fireplace33

fireplace33

Lives in Austria Upper Austria, Austria
Joined on Nov 28, 2007

Comments

Total: 214, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: Sheesh, some people are easily pleased.

it delivered it's one trick on the first 10 seconds. And it was far too quick. There's no ability to take it in and savour which might have saved it for me.

Lack of artistry, IMO. Either the guy is very young or he's not got good counsel. And the music?!?!?! His girl friend giving him advice here? It's no good asking people who love you. They'll be bursting with pride for you over any old cr*p.

In any case, if it made it to the front of dpreview, then evidently I haven't got the popular touch that makes the mediocre so successful and money-making.

Well, I guess I'm one of the easily pleased :-)

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 12:01 UTC

Beautiful shot!
Love that low sun.
My humble attempt at something similar in Scotland is over on the landscape forum.
www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4224416

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 22:33 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

fireplace33: This monster looks good but is1.2kg.
Can anyone estimate what the, not yet released, 50-200 2.8-4 lens would/could weigh?

So I guess we just have to wait and see what they decide to do with the new 50-200
Seems like F2.8-4 is fixed already but they still have options to play with. I'm hoping for excellent IQ (on a par with the 35-100 which I already have) and small size and weight. Not so bothered, in this case, about close focussing. We'll see, time will tell

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 17:16 UTC
In reply to:

fireplace33: This monster looks good but is1.2kg.
Can anyone estimate what the, not yet released, 50-200 2.8-4 lens would/could weigh?

The 35-100 is a constant 2.8 and weighs in at only 375g. Does the physics for change up to 50-200 2.
8-4 really need that much weight increase?
The 40-150 2.8 is 880g without the tc :-(

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 16:32 UTC

This monster looks good but is1.2kg.
Can anyone estimate what the, not yet released, 50-200 2.8-4 lens would/could weigh?

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 13:07 UTC as 9th comment | 4 replies
On photo Sunrise at the old pier in the Record album cover challenge (6 comments in total)

Makes you want to buy the album :-)
I wonder what music you'd put inside ?

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 18:09 UTC as 1st comment
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)

ACDSee ultimate !
Thank goodness I've been using ACDSee for years.
Very fast , good database features, excellent raw developer, multitude of easy to use editing tools including layers.
Fulfills all my needs. Results can be seen on my website.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 05:40 UTC as 415th comment | 1 reply

The previous gen 7 is not completely compatible with windows 7 !
The IT department in the company whete I work forbids the gen 7chip until windows 10 can be used. But that is delayed because of security and spyware type issues with win 10 :-(
So is this new gen 8 chip completly compatible with win 7 ?

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2017 at 07:39 UTC as 17th comment | 1 reply

Thanks for the inspiration :-)
Nice article.
Had some fun after reading this when I tried this myself and posted the results here if anyone wants to see.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4204129

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 17:08 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

fireplace33: Thought provoking article.
One thing I think some commenters seem to overlook is that at higher light intensities the noise is actually larger!
There isn’t a constant size of noise at all intensity levels, as I think some commenters are assuming.
Now we all know, after Richard’s many articles, that shot noise is the dominant noise source in an image (Poisson distribution), and the Standard deviation of that Shot noise coming from a light source is like sqrt(average number of photons arriving)
So, at higher light intensity levels, although the Signal to noise RATIO is much better, the ABSOLUTE number of digitised levels of noise is also GREATER vs. lower light levels
So at higher levels, a finer resolution of levels (more bit depth) will record the shot noise better, as Richard stated

e.g.
10 photons (S/N ratio is bad), something like +/-3 photons shot noise
10000 photons (S/N ration is much better) but something like +/-100 photons are shot noise
True or false? :-)

@ Arun H
Agree about read noise becoming more important at low levels

> "bottom line"
yes, for those reasons, for some time now I've been shooting with the "ETTR at lowest possible ISO" method to get the biggest signal and largest DR with lowest noise onto the sensor.
In PP I'll adjust and reduce the levels as necessary.

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

fireplace33: Thought provoking article.
One thing I think some commenters seem to overlook is that at higher light intensities the noise is actually larger!
There isn’t a constant size of noise at all intensity levels, as I think some commenters are assuming.
Now we all know, after Richard’s many articles, that shot noise is the dominant noise source in an image (Poisson distribution), and the Standard deviation of that Shot noise coming from a light source is like sqrt(average number of photons arriving)
So, at higher light intensity levels, although the Signal to noise RATIO is much better, the ABSOLUTE number of digitised levels of noise is also GREATER vs. lower light levels
So at higher levels, a finer resolution of levels (more bit depth) will record the shot noise better, as Richard stated

e.g.
10 photons (S/N ratio is bad), something like +/-3 photons shot noise
10000 photons (S/N ration is much better) but something like +/-100 photons are shot noise
True or false? :-)

Agree !
.. a better S/N RATIO is good. And at high light levels it doesn't help much to differerentiate between 2 output values that are very close to each other since the absolute value of the noise is much bigger than these 2 adjacent bit values (at high light levels)

At the lower light levels you'll want those values to be close together to differentiate between them and get more DR but as we all know the noise starts to show it's ugly head when the light goes down. (because the S/N ratio is smaller at lower light levels)

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2017 at 13:02 UTC

Thought provoking article.
One thing I think some commenters seem to overlook is that at higher light intensities the noise is actually larger!
There isn’t a constant size of noise at all intensity levels, as I think some commenters are assuming.
Now we all know, after Richard’s many articles, that shot noise is the dominant noise source in an image (Poisson distribution), and the Standard deviation of that Shot noise coming from a light source is like sqrt(average number of photons arriving)
So, at higher light intensity levels, although the Signal to noise RATIO is much better, the ABSOLUTE number of digitised levels of noise is also GREATER vs. lower light levels
So at higher levels, a finer resolution of levels (more bit depth) will record the shot noise better, as Richard stated

e.g.
10 photons (S/N ratio is bad), something like +/-3 photons shot noise
10000 photons (S/N ration is much better) but something like +/-100 photons are shot noise
True or false? :-)

Link | Posted on Sep 3, 2017 at 09:16 UTC as 31st comment | 4 replies

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4192047
This is a link to a post on the landscape forum where I just posted some waterfall shots from this weekend with similar equipment.
Oly Omd em5ii + 12-40 f2.8.
A great lens. And a nice lightweight system compared to my heavier Nikon gear.
The stabiliser on the oly is truely amazing! Surprisingly it allows for better handheld shots whem the light levels go down, despite the smaller sensor !

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:44 UTC as 21st comment
On article Caltech research team develops lensless camera (61 comments in total)

Some time ago, I used to work as an ultrasound physicist developing machines for medical diagnostic imaging.
This idea reminds me of the phased arrays used in the ultrasound world to modify the focus of the ultrasound probe in both transmission and receive modes.
Very effective and superb ultrasound images produced, despite of course their own special set of limitations and artefacts.
Many here have probably even seen the very first photo of their children with this phased array technique!
… and I thought working at the speed of sound was difficult. Light is a whole new ball game 😉

Link | Posted on Jun 25, 2017 at 13:40 UTC as 4th comment
On article Surreal photo shows London high-rise fire from the air (16 comments in total)
In reply to:

steelhead3: Don't English buildings have sprinkler systems or was this neglected due to it being housing for the poor?

A news report mentioned that while most high rise buildings in the USA use "active" systems like sprinklers, British buildings more often use (less expensive) "passive" systems to contain a fire to a specific area and stop a fire from spreading.
--> Something that clearly did not work at all in this particular case!

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 08:23 UTC
On article Before and after photos show Big Sur landslide (21 comments in total)

Very interesting article.
Amazing landslide photo. Well presented!

Link | Posted on May 28, 2017 at 15:45 UTC as 2nd comment
On photo tempête de neige in the Storms challenge (1 comment in total)

Nice shot !
I like the way the snow flakes make such bright streaks here.
Must have been quite windy!

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2017 at 22:29 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Fresh and juicy in the fruit challenge (2 comments in total)

Great, would make a nice bright and bold series.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 21:07 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Camera5: Guys, in future, please use logarithmic scales and make the use of colour more contrasty on your charts.

This cellphone comparison graph is making a valid point and making it very visually!!

Well done DPR!
I’m glad this particular chart was designed by DPR and not by Camera5 :-)
If it was presented in the more usual scientific , mathematical, “data design” way it would not provoke much attention at all.
... People would look at a “log plot” of this same info and forget it within seconds.
Presented in this long, long, long format, it stays in people's minds for much longer and shows just how big the cell phone market is.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 21:10 UTC
In reply to:

shademaster: you guys should look up "logarithm" ;)

@photomedium
yes, indeed ;-) like going to jail for 3 years for making a typo, then falling into a coma, & waking up three years later and walking free :-)

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 20:48 UTC
Total: 214, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »