SimenO1

Joined on Oct 13, 2011

Comments

Total: 521, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Toselli: In my opinion pentax did the right move, but they didn't have enough power (or money) to continue, they didn't even arrive to half of the journey they intended. The camera was in fact far from perfect, a strange design, no OVF, and a little pricey, so what was obvious happened, that camera was a huge fail and they couldn't invest other money to continue that route. The next step was to make lenses designed to go inside of the space that was the mirror box and at the same time protrude less from the mount. Something like this (obviously without a need for an external viewfinder):
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/15mm_test1.html
They even showed some mock-ups, but the market never understood that solution, because at least a 18-55 should have come with the camera. I think canon and nikon will follow that path, but having more money to invest than pentax we might see another result.

The K-01 failed only in USA/Europe. In Asia it sold well. In my opinion, the design and lack of EVF was the main reasons it failed in USA/Europe. Yes, K-01 was unfortunatly too little to continue that path. I really hope they someday will make a successor with EVF and different design.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 13:27 UTC
In reply to:

SimenO1: Comments on the article:

1. Sonys linear piezoelectric actuators is not so much about CDAF/PDAF, but battery. It doesn't waste lots of energy on rotation motion. This is a coming technology to DSLR lenses as well.

2. On sensor PDAF will never be as good as dedicated PDAF sensor because of pixel size. On sensor PDAF cant be much larger then 2x2 pixels before it takes away to much information from the image. Having many PDAF-pixels will increase image noise because they block out some of the light.

3. Pentax K-01 had slow AF, partly because of a weak built in motor, but sales failed in Europe and USA because of a different reason: design. In Asia it sold well.

4. One way to accept both a short depth and old lenses is to have a good mount adapter. Yet another way is to allow the rear lens elements to retract into the camera. Pentax had a wide angle lens prototype that used the space inside K-01.

K-01 also painfully lacks EVF.

I would love a black/silver retro designed K-02 with built in EVF, on sensor PDAF and improved motor power

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 13:21 UTC

Comments on the article:

1. Sonys linear piezoelectric actuators is not so much about CDAF/PDAF, but battery. It doesn't waste lots of energy on rotation motion. This is a coming technology to DSLR lenses as well.

2. On sensor PDAF will never be as good as dedicated PDAF sensor because of pixel size. On sensor PDAF cant be much larger then 2x2 pixels before it takes away to much information from the image. Having many PDAF-pixels will increase image noise because they block out some of the light.

3. Pentax K-01 had slow AF, partly because of a weak built in motor, but sales failed in Europe and USA because of a different reason: design. In Asia it sold well.

4. One way to accept both a short depth and old lenses is to have a good mount adapter. Yet another way is to allow the rear lens elements to retract into the camera. Pentax had a wide angle lens prototype that used the space inside K-01.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 13:02 UTC as 15th comment | 6 replies

Great for fast object tracking, but dont get tempted to think it will deliver great image quality for slow motion videography with its 4 bits of color depth in the 500 and 1000 fps mode.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2017 at 22:15 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

cgarrard: Ricoh GR and the GV-2 Viewfinder. Arguably better image quality from the lens an sensor plus you have a viewfinder in a smaller package and 28mm equivalent.

@cgarrard https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ricoh/GR-II

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 20:44 UTC

Just pan the device and take multiple exposures to build a stacked 360 VR image?

Link | Posted on May 13, 2017 at 15:45 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Panasonic Lumix FZ80/FZ82 real world samples gallery (78 comments in total)
In reply to:

SimenO1: Since the equivalence police haven't been around yet, I will just point out that this is _not_ a 20-1200mm lens. Not even close. The aperture numbers f/2,8-5,9 are true, but if DPR calculate an equivalency of the focal length, then the related aperture (focal length divided by aperture diameter) should also be calculated to an equivalence and presented with the equivalent focal length. If not, it will give a false impression of what we get. Wrong combination of numbers.

That said, the camera looks terrific for some.

The aperture number has nothing to do with sensor size or pixel count. Its only the aperture diameter expressed as a fraction of the focal lengt (f). Hence f/x or f:x.

Aperture and aperture equivalence matters, just as many other factors matters. Don't discredit good pre purchase evaluations.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 20:01 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix FZ80/FZ82 real world samples gallery (78 comments in total)
In reply to:

SimenO1: Since the equivalence police haven't been around yet, I will just point out that this is _not_ a 20-1200mm lens. Not even close. The aperture numbers f/2,8-5,9 are true, but if DPR calculate an equivalency of the focal length, then the related aperture (focal length divided by aperture diameter) should also be calculated to an equivalence and presented with the equivalent focal length. If not, it will give a false impression of what we get. Wrong combination of numbers.

That said, the camera looks terrific for some.

As I said, aperture equivalence is not only about DoF. Its also about shot noise. In order to get the same shot noise on the smaller sensor you would have to reduce the ISO accordingly to get the same amount of light per pixel (assuming the same pixel count). That also mean the comparison would be hypothetical in some situations as there is a limit to how low real ISO that can be chosen. Reducing ISO when going from a larger to a smaller format is necessary to compensate for the smaller sensor area, if the purpose is to keep the same shot noise. Also, doing a comparison you would want to keep the motion blur equal, so you cant change the shutter speed. One last thing is that silicon sensors keep the same sensitivity in their entire lifetime. The ISO range on digital sensors are not a sensitivity range but a post capture amplification range.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 21:53 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix FZ80/FZ82 real world samples gallery (78 comments in total)
In reply to:

SimenO1: Since the equivalence police haven't been around yet, I will just point out that this is _not_ a 20-1200mm lens. Not even close. The aperture numbers f/2,8-5,9 are true, but if DPR calculate an equivalency of the focal length, then the related aperture (focal length divided by aperture diameter) should also be calculated to an equivalence and presented with the equivalent focal length. If not, it will give a false impression of what we get. Wrong combination of numbers.

That said, the camera looks terrific for some.

@photo_rb: Equivalency is just a common base for comparing. Its a tool to understand what we can expect in terms of angle of view, depth of field, noise and more.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 21:39 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix FZ80/FZ82 real world samples gallery (78 comments in total)

Since the equivalence police haven't been around yet, I will just point out that this is _not_ a 20-1200mm lens. Not even close. The aperture numbers f/2,8-5,9 are true, but if DPR calculate an equivalency of the focal length, then the related aperture (focal length divided by aperture diameter) should also be calculated to an equivalence and presented with the equivalent focal length. If not, it will give a false impression of what we get. Wrong combination of numbers.

That said, the camera looks terrific for some.

Link | Posted on May 1, 2017 at 17:41 UTC as 17th comment | 8 replies
On article Dell's 8K monitor goes on sale in March for $5000 (217 comments in total)
In reply to:

Azimuth46: Lightroom is waaaay too slow with my two monitors (4k and 2K respectively) even if I use a AMD RX480 with 8GB VRAM... I don't want to know how terrible it could be editing photos on a 8K... forget it!

Then ditch the bottleneck, Lightroom!

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 21:41 UTC

I would like some more area to spread the pixels on, and I think Eizo and Dell alternatives to this are way to expensive. Can I opt for a TV in stead and get good calibrated image quality for still images? Could LG Oled do the job?

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 21:20 UTC as 9th comment
On article 2017 Roundup: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

khunpapa: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sigma_dp2q&attr13_1=leica_q116&attr13_2=pentax_645z&attr13_3=sony_dscrx1r_ii&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.6066653023809774&y=-0.36319036600198795

I compare DP 2 Q with
- Pentax 645 (medium format)
- Leica Q (full frame, editor's choice)
- RX1R ii (full frame, editor's choice)

Both resolution and color fidelity.
SIGH. S I G H.

Seem like DPR staff do NOT care about the IQ anymore.

Speaking of low ISO landscape shots, I just added Pentax K-1 with pixel shift to the comparison. It seems to outresolve even its own 51 Mp big brother, not to mention both DP2 Quattro and Q typ 116.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 21:14 UTC
In reply to:

Nojo: Seems to me that this is less about phone cameras than it is about post processing. If you do this for any camera with a larger sensor than the one in a phone the results will be exponentially better.

Agree, but its annoying that the credit is given to the device, not the trick it self.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 20:20 UTC
In reply to:

chshooter: Well, this shows the direction photography is heading towards. With the increase of processing power, sensor technology and software, computational photography will overcame many of the physical limitations of smartphone​ cameras. If the phone automates the post processing to a convenient extent and delivers good results, who care whether the pic was taken on a phone or DSLR.

Software tricks just overcome software limitations, not physical limitations or hardware limitations. For phones that means still no zoom, noisy high ISO, very long exposures to get acceptable noise levels and so on.

Increasing exposure times to reduce noise is an old trick - very old. Even exposure stacking are old.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 20:11 UTC
On article Sphere of frustration: Nikon KeyMission 360 review (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: This kind of devices, like Ricoh Theta, belongs to China. Look at the YI VR 360. They can do it better and cheaper. The quality from YI (5.7k) may even be a tad better than toy level.

The future for Nikon (besides the obvious mirrorless pro) if they really want to diversify, is in high quality, yet affordable tools for new application areas. E.g., for stereoscopic (3D) VR in 8k quality w/o the need for a $16000 17 camera setup. But this would require strengths in software Nikon does not have. So, better just confine yourself on your core competence and don't loose the professional event pro market to Sony.

The YI VR 360 is not cheaper then current Theta S. Its actually 50$ more expensive. But its not available yet. Its just for preorder with a promised june delivery date. Ricoh have already shown a Theta S replacement with 4K resolution, that will compete with the YI 360 when both becomes available.

The software of the YI is yet to be tested. Ricoh already proved that they can make good 360 software.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 19:24 UTC
On article Sphere of frustration: Nikon KeyMission 360 review (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: They should concentrate on making quality cameras and lenses, instead of wasting time on these gimmicks

360 cameras are a great niche. Keymission is just a horrible premature product, failing to take market share in this niche.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2017 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

OlyPent: Time to panic, FF equivalency police! That is fast for medium.

Still, why should they panic? FF equivalency is not about FF superiority - its about a common ground comparison basis.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 21:37 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: The big thing with the Thetas over some competitors is the real-time stitching, some others need that done afterwards, which is a pain. Looking forward to seeing this (and how it compares to the new GoPro 360 camera).

@Dr_Jon: What GoPro 360? You can't compare to something that doesn't exist. Ricoh Theta is the benchmark for 360 videos. All newcomers compare to that.

@jnd: The LG 360 cam is 2K-ish (2560x1280) so far. Samsung 360 VR is 4K-ish (3840x1920), but the software on the Samsung are very unstable. I dont know how the software on the LG are, but I do believe the Ricoh software are superior.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 19:38 UTC
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: I'm curious about what 4k means in 360 spherical. Normally we are viewing a rectangle, so we have a length and width that, when multiplied, comes out to roughly 4k.

But if 4k is spread out over an entire sphere, won't it be thinned out and pixelated anyway?

4K (I assume 3840x2160) are the recorded pixels. The viewed pixels depend on how wide your viewing field is.

The current models offer 2K (2 Mp) recorded, and that leaves few pixels for viewing. Thats why the upgrade to 4K (8 Mp) recorded is so important.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 18:27 UTC
Total: 521, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »