noirdesir

Lives in Switzerland Switzerland
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Nov 4, 2006

Comments

Total: 670, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Eric Calabros: Instead of impressive "sensor" I call it impressive "processing". However I think Canikony could achieve similar output if they were allowed to use NR tricks, consume lot of power and put the things in a big air cooled body.

You'd need an electronic shutter to do this efficiently. Not sure whether the sensors Canon and Nikon all have one. Several have electronic first curtain but not sure how many have a fully electronic shutter.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 22:27 UTC
In reply to:

Cheng Bao: As I remember previous RED dragon achieve the high DR score by combine multiple shots into one RAW, which is similar to what DXO one does. While although other vendors may have some feature, however, they don't output the multi-shot to raw file, so they are excluded from DXO ranking.

This one may also the fruit of this maneuver.

Which brings up the question whether DxO is ranking the multi-shot modes of the Pentax K-1 and K-3 II which also output a raw file?

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
On article DJI reportedly takes majority stake in Hasselblad (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

cdembrey: The old saying "you snooze, you lose." applies here. Japan has been snoozing, while China has been innovating.

Maybe DJI should buy a stake in Venus Optics, and let Hasselblad design auto focus for these innovative manual focus lenses.

Godox is supplying Broncolor with their flash triggers. How soon until Godox buys into a European prestige strobe manufacture?

'Completely different' can mean 'the opposite' on the right axis. As I said, I find most of what Ken says to be either trite or random. Not incorrect, not useless, just not anything worth writing home about. For example, 'reviewing' gear he hasn't used himself doesn't give you information you couldn't have read at the same place where he got his information from. Your example of the advice that "most lenses are sharp enough" is what I would consider trite. It doesn't tell you anything you didn't know before.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 01:22 UTC
On article DJI reportedly takes majority stake in Hasselblad (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

cdembrey: The old saying "you snooze, you lose." applies here. Japan has been snoozing, while China has been innovating.

Maybe DJI should buy a stake in Venus Optics, and let Hasselblad design auto focus for these innovative manual focus lenses.

Godox is supplying Broncolor with their flash triggers. How soon until Godox buys into a European prestige strobe manufacture?

Ken Rockwell deals out way too many platitudes for my taste. And his occasional opinions seem more random than true reflections on the gear he is talking about. His work reminds me a bit of tabloid journalism. Tabloid journalists are usually smart and knowledgeable people but their output is designed to get quick hits.

To illustrate this, I might point out somebody who is in many ways a complete opposite of Ken, which is Ming Thein.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 00:52 UTC
On article DJI reportedly takes majority stake in Hasselblad (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kurt Helge Roesand: Now bring back the 501CM in digital form that does not cost an arm and a leg, oh one can only dream. :)

If you can cut the cost of a silicon wafer by a factor of four, a 56 x 56 mm sensor might become affordable. Such a sensor is more than twice as large as the 33 x 44 mm sensor in the lowest-priced MF cameras. As production costs for sensors increase rather with the square of the size, it would probably cost around 4x that.

The Pentax 645z currently is available for $7000. Let's say the sensor cost in this is $3000. Then a 56 x 56 mm digital back would, even if sold at the volumes of the 645z, cost $12'000. Add the camera back, and you'll end up at $15'000+ for a body only. And at that price, the question whether you can get 645z volumes is very much an open one.

And even the 645z needed the sales of the much more expensive Hasselblad and Phase One bodies, to get this sensor rolling (Hasselblad and Phase One payed more for the sensor because they got it first and because they were buying smaller volumes). And Sony needed that extra initial income to launch this sensor.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 19:08 UTC
On article DJI reportedly takes majority stake in Hasselblad (191 comments in total)
In reply to:

cdembrey: The old saying "you snooze, you lose." applies here. Japan has been snoozing, while China has been innovating.

Maybe DJI should buy a stake in Venus Optics, and let Hasselblad design auto focus for these innovative manual focus lenses.

Godox is supplying Broncolor with their flash triggers. How soon until Godox buys into a European prestige strobe manufacture?

@PhotoUniverse: Are you knew to the English language? (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

@Mistral75: Hasselblad claims to have designed the three X1D lenses.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 18:54 UTC
In reply to:

GRUBERND: good job.
although.. cartographers do things like that on a daily basis and they even correct the images to be orthogonal and correctly georeferenced.. so.. good job on the marketing! ;-)

I think most maps have a significantly lower resolution (using imaginary taken from higher altitudes).

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 13:47 UTC
In reply to:

harry: Is it just me? The circle does not look a true circle to me?

I think it is the shadow that is fooling you, though there might also be a slight 'distortion' due to imperfect levelness of the plane.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 13:46 UTC
On article Dell's 8K monitor goes on sale in March for $5000 (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

EskeRahn: It does sound a bit like overkill on a 32" monitor, unless you use it really close...

Most people can just distinguish details down to around 1/12000 of the viewing distance. At my age it is more like 1/7000. I have met a single eagled eyed guy with a 1/25000 limit though, I'm sure he would love it.

I have made some test-sheets where you can test your eyes in seconds, that can be found here: http://eskerahn.dk/wordpress/?p=32

Thanks, it seems at this time of day with quite dirty glasses, I also am around 1/7000. But I need to repeat this on a higher resolution screen, measuring a distance of 1.5 m becomes borderline practical.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 02:02 UTC
On article Dell's 8K monitor goes on sale in March for $5000 (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

EskeRahn: It does sound a bit like overkill on a 32" monitor, unless you use it really close...

Most people can just distinguish details down to around 1/12000 of the viewing distance. At my age it is more like 1/7000. I have met a single eagled eyed guy with a 1/25000 limit though, I'm sure he would love it.

I have made some test-sheets where you can test your eyes in seconds, that can be found here: http://eskerahn.dk/wordpress/?p=32

So, the distance I should put into the formula is when I can see the two lines as two lines OR when the double line looks identical to the single line (instead of just like a thicker line)?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 01:27 UTC

Lightroom continues to rely on third-party plugins for features other DAMs already had for many years. Aperture added this feature back in 2010 (of course, Aperture is discontinued now). Another example of this policy is the lack of a native list view in LR (requires a third-party plugin).

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 21:19 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply

The GF9 has exactly the same dimensions as the GF8 (107 x 65 x 33 mm) and weighs only 3 g more (269 vs 266 g) but is noticeably larger and heavier than the GM1 (99 x 55 x 30 mm, 204 g). There is no merging of lines, the GF9 is a direct successor to the GF8 and has no GM1 attributes I can think of. The GF line is continued while the GM line so far seems put on hold.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 21:03 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

PixelJ: How come we don't see 24-1000 mm removable lenses that are not obnoxiously big? Are they doing something special with everything integrated that makes this work so much better than it would with a removable lens?

The closest you can get in terms of universal zooms (wide-angle to tele) is the 24-450 mm equiv. Tamron lens for APS-C DSLRs (actual focal length 16-300 mm).

If you look at tele zooms, you can get (in reasonable sizes) 225-900 mm equiv. zooms from Tamron and Sigma, when used on APS-C DSLRs (the lenses themselves also cover FF). There is also a Sigma 450-1200 mm equiv. lens (when used on APS-C) but then you are talking 6 kg and $7000. Nikon for a while offered a 1200-1700 mm lens (which would be 1800-2550 mm equiv. when used on APS-C), which weighed 16 kg and cost $60'000+.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2016 at 01:45 UTC

Stupid question: How do these clip on 'lenses' interact with the optical image stabilisation that some phones have?

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 23:10 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: re: "All previous digital medium-format models, other than the Leica S series, have been DSLRs with spacious mirror box housings"

Are you saying the Leica S-series are NOT DSLRs with moving mirrors? Other than having sensors SLIGHTLY larger than "full-frame" (1.25x in linear dimensions, 1.56x area), the Leica S cameras seem much more like a Pentax 645Z, or for that matter a Nikon D810, than they're like the X1D.

re: "the 6x4.5cm digital format"

No such thing (and there wasn't for film, either). 645 film is 5.6x4.15 cm or 5.6x4.2cm. The largest common digital sensors are 5.4x4.0cm. This camera's sensor is 4.4x3.3cm. (And for reference, the Leica S sensors are 4.5x3.0cm.)

I explicitly talked about the baby-MF sensors (which given the price of the FF MF sensors very likely sell in larger numbers than the FF MF sensors, something that is almost a given looking at the sales of the Pentax bodies). And the mirrorless MF cameras we are comparing things here with also both use the baby-MF sensor.

Point is, thus, most digital MF users had to contend with an oversized mirrorbox and flange distance. The Leica S was the only whose mirrorbox and flange distance designed to fit the sensor size. And yes, 30 x 45 mm is smaller than 33 x 44 mm, 3.7% in linear direction (which is what matters for flange distance) and being 3:2 instead of 3:4 also helps a bit with having a shorter flange distance.

Having a flange distance of 53 mm (Leica S) vs 71 mm for, eg, the Pentax 645 system, is a clearly noticeable difference and the 3.7% difference in sensor diagonal only plays a small difference in that regard.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 19:31 UTC
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: re: "All previous digital medium-format models, other than the Leica S series, have been DSLRs with spacious mirror box housings"

Are you saying the Leica S-series are NOT DSLRs with moving mirrors? Other than having sensors SLIGHTLY larger than "full-frame" (1.25x in linear dimensions, 1.56x area), the Leica S cameras seem much more like a Pentax 645Z, or for that matter a Nikon D810, than they're like the X1D.

re: "the 6x4.5cm digital format"

No such thing (and there wasn't for film, either). 645 film is 5.6x4.15 cm or 5.6x4.2cm. The largest common digital sensors are 5.4x4.0cm. This camera's sensor is 4.4x3.3cm. (And for reference, the Leica S sensors are 4.5x3.0cm.)

I think what was meant that the Leica S was the only digital MF camera without an oversized mirrorbox compared to it sensor size for cameras using the baby-MF sensors. Or said differently, it was the thinnest digital MF camera until the new Fuji and Hasselblad mirrorless MF cameras.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2016 at 15:01 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 2: Full-Frame (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

quietrich: Although these roundups are useful as an overview of current cameras in a particular class/budget, I suspect the 'which camera should I buy' conclusion is click bait. The answer to that question should always be the same simple one, that you should buy the camera that best suits the work you do, and feels most intuitive to you. Any other answer is just baseless generalising.

I do want to read it. I am curious as to what the opinion of the DPreview editors is. Objective tests are all good, but the final decision what to get is a) personal and b) a subjective. Personal in the sense that everybody will weigh all the different aspects differently and subjective in that this weighing is partly intuitive and subconscious.

Aren't you ever interested in a recommendation from somebody that knows more about something than you? Or vice versa, aren't you asked occasionally to give a recommendation on something you know more about than the person asking, be it about cameras, wine, or anything else?

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 13:43 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 2: Full-Frame (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

noirdesir: "there are just a few modern Pentax full-frame lenses, and they're both heavy and expensive"

Like a radio show host saying that they don't have many listeners and both are over 60.

You are most certainly right in your reading of that phrase. I assumed some accidental misphrasing but it only was a formulation that unintentionally could also be read the way I did.

One can put a serial comma in front of the 'and' but as much as I can tell that requires at least three elements in a series. To remove the ambiguity, replacing the 'both' with something like 'equally' would probably be a better solution.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2016 at 01:51 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 2: Full-Frame (366 comments in total)
In reply to:

quietrich: Although these roundups are useful as an overview of current cameras in a particular class/budget, I suspect the 'which camera should I buy' conclusion is click bait. The answer to that question should always be the same simple one, that you should buy the camera that best suits the work you do, and feels most intuitive to you. Any other answer is just baseless generalising.

If with clickbait you mean stuff that a lot of people actually want to read, then yes.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 16:18 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 2: Full-Frame (366 comments in total)

"there are just a few modern Pentax full-frame lenses, and they're both heavy and expensive"

Like a radio show host saying that they don't have many listeners and both are over 60.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2016 at 03:39 UTC as 27th comment | 2 replies
Total: 670, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »