Henrik Herranen

Lives in Finland Tampere, Finland
Works as a Digital Signal Processing Software Engineer, MSc
Joined on Oct 6, 2005
About me:

Plan: To baldly shoot what everyone has shot before.

Comments

Total: 351, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hot mess: Remembering the Leica M8 (140 comments in total)

"In the mid 2000s"

Barney, my friend, we are still about perhaps maybe approximately sort of 400ish years short of the "mid 2000s". :-)

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 19:41 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Photomonkey: I liked the disclaimer at the end that said "Do not attempt".

It had not occurred to me that I might find a neighbor with a 787 that wanted to horse around a bit.

Oh shoot! Yes, of course I do.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 09:42 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: I liked the disclaimer at the end that said "Do not attempt".

It had not occurred to me that I might find a neighbor with a 787 that wanted to horse around a bit.

But you just might... so better safe than sorry! :-)

Personally, I find it rather cute how the Boeing cub is following its mother at the end. The only thing missing is some poignant narration by Sir Richard Attenborough.

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 04:00 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: The Canon PowerShot G3 (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: AS an object, as a piece of design, surely the prettiest of all digicams?
I used one for a while, but it died and had to go back. Very good colour, very good for desktop macro closeups because of that tilt and flip screen, good macro, still a good camera, but the colour though good, and much better than the G5 was not IMHO as good as the G1 colour. G1 colour is VERY good.

I used to spend ages rearranging small objects on tables, started as a res test, but then the results began to take on a life of their own until there I was, with it on a tripod, recording old gold teeth and pot-pourri, and paperclips and my kids trinkets, as though I were Google earth (the patterns from above still very 3D).

Munro, in my opinion G1 colour was its weak point. With its CYGM filter it couldn't represent reds if its life depended on it. Canon made the smart move to go to baseline RGGB with the G2.

Nevermind that a weak or missing IR filter could wreak havoc with the G2 and G3, too, if for instance photographing hot coals. With an unfortunate white balance setting coals could turn from slightly purple to almost pure blue. But G1 really never got strong colours right.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2017 at 19:16 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: The Canon PowerShot G3 (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

fatdeeman: My first decent camera! I had so much fun experimenting with long exposures, working out exposure compensation and using AV and TV modes for the first time.

Car headlight trails, multiple exposures by covering the lens with your hand, having a friend appear in 5 different places in the same photo, those were the days!

And it actually produces respectable RAW files even today, I guess the low density sensor helps here. It's not so great anywhere above base ISO though!

The one camera I will never sell!

Nice. Very much like my first tests with my G2.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2017 at 19:12 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: The Canon PowerShot G3 (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

ggc: Thank you Dale for the nice article!

I have recently bought for not many €€ a used G5 that is moreless the same, really nice images at base iso, nice lens, orientable lcd, built in ac adapter, well, i have even used it :D .

Only troubles are the sloow AF (especially at max tele) and no live view whilst focusing, the noise (400 iso is almost unusable), only raw and no raw+jpeg, control dial requires slow turning, lens cap unhandy, but overall still a really nice cam ;) . I can still have fun with this camera.

Actually, the sensor of the G5 was significantly more noisy than G1, G2, and G3. Canon rectified that with the G6, but unfortunately the G5 fell between the cracks.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2017 at 17:14 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: The Canon PowerShot G3 (95 comments in total)

Although I owned the G2 for a while, G3 was my favourite "prosumer" camera for several years after I bought one of the early units on Nov 25th, 2002, during my holiday trip from Europe to Australia. That was a camera that held me happy until the 5D forced me to go DSLR. The G3 gave me lots of of fond memories and nice pictures. And yes, I had the IBM 1 GB Microdrive. :-)

One thing that I think should be mentioned is that the G series had the _excellent_ flip-and-twist-screen right from the very beginning. To me shooting discretely from waist height was one of its big pluses. Nobody understood at the time you could take pictures like that. Plus it was great to get so easily right to the ground or over people's heads.

But the proof is in the IQ. How about this for a 2002 15-second straight-from-camera JPEG?
http://www.iki.fi/leopold/tmp/021211-210851.jpg

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2017 at 17:11 UTC as 39th comment

"In the mid-2000s camera manufacturers had to find ways to differentiate themselves from the competition."

Well, last time I looked there still was close to 500 years until the mid-2000's... :-)

But yes, interesting read as Throwback Thursday articles use to be. Didn't even remember this particular camera!

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2017 at 14:49 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (666 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henrik Herranen: "In a perfect world, Sony would have offered a 12-bit Raw mode with a lossless compression curve (without that second stage of localized compression that leads to edge artifacts) for smaller file sizes with minimal loss in quality."

Um, by definition, fitting 14 bits to 11 bits is _not_ lossless. The difference may not be easily visible if a properly optimized curve is used, but the operation is definitely not lossless. Lossless means that you are able to get _exactly_ the original samples back. Example from the audio world: MP3 is not lossless, not even at the highest bit-rates, but FLAC is.

Thank you, Rishi! That one word really makes all the difference.
(And yes, I might be a pedant, but I also deal with developing lossy and lossless compression and decompression algorithms professionally, so to me using the words correctly is important.)

Link | Posted on May 19, 2017 at 05:17 UTC
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (666 comments in total)

"In a perfect world, Sony would have offered a 12-bit Raw mode with a lossless compression curve (without that second stage of localized compression that leads to edge artifacts) for smaller file sizes with minimal loss in quality."

Um, by definition, fitting 14 bits to 11 bits is _not_ lossless. The difference may not be easily visible if a properly optimized curve is used, but the operation is definitely not lossless. Lossless means that you are able to get _exactly_ the original samples back. Example from the audio world: MP3 is not lossless, not even at the highest bit-rates, but FLAC is.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 12:31 UTC as 115th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Gary Dean Mercer Clark: Camera got you a date? Thats a new level of pathetic. LOL

Gary Jean Too Many Names: How is that pathetic?

Having a rare science fiction series on VHS in 1997 got me a date, marriage, and a son who is now 13 and the light of my life.

People like you like to put other people down, but we're on to you. You are right, though. You and your ilk aren't pathetic. You are just sad.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2017 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

TORN: We will have to wait and see how this develops over the year. If at the end of 2017 we are still on a constant level then we will have consolidated. The interesting thing will be how the companies will then operate in this much smaller market. Will the pie be big enough for everybody?

Interestingly volumewise we are back to where we were in the 80s. That means only interested amateurs and pros invest into expensive cameras and not every mom and her dog anymore. I always wondered why around 2005-2010 suddenly everybody bought an entry level DSLR - even those people who never owned a SLR to begin with.

TORN: "Interestingly volumewise we are back to where we were in the 80s."

At least Canon isn't, not by a long shot:
http://www.iki.fi/leopold/tmp/CanonEosTotal.png
http://www.iki.fi/leopold/tmp/CanonEosAnnual.png

Link | Posted on May 3, 2017 at 11:32 UTC
In reply to:

Eloise: I've always wondered if when looking at camera sales, if you look not at year on year growth / loss but instead look at what was happening in 80s and 90s that would give you a better guide. Unfortunately figures from back then (those that I've seen quoted anyway) appear to be "sales of all cameras" where as to be of interest there needs to be SLR and compact camera sales separately.

Eloise: I don't know of the industry as a whole, but Canon has made its EOS numbers available for every 10 million cameras and lenses manufactured. From the figures below you'll see that at least for Canon manufacturing is still happening at a brisk rate of 5-10 times of what it was in the 1980's or 1990's, and way higher than just a decade ago:
http://www.iki.fi/leopold/tmp/CanonEosTotal.png
http://www.iki.fi/leopold/tmp/CanonEosAnnual.png

Link | Posted on May 3, 2017 at 11:27 UTC
In reply to:

villagranvicent: Well, besides the Leica Cine lenses they are a bargain indeed:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1233351-REG/leica_lei_smlx_c_set_10_summilux_c_10_lens_set.html

villa & Oly: Also sports. For when the camera zooms seemingly endlessly from a wide angle view of a whole golf course right into the ball flying in the air. And other similar applications.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2017 at 05:09 UTC
In reply to:

haziz: To DPReview Staff: Will you please drop this aperture equivalence nonsense.

Tommi, how can you be so lost? DoF and bokeh are different things. A triangle-shaped aperture changes bokeh, not really DoF. Equivalence makes no claims about bokeh, only DoF.

As for myself, I'm surprised by these announcements. This chanes things. Until now, the shallowest DoF was obtainable with Full Frame systems. But, from this day, there are Medium Format lenses that can do shallower. Nevermind, I don't have the slightest idea of image quality, bokeh, etc... But, for the first time in the age I know of, FF doesn't hold the shallow DoF advantage at every focal length. That is certainly newsworthy.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 19:54 UTC
On article Huawei P10 camera review (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

nw42: what about the P10 Plus with f1.8 lens? That one is made for the ones looking for IQ...
I own it and like the faster lens a lot...
Another thing: The jpeg settings of all current smart phones are garbage! It does'nt make sens to squeze a 12MP image into a jpeg smaller than 5MB. A real photo camera needs more than 2x the size to store all the details to the image.

So raw is the only way to take a good shot...

nw42: It's still not the JPEG encoding that is the problem. The main issue almost invariably is the heavy-handed automatic noise reduction, which has zero to do with JPEG encoding.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 14:41 UTC
On article Huawei P10 camera review (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

nw42: what about the P10 Plus with f1.8 lens? That one is made for the ones looking for IQ...
I own it and like the faster lens a lot...
Another thing: The jpeg settings of all current smart phones are garbage! It does'nt make sens to squeze a 12MP image into a jpeg smaller than 5MB. A real photo camera needs more than 2x the size to store all the details to the image.

So raw is the only way to take a good shot...

nw42: Sorry, but you are simply wrong here.

The limits of mobile phone image quality have very little to do with JPEG compression artifacts, at least at those file sizes. My original Canon 5D took 12.7 MP images typically between 3 and 7 MB for daylight photos with best JPEG quality. I've never encountered artifacts related to JPEG compression in these images. And yes, in my opinion the 5D was a real camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 12:17 UTC
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (464 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zerixos: Damn, what a pain in the ass. I don't mind that they add another 99 bucks to the price of new models if they really be replacing stuff. But those poeple loyal enough to buy a camera at his release or shortly after should have gotten this replace for free. This is a profecional camera, people need it, They can't miss it for a (short) amount of tim. Now they even gonna charge you to send in your camera for something they should have done right away. I don't mind firmware updates, these are most of the time a simple task to upgrade. But this is just wrong, having to "buy" your firmware update.

Zerixos: What you wrote would be true if the camera was sold as "C-Log" capable. But it was not. This is a new feature that Canon never said was included in the original price.

So, if they have to make any non-user operations, even if it is just opening the camera and reprogramming an FPGA, why would they have to give it out for free? Not to speak of if they actually have to add or replace a piece of hardware, like a more efficient cooler to e.g. avoid banding or some other artifacts that might become apparent if using C-Log without the fix?

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 14:32 UTC
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (464 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fujica: shameful considering other manufacturers give you firmware updates for free.

There is no hardware change needed considering the fact that it is just a codec. Canon just wants you to believe... Horrifying to see how Canon keeps treating their customers.

Yeah Fujica, because Canon as a company is a blatant liar and wouldn't mind a class suit. The same lie of Canon is also the reason why new 5D4 cameras will be available in July with the non-existing hardware update included.

Sheesh, sometimes I really wonder if these forums are full of paid trolls, or if people actually are as pathetically clueless and vitriolic as they seem.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 13:18 UTC
On article Canon EOS 77D Review (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: That white wolf should be a standard part of every DPR camera review - very photogenic. :-)

I like cats.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 18:40 UTC
Total: 351, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »