Nate Khler

Lives in Switzerland Zürich, Switzerland
Has a website at
Joined on Nov 11, 2009


Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm announces affordable XC 35mm F2 prime lens (283 comments in total)
In reply to:

CanonKen: Semi-related - all the people buying a 50mm lens for their APS-C camera and ending up with a ~75mm equivalent lens which is fine for some things but not really the general use lens a 35/50mm would have been (Nikon has that solved with their 35mm f/1.8 DX lens).

Joe, got any source for that? I checked photonstophotos and the dpreview studio comparison, x-t20 beats a 5d2 in every metric.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2020 at 09:25 UTC
In reply to:

noyo: If this works, is reliable and accurate, it would be a good feature. However, I think that with the costly monthly subscriptions, Adobe should be providing this as an included feature and not a third party.

Of course I can sift through and tag any obvious miss-shots (for whatever cause) using the arrow keys and X, but often it is hard to tell whether shots are genuinely out of focus as LR can take many seconds before images pop into focus, that's with a fairly good PC (4GHz, 8 core, 16 threads, 32GB RAM, good graphics card, etc).

I've tagging shots on numerous occasions only to have them suddenly pop into focus afterwards, then I have to un-tag them again. So I sit and watch, wondering, will it? won't it? on a loop. That's very time consuming/frustrating.

Anything that helps reduce this without additional fuss, is welcome.

try out fast raw viewer, it's pretty cheap, and it's great for culling.
it shows you a rendering of the RAW, you see directly the raw histogram. on my computer it takes 0.15s to change between pictures. it's really great.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2020 at 14:01 UTC
In reply to:

LifeAfter: I have both: Sony A7RIII with a bunch of lenses and also Fujifilm X-Pro 2 with 5 lenses. So i’m not committed to any of them but very divided!
I was waiting for one or two lenses from fuji to be fast enough to convince me leave my Sony A system and go all Fuji... but this decision might change my ideas.

It would take a 33mm f 1.0 and something like 50-140 f1.8 (or 2.0)
To be equivalent in price as the FF ones.

P.S. Sony FE 50mm f1.4 = 778gm = 1398 $
Canon EF 50mm f1.4 = 545gm = 1349 $
Not to mention some other f1.4 lenses!

for its size, prize and weight, the 35/1.4 is great. but it is nowhere near as good as as sigma or canon 50mm prime.

and as a wedding photographer using the x-h1, I was eagerly looking forward to owning a 35mm that was as good in quality as the 16mm, the 56mm, the 90mm or the 80mm.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2019 at 10:43 UTC
In reply to:

Karroly: This is a huge and costly setup. Why not still filming actors in front of a blue or green background with a special camera that allows merging the real-time stream of the 3D background coming from a computer (which knows the camera position, focal length, exposure parameters, and eventually spotlight position, for a more realistic background rendering) with the image coming from the camera sensor and displaying the final image on the camera screen ?

with green screen you still need to light the actor convincingly. With this, the character is lit by the led screens. (which is also the reason for led screens, since they can have a much larger dynamic range) so you can change the surroundings quickly, and the lighting changes also.

at least that is the motivation behind it, i believe.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2019 at 10:09 UTC
In reply to:

doady: I use Structure in Capture One all the time. I didn't realize Lightroom lacked something similar until now. Kinda sad, but better late then never I guess.

Welcome to the party, Lightroom users. If you wanted Structure so bad maybe you should have thought about why you continue to use Lightroom in the first place.

Despite the company's anti-consumer policies and key features missing from their products, people will continue to use Adobe products no matter what. I find that odd.

Well, there are pros and cons to every software. Bottom line is: Lightroom works very fast for me, and I like to spend as little time on the computer as possible. I focus on taking pictures.

Especially Lightroom mobile has been more useful to me than I'd ever imagine.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2019 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

cxsparc: All those posts about the fee of 1400 USD being too low for serious work.

I don't intend to hurt the pride of any professional photographer, but when I compare the required training and equipment to a medical doctor or an engineer who earn 50 Euro max per hour after years of costly education, this whole business is overcharged. Furthermore, 1400 USD is a lot of money for many US and European citizens to spend only on photography.

In certain countries the wedding celebration goes over the top in Holly/Bollywood fashion, and drives some close to ruin. Strangely, the amount of money spent on the party does not appear to correlate with the success rate of the marriage.

I'd rather prefer a photog being present as integrated friend unobtrusively observing and recording the moments of real life and real persons, like Kim Smith-Miller does.

For me its about 5k investment per year, 10 weddings => 500 per wedding.
But I shoot other stuff, so it's OK. But only the weddings require me to have 3 bodies, 2 lenses in every important focal range, audio equiment, gimbal and so on...

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2019 at 18:38 UTC
In reply to:

d2f: This maybe of interest to those who have customers who are looking for the artistic image. Or for the photographer who wants to increase their scope so as to separate their work from the other professionals. While special effect images can be created in post this product offers the advantage of displaying the image immediately to the customer which can gain emotional response sales. Even for someone starting out this could be something fun to play with and explore the possibilities limited only by their imagination. Even if people do not purchase this particular product they maybe inspired to try something along the same lines.

one problem though: I assure you those examples are handpicked. If you bring this to you random shoot on location, you will be very difficult, sometimes even impossible to find a good compositionn that works.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2019 at 18:40 UTC
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: You forgot to use the lowercase 'B' for bits instead of bytes. It's 1.25 Gb/s or 0.16 GB/s. The 10GB/sec has absolutely nothing to do with SD UHS-II card speeds but the interface itself (USB 3.1 Gen 2). So even when reading the two cards simultaneously, it won't reach the claimed speeds! But other than that, finally, what I have been asking for the longest time!

no, they did not forget it. The reader can connect to the computer over USB 3.1 Gen 2, which has these 10 Gb/s or 1.25GB/s that you read in the article. Thats the same number. Because SDXC tops out at about 300 MB/s, you will probably get around 600 MB/s when downloading two cards.

For me, I am just happy I finally found a reader that lets me download my fast and large UHS-II cards in a reasonable amount of time.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2019 at 17:35 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: Oh boy! @DPreview why do you copy manufacturer BS, when the claims aren't even technically possible?

UHS-II specs are limited to:
156 MB/s (FD156)
312 MB/s (HD312)

Even UHS-III which is not even supported by that reader only goes up to
312 MByte/s (FD312)
624 MByte/s (FD624)

Same goes for all other card formats supported

but with this I should be able to download 2 UHS-II SD Cards at the same time, giving me about 600 MByte/s, which is not that far off of the theoretical maximum achievable over the USB 3.1 Gen2.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2019 at 17:32 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T3 Review (2480 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lukedriftwood: Was the video stills tested with in-camera sharpening at 0 or -4? Was noise reduction at 0 or -4?

Sharpening at negative values depend on manufactures. Some have already quite heavy sharpening at 0, some don't.

But look at the stills: there are no halo, no significant moire or other sharpening artifacts. So why wouldn't you shoot with sharpening set to 0?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2018 at 10:25 UTC
In reply to:

Dave Andrade: So, don't fly them near airports.

I solved it all.

You're welcome.

Military aircrafts can fly 300 ft and 300mph here, anywhere they like. It's just a matter of time and probability until they hit a drone.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2018 at 12:05 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.

Depending on how you scanned it, it will have full color information for each pixel. That's 3-4 times the information that a camera sensor produces. So your 6-8mp range equates to 18-30 mp.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2018 at 16:45 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): cant wait to see these hit Newegg, Microcenter etc.
I have a mini raid which only takes 2.5" 9.5mm drives. It's due for an update from 1tb drives. But after you take out all the 13mm tall 2.5" drives there are only a handful of contenders over 1TB. If I can make a jump to SSD for the raid that will make it worth keeping online. Otherwise it's actually pitifully slow.
(really DROBO products are kind of pitiful performance, go with QNAP, or OWC Thunderbay.)

I promise you won't like the price of those ssd. If you have that money to spend, your are better off with a new nas.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2018 at 07:52 UTC
In reply to:

Dylthedog: Make sure you backup whatever you put on it, that's a big bucket of data to lose.

You might not have moving parts that fail, but the controllers on flash drives fail with alarming regularity, and unlike (sometimes) with a HDD, they give no warning.

I've had two die now, and when researching it I found a Google study that said you're more likely to loose data on flash disk, believe it or not.

What ssd did fail

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2018 at 07:50 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: Part 3 of 3

I only just discovered that a good sensor can cope amazingly well, often in just one frame, but definitely with three.

Last night I rushed out of my front door to take some pictures into a very bright sky with some delightful clouds close to the direction of the setting sun. It was an ideal opportunity to test whether my recently adopted technique was precise enough not to blow out the highlights and also get enough detail in extremely heavy shadow and without suffering visible noise there too.

But, to my amazement, the exposure +4, based on a reading of the brightest parts, captured everything fine. The highlights were negligibly over-exposed in less than 0.44% of the pixels (as FRV shows) but because of so much very heavy shadow, over 50% was heavily under-exposed. Most of the image was hugely solid black until adjusted in software but when I did that I got a far better result from the one frame than using all three, even in such an extreme situation as this was.

Been also using fast raw viewer for a year, it's absolutely great. But we use it for events and weddings. As you said, after a short while you get to know which specific settings on your camera give you the best exposure.
Plus we save so much time culling.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 06:00 UTC
In reply to:


Why isn't this in the voting options, so we're not stuck in 3:2, once the limiting SLR mirror box is gone?

Not to my knowledge, no. They only crop the 3:2 sensor.
What they could do is a sensor that is much larger and covers the whole image circle. But it would be 50% larger, i don't think they will do it for cost reasons

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2018 at 09:35 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-T100 review (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

wed7: I kinda like the look and the simplicity of this camera, simply it just takes good jpeg pictures, do you think it would be more exciting if this will be paired with better optics such as XF 23/2 or XF 35/1.4 to be used as a travel camera? Or better look for a re-loved X-T20

At the moment why not wait for the x-t3 release to grab a used X-T2. They are already at about 1000 new, so they should easily hit 600 used in the fall.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2018 at 10:03 UTC
In reply to:

mainger: It's neither a square, nor a trapezoid; it's a pyramid!

i think you mean tetrahedron.
a pyramid has 5 corners in total...

Link | Posted on May 27, 2018 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

tabloid: Am still looking for a RAW editor that can do for RAW that photoshop can do JPG's (magnetic lasso tool, spot healing, clone, erase, blur tool, brush tool, history brush, move tool, etc). Ive asked for that for years.

16 bit per channel Tiff should easily allow the same highlight recovery, but to be honest i never tried it out myself.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 17:11 UTC
In reply to:

tabloid: Am still looking for a RAW editor that can do for RAW that photoshop can do JPG's (magnetic lasso tool, spot healing, clone, erase, blur tool, brush tool, history brush, move tool, etc). Ive asked for that for years.

16 bit per channel Tiff should easily allow the same highlight recovery, but to be honest i never tried it out myself.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2018 at 17:11 UTC
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »