vynz

vynz

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Jun 18, 2007

Comments

Total: 134, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

doctor digi: Strange article heading: "Why lower resolution sensors are not better in low light". It's got nothing to do with resolution and everything to do with "pixel size" (the more accurate term being photosite size - sensors don't have "pixels").

Well Sony also Cites "Large pixels deliver high sensitivity and low noise" so I'm not putting much weight behind ISO claims. Especially as ISO is competely fake anyway. https://youtu.be/QVuI89YWAsw

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 13:50 UTC
In reply to:

kodakrome: How much noise would there be if each sensor had just one giant pixel?

Any light sensor e.g. motion sensors, the ones that control your laptop display brightness, turn your car headlights on after dark etc are all essentially single pixel sensors. Although they cant be used to generate an image, the same signal to noise rules apply to them as well. If you need a better signal to noise ratio, increase the signal, either by using a larger sensor area or increasing the ammount of light with a large aperture lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 12:49 UTC
In reply to:

Toilet Roll: Bigger pixels especially in full frame lower megapixel sensors are more sensitive to light and can gather more, this video doesn't dispel anything. The high megapixel version simply has a modern processor that deals with noise better than older cameras.

The point still remains, larger pixels gather more light which you can't argue with physics.

A one pixel 35mm sensor gathers the same light as a 64 Megapixel 35mm sensor. That is physics.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 12:38 UTC
In reply to:

PetersJV: I thought the camera comparison was apples and oranges. The comparison should be of same megapixel count sensors of different aspect sizes, so same MPX in 35 full, APS-C, 4/3rds. If you review the "studio" camera tests looking at raw files, it looks to me that full frame 35mm has a near two stop advantage noise-wise over APS-C, that is, at the point where you start seeing noise, "ASA" 800 on APS-C looks like ASA 3200 (two stops) on full frame.

That would be testing the effect of sensor area on light gathering ability i.e. something completely different.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 12:36 UTC
In reply to:

Zdman: You don't make it clear that this largely because of BSI and microlens improvements and the fact that full frame pixels are still enormous in comparison to smaller formats. At smaller pixels sizes with FSI quality really started to drop (just compare the Nikon J1 to J4). BSI fixed this by moving wiring to the back and improving the angle response (see the Nikon J5). Then there was higher cross talk at very high resolutions which was again solved in phone sensor with well isolation and will most likely be moved to cameras when they reach that density. So it was something that was very real but is less of an issue now.

Do the same comparison with any sensor size and the result will be the same.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 12:31 UTC
In reply to:

doctor digi: Strange article heading: "Why lower resolution sensors are not better in low light". It's got nothing to do with resolution and everything to do with "pixel size" (the more accurate term being photosite size - sensors don't have "pixels").

Pixel size is inversely proportional to resolution keeping the sensor area constant.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 12:27 UTC

A good anaolgy I use to explain this to people is cropping. Using a low resolution sesor with bigger pixels is like using a digital crop. The sensor averages out noise at the point of taking the picture but the resolution is lost forever. A high resolution small pixel sensor retains the resolution information but can be digitally averged in post by applying noise reduction. In both cases the result looks the same but in the latter case the photographer has more ccontrol and retains the resolution information.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2021 at 12:26 UTC as 86th comment
In reply to:

JE River: Reading the comments it's obvious people are wanting cheaper software than Adobe's subscriptions. But I think it's a bit of hyperbole to claim it's equal or better than Photoshop. A lot of that has to do with workflow speed with the tools. While Affinity can end up with a similar result, it's like working with a very old version of Photoshop from the late 90's or early 2000's, which takes a lot more time and manual workflows to get the end result. There are some complicated processes you can make very easy in Photoshop that are just a huge hassle in software that isn't as full featured and fine-tuned.

I think anyone happy with Affinity is getting what they need out of it just fine, but once you start getting into the really advanced photo processing it's just not even in the same universe as Photoshop. I have Affinity and ran into far too many dead-ends where just a couple of clicks in Photoshop would get me there, but in Affinity it's a much longer process if even possible.

I like the one-click frequency separation in AF.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2021 at 17:09 UTC
On article Olympus M.Zuiko 8-25mm F4.0 Pro field review (278 comments in total)

I wish it was a f2.8. The 12-40 is 2.8 and is a nice compact lens. There is a lot of noticible grain at f4 on a MFT sensor even in daylight. Perosnally grain doesn't bother me but it may affect people who want to submit to stock photo websites for example whos requirements sometimes includes no visible noise.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2021 at 14:16 UTC as 29th comment | 9 replies
On article Olympus M.Zuiko 8-25mm F4.0 Pro field review (278 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosmicnode: Please stop quoting dimensions in centimetres, they went out with feet and inches, the world works in millimetres, except a few countries that have not fully adapted SI units. Hint Nikon used to quote focal lengths in centimetres and changed to mm 50 years ago to adapt.

I always do a double take when i go to Europe and see drinks measured in cL but its easy enough to understand being metric. It's not like I have to divide by 1694 or whatever.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2021 at 14:11 UTC
On article Sony ZV-E10 review (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): I have a galaxy S21. The benefits I see over this camera are
4K 60p for smoother vlogging video
better IBIS
less rolling shutter
HDR video for more dynamic range.
built in 10x lens for more reach than kit lens.
lighter and easier to carry
full touchscreen operation.

I bet the 6 people with Sony smartphones will find them better overall too. Sony smartphones are better for video than most of their cameras (4K 60p, DCI 4K, etc.)

I'd rather spend the $$ on a nice external mic for a smartphone. The video examples I've seen promoting the ZV-E10 are all pretty bad.

I hope you guys tried it before commenting. The other day I used my S9 for some B-roll on a light slider and OMG the noise and grain, even in a brightly lit room was so bad compared to the output from my S5, it was completely unusable.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2021 at 14:00 UTC
On article Sony ZV-E10 review (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

QuietOC: Why are these recent Sony cameras without viewfinders but with Multi Interface Shoes (MIS) not compatible with their MIS EVF (FDA-EV1MK)? http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/www/cscs/accessories/compatibility.php?area=gb&lang=en&mdl=FDA-EV1MK&cat=1

Somebody must have saved a few $$ somewhere.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2021 at 13:57 UTC
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: I suppose for stills you could call this a "portrait zoom" but as a general purpose lens it it would have to be the most annoying lens ever made (for me...).

I'd be forever wanting a bit wider than the 50mm equivalent. I know Panasonic make another F1.7 zoom that goes wider from 50mm equivalent but I'd be forever swapping between it and this lens which for me defeats the object of a zoom lens that goes anywhere near 50mm equivalent.

Back in the days of film I used to shoot a Zuiko 35-105 zoom. Very sharp and lens changes were at a minimum so I wonder how big this Panasonic lens would be if it went 17-50? It would I think, appeal to far more people if it did have that range.

Panasonic 20-60 which I use is superb and the best zoom range ever imho.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2021 at 10:43 UTC
In reply to:

MikeB2000: A small nit-pick here: The author said, "The three most common sensor formats are Four Thirds, APS-C and Full Frame." Might want to change "four thirds" to "micro four thirds" to prevent confusion.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3225878#forum-post-41865662

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2021 at 13:08 UTC

I think sticking with a tried and trusted physical form factor is great. Pity it will run ar USH-I speeds in current UHS-II cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2021 at 12:08 UTC as 3rd comment

LOL!!! Cute.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2021 at 16:25 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Skromny Tomasz: Good business idea and execution but not sure how many people who actually own such an expensive camera would go for an aftermarket fix like this.

I can't imagine saving for R5 or the A1 for months or years to then give it away to be frankensteined by anyone but the actual manufacturer, too dear of an item

Agreed. I dont think people who use 8K professionally are even looking at this camera anyway.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2021 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

ArtistAndCamera: Didn't DIY Perks do this?

He did. In 2020. Was just wondering myself why no mention.

https://youtu.be/X1u-9YqrIJc

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2021 at 16:18 UTC

Nobody going to credit DIY perks for doing this in November 2020?

https://youtu.be/X1u-9YqrIJc

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2021 at 16:18 UTC as 12th comment | 3 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix S 20-60mm F3.5-5.6 sample gallery (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

David610: An amazing lens that needs a better camera. Sigma Fp not really a stills camera, S5 needs a better EVF, S1/R too heavy, Leica too expensive.

Nikon, the Z5 is crying out for a lens like this.

I'm not sure if you have tried a S5 but it's excellent ergonomically, second only to the R5 in my opinion. It makes my A73 feel like a really blunt tool in comparison.

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2021 at 13:12 UTC
Total: 134, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »