UlrichSchiegg

Joined on Mar 16, 2013

Comments

Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Updated: Pentax K-3 Mark III sample gallery (208 comments in total)

Thank You.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2021 at 13:54 UTC as 39th comment
In reply to:

Halftrack: I'll echo others who say that the vibration test doesn't seem relevant. When was the last time you used a tripod on a vibrating surface? Wind seems like the much bigger issue. Maybe a large fan next time?

Maybe you misunderstood. I did not see anybody questioning that vibration is relevant. What was questioned is whether the type of test that was done by dpreview is relevant for practical use cases.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2021 at 19:56 UTC

Chris, Jordan regarding the vibration test, a comment from an engineer.

Weight gives stability and has little influence on damping (changes the frequency a bit). A good tripod needs stability and damping. The way load is applied, the way excitation is applied matters with respect to the response (amplitude, frequency). You may have excited eigenmodes with your shaker not really relavent in practical tripod application and may have missed excitation relevant. I guess you are aware that you are testing the system tripod plus ballhead? If you want to test the tripod, use the same ballhead.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2021 at 23:37 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply

The first question before to buy a camera is, want do you want to achieve with it? Don't look into a "catalogue", clarify for yourself, what you want to do. Do you want to get into photography, for what reason?

Before you buy, most sites today speak about better, the best, class leading, ... Today's camera market is shifting from DSLR technology to DSLM technology.
There are excellent used cameras on the market, hardly used because a lot of people drive for the better the best gear around and forget the purpose of the device.

Check the used market, get an excellent used camera. Cameras often loose more than 50% of value in less than 2ys on the used market. One year later ask yourself: did you use the camera to the extent you wanted to use it. If you answer the question with yes, is the camera you have limiting your ability, if also this question you answer with yes. Then take a look to buy a new camera, which can still be a used camera then.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 13:55 UTC as 50th comment

Nice gallery. Thank You.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2021 at 13:24 UTC as 27th comment
On article Why have cameras and lenses become so expensive? (673 comments in total)
In reply to:

unhappymeal: Richard, these analyses always miss the other side of the equation: wages. Real wages have been stagnant (or declining) since the late-1970's and the share of corporate profits gone to workers hasn't recovered since the Great Recession. Income inequality in North America is at a level not seen since the Gilded Age with Boomers holding the vast majority of gains in the economic recovery. Household savings are at an all time low and household debt is at a record high. At the same time, the ticket price of tuition has increased 17-fold since the 1970's. Health insurance costs have exploded in the US, as has the cost of housing. Yes, the cost of camera equipment is fairly stable in real terms, but that doesn't matter if people do not have the disposable income to buy it.

Classical philosophical discussion from: "Everyone is the architect of his own fortune" you easily get to "Blaming of the victim".

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2021 at 12:57 UTC
On article Pentax K-3 Mark III added to studio test scene (385 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Paris: Shutter shock is a resonance phenomenon, so what occurs with a specific body+lens+tripod combination may disappear if one changes any of those elements. Did you try with another tripod?

There is more to it, than just the body, lens and tripod. The SR for example. It's a system question. The shutter is not designed by Pentax and all high resolution cameras have weak spots in the stability diagram. For some the moon phase name appears to be Pentax.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2021 at 09:39 UTC
On article Pentax K-3 Mark III added to studio test scene (385 comments in total)

You are still using the old DA 55mm lens. Why not the DFA* 50mm lens? See: https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/9236543269/why-are-modern-50mm-lenses-so-damned-complicated?

Link | Posted on May 31, 2021 at 13:14 UTC as 105th comment | 4 replies
On article Why have cameras and lenses become so expensive? (673 comments in total)

Prices are all about perception. If the data is sorted a bit differently, you come to different conclusion. It is a matter of what can be discussed today. A Canon 5D IV with the trio of the EF mount 2.8 lenses compared to a Canon R5 with the trio of the R mount 2.8 lenses. Today. What is missed out, if not the latest and greatest equipment is used? Does it need to be latest and greatest? The only steady constant is, that if you want latest and greatest a premium price is requested, in whatever year you did or will buy the equipment. And this includes the amazon fee. The higher the price, the higher the fee.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2021 at 15:23 UTC as 222nd comment
On article DPReview TV: Pentax K-3 Mark III review (598 comments in total)
In reply to:

UlrichSchiegg: The modified raw discussion is a purist discussion. The train has long left the station, and there is no way back. A review will need to assess the result and how does it compare to competition. Pure raw never really existed.

From another thread: RCicala: "I also think all of that may become a bit of a moot point as in-camera computer modification of the actual image becomes more-and-more powerful. There is already some of that going on. For example, my tests of only the lens give some quite different results from even unmodified raw files from lens-on-camera images for things like distortion and vignetting because those (and I suspect in some cases sharpness) are already modified as the raw file is written." https://www.dpreview.com/news/9236543269/why-are-modern-50mm-lenses-so-damned-complicated?comment=2516147815

Anybody can do the testing for himself. Most modern sensors are ISO invariant. Camera on a trippod, take the image at the proper exposure (high ISO, ...). Take a second image at ISO 100, when the accelerator is off. Push the scond image in raw to the high ISO. Compare the 2 images, make your own conclusion.

Determine your own needs, with your own camera, your own lenses.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2021 at 21:09 UTC
On article Pentax K-3 Mark III sample gallery (178 comments in total)

Nice gallery and nice variety of lenses used. Thank you.

I hope for the studio tests you could get a DFA* 50mm.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2021 at 15:30 UTC as 44th comment
On article DPReview TV: Pentax K-3 Mark III review (598 comments in total)
In reply to:

UlrichSchiegg: The modified raw discussion is a purist discussion. The train has long left the station, and there is no way back. A review will need to assess the result and how does it compare to competition. Pure raw never really existed.

From another thread: RCicala: "I also think all of that may become a bit of a moot point as in-camera computer modification of the actual image becomes more-and-more powerful. There is already some of that going on. For example, my tests of only the lens give some quite different results from even unmodified raw files from lens-on-camera images for things like distortion and vignetting because those (and I suspect in some cases sharpness) are already modified as the raw file is written." https://www.dpreview.com/news/9236543269/why-are-modern-50mm-lenses-so-damned-complicated?comment=2516147815

The data doesn't show it.

What is visible is, that the 77mm FA is not on par with more modern lenses of the other original manufacturers. But maybe for the K-3 iii dpreview will use a DFA* ?

If not, the center image part has sufficient detail. For a photographer the difference between sensor tech gets marginal.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2021 at 06:14 UTC
On article Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated? (923 comments in total)
In reply to:

UlrichSchiegg: Interesting text. On the older lenses photographers have been saying for years: 50mm F1.7 maybe better for resolution and sharpness than a 50mm F1.2 or F1.4 when stepped down.

Is that conclusion extendable to most recent 50mm glass, e.g. also for the Tokina Opera 50mm F1.4?

What I would appreciate, if graphs axis, legend, etc. and appreciations are explained or if this is a standard, a link provided.

Am I the only one that doesn't know all the abbrevs by mind?

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009/06/have-you-seen-my-acutance/

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 16:04 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Pentax K-3 Mark III review (598 comments in total)

The modified raw discussion is a purist discussion. The train has long left the station, and there is no way back. A review will need to assess the result and how does it compare to competition. Pure raw never really existed.

From another thread: RCicala: "I also think all of that may become a bit of a moot point as in-camera computer modification of the actual image becomes more-and-more powerful. There is already some of that going on. For example, my tests of only the lens give some quite different results from even unmodified raw files from lens-on-camera images for things like distortion and vignetting because those (and I suspect in some cases sharpness) are already modified as the raw file is written." https://www.dpreview.com/news/9236543269/why-are-modern-50mm-lenses-so-damned-complicated?comment=2516147815

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 15:38 UTC as 27th comment | 12 replies
On article Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated? (923 comments in total)
In reply to:

david_sladek: Shame the Pentax D-FA* 50 / 1.4 is not included here. It is one of the best and right on topic.

You could take a Tokina Opera one Nikon F or Canon EF mount, is close enough.

https://tokinalens.com/product/opera_50mm_f1_4_ff/

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 13:41 UTC
On article Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated? (923 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ze De Boni: I hope this is just Part #1 of a long series. And I wish that this subject blends with the FIELD CURVATURE theme, because I think there was more to add to your series which relates exactly with INTERNAL FOCUS and FLOATING ELEMENTS. Sorry if I am anticipating the sequence to this article, but these two optical concepts are among the main reasons for the increased number of elements.
I am still waiting for some tests and demonstration of field curvature correction in the full focusing scale by lenses with floating elements.

"RCicala: Actually, I was thinking I might redo a piece or two on the early history of lens design. Things were way more fun back then when it was people and not corporations. The story of Petzval and Voigtlander is EPIC!!"

I would appreciate that. The Petzval lens was a huge step in lens design. For portaits, it allowed going from >15min (before 1840) to <1min (after 1840) exposure time. Everybody had a Petzval lens from Voigtländer then.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 09:55 UTC
On article Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated? (923 comments in total)

Interesting text. On the older lenses photographers have been saying for years: 50mm F1.7 maybe better for resolution and sharpness than a 50mm F1.2 or F1.4 when stepped down.

Is that conclusion extendable to most recent 50mm glass, e.g. also for the Tokina Opera 50mm F1.4?

What I would appreciate, if graphs axis, legend, etc. and appreciations are explained or if this is a standard, a link provided.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2021 at 09:40 UTC as 107th comment | 1 reply
On article DPReview TV: Pentax K-3 Mark III review (598 comments in total)

Any idea when the camera will be available in the studio comparison tool?

Link | Posted on May 8, 2021 at 21:01 UTC as 75th comment
In reply to:

PocketPixels: Always happy to get new Pentax options, but most modern Pentax cameras have shift built in. Using sensor-based shift (or "Composition Adjustment" in Pentax menus) lets me use ANY of my autofocus lenses as shift lenses.

Granted, the +/- 11mm of shift this Venus Laowa offers is surely more shift than my sensor can shift up and down.

Thank you

Link | Posted on May 7, 2021 at 23:09 UTC
In reply to:

PocketPixels: Always happy to get new Pentax options, but most modern Pentax cameras have shift built in. Using sensor-based shift (or "Composition Adjustment" in Pentax menus) lets me use ANY of my autofocus lenses as shift lenses.

Granted, the +/- 11mm of shift this Venus Laowa offers is surely more shift than my sensor can shift up and down.

Thank you

Link | Posted on May 7, 2021 at 13:18 UTC
Total: 82, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »