robgendreau

Lives in United States California, United States
Joined on Nov 4, 2011

Comments

Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

stepalex: Guys, why so much negativity?! Yes, they are way behind schedule. Yes, they are not a full Lightroom competitor yet as far as DAM is concerned.

But with every major update they and ON1 are moving in the right direction - and the photo community BADLY needs a viable alternative to Lightroom. So let’s be more supportive of the devs - if not with wallets yet, then at least with words.

Negativity? Mainly because they overpromise.

I have shareware that has better organizing functions, far better. And even Bridge, for free. And hey, I'm a long time MacPhun Skylum owner, since their first products.

I think they wanted to exploit some folks dissatisfaction with Adobe. But for some of us, they were a better product when they had the Creative Kit plugins for Lr and Ps and left that other stuff alone. I put in a bunch of money to those products; now they're fallow. If Skylum wants to win me back it's not gonna be with a de minimus photo browser. They should, IMHO, be more like Topaz. That's where I've shifted my $$.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2018 at 23:44 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1546 comments in total)

If you're interest in night sky stuff, which DPR didn't test, like Milky Way and star shots, see this: https://www.lonelyspeck.com/pentax-k-1-mark-ii-astrophotography-review/

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2018 at 16:13 UTC as 34th comment | 11 replies
On article Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade? (1546 comments in total)
In reply to:

BobORama: Dear DPR, you again botched the test image. HOW? HOW Does this happen over and over and over again?

Use the comparison tool to compare K-1 vs K-1 II and pay close attention to the lower left playing card image: out of focus. The edges of the image show varying degrees of blur, indicating the image is improperly focused and the focal plane is not parallel to the test pattern. Note also large amounts of CA present in the K-1 II images which are entirely absent in the K-1 images. Did the image processor ADD that too? Of course the images appear blurry, even at base ISO - Because you don't know how to focus the damn lens, and you don't bother vetting a poor result that you WANT to publish.

So before we get all "OMG! RAW NR is killing IQ, can we please get a properly focused test image, one not tilted and skewed.

Yeah the tubes on the lower right show very different than the upper left. Why not use the same lens? geez.

I appreciate the criticism of having NR in raw at higher ISOs you can't turn off; fair point. But the test isn't persuasive. I also found the K-1ii RAWs survived a bit of sharpening better than the K-1 (downloaded the 6400ISO samples). And some parts of the test were better on the K-1ii even before doing that. Maybe lens again.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2018 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

matthias jurisch: O my dear DOX...no one needs you...really , I have sold my photographs from a Canon 7D MKII for many years... from a camara that you deemed as s@hit in your lab report...please send your evaluation to NASA...Werner von Braun would be proud of you...

That's not the company that is having trouble: DxOMark is separate from DxO Labs, so your schadenfreude is misplaced. I would have wished it were the other way round too.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2018 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: That is probably good news for CaNikon users, as they may get something similar eventually. It shows that pixel shift does not require IBIS.

Um, the conclusion of the article is that dynamic pixel shift (ie handheld) is NOT as good as regular pixel shifted images. An in depth look would probably bear that out, especially when considering color fidelity, noise, etc.

Bracketing and stacking have been in use for ages esp to reduce noise in night sky shots. Every camera should have it for those purposes, and for focus stacking, HDR, etc. But the kind of pixel shifting that Pentax or Sony or Oly does is gonna require IBIS. I've read elsewhere that the movement of the image stabilizers (cause you can use IBIS in handheld, unlike regular PS) gives data on movement that's then used in the stacking; it's not just a blend. Dunno about the details though.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 22:43 UTC
In reply to:

Bas Bridges: Pentax needs to change its business model to Adobe's. I would pay 5-10 dollar per month if it meant the k-1 would eventually be mirrorless, have rapid AF, serious video specs, and more of lenses. The incentive to subscribe would be that you build credit which lets you update your camera with more software features.

The current small-time fringe existence is not what pentax deserves...

Well, how 'bout just getting Sony to have better pixel shift, Astrotracer, etc?

DPR has an interview with Pentax 'round here somewhere, and they just aren't going there. If they did they'd probably get outgunned by Sony. So maybe a niche ain't so bad. I just have both kinds of bodies; solves that issue, unless one is the sort of person who doesn't diversify.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 22:35 UTC
In reply to:

monked: You can do this in photoshop, no? I've seen scripts that will do this if you have multiple shots taken.

Yeah. Other sites have examples. It does help. And astro folks have been doing this forever. I was kinda surprised a camera has the oomph to do that sorta thing, but great. Olys can do focus stacking in camera too.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

bluevellet: The handheld shot mode is disappointing up close in this early stage... but it could still have its uses.

I wonder what portraits look like.

Or just use a lens more appropriate for portraits. Unflattering sharpness can be caused by lotsa stuff besides pixel shifting. The fetish for sharp isn't shared by a lot of portrait shooters, or at least those who are trying to please their subjects :)

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2018 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

xectis: So Pentax/Ricoh is not paying too much attention to mirrorless. Not such a clever thinking.

The Theta doesn't have a mirror, nor does the GR.

And from a user point of view, why should every camera company produce every kind of body? I don't see folks clamoring for Oly or Sony to have a new DSLR. They are different tools; if I wanted a Pentax mirrorless I'd just buy the Sony or an M43 (and in fact I have). They complement each other well, although it's probably heresy to those who wanna have One Brand to Rule Them All.

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2018 at 16:29 UTC
In reply to:

Lluiset: contribution to US economy... why not the news is the contribution industry photographic of another country, I mean , this is important news for anybody outside usa?

Hey...maybe it's useful info for folks in other countries deciding how to target your retaliatory targets, as I'd guess most camera equipment including smartphones has imported materials. :)

Or maybe it's such small potatoes no one will bother and those buying camera gear here in the US will be spared.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2018 at 22:59 UTC
On article Lensbaby Burnside 35: sample gallery and impressions (65 comments in total)

I'd love to see a comparison with the Lomography Daguerreotype Achromat 64mm. By the same reviewer since it's longer, and in the same price range.

If I want to go to the trouble of using such a specialized lens (which is fun in its own right, but not for those who need auto focus or aperture), I might wanna go all the way and use something like the Daguerreotype instead. It's kinda ridiculous, but at least it looks very cool and has some effects you'd never get even with a ton of time in Photoshop.

Dear reader, if you were interested enough to read the review, and at any time thought "gee that might be fun to try," then head out and get a Helios 44-2. You can get some similar effects, but stopped down some it's still a terrific 58mm lens. For about $50USD. Jeez, it even has its own website, and you can put it on just about any camera. There's even an iOS app, Focos, to use the Portrait mode with a Helios effect on a recent iPhone.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 15:37 UTC as 4th comment
On article Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know (461 comments in total)
In reply to:

zakaria: Bravo Pentax you always be a very generouscompany . Give a lot for a little, yet we still complain.

Well, it is a i to ii. And a completely new logic board is potentially a very large improvement if handheld PS is possible. Given there are bazillions of other FF that do some stuff better than the K-1, I think it mighta been smart for Pentax to focus on improving the unique features of the K-1, like PS. If PS matters (and the improvements are real) then $550 would probably fly outta i owner's pockets.

I'd pay for it on a K-3ii maybe.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2018 at 15:10 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: Honest question: Why would you export it as a DNG? I can only think of a very small reason to and neither have to with web or print.

When I share an edited file with someone who I want to share edits with, but who I also want to have the "raw" file with the ability to make more edits, reverse mine, etc, then the DNG is a nice option.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

kelstertx: I think it was an unusual choice for camera. The latest and greatest of the phone world (Apple world anyway) against a wimpy starter model. If you're going to compare a $1700 phone, shouldn't it be against a $1700 camera? LOL

Not that the outcome would have changed, I just find it weird that the essence of the article is "you don't need to buy a $550 camera anymore, just buy a $1700 phone instead"

I think it was a fine choice.

No matter what DPR selected as the comparison we'd get the same boring complaints that they shoulda picked a different lens, body, filter, ad nauseum. And yeah, it's a rather crappy seen. But that's kinda the point, and no one is saying that with a good photographer and a good set of gear that the iPhone would be bested. So good choice, as it is a competitor to camera phones.

Meanwhile, an important point got lost in the discussion of the image. It's the starting point. With the camera, if say you needed to de-emphasize the background cuz you kinda didn't get it in the capture, you're off to your computer and software. Meanwhile, the iPhone user can fix it in post on the iPhone while he's talking to the subject, get his approval, and email him the result. The camera could do so much more, but the manufacturers don't get it and probably never will, preferring to remain a niche market. Which might be the right choice.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2018 at 16:31 UTC
On article Waterfails: We test Pentax K-1's Pixel Shift (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

howieb101: The green footnote is misleading by excluding important and highly relevant information:
ACR introduces a color cast;
ACR does not support pixel shift.

Add those and be honest and explicit about it. Hiding behind the explanation that the test has been done with ACR when it is not fit for purpose is...deceptive.

ACR DOES "support" PS. If it didn't one wouldn't see a difference in the images DPR posted.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 16:47 UTC
On article Waterfails: We test Pentax K-1's Pixel Shift (225 comments in total)
In reply to:

steelhead3: Besides Silky pix, is there another converter that supports pixel shift (raw therapy, dxo, capture 1 etc.)?

Incorrect.

dcrawps will process them. Arguably better results than the Pentax Digital Camera Utility (aka their variant of SilkyPix).

And as you can see from reading the article, ACR and Lr DO process PS images. It just doesn't do motion correction very well (or incidentally? not sure even after seeing the images).

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 16:45 UTC

Great news. Kudos to Adobe for moving the bar up again. I hope iOS follows suit.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2016 at 16:48 UTC as 5th comment
On article Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)

Are there any pixel shifted RAWs and JPEGs available for download and testing anywhere?

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2016 at 18:19 UTC as 501st comment | 2 replies

What is the software they're referring to?

I.e.: "...develop software solutions that make it easier for our customers to offload, access and edit their GoPro content."

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 16:56 UTC as 18th comment | 4 replies
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »