recently and on the one I thought it came from, well was pretty certain it was, I have a different user name, so I suspect it's long gone and lost to history).

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 09:25 UTC
On article Popular Prisma photo app now available on Android (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

zzzxtreme: I'm truly impressed

This is one example

http://i.imgur.com/GIkGtBuh.jpg

Nice! BTW you can turn the watermark off in settings.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2016 at 09:14 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: A great camera to own.

So sad that there are so many "exclusive" proprietary 360 VR engines out there... there should be a universal standard to load and view typically any 360 VR file... just like the common JPG can be read by any mainstream software...

.

Thank you. Presumably your software could run on PC hardware, is there any plan to let users download your stitcher as an option in case of issues like I described? Presumably you could make it quite specific to your camera (well, I'd assume that's a given as presumably you have a lot more parallax handling than anything else currently around).

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 21:34 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

DamianFI: Remember 3DTV?
This is the next 3DTV.

"They haven't caught on"? Well you could argue Google's use of this technology does pretty well. They call it "Street View". Also the spherical pano community while not large is pretty solid,

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 19:23 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

photomedium: From Dan 'ghosting' on the balcony I would say its not quite ready for primetime.

I think it's okay if you do multi-shot HDR and someone moving between images doesn't come out so well. Hiding that could be improved in future, but I don't see it as a show-stopper.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 19:15 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: A great camera to own.

So sad that there are so many "exclusive" proprietary 360 VR engines out there... there should be a universal standard to load and view typically any 360 VR file... just like the common JPG can be read by any mainstream software...

.

So Jonas I hope you don't mind me asking, but will it be possible to stitch photos locally with a version of your software, or will the camera only have any functionality as long as your cloud servers exist...?
This is a video of an expensive paper-weight... (mine's called Freddie, BTW)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Tw7RG5J0RY
I could post more examples...
P.S. I get I could use PtGui Pro, or whatever, if I have the original images, but the parallax issues will be a real pain.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 19:12 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: If you need their servers to crunch the data then if they go bust you have a very expensive paperweight. I'd want the option of processing images locally, even if very slowly, before paying that much. I already have some internet-enabled paperweights that are no longer supported by the people that made them.

Err, my memory was being generous, more like ten+ minutes, but I use SmartBlend which is about 5x slower (maybe 20x) than the built-in blender in PtGui Pro.
I just tried running it again and ran out of space on my C drive (which only had 21GB free) after 5 minutes of stitching.
You do end up with a 1.5GB TIF :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 22:39 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: If you need their servers to crunch the data then if they go bust you have a very expensive paperweight. I'd want the option of processing images locally, even if very slowly, before paying that much. I already have some internet-enabled paperweights that are no longer supported by the people that made them.

Probably a couple of minutes, but I use SmartBlend which is about 5x slower (maybe 20x) than the built-in blender in PtGui Pro.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 22:22 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: If you need their servers to crunch the data then if they go bust you have a very expensive paperweight. I'd want the option of processing images locally, even if very slowly, before paying that much. I already have some internet-enabled paperweights that are no longer supported by the people that made them.

The biggest spherical pano I've done on my 2012 vintage PC is 227MP (32 x 21.1MP source images = 675MP of data):
http://www.viewat.org/?i=en&id_aut=7366&id_pn=23962&pag=1&sec=pn
Which was back when I had 16GB not the current 32.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 17:39 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: A great camera to own.

So sad that there are so many "exclusive" proprietary 360 VR engines out there... there should be a universal standard to load and view typically any 360 VR file... just like the common JPG can be read by any mainstream software...

.

There's a few pretty standard ways for storing 360 degree panos which are easily manipulated by lots of software. Firstly just as a JPEG/TIF/etc. image saved in a particular projection that can be displayed by many programs. Secondly as six cube faces again saved as JPEGs/whatever. Thirdly a Quicktime 360 degree pano. I use all three.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:28 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

AstroStan: Dangle it from a drone.

Good idea! BTW I suspect doing that upside down would be best, as their software is presumably optimised for removing stuff underneath it.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:21 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkrumm: My dog wants me to buy it.

That could be an expensive chew toy, although the images during its 90 second lifespan might be cool...

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:20 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: This is a very difficult gadget to make into something that has high quality. For several reasons.

1. The lenses are on the surface of a sphere. They should have the same entrance pupil. Which is impossible. Therefor it is impossible (without some serious rendering) to stich nearby objects at the same time as far away objects. Which can be seen in several images.

2. There is a lot of cameras. They have to be small and cheap. So - true - they are stitched together making it higher resolution. But - small sensors and small lenses have problems. No matter how many they are. Clipping, blooming, etc. In particular since they have to be cheap.

3. How to keep it clean and scratch free?

So, the conclusion is that it is a toy.

Then again (as someone who'd spent way too much time stitching 360 panos) the possibility of just taking 20+ panos in a fairly short period and picking out the good one does seem attractive.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:20 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

cits: Wonder if anyone has tried taking 2 cameras with backs taped together, lens that can shoot 180 degrees and use remote shutter release & then stitched together the images...better yet, 4 cameras with their corners touching..LOL

I still have my 950 and FC-E8 (wonderful bit of glass) although haven't used either in maybe 10 years (8-15 on 5Dsr these days for Panos).
Although CUDA on a GTX1070/80 in your desktop PC would probably leave your "super" in the dust :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:17 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)

If you need their servers to crunch the data then if they go bust you have a very expensive paperweight. I'd want the option of processing images locally, even if very slowly, before paying that much. I already have some internet-enabled paperweights that are no longer supported by the people that made them.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:13 UTC as 21st comment | 10 replies
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Melchiorum: Ricoh Theta S is much more practical, easier to use and maintain, and it's way cheaper. And though Panono has higher resolution, the image quality isn't much better. So yeah, to me it seems like a weird expensive toy.

Also, can we please stop calling 2D spherical images "VR"? Because they aren't. You need 3D for VR and a proper one at that.

I like the idea of the newer Theta, but always feel the quality is just a bit short of making it more than an amusing gadget. This looks more interesting, although the price is silly.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:10 UTC
On article Real world test: The Panono is a 108MP spherical camera (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jon Stern: Sensor performance is all about area, so a 1/4-inch sensor isn't really, "a bit smaller than the sensor likely found in your smartphone", it's a lot smaller. Half the area of those in mid-tier phones, smaller still than the sensors that are being used in current flagship phones.

For cost reasons, and probably depth of field, it's clear why they'd go for 1/4-inch, but it's a disappointment when it comes to image quality.

It uses 1/4" sensors which are 4x3.2mm, let's assume after overlap (big guess) you get 3x2.4mm of actual unique area (I suspect it's larger, depends on how accurately they align the sensors). There's 36 of them so the total sensor area is about 260 sq mm. However it has two images for a lot of that which can be used to reduce noise.
If using an 8mm Circular Fisheye on a FF camera you make a spherical panorama using about 777 sq mm, so basically 3x the area, which isn't a huge difference. (They actually have 460 sq mm of sensors, so potentially could get closer to half, but if sensor-case alignment and sensor-lens alignment isn't good you want to avoid getting too close to that.)
Oh and there's diffraction to consider too.

BTW this is a 777 sq mm pano:
http://www.viewat.org/?i=en&id_pn=26484&sec=pn

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 09:06 UTC
On article Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

KrisAK: Great, but I really need a camera with a built in viewfinder.
Any chance, Canon?

I will say the external EVF on my GF1 was always pretty annoying, both getting lost, needing a bigger case and getting banged into things. I'm happy with the EOS-M3 as it is (I'm not the target audience) but if they come out with a more serious model I would like a good built-in EVF then.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 15:02 UTC
On article Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

KrisAK: Great, but I really need a camera with a built in viewfinder.
Any chance, Canon?

I'd like a built-in EVF on an EOS-M boy too, but as you can get an add-on one for the M3 I struggle it see it as a huge disadvantage. Competitors without touch-screens being somewhat more limited...

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 09:50 UTC
Total: 1089, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »