Jack Hogan

Lives in Canada Toronto, Canada
Has a website at www.strollswithmydog.com
Joined on Nov 23, 2009

Comments

Total: 71, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Quality of HQ cam images is actually pretty good

https://www.strollswithmydog.com/open-raspberry-pi-high-quality-camera-raw/

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2020 at 15:27 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Jack Hogan: Smaller sensors don't scan faster Jordan, fewer pixels scan faster.

And Chris, you do realize that if mFT had more pixels (= smaller pixels) in the frame their lenses would not appear as 'sharp', negating a good chunk of the premise, right?

No such thing as a free lunch unfortunately. Keep up the good work!
Jack

:-)

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

Harold66: What a terrible video ! First of all, you talk like a m4/3 F4 lens is an equivalent F8 lens period, like DOF equivalency is the ONLY criteria which matters. Have you heard about exposure? Which means that to get your "equivalency" the 35mm sensor cameras at equal speed needs to bump the iso by two stops losing some of the IQ advantage in the process. But more importantly, you continue to spread this silly idea that thin DOF is always to be sought . Maybe most people agree for portrait stuff but it is far from being the case from every subject. For wildlife, for instance , there are instances when you want the animal surroundings to be in focus in which case the advantage of using m4/3 lenses extend beyond just weight and size by providing a better result at f 5.6 than the 35mm combination would at F11
And this is from reviewers who claim they like the m4/3rds . they could have fooled me
Harold

I like it when folks start a reply with 'No', it usually means something constructive will follow:-) FF does not need to bump ISO, it has the option of doing so. Same with the rest. My thoughts are clearly outlined in the article I linked and

https://www.strollswithmydog.com/equivalence-focal-length-fnumber-diffraction/

and

https://www.strollswithmydog.com/equivalence-sharpness-spatial-resolution/

No need to repeat them here.
Jack

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 10:43 UTC
In reply to:

Harold66: What a terrible video ! First of all, you talk like a m4/3 F4 lens is an equivalent F8 lens period, like DOF equivalency is the ONLY criteria which matters. Have you heard about exposure? Which means that to get your "equivalency" the 35mm sensor cameras at equal speed needs to bump the iso by two stops losing some of the IQ advantage in the process. But more importantly, you continue to spread this silly idea that thin DOF is always to be sought . Maybe most people agree for portrait stuff but it is far from being the case from every subject. For wildlife, for instance , there are instances when you want the animal surroundings to be in focus in which case the advantage of using m4/3 lenses extend beyond just weight and size by providing a better result at f 5.6 than the 35mm combination would at F11
And this is from reviewers who claim they like the m4/3rds . they could have fooled me
Harold

If two systems are set up equivalently (which pointedly assumes the same number of pixels), the IQ of resulting pictures should be, well, equivalent. See for instance here.

www.strollswithmydog.com/equivalence-and-equivalent-image-quality-signal/

Jack

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 07:17 UTC

Smaller sensors don't scan faster Jordan, fewer pixels scan faster.

And Chris, you do realize that if mFT had more pixels (= smaller pixels) in the frame their lenses would not appear as 'sharp', negating a good chunk of the premise, right?

No such thing as a free lunch unfortunately. Keep up the good work!
Jack

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2020 at 07:14 UTC as 75th comment | 3 replies

Always a pleasure to see masters of their trade, well done.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2020 at 12:36 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

Thoughts R Us: For the average person these cameras on the iPhone are getting to be amazing.

Consider that for many people, with out the iPhone they wouldn't take any pictures or own any dedicated camaera. Many other users would maybe own a camera but barely use it; many others might have used a point and shoot less capable.

I also know pro's who use DSLRs in their work, but on their off time, when out with the family, use the iPhone because it's so doggone convenient. They get great shots with it.

It was often talked about how Steve Jobs wanted to reinvent the camera; well, he did...it's just called the iPhone and does a whole bunch of other stuff.

There was Point & Shoot and then there was Photography.

Over time more and more of the P&S segment was absorbed by smartphones (as so many of our other gadgets, remember the mp3 player or the 'GPS'?). Now that a billion people have a P&S always at their disposal they can memorialize every aspect of their life and share it instantly, documenting it with pictures that look like everybody else's, thanks to the similarly powerful built-in computers and software.

There are P&S and then there is Photography. Different strokes for different folks.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2019 at 13:42 UTC
On photo Golden Eagle in snow storm in the Best Photo of the Week challenge (23 comments in total)

Fantastic. Try that with a smartphone ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2019 at 16:41 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Before and after: Shooting Raw with the iPhone X (67 comments in total)

Ugh!

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 17:46 UTC as 22nd comment

We all all love to own shiny precision mechanics accessories, independently of their performance. Jewellery and the Swiss mechanical movement watches come to mind. To each their own.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 09:16 UTC as 46th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Isn't this the type of device that doesn't do dark/blacks/contrast too well? Yet no comment on that.

It'd be good for someone in the know to perform comparative, independent, technical reviews of these very useful devices.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 10:11 UTC
On article Review: Affinity Photo 1.5.2 for desktop (309 comments in total)

"It’s also frustratingly opaque: The software will apply a tone adjustment, but the edits aren’t reflected in the settings anywhere."

That's the way a profile tone curve works: it's applied during initial rendering, before you start playing with the image. Most raw converters do not let you play with it but bury it into the selected camera 'Standard','Landscape','Portrait','Vivid' etc. profiles. It's necessary to squeeze the typically larger DR of the camera into the typically much smaller DR of the output device.

Take a read of this as to why it's important in some cases to be able to adjust it. Make sure to also scroll down to the image of the standard curve applied by Adobe.
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1872272

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 06:35 UTC as 41st comment
In reply to:

embie: The one I use isn't on this list ?
It's PhotoScape, works very good for JPEGs, lots of tools here.

Yeah, not a 'best of' list, just what he has tried. And he hasn't tried much.

Who does a list like this without first trying widely used and respected programs like RawTherapee or IrfanView?

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 11:43 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (298 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jack Hogan: My 2c for those looking to buy a Nikon DX body today, ignoring price or when it came out:

Video/Action = D500/D7500 based on your requirements.
Landscape = D7200.

Sure they would be pleased. But based on objective measurements and what I have seen a landscaper would be pleaseder with the D7200 at base ISO ;-)

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 20:47 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (298 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jack Hogan: My 2c for those looking to buy a Nikon DX body today, ignoring price or when it came out:

Video/Action = D500/D7500 based on your requirements.
Landscape = D7200.

I am sure that it is very good but the D7200 is even gooder at base ISO: more pixels and better DR. Why would a landscaper want to give those up? Different story for action/birding.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 17:51 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: Should I upgrade from my D7200? (298 comments in total)

My 2c for those looking to buy a Nikon DX body today, ignoring price or when it came out:

Video/Action = D500/D7500 based on your requirements.
Landscape = D7200.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 13:20 UTC as 69th comment | 5 replies
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (519 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jack Hogan: This camera is a turnoff for landscape shooters like me. Lower resolution, probably lower DR at base and the old AF. The old AF is no slouch but then I would prefer a D7200 over the obviously-crippled-by-marketing D7500 today even if they both cost the same $1000. Tsk, tsk Nikon, two years later and this is all you can come up with at a critical juncture in the industry?

No argument from me Russ, many cameras today are outstanding for landscapes, including some with older technology like the D7200, which is apparently better than the new offering in a number of ways at base. If I did not know when the two were released or their price I would pick the D7200 today. To landscapers like me the D500 is not as good as its predecessor. Excellent news for who owns a D7200, it will keep its value longer. (Nice images there at flickr btw).

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 15:10 UTC
On article Nikon D7500: What you need to know (519 comments in total)

This camera is a turnoff for landscape shooters like me. Lower resolution, probably lower DR at base and the old AF. The old AF is no slouch but then I would prefer a D7200 over the obviously-crippled-by-marketing D7500 today even if they both cost the same $1000. Tsk, tsk Nikon, two years later and this is all you can come up with at a critical juncture in the industry?

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 07:16 UTC as 120th comment | 3 replies
On article Nikon announces midrange D7500 DSLR (394 comments in total)

Big strategic mistake at an industry turning point. Goodbye landscapers and upgraders.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2017 at 07:01 UTC as 94th comment | 1 reply

Good one Rishi.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 12:27 UTC as 438th comment
Total: 71, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »