tedolf

tedolf

Lives in United States Seattle, United States
Joined on May 12, 2010
About me:

Admiral, Tedolph Undersea Command

Comments

Total: 304, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hot mess: remembering the Leica M8 (57 comments in total)

I often wonder why someone doesn't make an m4/3 rangefinder with three lenses, 14mm, 20mm and 42.5mm. The lenses largely already exist, at least optically. All you would have to do is add a manual helicoid. You could use the GM-5 body as a mule. Focus confirmation could be by an led with phase detect focusing sensors reflected off the shutter?

Tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2017 at 17:08 UTC as 6th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

ecka, where are you getting these ideas from? False color? Noise which is there but you can't see it, etc. These are all figments of your imagination. A sensor only generates false color if you exceed the dynamic range of the sensor, i.e. overload it, or if there is no signal present, i.e. below the threshold detect of the pixel and then you try to amplify the non-existent signal in PP.

With a properly exposed image, in any format having a resolution over 8mp, on a 4k monitor you are not going to see any differences except DOF profile differences.

tEdolph

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

I've got bad news for you ecka, your 4k monitor only had about 8 million pixel elements in it. From a resolution standpoint, you really aren't going to see any differences between modern sensor formats on a 4k screen. You might see some noise differences, but not bellow ISO 800; you might see some dynamic range differences, but not in most scenes (4k screens don't have great dynamic range anyway); but you will see DOF profile differences, or not depending on the lenses used.

Finally even in prints, at normal viewing distances human acuity is the limiting factor. All crop sensor formats currently exceed that limit unless you have very unusual eyes.

tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 15:29 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

Really, you seem to have a negative attitude about "people" and their "BS opinions". I find that most people here have thoughtful and legitimate opinions.

For those of us who print, the difference between APS-c and FF if you take away the DOF issue is pretty much indecipherable at normal viewing distances and typical large print sizes, i.e. up to 16" x 20". I have only printed larger than that twice in my life and it was for a trade show with the prints being viewed at a distance of about six feet. That was done with 35mm film on a lens stopped down to f/5.6 which probably had a resolution similar to maybe 12mp.

That kind of IQ is easily replicated by a modern crop sensor camera.

I would like you to give me a real world scenario where only a FF camera is going to get the job done.

Tedolph

Tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 21:54 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

Eka, you seem to miss my point. Maybe you should re-read my post. I said that in some situations FF DOF profile is an advantage (wide angle) and sometimes a disadvantage (telephoto, portraits). So things are a bit more complex than your blanket statement that FF is advantaged in all situations.

Where to draw the line in sensor size? M4/3 is about as small as you can go and still have DOF control without having to go to extremes in placement of camera relative to subject relative to background. The argument about noise gets more and more irrelevant with each new generation of sensor technology.

What doesn't change is that DSLRs with long flange distances are going to have larger/heavier lenses, wide angle lenses with more complex retro focus designs, and more expensive lenses.

tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2017 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

And your point is?

Fuji has f/1.2 lenses if you want them so where is the noise advantage?

And, as I said before using lenses faster than f/2 on full frame is problematic from a DOF point of view.

TEdolph

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 22:49 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

Read the article and looked at the samples. Noise difference between full frame and 1.5x crop sensor? About 1 F stop to my eye, maybe less. Readily handled by getting a 1 F stop faster lens.

Noise really isn't the issue. The only real difference between FF and crop sensor cameras is the DOF profile difference, and that can be an advantage (wide angle) or a disadvantage (telephoto/portraits) depending on what you are shooting.

TEdolph

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 21:19 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

At what ISO? Can you see the difference at ISO 200? 400? 800?

Tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 20:13 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

The X-pro cameras are red herrings. They are huge for mirrorless cameras. Take a look at the Oly OMD 10 mark II cameras or Pen F camera with a few primes.

Tiny, 20mp, excellent stabilization, adaptable to legacy lenses, etc. etc.

This is what most people want to carry around, not 10 lbs. of gear.

Oh, and your aperture equivalence talking points are actually crop sensor selling points. Apertures smaller than f/2.8 are largely unusable on FF cameras because the DOF is too shallow.

That's right-too shallow.

TEdolph

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 19:06 UTC
In reply to:

ecka84: Overpriced APS-C system - don't care, not interested, FF costs less, dramatic size difference is a myth.
Cheaper but still too expensive medium format - don't care, not interested, niche product, cannot afford.
Nice and reasonably priced FF - Hello Canon, Nikon and Sony, my old friends :).

Sorry, most people don't want to carry around a full frame camera and three or four lenses.

They just don't.

tEdolph

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 17:16 UTC
In reply to:

tedolf: I wish Fuji would make the XA series with an option for an EVF.

Tedolph

No, the XE has the EVF built in.

I like to have it removable.

Tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 21:29 UTC

I wish Fuji would make the XA series with an option for an EVF.

Tedolph

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 19:58 UTC as 39th comment | 5 replies
On article Nikon reshuffles management structure (248 comments in total)
In reply to:

fPrime: Reshuffling deck chairs on the Titanic?

What's needed at this point are rolling heads for SnapBridge, KeyMission, and Nikon's preference for iteration over innovation.

True 'nuff.

Tedolph

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 03:55 UTC
On article Nikon reshuffles management structure (248 comments in total)
In reply to:

fPrime: Reshuffling deck chairs on the Titanic?

What's needed at this point are rolling heads for SnapBridge, KeyMission, and Nikon's preference for iteration over innovation.

Don't see any innovation from Canon? How about dual pixel AF? How about the m5 mirrorless camera. Compare that to Nikon 1 debacle.

tedolph

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 23:07 UTC
In reply to:

alolywu: I think what this article fails to mention is that the all in one solutions are designed/optimized for its sole purpose. I good example would be the Sony RX1R II / Leica Q where the lens/sensor/firmware are all dedicated to just operating at that focal length and variability and lens design can be optimized.

So an integrated all in one solution would perform better than simply putting a pancake lens on a compatible body.

@alolywu

Thanks for your response. The problem is I don't see the "performs better" on the DPR Compare-O-meter.

Not being argumentative, I just am not seeing it.

tedolph

Link | Posted on May 16, 2017 at 20:03 UTC
In reply to:

alolywu: I think what this article fails to mention is that the all in one solutions are designed/optimized for its sole purpose. I good example would be the Sony RX1R II / Leica Q where the lens/sensor/firmware are all dedicated to just operating at that focal length and variability and lens design can be optimized.

So an integrated all in one solution would perform better than simply putting a pancake lens on a compatible body.

Nice theory alolywu. Got any data to back that up?

Tedolph

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

Muskokaphotog: Planned obsolescence has been around for a long time. The first Leica SLR metering was not through the lens. The next model was and so on. Only a few cameras like the 500 c series have truly withstood time. I believe all current digital cameras will be obsolete in 3 to 5 years max. Print options have not really improved enough for it to matter. Nor will newer cameras create any better photographers.

@Scottelly:

Nobody looks at a 6' wide panoramic print close up.

Nobody needs more than 8mp sensor resolution.

Tedolph

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 16:34 UTC
On article 2017 Roundup: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras (463 comments in total)

So help me out here. What am I getting with one of these that I don't get with a Fuji rangefinder style camera and a 23mm f/2 lens?

Tedolph

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 17:12 UTC as 23rd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: NIKON 1 V3 was Sony A9 killer of yesterday! It delivered the fps, the accuracy, the speed, and all photographers ever needed for sports action (20 fps tracking, 60 fps fixed focus, etc), and a Nikon 1 kit could be assembled for peanuts compared to an A9 set.
But again, the tremendous prejudice of the digital photography snobbery sniggers at anything with sensor smaller than FF, and less than a truckload of equipment to show off. Just read the sorrowful comments below about "death of Nikon 1". What a horrible attitude towards a genuinely great system! But geeks celebrate A99 years later — despite fact that technology already was there that allowed work to be done, even to sports photographers. It shows the pathetic state of this market — it is not about the essence, but all about pretence, all about snobbery.

Not quite. A lot of us saw the potential in this system for sports/nature/animal photography. What was missing was fast prime lenses.

Don't know why Nikon refused to go there. Maybe expected customers to use adapted Nikon F lenses?

tedolph

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 19:20 UTC
On article Sphere of frustration: Nikon KeyMission 360 review (200 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: I have no idea who would want to loot at images from a 360 degree camera. People don't see the world like that normally. What is the use of such a thing?

tedolph

I still don't get it. If I want to make a place as attractive as possible, I want to control the framing. I don't want the potential customer looking at the ugly stuff!

Tedolph

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 19:17 UTC
Total: 304, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »