SRT201

SRT201

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Mar 8, 2010

Comments

Total: 117, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Paul Clark SJ: Whether a camera has a mirror or not is irrelevant. Its the image quality produced at the end of the image processing chain that matters along with the camera having the features that you need for your photography. Who cares if it has a mirror.

John Koerner, NOWHITELENS
Again, my point was not that DSLR's can't get around these issues. LiveView and Mirror Lockup do just that. The only point is that the mirrorless bodies have these advantages in all shooting situations.

I have no doubt you have both taken razor sharp photos with your rigs and in many cases the sharpness lost to mirror-slap or PDAF errors would be hard to see.

At least in my case, I'm only addressing the strict definition of image quality and sharpness is a big part of that so anything that increases sharpness in more situations is an improvement in design.

I'm no Sony fan boy nor am I suggesting that mirrorless is a replacement for all DSLR uses at this point.

We can talk sharpness all day but great photos often don't depend on that at all so this is a purely academic conversation. I'm an engineer so such conversations are fine with me. :-)

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 16:18 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Clark SJ: Whether a camera has a mirror or not is irrelevant. Its the image quality produced at the end of the image processing chain that matters along with the camera having the features that you need for your photography. Who cares if it has a mirror.

Sorry NOWHITELENS, but in the world of physics there is ALWAYS going to be some level of calibration error between the PDAF sensor's measured focus point and the real one. You don't have that source of error when the focus is being measured on the image plane.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 15:17 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Clark SJ: Whether a camera has a mirror or not is irrelevant. Its the image quality produced at the end of the image processing chain that matters along with the camera having the features that you need for your photography. Who cares if it has a mirror.

BlueBomber,
You're really trying to stir things up aren't you by pointing out yet another physics problem in the DSLR's design. :-)

Having a focus sensor located someplace other than the imager means there is yet another inescapable source of image quality degradation inherent to the DSLR design. I have owned a number of DSLR's and experienced these error first hand. Again the DSLR manufacturers admit this by including a mode that actually allows the user to focus WITH the imager.

I'm no fanboy. I'm not arguing for a brand here just simply pointing out that there are inherent flaws in the DSLR design as there are in ALL DEVICES. Nothing is perfect. In this case though, the mirrorless cameras have overcome these two rather important flaws that effect image quality. Have millions of wonderful images been taken regardless of these flaws? Of course. Nobody is claiming otherwise.

Again!... just physics.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Clark SJ: Whether a camera has a mirror or not is irrelevant. Its the image quality produced at the end of the image processing chain that matters along with the camera having the features that you need for your photography. Who cares if it has a mirror.

Nobody was suggesting you can't get a sharp image with your D800. But you'll note it includes a mirror lockup function does it not. Nikon themselves suggest that you are NOT getting the maximum sharpness in many situations due to vibration from mirror-slap. So they provide you the option of sharpER images should that work for a given shooting situation.

Mirrorless cameras have simply done away with that moving mass and so have the advantage of less camera-induced vibration in every shooting scenario.

Again it's just physics. I have no idea why people take this stuff personally.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 14:50 UTC

Too bad Ricoh/Pentax missed the mirrorless boat. The sad part is that they didn't really miss the boat. They failed with the bizarre K-01 mirrorless (I have one) and then didn't have to stomach to continue forging into new territory.

I was a big fan for a long time but I think Pentax may be too far behind to recover the lost ground.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 14:08 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Paul Clark SJ: Whether a camera has a mirror or not is irrelevant. Its the image quality produced at the end of the image processing chain that matters along with the camera having the features that you need for your photography. Who cares if it has a mirror.

Physics says it matters. The mirror has far more mass than a shutter of any kind and the simultaneous goals of moving and stopping that mirror as quickly as possible and keeping the imager as stable as possible are in opposition. The simple fact is that if you want to keep the image as sharp as possible you must limit vibration aggressively. Sure, DSLR's have mirror-lockup but's really only useful for limited situations. The long and short of it is that for precise image sharpness mirror-less cameras have an immediate advantage. Physics won't be argued with.

John, of course there's probably a 100:1 ratio between DSLR and mirrorless awards. DSLR's have been around a lot longer. We're talking about image quality here, not artistry. Many great images don't depend on sharpness at all but that's another topic.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 13:58 UTC
On article Alien Skin offers Exposure X3 update (12 comments in total)

Great to see more and more viable Adobe alternatives in the field. Bathing in their hubris, Adobe won't figure out they've pushed customers too hard until they've permanently lost a huge chunk of the market.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2018 at 12:32 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: "Bokeh Master" !!! Bokeh is now in vogue that never were since photography was invented before I was born. The promotion and touting of "Bokeh" is meant to kill bokeh-less extremely convenient cellcams that are killing dSLRs? Regardless, cellcams is in. dSLRs is out !!! Bokeh or no bokeh cellcams wins.

Spoken like a true Facebook aficionado... The battle is over! Tiny imagers with noisy, smeared pixels are IN! Big imagers with DOF control, low noise, and wide dynamic range are OUT!

You heard it here. :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 19:24 UTC
In reply to:

milkod2001: Just tried this Select Subject in PS. It does indeed work but like she said it is only good starting point and needs lot of tweaking. Good for quick selections.

Nothing beats precise but time intensive good old pen tool.

jimread,

Your points are well put and correct, but these "stupid tools" are all Adobe has to convince the customers that their perpetual subscriptions actual have some value.

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2018 at 16:02 UTC

Oooh that sounds really neato. Should be worth at least $60 or maybe $80 a month!

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2018 at 19:42 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Timur Born: Elements 2018 does multi-threaded face recognition, whereas my monthly paid Lightroom still only uses a single thread of my 8 core / 16 thread CPU. Time to update Lightroom, Adobe, that's what we pay subscriptions for.

Unfortunately Import only seems to run on a single core. Well, Intel will be happy that Adobe entices (forces) customers to still put money into CPUs with high single-core performance.

Better yet, why not ditch Adobe and that STOOOPID import step completely. There are a growing number of catalog-free alternatives that can actually work on existing files without having to go through some laborious catalog building step first.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 12:45 UTC
In reply to:

Timur Born: Elements 2018 does multi-threaded face recognition, whereas my monthly paid Lightroom still only uses a single thread of my 8 core / 16 thread CPU. Time to update Lightroom, Adobe, that's what we pay subscriptions for.

Unfortunately Import only seems to run on a single core. Well, Intel will be happy that Adobe entices (forces) customers to still put money into CPUs with high single-core performance.

Why should they bother to update important features like that. They already have you on the hook and they don't really care to take all the time to make real changes to their applications. The only way to get Adobe to change is to leave them. Fortunately their arrogance has opened the field to a number of very nice alternatives. Look around and ask why you're paying monthly for this kind of "performance".

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

KEnrique: Don't understand why people keep on using Lightroom or Photoshop Raw to convert raw files... They are terrible!!! Try Capture One, or anyone of the good raw converters!

Couldn't agree more. Adobe can continue to court customers with cheesy new features but they have driven away a solid portion of their user base with heavy handed "we own the customer" business practices. None of this silly garbage is going to lure me back. Oooh how about a feature that automatically adds fun hats to everyone in the photo! :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 12:28 UTC
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: This camera puts to shame every mirrorless camera. Mirrorless is a dead-end technology for people that don't know how to take a good photo.

If you go to Cannes, the Oscars, Fashion Week, etc.. you will see that NO ONE uses a mirrorless camera. They are garbage.

Professionals use a real dSLR, instead of baby-mirrorless cameras. Leave the mirrorless for your kids, to teach them what a bad camera is.

All reasoned responses, but that's the problem. The comment you are all replying to is from a serial troll who will not be reasoned with.

https://www.dpreview.com/members/9056066929/overview

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2017 at 18:43 UTC
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1086 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: This camera puts to shame every mirrorless camera. Mirrorless is a dead-end technology for people that don't know how to take a good photo.

If you go to Cannes, the Oscars, Fashion Week, etc.. you will see that NO ONE uses a mirrorless camera. They are garbage.

Professionals use a real dSLR, instead of baby-mirrorless cameras. Leave the mirrorless for your kids, to teach them what a bad camera is.

You guys are wasting keystrokes replying to a troll who likes to put his or her insecurity on parade.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 21:02 UTC
In reply to:

Just A Plain Dude: Is it maybe possible to have a narrator with clearer pronunciation?
It was extremely painful to follow this one, sadly.

I found him easily understandable. On top of that, his English is far better than my Hindi. :-)

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 17:55 UTC
In reply to:

SRT201: Oh that's just precious isn't it! Adobe is finally noticing that their heavy-handed licensing and general disdain for the user is effecting their bottom line. Well now we can be sure that they are well and truly interested in giving users what they have been asking for.

Yeah right!

Adobe's arrogance has provided the opportunity for a number of good RAW development alternatives to emerge and some of them are excellent and MUCH faster than Adobe products. I've moved away from Adobe as have so many others.

Arrogance eventually comes back to bite the arrogant. Enjoy the rewards Adobe!

That's overall revenue. Could be they are seeing slower adoption rates or falling subscription numbers for Lightroom.

Or, I'm just wrong. :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 19:08 UTC

Check out ON1 Photo Raw as well. I'm quite pleased with the results. Not missing Adobe at all.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 18:55 UTC as 97th comment

Oh that's just precious isn't it! Adobe is finally noticing that their heavy-handed licensing and general disdain for the user is effecting their bottom line. Well now we can be sure that they are well and truly interested in giving users what they have been asking for.

Yeah right!

Adobe's arrogance has provided the opportunity for a number of good RAW development alternatives to emerge and some of them are excellent and MUCH faster than Adobe products. I've moved away from Adobe as have so many others.

Arrogance eventually comes back to bite the arrogant. Enjoy the rewards Adobe!

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2017 at 18:42 UTC as 101st comment | 7 replies

Really unfortunate. I could always count on Lexar for quality and speed. Sandisk... not so much.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 17:35 UTC as 96th comment | 3 replies
Total: 117, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »