LensBeginner

LensBeginner

Lives in Italy Italy
Joined on Jan 23, 2012

Comments

Total: 1017, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Lens Fanatics: Nikon - Gold
Canon - Red
Fuji - Green

Oh brother who's gonna take the Pink ?

Uh... Pentax green, since quite some time.
But red and gold so yeah, not exclusive nor all that distinctive.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2018 at 21:24 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: I would have liked to use it with jpeg files... yes I noticed the name and the target devices (professional VR cameras), but still...

Rationale: most cameras that are able to shoot RAW usually have a phisical shutter, and I'm not a fan of stressing that part unnecessarily.

It's free so I cannot complain.

@Karroly
Probably too cumbersome.
I already have a quite fast way to do stacking, and was only looking for a more streamlined way (possibly with less memory leaks and less of a resource hog).

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2018 at 18:56 UTC
In reply to:

SteveCooper: There is also another alternative that is not being discussed- for the same amount of money, I bought a used Nikon 70-200 F2.8 VRII with a 2 year Mack warranty in Excellent+ condition from a respected retailer. I would imagine one could also find a Canon lens with a similar deal. Aren't most people that opt for a 70-200 F4 really wanting a 70-200 F2.8, but can't afford it, or is it they are after a lens that weighs less?

I know people who own an f/2.8 from one of the major brands (and not third-party) and routinely shoot it at f/4 for sharpness/DoF in paid photo gigs.

For some use cases, it could make sense to compare an f/2.8 and an f/4 lens both at f/4.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2018 at 13:17 UTC
On article Kodak distances itself from failed Bitcoin scheme (76 comments in total)

Iceland? You mean Klondike.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2018 at 13:04 UTC as 35th comment
In reply to:

LensBeginner: I would have liked to use it with jpeg files... yes I noticed the name and the target devices (professional VR cameras), but still...

Rationale: most cameras that are able to shoot RAW usually have a phisical shutter, and I'm not a fan of stressing that part unnecessarily.

It's free so I cannot complain.

Ok.
Since the answers I received when I voiced my perplexities were basically "just buy another (newer) camera", I think this tool is not for me.

More power to those who can use it!
To me, it's just a missed opportunity to do something great. Since they were catering for their cameras' user base, they probably didn't mean for it to cover other use cases, so it's ok, they're in it for business just like everybody else.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2018 at 13:02 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: I would have liked to use it with jpeg files... yes I noticed the name and the target devices (professional VR cameras), but still...

Rationale: most cameras that are able to shoot RAW usually have a phisical shutter, and I'm not a fan of stressing that part unnecessarily.

It's free so I cannot complain.

@anticipation_of
You're talking about a 2'000€ camera...

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2018 at 06:46 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: I would have liked to use it with jpeg files... yes I noticed the name and the target devices (professional VR cameras), but still...

Rationale: most cameras that are able to shoot RAW usually have a phisical shutter, and I'm not a fan of stressing that part unnecessarily.

It's free so I cannot complain.

@pf I obviously tried with RAWs from my smartphone... the software crashed every single time. My smartphone is from 2016 BTW.

I don't care much for pre-baked apps, I prefer to do my own stacking, because I can get better results.

That "old" compact cameras (I'm unsure what you mean by that BTW) don't let you turn off RAW NR, I'm not sure either... I remember processing RAWs from an FZ-28, and they were quite full of noise. It's a bridge camera, but I think the point is still valid.

Why are you limiting yourself to ILCs when talking about "old" cameras? the P900, for instance, is from 2015, is not an ILC, is very popular and only shoots jpeg.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2018 at 20:48 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: I would have liked to use it with jpeg files... yes I noticed the name and the target devices (professional VR cameras), but still...

Rationale: most cameras that are able to shoot RAW usually have a phisical shutter, and I'm not a fan of stressing that part unnecessarily.

It's free so I cannot complain.

@Karroly but you'd need a (more) recent camera. This is perfect tech to improve the performance of old or lightweight cameras. In fact it's quite some time that I use superresolutions stacks with my smartphone in low light, only I do it manually.

@pf Because the opposite is also true (most cameras which only shoot jpeg only feature an electronic shutter)

My DSLR already produce 12 bit RAWs, so I have less of a need to improve on that.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2018 at 19:55 UTC

I would have liked to use it with jpeg files... yes I noticed the name and the target devices (professional VR cameras), but still...

Rationale: most cameras that are able to shoot RAW usually have a phisical shutter, and I'm not a fan of stressing that part unnecessarily.

It's free so I cannot complain.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2018 at 19:36 UTC as 52nd comment | 17 replies
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (577 comments in total)

https://camerasize.com/compare/#462,789
Do check front and top view.
'nuff said...

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2018 at 21:48 UTC as 93rd comment
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (577 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben of the North: Image quality is horrible on those small sensors, dont waste your money!

That camera is for your mom and pop to take bad pictures of squirrels in the backyard and fill your Facebook with it..... if they manage to upload their pics on the PC! ;-)

Image quality is not horrible... it's horrible outside their intended scope of operations.
You pay DoF with noise performance, trouble is that to get good noise performance you'd have to go wider than the lens can go.
So they're good, but in a specific field: large DoF in good light.

With this one you can even manage to get lots of background blur, but again in specific circumstances: close focus (thinner DoF) and long FLs (more blur).

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 21:33 UTC
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (577 comments in total)

I have played with TCs, and got nice pics @400mm f/11-16 on APS-C (the FoV of a 600mm on film), and it was not all that easy to keep the ISO low, even in good light. Had a good SR, BTW.

I can't even begin to imagine what it means to shoot with the safety speeds a 3000mm equivalent FoV entails, a min. aperture of f/8 at that FL, and the bad ISO perf. of a 1/2.3" sensor, if you really want the extra reach...

Well, actually I can:
APS-C: 600mm eqFoV, ISO 560, f/16, 1/500s
P1000: 3000mm eqFoV, ISO800 (+0.5 stops), f/8 (+2s stops), 1/3000s (-2.5 stops)

BTW, I could have gone to f/11 (f/5.6 on the lens, doubles with 2X TC) on APS-C with my setup with no significant penalty, while this, "wide-open", means ISO800 (or a tripod) is virtually a necessity.

Since we should have a nearly 4 stop disadvantage (base two log of the ratio of the areas, 370.52 and 28.07 mm^2 respectively, is about 3.72), it's like shooting at a little less than ISO 12800 on APS-C.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 21:21 UTC as 140th comment
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (577 comments in total)
In reply to:

nemark: I am eager to see what results would be in the practice, particularly for beards and at wide end. Meanwhile, I would also like to see a 1" sensor compact with telephoto zoom with macro capabilities and large aperture (2.8-4.0) ONLY. Say 150-600, or even 1000mm, with HQ image. (And not as expensive as Sony RX10 Mk IV. It should be easier to make, I suppose, than wide angle to super-tele. Long ago I had the opportunity to try friends Fuji ultrazoom camera (HS10) - it was useful at telephoto end (it was 720mm eq.), but very poor as a wide angle (24mm).

@jaykumarr
He obviously meant flying beards.
As in: on a helicopter or somesuch ;-)

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 21:00 UTC
On article Nikon Coolpix P1000: what you need to know (577 comments in total)
In reply to:

manifest destiny: Gosh - it just seems like it's begging for a 24 or 28 MP APS-C sensor to be really great, to have appeal beyond the cellphone crowd.

@manifest destiny
Judging from the shots in the Sample Gallery, it struggles to resolve 16 MP due to aggressive NR... no way it could resolve 24 MP in a meaningful manner.

Edit: just like mgblack74 said a couple of posts below. It's this evident.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 20:57 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: Kind of a pity...

I could consider buying one used for pennies, just for curiosity (currently feeling good with another brand, but have no prejudices)
Trouble is eBay listing will probably change from "lightly used 1-series camera" to "RARE!!!1!!1! UNOBTAINABLE!11!1!! Nikon 1-Series Camera!" overnight, and prices will rise instead of decreasing :-/

@TillmanB Ah I see, thanks!

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 20:51 UTC
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: Do me a big negative was the lack of an EVF. I’m not interested in a system camera I cannot hold up to my eye.

The V3 has an accessory but the total was $1500 - almost what I paid for my far-more-useful RX10-IV.

What is the point of an advanced amateur camera without a viewfinder?

@PhilDunn taking the mirror out of the equation I think the rate of keepers would be about the same - but you'd need a neck strap for "my" method (not actually mine of course)... unsure how it's gonna play out with a leather slingshot-type belt... no dice with a hand strap of course.

LCD loupes are effective and nice to use with manual focus lenses, but I have to concede that are bulky as hell...

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 20:50 UTC
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: Do me a big negative was the lack of an EVF. I’m not interested in a system camera I cannot hold up to my eye.

The V3 has an accessory but the total was $1500 - almost what I paid for my far-more-useful RX10-IV.

What is the point of an advanced amateur camera without a viewfinder?

@PhilDunn I thought so as well, but I changed my mind after trying.

In my experience I can go to lower shutter speed with a mirrorless with the strap held taut than with a DSLR held against my eye: the lack of mirror slap makes up for the purported minor stability - which BTW I'm not sure about.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

LensBeginner: Kind of a pity...

I could consider buying one used for pennies, just for curiosity (currently feeling good with another brand, but have no prejudices)
Trouble is eBay listing will probably change from "lightly used 1-series camera" to "RARE!!!1!!1! UNOBTAINABLE!11!1!! Nikon 1-Series Camera!" overnight, and prices will rise instead of decreasing :-/

Since eBay doesn't get commissions on shipping... quite probable actually! XD

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 20:11 UTC

Kind of a pity...

I could consider buying one used for pennies, just for curiosity (currently feeling good with another brand, but have no prejudices)
Trouble is eBay listing will probably change from "lightly used 1-series camera" to "RARE!!!1!!1! UNOBTAINABLE!11!1!! Nikon 1-Series Camera!" overnight, and prices will rise instead of decreasing :-/

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2018 at 19:58 UTC as 110th comment | 4 replies
On article Kodak Alaris brings 35mm Pro Image 100 film to Europe (147 comments in total)

storta...

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2018 at 18:10 UTC as 26th comment
Total: 1017, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »