huyzer

huyzer

Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a Photographer
Joined on Jun 15, 2005
About me:

!! Excited to be buy a Sony a7S II soon! I can't wait! Only 9 days more, maybe! Ack! :D haha! (Oct. 7, 2015; weds.)
Update: Oh my GAHHH! I just got the a7S II about 6 hours ago, at around 4:30 p.m., after work! Ahhhh!!! I'm SOOO excited for this low light monster! It is smaller, and kind of cramping my hands up compared to the D800, which fits my hands nicely. But I'll be making the best of it. "Sacrifices..." :D (Oct. 19, 2015; mon.)

I now am waiting for my first full-frame DSLR! It is the Nikon D800! I can't wait to play with/use it! :) (Sept. 12, 2013; thurs.)
Update: It arrived at 7:08 p.m. on Friday the 13th. :D 2013. Oh boy, two 13s. Does this bode well for me? Yes! I got a full-frame camera. Will it have left sensor focusing problems? I certainly hope not.

Looking into digital camera capture. Fuji S5Pro's dynamic range is really high up there for me. Seems like 'the look' more closely resemble film's ability to keep highlights. Hope that's the case. I just HATE that digital look. 'Crossing my fingers'. HA! ... Update: Woot! I'm getting the S5 Pro. Yippee! My first dSLR. Should be FUN! (Sept. 8, 2007; sat.) --shipment has arrived-WOOHOO!!-(Sept. 11, 2007; tues.)

Comments

Total: 355, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Rooru S: And of course, nothing for A-mount. How long will it take for Sony to stop being cowards to their legacy customers?

So I'm guessing that would mean the a7S II will also use the Sigma Art lenses natively, without the adapter, too?

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 15:56 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: Ya... but, no... at least for me. My goodness! That price!
EDIT: And that barrel distortion. Whoa!

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for it. It just never stood out so badly as this. But it might have been just the user's bad choice in lens for the given indoor situation. I'm guessing a 35mm was used?

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 08:24 UTC

Ya... but, no... at least for me. My goodness! That price!
EDIT: And that barrel distortion. Whoa!

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2016 at 02:02 UTC as 17th comment | 2 replies
On article SLR Magic announces anamorphic lenses for filmmakers (33 comments in total)

I'm interested. Hopefully the test/results are good, and pricing isn't astronomical.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2016 at 01:44 UTC as 13th comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2501 comments in total)
In reply to:

huyzer: That's too bad the change in exposure is not smooth & stepless, but sudden jumps.

Ah, thank you Richard Butler. Good point.

@electrophoto
Yes, I love using the declicked lenses. I have an 85mm Rokinon T/1.5.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 06:10 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2501 comments in total)

That's too bad the change in exposure is not smooth & stepless, but sudden jumps.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 15:18 UTC as 234th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

teddoman: Personally I don't think glamour portraits are the right way to treat this subject, but I can totally understand if that's what many photographers are used to and how they might instinctively make this artistic choice.

teddoman, haha!
"Learn as you go", they say. :)

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2016 at 03:43 UTC
In reply to:

teddoman: Personally I don't think glamour portraits are the right way to treat this subject, but I can totally understand if that's what many photographers are used to and how they might instinctively make this artistic choice.

teddoman, sounds like a worthy project in showing that contrast. I think you've got something there. Lookin' forward to you being featured. :)

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2016 at 14:18 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: Wow. Her eye color. Is that gold?

Hmm
:)

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2015 at 15:03 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: Wow. Her eye color. Is that gold?

Do you think they are hazel? I thought hazel was a mishmash of colors, with green, etc. I don't see that here.

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2015 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: Wow. Her eye color. Is that gold?

I didn't know brown could be so nice. :)

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2015 at 22:51 UTC

Wow. Her eye color. Is that gold?

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2015 at 18:54 UTC as 32nd comment | 6 replies
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)

<3 II C creative titles like that. :)

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 16:38 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

huyzer: There is a LOT of blocking in areas where there isn't detail. The gradations aren't as detailed, but blocky, in those areas of limited color range that are just an expanse of similar colors.

1) Open both images for the brussel sprouts(?) at 100%.
2) Go to the upper right corner so that the images align easily.
3) Flip back and forth between the two.

You will notice blocking of the color; and the detail/noise, gone.
Especially easy to see in the darker leaf.

For me, I wouldn't want to lose that much information for savings in size.

@BadScience
What is pathetic is your pathetic attitude.
You're trying to show you're so smart with the difference layer in photoshop. Great, I know how to do that too. Let's open the program, copy the image, paste it, copy the second image, paste it, then set the layer to difference. Lots of steps that's not necessary compared to opening two images in separate tabs. Get the points?

My point is that I'm pixel peeping to see if it's worth the quality loss. You have to test/pixel peep to do that. And later changes, effects, heavy handed editing will suffer more from the compression.

Now, let's work on your attitude, shall we?

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2015 at 02:26 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: There is a LOT of blocking in areas where there isn't detail. The gradations aren't as detailed, but blocky, in those areas of limited color range that are just an expanse of similar colors.

1) Open both images for the brussel sprouts(?) at 100%.
2) Go to the upper right corner so that the images align easily.
3) Flip back and forth between the two.

You will notice blocking of the color; and the detail/noise, gone.
Especially easy to see in the darker leaf.

For me, I wouldn't want to lose that much information for savings in size.

@BadScience
When you want to see if you will use something, you have to be "sad" and spend time on it. That's called "Science". But you wouldn't know I guess.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2015 at 00:05 UTC

There is a LOT of blocking in areas where there isn't detail. The gradations aren't as detailed, but blocky, in those areas of limited color range that are just an expanse of similar colors.

1) Open both images for the brussel sprouts(?) at 100%.
2) Go to the upper right corner so that the images align easily.
3) Flip back and forth between the two.

You will notice blocking of the color; and the detail/noise, gone.
Especially easy to see in the darker leaf.

For me, I wouldn't want to lose that much information for savings in size.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2015 at 20:48 UTC as 16th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

J Alan Paul: How are they getting that kind of quality out of the ISO 8000 images? I swear my A7ii with the old and new firmware doesn't look that good at ISO 1000. I've pushed a few files up to 3200 and 4000, but all I get are smeared details and ugly noise patterns.

I'm shooting in raw, processing in Lightroom CC2015 and Photoshop CC2015.

Am I missing something?

My D600's files hold up much better at 6400 than my A7ii does at 3200. I love this camera but I've learned that I can't shoot it that high. I'm trying to justify leaving nikon for Sony, but I consistently get better images out of my Nikon. It's a bummer because of how much I enjoy having the Sony with me at all times and not my bulky Nikons.

It doesn't make sense to see those night city images at an ISO that high looking that detailed. Is there something wrong with my camera?

I'm using an la-ea4 with a Minolta 24-50, 28-135, and 70-210. Also have adapted a few of my Nikon lenses to it as well, including my 85 1.8, and Tokina 16-28 2.8.

Hello,

Sounds good. Have fun with family this weekend. Looking forward to your tests and conclusions afterwards.

I'm finding I'm not liking the pause between a single shot till the next. I'll be keeping my D800 for critical, photographic endeavors. But for a slow, methodical, low-light candids, I'm loving the a7S II.

Talk to you later,
Huy

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 09:44 UTC
In reply to:

J Alan Paul: How are they getting that kind of quality out of the ISO 8000 images? I swear my A7ii with the old and new firmware doesn't look that good at ISO 1000. I've pushed a few files up to 3200 and 4000, but all I get are smeared details and ugly noise patterns.

I'm shooting in raw, processing in Lightroom CC2015 and Photoshop CC2015.

Am I missing something?

My D600's files hold up much better at 6400 than my A7ii does at 3200. I love this camera but I've learned that I can't shoot it that high. I'm trying to justify leaving nikon for Sony, but I consistently get better images out of my Nikon. It's a bummer because of how much I enjoy having the Sony with me at all times and not my bulky Nikons.

It doesn't make sense to see those night city images at an ISO that high looking that detailed. Is there something wrong with my camera?

I'm using an la-ea4 with a Minolta 24-50, 28-135, and 70-210. Also have adapted a few of my Nikon lenses to it as well, including my 85 1.8, and Tokina 16-28 2.8.

Mr. J Alan Paul,

You know what might be a good test is this. Download the RAW file that DPreview provides, of the 8,000 ISO image that you are amazed by. Take a look at their settings and set your LightRoom settings exactly like it, and see what you get. Flip back and forth between the layers (yours and theirs, and possibly the JPEG they have here - though, not sure if that would suffer from compression on their server's automated process?).

Also, duplicate the XML file of one of your images that have the bad "smeared details and ugly noise patterns", and then rename it the same as the RAW file downloaded from here. After re-opening that RAW, adjust exposure accordingly, but then take a look at the details and noise.

Regards,
Huy

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 07:25 UTC
In reply to:

J Alan Paul: How are they getting that kind of quality out of the ISO 8000 images? I swear my A7ii with the old and new firmware doesn't look that good at ISO 1000. I've pushed a few files up to 3200 and 4000, but all I get are smeared details and ugly noise patterns.

I'm shooting in raw, processing in Lightroom CC2015 and Photoshop CC2015.

Am I missing something?

My D600's files hold up much better at 6400 than my A7ii does at 3200. I love this camera but I've learned that I can't shoot it that high. I'm trying to justify leaving nikon for Sony, but I consistently get better images out of my Nikon. It's a bummer because of how much I enjoy having the Sony with me at all times and not my bulky Nikons.

It doesn't make sense to see those night city images at an ISO that high looking that detailed. Is there something wrong with my camera?

I'm using an la-ea4 with a Minolta 24-50, 28-135, and 70-210. Also have adapted a few of my Nikon lenses to it as well, including my 85 1.8, and Tokina 16-28 2.8.

It most likely has to do with your Detail setting under the Develop module. Before purchasing my a7S II, I was doing research on image quality. I did not like what I saw. So I downloaded some RAW files to see if it was user settings that gave the funky, stroke-like, watery pattern I disliked. I'm used to my Nikon D800 files too. So what I found out was that it definitely was the settings under Detail. Mess with those and then you may begin to like your Sony files. Oh, also, under Camera Calibration, the different Process years have a massive effect too. As a side note, the newer years are good at reducing noise, at the major detriment to the natural lip colors. The newer Process years deaden the lips of everyone and makes them look grey/ghoulish/cadavers.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 06:03 UTC
On article SLR Magic announces CINE 50mm F1.1 (63 comments in total)
In reply to:

huyzer: There was no mention about the aperture being de-clicked... but I'm assuming for a Cine lens, that it is by default?

Also, when mounted, if the scales will be on the side, or on top (thinking sides, for Cine reasons, again).

Thank you, Pandimonium!

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2015 at 19:08 UTC
Total: 355, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »