Victor Engel

Lives in Austin, TX
Joined on Dec 21, 2002

Comments

Total: 108, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

melgross: Sigh! This is a really oversimplified explanation of why we want, and need higher bit depth.

Well, it's better to oversample than to undersample, though.

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2017 at 03:02 UTC
In reply to:

RPJG: "... their ability to provide enhanced creative control over perspective through the tilt function and depth-of-field through the shift function in their images."

I'm probably going to regret asking this, but isn't that back to front? I thought you used tilt to control DOF, and shift to control perspective?

Sure - just as people who use TS lenses know which function has which effect.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2017 at 14:54 UTC
In reply to:

RPJG: "... their ability to provide enhanced creative control over perspective through the tilt function and depth-of-field through the shift function in their images."

I'm probably going to regret asking this, but isn't that back to front? I thought you used tilt to control DOF, and shift to control perspective?

Actually, perspective is controlled only by camera position. It's distortion that is controlled by shifting. The perspective remains the same.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 20:57 UTC
In reply to:

aftab: Canon Video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3XrBwP_vQ

Apparently, these lenses are good for shooting sushi. :)

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

PWPhotography: Congrats to Canon, not only make for Canon but for Sony system as well :-)

Ironically Canon TS-E lenses actually are much easier to use on Sony A7/A9 series due to EVF, much easier for precise MF, full-time liveview, focus peaking (much easier for Tilt function) and WYSIWYG exposure as well as IBIS to gain a few stops in hand-held under dim light, and you don't need to leave eye from EVF. On Canon DSLRs you'd need to use back LCD for precise focus (magnification) and accurate exposure when T/E out.

... Or you can use something like Camranger.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2017 at 13:36 UTC
In reply to:

DaQi: I saw this post and decided to look at my pictures of the eclipse that I took in Casper WY to see if I might have captured the transit. My pictures are no where near as good as these but I can clearly see the sunspots that are in this picture. Now, this is where it got interesting for me. As I was looking at my pictures the curve of the moon is quite different in this sequence from mine. In my pictures when it as low as it is in these pictures on the right hand edge (i.e. almost aligned with the lower sun spot) the top sun spot is covered already. Banner is about 130 miles North of Casper so I am trying to understand how the angle of the moon covering the sun was that much different there than where I was. Bottom line though is that I went through my pictures and must have missed the transit. I was taking a series of 5 bracketed pictures every couple minutes. Also missed the one on the other end of the eclipse as well.

I was in Jackson with a group of strangers. I wondered out loud to one of them where the ISS was. Maybe it was right there as I was wondering about it. :)

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2017 at 03:35 UTC
In reply to:

digiart: Nice footage. Pity the camera did not capture the nearby jet @ 5:30, by the sound it must have been close! Info on the height the balloon reached would be nice.

I saw a jet in the video. Take Another look - right side of screen.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2017 at 00:50 UTC

"All of the photos were shot wide open at f/1.8 (no other option really...)"

The other option is f/2.8 by using the 2x camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 15:29 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

(unknown member): Anyone considering wasting money on this piece of fluff should read Dororthy Rabinowitz' Wall Street Journal review entitled "The Dumbing Down of ‘Dunkirk’".

Stick to Batman movies, Mr. Nolan.

For the record, I was not the one asking what you found fluffy.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 22:31 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Anyone considering wasting money on this piece of fluff should read Dororthy Rabinowitz' Wall Street Journal review entitled "The Dumbing Down of ‘Dunkirk’".

Stick to Batman movies, Mr. Nolan.

Perhaps a better review of the film here: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/07/20/what_s_fact_and_what_s_fiction_in_dunkirk.html

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 00:21 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Anyone considering wasting money on this piece of fluff should read Dororthy Rabinowitz' Wall Street Journal review entitled "The Dumbing Down of ‘Dunkirk’".

Stick to Batman movies, Mr. Nolan.

Well, I saw it - standard 70mm. The only real criticism I have about it is the music. Well, I guess character development could have been improved. I don't have an account with the WSJ, but I think I found a copy of the article. I think the author missed the point. It's not a movie about Dunkirk, really. It's a movie about several people's attempts to live another day through the perils of war. What war it was, or whether Churchill was relevant is beside the point.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2017 at 05:38 UTC

Apparently, I thought a photo was altered that wasn't. The photo had very fake-looking ground as if it had been poorly cloned. Oh, well. I guess some people live around fake-looking ground.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 23:50 UTC as 30th comment
In reply to:

(unknown member): Anyone considering wasting money on this piece of fluff should read Dororthy Rabinowitz' Wall Street Journal review entitled "The Dumbing Down of ‘Dunkirk’".

Stick to Batman movies, Mr. Nolan.

Maybe I'll read it after I see it. I purchased tickets for a70mm version some time ago, and I'll be seeing that tonight. It's not an IMAX theater, but it does have a high screen. I'll be curious to see what format is used.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 23:21 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

You're making me hungry.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 22:30 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

It's just a comparison from a lens we're more familiar with - not really relevant. Feel free to disregard. I didn't mean to imply it wold have to be 72mm, and I think my numbers back that up.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 21:09 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

I mentioned the filter size because it serves as a reticle to determine the size of the entrance pupil. Using the picture on this news item, I measure the diameter of what seems to be the filter thread. That is 52mm. I then take the measurement of the largest the entrance pupil could be. The ratio of these times 52mm is the diameter of the entrance pupil. The quotient of that and 50mm, is then the f-stop. It seems to be somewhere in the range 1/1.25 - 1/1.29 using this method.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 20:32 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

The lens objective is irrelevant to determining f-stop. What counts is the size of the entrance pupil. Note that the entrance pupil is a virtual pupil. It is the image of the physical pupil as viewed through the objective. So the objective needs to be at least as big as the entrance pupil. But it is the entrance pupil size that determines the f-stop.

A lens designed for full frame for the same focal length needs to cover a wider field of view than does one designed for a crop sensor, so you're right, the objective is likely to be larger. However, the entrance pupil is the same size for the same f-stop. It just fills up a smaller portion of the objective on a lens designed for full frame than on one designed for APS-C. In both cases, a minimum bound for the size of the objective is the focal length times the f-stop, so in this case, 50mm * 1/1.1 or 45.5. It does not appear to be that large in the picture.

It's possible I'm mistaking the lens hood for the filter thread....

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 19:21 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

50mm is 50mm. It doesn't matter what you put it on. The f-stop is the ratio of the entrance pupil size to the focal length, so in this case, that means the entrance pupil must be 50/1.1 = 45.5mm. The filter size is 52mm, so the space between the outer edge of the lens and the filter thread has to be (52-45.5)/2 = 3.3mm. If the space between the thread and the outside of the lens is more than 3.3 mm, then it is not an f/1.1 lens. This math works whether the lens was designed for full frame or APS-C.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 13:53 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

By comparison, the Canon 50mm f/1.2 lens has a 72mm filter size.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 20:52 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (252 comments in total)
In reply to:

George_pix: Using a ruler on my pc screen, if the filter is 52mm this lens is 50 1.25 not 50 1.1. What do you think?

I got 1.29. Actually, I guess it depends on what lens the photo of the lens was shot with. :)

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2017 at 20:47 UTC
Total: 108, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »