Roland Karlsson

Lives in Sweden Stockholm, Sweden
Works as a Programmer
Joined on Feb 23, 2002
About me:

Collector of K-mount and M42 stuff. Main camera K-1. Also interested in camera technology, e.g. Foveon. Also interested in computer based image analysis and transforms.

Comments

Total: 2077, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article DJI goes portable with the Mavic Pro (149 comments in total)

Good movie. It makes me want to buy it :)

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 21:37 UTC as 50th comment
On photo Playing goofball... in the Animals that look stupid funny challenge (14 comments in total)

The shadow of the dog makes the image perfect IMHO.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 07:30 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: The lenses are too far apart. It is impossible to stitch nearby things seamlessly.

BTW - I do understand why they have made such a large disc. It is to avoid the tripod. But, on the other hand, the stone that the camera stands on will look rather strange after stitching.

There is not spherical camera that can fully replace a normal camera and a pano head. They are all, more or less, toys.

Yes, I understand that. Still, they will get stitching problems, 3D or not.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 21:37 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

MichailK: I wonder if the thick sensor stack of the mft system forces such a multi-element design to achieve optimum telecentricity (if I got all this Olympus 'digital lens holy grail" right). This is a 25mm prime, not a 250mm to have 19 full elements!

Maybe Olympus did not choose wise going for the thick sensor stack in the first place back in early '00s. The half-educated Me thinks they did it to increase incompatibility to other 'lesser' 'non-digital' lenses that would loose sharpness too much due to this unique to the mft system excessively thick sensor stack.

Any better educated guys than me commenting?

One thing though. The thicker the glass in front of the sensor, the more important the surface is high quality. Any unevenness of the front surface will deflect the light more.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 20:44 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

MichailK: I wonder if the thick sensor stack of the mft system forces such a multi-element design to achieve optimum telecentricity (if I got all this Olympus 'digital lens holy grail" right). This is a 25mm prime, not a 250mm to have 19 full elements!

Maybe Olympus did not choose wise going for the thick sensor stack in the first place back in early '00s. The half-educated Me thinks they did it to increase incompatibility to other 'lesser' 'non-digital' lenses that would loose sharpness too much due to this unique to the mft system excessively thick sensor stack.

Any better educated guys than me commenting?

The DP cameras have the IR filter close to the sensor.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 20:17 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

MichailK: I wonder if the thick sensor stack of the mft system forces such a multi-element design to achieve optimum telecentricity (if I got all this Olympus 'digital lens holy grail" right). This is a 25mm prime, not a 250mm to have 19 full elements!

Maybe Olympus did not choose wise going for the thick sensor stack in the first place back in early '00s. The half-educated Me thinks they did it to increase incompatibility to other 'lesser' 'non-digital' lenses that would loose sharpness too much due to this unique to the mft system excessively thick sensor stack.

Any better educated guys than me commenting?

I think the sensor stack is thick as it puts dust further away from the sensor, so it is less visible. Sigma has gone even further and have a dust protector that almost touches the lenses.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 19:28 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

dotyman: Nice job Olympus. Lens looks awesome–sharper than my 50 1.2L across the frame with good bokeh. Now to pair it with the M1II...

I am quite amazed with how people go around the bush and answer things no one has asked and also criticizes things no one have said and also add things no one have asked for.

@LightCatcherLT. As far as I know no one have said that FourThirds is a bad choice. At least I have not even dreamt of saying that. So, sure, continue enjoying it and taking good pictures. I can see myself having a small Oly with some small lenses. That sounds very appealing.

The only thing that have been said is that drooling over a 24 mm F1.2 lens and also calling such stuff Nocti-something is technically naive. It is quite ordinary and cheap stuff for larger sensors - due to equivalence. As you probably know, as you understand it.

So, I fail to see your point.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 18:39 UTC

The lenses are too far apart. It is impossible to stitch nearby things seamlessly.

BTW - I do understand why they have made such a large disc. It is to avoid the tripod. But, on the other hand, the stone that the camera stands on will look rather strange after stitching.

There is not spherical camera that can fully replace a normal camera and a pano head. They are all, more or less, toys.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 21:43 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies

Genius or just plain dumb? Cannot decide. It is quite tempting to try it out though. Feels like I want more controllers than the $199 kit. Might get rather expensive in the long run.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 21:35 UTC as 8th comment
On article Photokina 2016: Hands on with Sigma's latest lenses (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: The 85 F1.4 is a massive piece of equipment. How long can this trend last? When do prime lenses go down to reasonable sizes again?

@Diablo - take a look at the existing 50 mm lenses. Yes, the maximum aperture affects the size. But, there are quite small F1.4 lenses.

The thing that makes the modern monster lenses very large is that the designers have decided that all parameters shall be super good at F1.4. It shall be razor sharp (all over the image). It shall have no distortion. It shall have no chromatic aberration. etc, etc ... and that at F1.4. Then, the lens becomes super large and expensive.

I think you can, with modern methods, make a 50/1.4 that is not much larger than a legacy F/1.4 and still get stellar performance at F/2.0. This lens would be much more interesting. At least for me.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:13 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

photohounds: Oh no! The equivalence police have whistled in.

1.2 gives the shutter speed of ant 1,2 lens so yep, that's equivalent all right.

Clearly "pixel peepers who don't actually USE their full MARKETING frame cameras" are BORED with their serving of "news" .
If I wanted a big sensor, I'd bypass miniature 35mm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm_film#Academy_format and go for the new Fuji MF.

F1.2 do not give any shutter speed. Where did you get that from?

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 19:01 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

Achiron: This is merely an F9 150mm on my Polaroid 20×24. Pure garbage, I wouldn't even consider using it as a paper weight as it's this plasticy light m4/3 construction. Olympus should close it's shop and focus on making paper cups.

@Achiron - actually I think those comments only comes when some almost wet their pants over an F1.2 FourThirds lens and even might call it Nocti-something. Or someone claims that their amazing 300/4 equals a 600/4.

Then people, knowing better, rolls their eyes and says - not again! When will they ever learn? Because it is so totally naive.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 18:58 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands on with Sigma's latest lenses (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: The 85 F1.4 is a massive piece of equipment. How long can this trend last? When do prime lenses go down to reasonable sizes again?

Yes, a long lens might be more tele centric, which is an advantage for digital sensors. But ... an 85 mm lens is already kind of tele centric. So ... I do not know if that is important.

But ... it is like this. For every lens there is a sharpness curve as a function of the aperture. An expensive, large, extremely good F1.4 one has a maximum at F1.4, so it will only get less sharp when stopping down.

What happens when the lenses gets cheaper (and smaller) is that the maximum will go down to smaller apertures. Below the maximum the lens is just as good as the more expensive ones. Above the maximum it is worse than the more expensive ones.

This means, that if you almost always use F4.0 or smaller aperture, you can save lots of money. You will then not gain anything at all by getting a super expensive and large lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 21:23 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: How much would anyone pay for depth of field that's equivalent to a 50mm F/2.4 lens? To put it another way, a slow F/2.4 "Nifty Fifty" selling for $1,199 wouldn't be all that nifty at all, now would it?

If M43 still has a future outside of videography, it's as the low end, hence the new Yi camera body and cheap 42.5mm F/1.8 prime.

I am not sure what you are trying to criticize in my posts. I have not written anything about total IQ. I have only commented on the belief that the portrait shown shows an F1.2 kind of DOF. It simply do not. Its an F2.4 kind of DOF. The photographer that have taken the images is very skilled and creates an illusion of shallower DOF than it really is.

But, regarding IQ. There are zillions of nifty fifties with very nice rendering, at bargain prices. The FA 50/1.4 from Pentax is absolutely fantastic at F2.8. And if you do not want an oldie, you always have the Sigma 50/1.4 Art for half the price of the Oly. And there are several others. Why not the Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 T*? It is also half the price.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 21:03 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands on with Sigma's latest lenses (82 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: The 85 F1.4 is a massive piece of equipment. How long can this trend last? When do prime lenses go down to reasonable sizes again?

Exactly!

The main reason for making huge 85/1.4 is that the optimal sharpness IS at F1.4. If the optimal sharpness had been at F2.8, then it could be much smaller. And if it was at F4.0, then it could be just as small as older ones, and still sharper than the older ones. And much cheaper.

And most high IQ images are actually taken at F4.0 or smaller aperture, because the shallow DOF at F1.4 effectively hides the sharpness for non flat surfaces.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 20:33 UTC
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: How much would anyone pay for depth of field that's equivalent to a 50mm F/2.4 lens? To put it another way, a slow F/2.4 "Nifty Fifty" selling for $1,199 wouldn't be all that nifty at all, now would it?

If M43 still has a future outside of videography, it's as the low end, hence the new Yi camera body and cheap 42.5mm F/1.8 prime.

@rfsII - no - equivalence is not pseudo science. A 24 mm F1.2, for FourThirds, do have the same DOF and FOV as a 50 mm F2.4 for 35 mm FF. It really does. No pseudo at all.

Yes, you are right that this is not the only parameter.

But, if you think the portrait is fantastic, with regard to shallow DOF, and also choose to call 24 mm F1.2 lenses for Nocti-something, then it is, more or less, a duty to shatter that misunderstanding. A $50 50 mm F1.7 will just blow this lens out of the water on a FF camera.

And this rather ordinary lens is absolutely not called Nocti-something. Of course. A real Noctilux is 50 mm F0.95, which should represent a 24 mm F0.45 for FourThirds, which is not even possible in vacuum.

Maybe you do not want a FF camera. But, it may be educational to understand the reality anyhow.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Hands on with Sigma's latest lenses (82 comments in total)

The 85 F1.4 is a massive piece of equipment. How long can this trend last? When do prime lenses go down to reasonable sizes again?

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 18:31 UTC as 12th comment | 12 replies
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

belfastbiker: it has such shallow DoF that some of her eye ain't in focus.... how much less DoF do we need?

If you "stop down a little" you lose the creamy background. As I said, the images has to be taken either at the same time, or very rapid. It is very hard to take multiple exposures of humans otherwise. We are very bad at sitting still.

An alternative is to take two image, one with large aperture and one with smaller and then combine them cleverly. Do not know if that can be made in a good way.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 06:53 UTC

Interesting! Now we all want to know ... size and weight of body and lenses. It is said to be smaller and lighter than conventional medium format (SLR).

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 06:48 UTC as 48th comment | 7 replies
On article Pinnacle Prime: Olympus ED 25mm F1.2 Pro sample gallery (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: How much would anyone pay for depth of field that's equivalent to a 50mm F/2.4 lens? To put it another way, a slow F/2.4 "Nifty Fifty" selling for $1,199 wouldn't be all that nifty at all, now would it?

If M43 still has a future outside of videography, it's as the low end, hence the new Yi camera body and cheap 42.5mm F/1.8 prime.

The light gathering ability of a lens is dependent on the aperture (entrance pupil), in mm. That is how much, of the subjects light it can catch. Ask the astronomers!

What happens behind the lens is only scaling and cropping.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 22:23 UTC
Total: 2077, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »