Geomaticsman

Lives in Canada Ontario, Canada
Joined on Dec 18, 2006

Comments

Total: 11, showing: 1 – 11
On article DPReview TV: ProRes Raw on the Nikon Z6 (196 comments in total)

Lots of options. My take is that if you want the absolute sharpest videos, stick with 8-bit internal but nail the exposure and/or compress the dynamic scene. If you want a little more latitude to post and are willing to sacrifice a bit of sharpness from higher noise, go with external 10-bit w/N-Log. If you want the convenience to post process raw but don't care so much about sharpness (think cinematic) then go with Prores Raw. Horses for courses.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 22:38 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
On article DPReview TV: ProRes Raw on the Nikon Z6 (196 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: Thanks for an excellent video.

Regarding line skipping - in case anyone wonders:

On 2020, Jan 11, I made a test (in collaboration with photographer Marc Jungbluth) and blog post about the topic where I actually found out and confirmed that Z6 RAW uses pixel skipping (probably line plus row skipping).

-> http://blog.falklumo.com/2020/01/the-conundrum-of-nikon-z6-prores-raw.html

On Jan 13, it actually made it to the EOSHD home page ;)

@Chris Niccolls
@Jordan Drake
Do you refer to this work when making the
"*we can confirm that line skipping is used"
footnote in the video @2:45? Or is there other work I'd like to be aware about?

Nikon needs to give the Z6 6k ProRes RAW as there is no *technical* reason not to.

Falk Lumo

-

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2020 at 22:37 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Best and worst of 2018 (468 comments in total)
In reply to:

pro photo 2011: Chris and Jordan,

I really don't like that you used a whiteboard to write out the candidates of best and worst of the year, it was not very clear to read. Handwriting is time-consuming and the markers are not fully inked, resulting in faint texts.

Second, it is really not necessary that the rest of the DPR staff are at this event. It is the discussion of the candidates that are important.

I wish that you copy more of the format that you guys did back at TCSTV. Thanks.

LOL these aren’t exactly the Oscars.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2018 at 15:35 UTC
On article Gear of the Year 2018 - Barney's choice: Nikon Z7 (358 comments in total)

My D850 isn’t going anywhere yet (I still need its resolution and stellar AF capability) but shooting my Z7 is much more fun. The D850 seems clunky in comparison.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2018 at 15:10 UTC as 75th comment
In reply to:

pentaust: - Weight and size advantage of mirrorless: true benefit when not carrying a tripod and using only one slow lens of the camera, otherwise the weight advantage fades off.

- IBIS is presented a benefit. How can this be given that the former Canon and Nikon argument was that optical stabilization was better than in body sensor stabilization. If IBIS was a benefit over optical stabilization, then Pentax have had provided this benefit for about 20+ years because all Pentax bodies featured up to 4.5 stops of in body sensor stabilization, in DSLR bodies that were all 30% smaller than Canon and Nikon counterparts.

- WYSIWYG agrument of EVF is only true when shooting JPEGs. When post-processing RAW images EVF has no advantage over OVF.

I have the impression that new models tend to had video features more developed than older models while they are not any better than DSLR for still photography.

@pentaust. Yes, of course. My point was only that in the Nikon world, the new f4S lenses are good enough to do quality landscape work in comparison the aging f4G’s which forced me to use f2.8G zooms. So in my case moving from a heavy f2.8 zoom to a slower, but smaller and lighter f4 zoom with no loss in IQ (along with a smaller/lighter mirrorless body that is actually better for landscapes) makes it not only a viable solution, but has a host of other benefits as well (cost etc.).

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2018 at 18:40 UTC
In reply to:

pentaust: - Weight and size advantage of mirrorless: true benefit when not carrying a tripod and using only one slow lens of the camera, otherwise the weight advantage fades off.

- IBIS is presented a benefit. How can this be given that the former Canon and Nikon argument was that optical stabilization was better than in body sensor stabilization. If IBIS was a benefit over optical stabilization, then Pentax have had provided this benefit for about 20+ years because all Pentax bodies featured up to 4.5 stops of in body sensor stabilization, in DSLR bodies that were all 30% smaller than Canon and Nikon counterparts.

- WYSIWYG agrument of EVF is only true when shooting JPEGs. When post-processing RAW images EVF has no advantage over OVF.

I have the impression that new models tend to had video features more developed than older models while they are not any better than DSLR for still photography.

The size and weight advantage can be huge. In order to get acceptable quality landscape shots with my D850 I relied on Nikon's f2.8 zooms (I'm not a prime guy), Series 3 tripod and BH-55 head. With the Z7 I can get essentially the same IQ from the small/light 24-70/4S and a traveler tripod/head with almost half the volume and weight of the DSLR kit...no kidding.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2018 at 15:38 UTC
On article Shooting with Nikon's new 500mm F5.6E PF in Kamchatka (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

janist74: Ok, the bear photo maybe shows, that one lens is a bit sharper than the other, but it also shows, how pointless is to carry an f4 vs f5.6 lens. The background is virtually identical for a simple mortal humanoid. True, you get more light for focusing, but with the today cameras this does not seem to be a real reason...

BIF — birds of all types and sizes...even Ospreys require 1/5000 when diving (i.e. ensuring the eye is sharp at the pixel level). I shoot a D850 and am often cropping heavily and can easily see any softness on my 5K monitor...anything less than 1/5000 often comes out soft...though it does depend on the circumstances somewhat.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2018 at 12:44 UTC
On article Shooting with Nikon's new 500mm F5.6E PF in Kamchatka (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

janist74: Ok, the bear photo maybe shows, that one lens is a bit sharper than the other, but it also shows, how pointless is to carry an f4 vs f5.6 lens. The background is virtually identical for a simple mortal humanoid. True, you get more light for focusing, but with the today cameras this does not seem to be a real reason...

I’ll lay odds there’s no way the 500PF is visibly sharper than the 500E. This “test” is useless in that regard.

And to me, f4 is a huge benefit....I need 1/5000 to stop most action on my D850, and the light is just not good enough around here to do that most of the time when shooting at f5.6.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2018 at 12:18 UTC
On article Nikon 1 V3 Review (653 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: This is a great camera for someone who doesn't know what a great camera is.

My apologies for not being clear: I was talking in terms of IQ. FPS and all the other hyped up metrics are useless if the IQ isn't up to snuff, which it isn't.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 21:40 UTC
On article Nikon 1 V3 Review (653 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: This is a great camera for someone who doesn't know what a great camera is.

Exactly. It's hard to understand why Nikon would develop a premium priced system around a series (1) of cameras with such a poor performing sensor. Heck, any of Nikon's entry-level DSLRs will run rings around this puppy.

Link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 20:36 UTC
On article Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary (594 comments in total)

Looks like a nice, full-featured (if pricey) package...much better thought out than the V1 and V2. But unless Nikon has found a way to break the laws of physics, the tiny sensor/photosites will still be the achilles heal of the system...which renders it useless to me.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 12:54 UTC as 157th comment
Total: 11, showing: 1 – 11