falconeyes

falconeyes

Lives in Germany Germany
Has a website at falklumo.blogspot.com
Joined on Apr 28, 2008

Comments

Total: 735, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Hands-on with Hasselblad X1D (810 comments in total)

Nice body. But the MF problem of lack of fast or affordable lenses persists, i.e., this will remain a niche product although I applaud them to be first for a possible new trend.

2695$ for a 70mm/2.5 equivalent when a very good 85mm/1.8 equivalent (for full frame) is 500$? In theory, MF lenses (with the same equivalent properties) should be cheaper (they are easier to make) but so far, nobody delivers on this technical promise.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 08:34 UTC as 120th comment | 7 replies
On article Medium-format mirrorless: Hasselblad unveils X1D (1190 comments in total)
In reply to:

StevenE: The sensor is only 22% wider than full frame.
For perspective, full frame is 62% wider than APS-C, and more than 100% as wider than MFT sensors.

By convention, the size of a thing is a linear dimension, not a square one. E.g., by talking about the size of a human, we mean height, not skin surface area. For monitors, we mean the screen diagonal. Etc.pp.

For camera sensors, this became the image circle diameter.

44x33mm has a +27% larger image circle than 24x36mm (aka 0.79x crop).

It would be interesting to learn if the XCD mount and lenses are designed for the small 44x33mm format (like Leica S) or the full MF format (like Hassy H or Pentax 645Z).

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2016 at 07:59 UTC

I've seen CorelDRAW and Corel PhotoPaint fade away while their changing shareholders kept trying maximize profit w/o real improevements to the core product.

With competition from Affinity and alike, I no longer think this is impossible with PS. However, every so tiny change is kept being reported by the press. So, I am not sure ...

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2016 at 13:28 UTC as 45th comment
In reply to:

blurredvision: Hey look! Another post about an Adobe update where people complain about the subscription in the comments! I'm still waiting for all the detractors to switch to another product like they promised us they would 3 years ago...

Why switch to another product? LR6 is not subscription (rented software), it is purchased. People complain about part of the upgrades not shipped to owners of a product which is still current. But as the upgrades are so minor, I don't personally care. And they will all be in LR8 ...

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 12:58 UTC
On article Waterfails: We test Pentax K-1's Pixel Shift (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: Never used ACR. I don't care about ACR. I'd like to add - they use f16 for tests...To use f16 is useless. The resolution is rather low and the diffraction already started with 36 MP FF camera at such aperture.

@ogl, to call it useless is a bit harsh.
Actually, up to F13, diffraction losses are recoverable (via smart sharpening) at the 36MP pixel level. Especially at the low noise levels provided by four ISO 100 frames.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 14:21 UTC
On article Waterfails: We test Pentax K-1's Pixel Shift (225 comments in total)

I do still take offense that DPR misses to test against the most obvious reference:

A burst of 4 images shot in the conventional way, stacked using software like PhotoAcute, preferably in superresolution mode and downscaled back to the original resolution.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 11:13 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

falconeyes: The "Intelligent Zoom" feature could make this a useful tool.

However, I don't buy their claim that their algorithm is AI. The threshold for any algorithm to classify AI is rather high and I doubt they come even close. IMHO, it is a classical image processing app (like optical character recognition which once was considered artificial intelligence -- but not anymore).

@ProfHankD, I don't want to start a debate about what is AI. To some degree, it is a question of definition. Personally, I don't consider pre-trained neural nets AI.

As for your comment about RAW, you are right of course. Cropping, altering color balances etc. will all throw their "weights" all over the place for what remains, essentially, the same image. Which highlights the trouble of their approach (or any approach within the current state of the art).

The most useful application currently IMHO would be a sorting wrt sharpness after face and eye detection. More modest claim but more useful result.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 10:08 UTC

The "Intelligent Zoom" feature could make this a useful tool.

However, I don't buy their claim that their algorithm is AI. The threshold for any algorithm to classify AI is rather high and I doubt they come even close. IMHO, it is a classical image processing app (like optical character recognition which once was considered artificial intelligence -- but not anymore).

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 15:51 UTC as 10th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

falconeyes: Is this the level of innovation Adobe thinks is acceptable to CC users?

It saves to click 4 corners with the mask tool and then use content-aware fill which was inroduced with CS5, I believe. Actually, it just makes a script a built-in feature.

Where is the real innovation? A new tool like content-aware fill as such?

The last innovative feature brought to PS was content-aware fill introduced in CS5. It is based on the PatchMatch algorithm (2009), with contributions from Princeton University, University of Washington and Adobe. 3 of 4 authors are now with Adobe.

I am sure there is enough imaging research going on. It is just Adobe isn't investing anymore in the core strengths of its product. Rather, they add bells and whistles like upload to the cloud etc.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: Is this the level of innovation Adobe thinks is acceptable to CC users?

It saves to click 4 corners with the mask tool and then use content-aware fill which was inroduced with CS5, I believe. Actually, it just makes a script a built-in feature.

Where is the real innovation? A new tool like content-aware fill as such?

I wouldn't. But I don't see noteworthy innovations brought to PS since a couple of releases now. Instead, I see "new features" which would normally go as actions.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 23:18 UTC
On article Lens shootout: Sony RX10 III destroys the competition (487 comments in total)
In reply to:

Grig: I don't see destruction compared to FZ1000... Sorry... May be good idea to change it to "outperforms" or something like it if you really think so, but not destroys for sure... But to me FZ Leica lens is sharper and less CA... Especially on the sides at F8 at 400mm

I agree the "destroys" headline should remain reserved for findings which deserve such wording.

In this particular case, I would have appreciated to read "outperforms the competition".

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:54 UTC
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: I have not purchased a HDD in years and all of my PCs and Macs have SSDs.

Most photographers do still rely on RAID5 HDD arrays for their >10TB archives.
SSD arrays not only are more expensive, they do also fail in a less predictive way.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:36 UTC

Is this the level of innovation Adobe thinks is acceptable to CC users?

It saves to click 4 corners with the mask tool and then use content-aware fill which was inroduced with CS5, I believe. Actually, it just makes a script a built-in feature.

Where is the real innovation? A new tool like content-aware fill as such?

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:28 UTC as 37th comment | 6 replies

Not a bad idea for a plugin or filter program.

However, I'll look forward to more deep testing of its mask tool vs. e.g., Topaz ReMask which would be my reference for the tree vs. sky example.

The example video with the couple vs. water created a terrible mask though.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2016 at 10:35 UTC as 49th comment
On article SmugMug Films: Passport to Morocco (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sean65: The use of a tripod in bright light and narrow streets is more than a little odd.

I know the places photographed in this film. Using a tripod (plus long coat in hotr weather btw) sets you apart from the crowd which is necessary to take good pictures. If you look closely, he tends to put down his tripod to then shot freehand with his Sony ;)

Which all makes sense if you know how tourists (when they stop walking) in, e.g., Fez, are approached all the time otherwise ...

Link | Posted on May 15, 2016 at 08:57 UTC
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (182 comments in total)
In reply to:

saeba77: image the same quality sensor and similar AF in a mirrorless body as the A6xxx.
Damn if only Nikon making that not cannibalize his own market:(

@Zerixos,
agree with your arguments. Except that an EFCS (electronic first curtain shutter) removes the requirement to close shutter in LV first, without the mentioned negative impacts. The only constraint is that EFCS is hard to make for 1/2000s or shorter.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 11:45 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: When Lytro launched their first (innovative but impractical) camera, I said Canon or Adobe should buy them. Neither did, and being they had so much venture finding ($200m if I recall) I knew they would survive to eventually get their business model right, and they have, as their remarkable machine announced at NAB shows. Canon make very good (high end) movie cameras, but have Sony and Panasonic on their tail, but most importantly of all, Canon's greatest technology has always been their AF. So it would have made sense for them to invest in a technology that makes focusing obsolete in specific use cases - namely Lytros.

Instead, they launched the unversatile unimaginative M series so Panasonic and Oly ate them for lunch.

I have never owned a Canon camera (love their scanners and printers!), but know how good their gear can be from other users and results, but they cannot rest on their past reputation.

Buy Lytro Canon & launch a revolutionary multi-focus APSC mirrorless.

@MrTaikitso: if you look closely, what Lytro does is not disruptive.

More precisely:
Both Lytro (M=6) and Canon (M=1.4) use a Multipixel sensor with M^2 sensels per microlens. They are closer than you think and just use a technology originally introduced by Fuji (phase sensels). Multipixel sensors patents cannot be defended (obvious technology) and soon, all sensors will be of Multipixel type (cf. Sony and Samsung).

Personally, I think M=2 (quad pixel) is the sweet spot.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 14:37 UTC

This news is welcome.
Esp. in BIF this camera seems to be made for, backlit subjects are very frequent and the ability to push shadows is an important asset for the D500.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 11:20 UTC as 38th comment
In reply to:

Donald B: I think you need to compare it to the k3ii at iso 6400 raw .

Made my day.
Logic errors in arguments this large are rare :)

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 11:15 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: Thanks for the additional info.
As a matter of fact, it means the Lytro Cinema is an example of the "Multi-Pixel AF Sensor" with 21 MP and Multi=6x6.
The Canon Dual-Pixel AF Sensor is another example with Multi=2x1.
For some time now, I advocate a broader adoption of Multi-Pixel AF Sensors, specifically Quad-Pixel with Multi=2x2.
OTOH, it is a significant step-back from the original idea of a real Light-Field or plenoptical camera which requires a much higher sub-ray resolution being captured. But this stepped-back specification yields a much more interesting camera overall, still increasing the available depth of field by a factor six.

Just adding to it...
We do not know yet the 35mm-equivalent properties of this camera. But as it looks massive, even F-Stop numbers of 6*N could imply shallow-enough depth-of-field to make this camera operate more like a conventional camera which requires constant focus operation.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2016 at 08:26 UTC
Total: 735, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »