Mark9473

Joined on Oct 6, 2006

Comments

Total: 83, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Awe inspiring. I'd love to see it 2 or 3 times slower.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 12:56 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply

Curious what the attraction is, and why this is news for this site.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 21:33 UTC as 35th comment | 8 replies
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

OBI656: $69.00 is a crazy upgrade price. I will pass on this upgrade.

Joe, you have to log in to your account to see the suggested upgrade.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2016 at 15:41 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: Does anyone have any actual examples that shows that the PRIME noise reduction is worthwhile?

I've tried the "best" NR packages in the past (i.e. Topaz DeNoise) and find that they all still obliterate too much detail. I'm happy removing chroma noise which is dead easy in any package, but I haven't yet found a noise reduction solution for luminance noise that looks better than leaving it untouched. Your mileage and aesthetic preferences may vary.

That was 10.
I don't feel an immediate need to upgrade to 11.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2016 at 15:35 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: Does anyone have any actual examples that shows that the PRIME noise reduction is worthwhile?

I've tried the "best" NR packages in the past (i.e. Topaz DeNoise) and find that they all still obliterate too much detail. I'm happy removing chroma noise which is dead easy in any package, but I haven't yet found a noise reduction solution for luminance noise that looks better than leaving it untouched. Your mileage and aesthetic preferences may vary.

Okay, here are some images I've uploaded to my gallery that might be more suitable. This is an ISO 3200 image, cropped at 100% resolution, with my default RAW development recipe which includes a bit of shadow lifting, in four versions:
- with all NR switched off
- with 20% Prime noise reduction
- with 30% Prime noise reduction (my default setting)
- with 40% Prime noise reduction (program default)

Link: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5120988127/albums/dxo-prime

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2016 at 09:07 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: Does anyone have any actual examples that shows that the PRIME noise reduction is worthwhile?

I've tried the "best" NR packages in the past (i.e. Topaz DeNoise) and find that they all still obliterate too much detail. I'm happy removing chroma noise which is dead easy in any package, but I haven't yet found a noise reduction solution for luminance noise that looks better than leaving it untouched. Your mileage and aesthetic preferences may vary.

Well guys you might be right so please go and test the free trial and post back your better chosen images when you have them.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2016 at 08:41 UTC
On article DxO OpticsPro 11 brings advanced Raw noise reduction (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

Androole: Does anyone have any actual examples that shows that the PRIME noise reduction is worthwhile?

I've tried the "best" NR packages in the past (i.e. Topaz DeNoise) and find that they all still obliterate too much detail. I'm happy removing chroma noise which is dead easy in any package, but I haven't yet found a noise reduction solution for luminance noise that looks better than leaving it untouched. Your mileage and aesthetic preferences may vary.

You can finetune the settings to decide for yourself how much detail you want to keep.

As an example, here's an ISO 6400 image from my Canon compact:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56289711
Today I'd process this with a little less noise filtering.

The DxO OP trial is free and fully functional. Give it a try!
FWIW I also used Topaz and Noise Ninja and a few others in the past, and DxO OP is clearly superior in my experience.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 18:22 UTC

Amazing how people can grasp at the tiniest tiniest differences only slightly visible at 100% scale and then pretend it's going to make a huge difference in the photographs they get in real life.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 08:26 UTC as 52nd comment | 2 replies
On article First sample images from 20MP Sony Cyber-shot RX10 III (194 comments in total)
In reply to:

clauderobidoux: Hello everyone! This comment might seem a little out of context but I am posting it here because this camera looks interesting to me and I'll explain why, and would love to have some advice from you guys. I just sold my DSLR gear, D610, 14-24, 50 prime and 70-200 f/2.8 VR II. Now the main reason may seem strange but here it is: DUST !! I just couldn't stand it anymore, it seemed to be ruining my fun of doing photography. Basically it was at the point that I would miss photo opps because I was scared of switching lens outside. I got my camera cleaned by Nikon, when I downloaded my latest pictures I counted over 60 dust spots. The other reason is weight while hiking. I am ready to buy something new but I'm scared about that dust problem that I've had with this one, and my previous 30D, 40D and 5D II. Does anyone have a good DSLR or mirrorless to suggest that is better regarding this problem? Or should I be looking into something like this Sony or the new DL's. Any suggestions? Thank you

Olympus has the best anti-dust system.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 22:11 UTC

"1.7X oversampled, full pixel readout (without binning)"
I'd like to understand what that means; any hints or tips?

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 20:58 UTC as 42nd comment | 2 replies
On article iPhone SE is a compact-sized iPhone 6s (183 comments in total)

Amazing how many people are complaining about it for some reason or another. If you don't like it, there are plenty other smartphones on the market.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 13:27 UTC as 25th comment
In reply to:

York PA: couldn't find the discounted price DxO FilmPack 5 ELITE Edition: $64/£49 (instead of $129/£99) on the web site.

https://shop.dxo.com/us/photo-software/dxo-filmpack shows 23% off; the 50% off that was reported must have been a typo.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 20:19 UTC
In reply to:

Jan_Shim: After waiting 3 months for DxO to finally support G5 X RAW files, so disappointed to find a strange flaw in the way the software renders the RAW files. I posted my findings in the DxO Forum and raised a support ticket.

http://forum.dxo.com/index.php/topic,11989.0.html

Great. For what remains of dark corners, you need to finetune the Vignetting setting. In difficult cases this can be different for each image.

To be honest this residual vignetting correction is in my opinion the one area in which DxO OP10 is a bit weak.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 10:12 UTC
In reply to:

Jan_Shim: After waiting 3 months for DxO to finally support G5 X RAW files, so disappointed to find a strange flaw in the way the software renders the RAW files. I posted my findings in the DxO Forum and raised a support ticket.

http://forum.dxo.com/index.php/topic,11989.0.html

"Activating Distortion (only Manual correction is available)"

That doesn't sound right. There should be an option "Auto with DxO Optics Module" and that's what you want to use. Could it be you didn't download your camera profile?

Check in the menu at the top under DxO Optics Modules, to see if the G5X profile is installed (there should be two, one for JPG, one for RAW). If it is, and you don't get the option to auto-correct the distortion, then definitely something is wrong.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 10:00 UTC
In reply to:

Jan_Shim: After waiting 3 months for DxO to finally support G5 X RAW files, so disappointed to find a strange flaw in the way the software renders the RAW files. I posted my findings in the DxO Forum and raised a support ticket.

http://forum.dxo.com/index.php/topic,11989.0.html

You didn't really answer my question. ;-)

The GX cameras at their wide angle setting give optically a fairly fish-eye like image, that is corrected in software to a rectilinear image. My G1XII does this too. DxO can be set to display the image with or without this software correction applied - a dramatic difference at wide angle.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 09:20 UTC

"23 elements (in seven moving groups), seven of which are made from glass with anomalous partial dispersion"

I have zero interest in owning this lens, but I have to admire the skill that went into designing and producing it.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 08:35 UTC as 48th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Jan_Shim: After waiting 3 months for DxO to finally support G5 X RAW files, so disappointed to find a strange flaw in the way the software renders the RAW files. I posted my findings in the DxO Forum and raised a support ticket.

http://forum.dxo.com/index.php/topic,11989.0.html

Have you activated distortion correction and vignetting correction?

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 07:52 UTC

Thanks for the heads up. Feels like OP loads a bit faster than previously, let's hope that impression remains.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2016 at 19:28 UTC as 11th comment
On article On assignment: the Leica Q at a Portland wedding (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

nickonline: Really appreciate this post, because it makes any desire I have for the Q go right out the window - I really just dislike the 28mm look. Totally a personal preference, it's just that the wide angle DoF is too unnatural for my eyes.

Switch the viewfinder to a 35mm or 50mm setting if you like that better.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2016 at 10:28 UTC
Total: 83, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »