ProfHankD

ProfHankD

Lives in United States Lexington, United States
Works as a Professor
Has a website at http://aggregate.org/hankd/
Joined on Mar 27, 2008
About me:

Plan: to change the way people think about and use cameras by taking advantage of cameras as computing systems; engineering camera systems to provide new abilities and improved quality.

Comments

Total: 1080, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

DFPanno: These posts really sadden me.

It seems no dimension of our lives is being left untouched.

I'm with you. It was depressing enough with the previous article. Let's hope some of these idiots get caught and are vigorously, very publically, prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law....

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 02:07 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Hmmm. No doubt this uses a Fuji-designed, Sony-fabbed, variant of what is fast becoming the Sony sensor that is "the APS-C of Medium Format." Impressive they've got so many lenses for it, but, like APS-C, I have serious doubts about the longer term future of this format as "Medium Format." At least this has a short enough flange distance that using FF lenses on it should work -- and covering multi-aspect within a FF image circle is where this size sensor could really shine. Still, is that worth anywhere near $10K for the body?

Ranma13: No, you're not an expert, nor competent, nor polite. Forgive me for unreasonably assuming that you were any of those things. ;-) At the University of Kentucky's CeNSE (http://www.engr.uky.edu/~cense/), my fellow faculty started making segmented solar cells with circuitry underneath about half a decade ago; the sensor I'm talking about is basically that, but the circuitry under each cell is a very simple nanoprocessor (http://aggregate.org/KYARCH/ -- which we've been developing since 2003). The sensor will directly implement TDCI capture, as discussed in our Electronic Imaging 2014 paper, "Frameless, time domain continuous image capture" (slides at http://aggregate.org/DIT/ei20140205.pdf).

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 21:31 UTC
In reply to:

mr.izo: looks like portable HAL 9000, lol.

What makes you say that, Dave?

HAL's body was always white. Hard to get inside this one to pull memory cards... but, come to think of it, pretty easy to pull the microSD card... so you can relax. ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:32 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: A tiny noisy sensor housed in a 600 gram bulky body. Mount the new hefty 600 gram 12-100mm f4 and weight wise you are comfortably in FF territory.

Well, IBIS on my FF A7II definitely works better than on my APS-C A55... even seems to take less energy (judging by battery life) and causes less sensor heating.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:43 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Hmmm. No doubt this uses a Fuji-designed, Sony-fabbed, variant of what is fast becoming the Sony sensor that is "the APS-C of Medium Format." Impressive they've got so many lenses for it, but, like APS-C, I have serious doubts about the longer term future of this format as "Medium Format." At least this has a short enough flange distance that using FF lenses on it should work -- and covering multi-aspect within a FF image circle is where this size sensor could really shine. Still, is that worth anywhere near $10K for the body?

Ranma13: I'm not kidding; I've published peer-reviewed technical papers on this. For a given fab process, cost goes roughly as the cube of the die area, so you'd expect bigger sensors to be very expensive, and they usually are. Things like BSI processing multiply that cost for large dies. However, solar cells are commonly built at wafer scale, and our nanotechnology center does it with cost of a few dollars per 6" wafer. The trick is that solar cells use old, well-tuned, fabs with large feature sizes and relatively simple processing, so processing cost is low and yield (fraction good) is very high. The wavelength of light we're interested in isn't getting smaller, but fabs continue to improve. 500MP on 4x5 is only the pixel density of 14MP APS-C (but roughly what 4x5 lenses resolve), easily done with cheap solar cell fabs. Individual pixels are nowhere near as good as Sony's latest, but they're good enough and have other more desirable properties.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:29 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Hmmm. No doubt this uses a Fuji-designed, Sony-fabbed, variant of what is fast becoming the Sony sensor that is "the APS-C of Medium Format." Impressive they've got so many lenses for it, but, like APS-C, I have serious doubts about the longer term future of this format as "Medium Format." At least this has a short enough flange distance that using FF lenses on it should work -- and covering multi-aspect within a FF image circle is where this size sensor could really shine. Still, is that worth anywhere near $10K for the body?

Aaron801: for some years now, I've been working toward a 500MP 4x5 sensor in my research... truth is, physics favors large sensors and there are lots of applications for them once fab for them becomes cheap enough. On the other hand, you don't need 500MP to post a photo on FaceBook.

PS: Ranma13, my 4x5 sensor would cost more like $5 in moderate quantity using several generation old solar cell fab processes. Sensor cost will come down.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 05:29 UTC
In reply to:

ekaton: A tiny noisy sensor housed in a 600 gram bulky body. Mount the new hefty 600 gram 12-100mm f4 and weight wise you are comfortably in FF territory.

Well, that's the problem. This has a set of features that could be in a FF mirrorless body, but many are unfortunately not... while the A7 family kills on image quality. I follow the IQ, but it sure would be nice to see the sensor-shift superresolution and some other easy-to-implement features listed above in FF mirrorless bodies.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 05:14 UTC

Hmmm. No doubt this uses a Fuji-designed, Sony-fabbed, variant of what is fast becoming the Sony sensor that is "the APS-C of Medium Format." Impressive they've got so many lenses for it, but, like APS-C, I have serious doubts about the longer term future of this format as "Medium Format." At least this has a short enough flange distance that using FF lenses on it should work -- and covering multi-aspect within a FF image circle is where this size sensor could really shine. Still, is that worth anywhere near $10K for the body?

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 04:11 UTC as 62nd comment | 16 replies

It's an A7RII in SLT A-mount clothing; awesome, yes, but actually exactly what I'd expect -- zero surprises, which is itself surprising from Sony. ;-)

The wacky thing here is the numbering. Why is it a "7" in E mount and a "9" in A? Strange as it might sound, it feels like Sony has inverted it's view of the A and E mounts so that E is now the higher-end mount. Of course, the A-mount bodies use the same numbering scheme for APS-C and FF, which E-mounts don't. In any case, the message sent by this model is at least clearly "we will continue to support A mount."

PS: By my count (e.g., counting KEH offerings), largely thanks to Minolta being the first with AF and lots of 3rd-party lens brands, there are still more old A-mount AF lenses than there are native AF lenses for any other mount. They're mostly screw drive, but they are fantastic price/performance.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 14:13 UTC as 168th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

vscd: Bring on the original 56mmx56mm sensorsize and you will be welcomed. Otherwise.. meh'

Yup; the full 6x6 format (which is really 56x56mm usable) is what this should be. I agree that "crop medium format" is a disturbing concept to begin with, but you really want to get the original image circle... choice of wide lenses is limited enough.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 12:30 UTC

KIRK: I'm curious, Doctor. Why is it called M5 and not M1?
DAYSTROM: Well, you see, the Multitronic units one through four were not entirely successful. This one is. M5 is ready to take control of the ship.

Just to be clear, Star Trek's M5 killed some friendly ships and then committed suicide. I hope Canon will have somewhat better luck with their M5. ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2016 at 15:22 UTC as 274th comment
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: The M5 really seems like a Canon-flavored answer to the A6000 in an A7-ish body ( http://camerasize.com/compare/#684,487 )... overall trailing Sony by about 3 years. However, with the much improved IQ of the M5's not-quite-APS-C (1.6X crop) sensor, Canon has probably crossed the threshold where it is good enough to keep lots of folks from "jumping ship" to Sony mirrorless... especially if they want to continue to use their EF/EF-S lenses. Current Canon users might not even buy that many M5, but the mere suggestion that Canon is now serious about mirrorless is enough to make lots of folks hesitant about switching brands....

Personally, I'll buy one iff either (1) they support dual-pixel (48MP) raw or (2) there is a port of Magic Lantern to it. Magic Lantern is why I own an M... sensor IQ and ease of use with manual lenses is why I own a bunch of Sonys. ;-)

That's what I said -- it is the not-quite-APS-C 1.6X crop that Canon has been using all along (the Canon APS-C sensors actually have gotten slightly smaller over time, but by less than 0.5mm). That size is a "bug," not a "feature."

APS-C for film was 25.1 × 16.7mm, nearly all digital APS-C is about 23.6 x 15.60mm, and Canon is 22.30 x 14.90mm. Film APS-C would be a 1.44X crop, digital would be 1.53X, and Canon is 1.61X. Put another way, compared to Sony, Nikon, Pentax, Samyang, and Fuji, you get about 5% narrower view angle on Canon's so-called APS-C, and the sensor is about 11% smaller area. There are rumors Canon went smaller to hide lens vignetting problems, but I don't think any official reason has ever been given.

Incidentally, Sigma crops more like 1.7X and u4/3 is 17.30 x 13mm, which would be 2X (ignoring aspect ratio; for 3:2, it's more like 2.1X). I just don't like Canon calling theirs APS-C when it isn't within reasonable bounds of any standard APS-C frame size....

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 05:09 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: The M5 really seems like a Canon-flavored answer to the A6000 in an A7-ish body ( http://camerasize.com/compare/#684,487 )... overall trailing Sony by about 3 years. However, with the much improved IQ of the M5's not-quite-APS-C (1.6X crop) sensor, Canon has probably crossed the threshold where it is good enough to keep lots of folks from "jumping ship" to Sony mirrorless... especially if they want to continue to use their EF/EF-S lenses. Current Canon users might not even buy that many M5, but the mere suggestion that Canon is now serious about mirrorless is enough to make lots of folks hesitant about switching brands....

Personally, I'll buy one iff either (1) they support dual-pixel (48MP) raw or (2) there is a port of Magic Lantern to it. Magic Lantern is why I own an M... sensor IQ and ease of use with manual lenses is why I own a bunch of Sonys. ;-)

No, dual pixel means half-pixels pointed left and right -- I'm a computer engineer doing computational photography research, and I can do some very cool things with that... but I don't want to have to buy a 5D IV to do them. ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 01:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS M5: What you need to know (543 comments in total)

The M5 really seems like a Canon-flavored answer to the A6000 in an A7-ish body ( http://camerasize.com/compare/#684,487 )... overall trailing Sony by about 3 years. However, with the much improved IQ of the M5's not-quite-APS-C (1.6X crop) sensor, Canon has probably crossed the threshold where it is good enough to keep lots of folks from "jumping ship" to Sony mirrorless... especially if they want to continue to use their EF/EF-S lenses. Current Canon users might not even buy that many M5, but the mere suggestion that Canon is now serious about mirrorless is enough to make lots of folks hesitant about switching brands....

Personally, I'll buy one iff either (1) they support dual-pixel (48MP) raw or (2) there is a port of Magic Lantern to it. Magic Lantern is why I own an M... sensor IQ and ease of use with manual lenses is why I own a bunch of Sonys. ;-)

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2016 at 01:09 UTC as 34th comment | 6 replies

So, any word on whether this allows raw dual-pixel capture? I'm guessing it doesn't because I don't see anything talking about 48MP raws, but I'm hoping....

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 23:49 UTC as 48th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon PowerShot Pro70 (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

OzarkAggie: My first digital. Took a swim in the Meramec river about a month after the 3.3 mp G-1 came out.

Both used the CMYG filter array, and raw conversion of those files is limited to PhotoShop, maybe Paint Shop Pro.

I was so excited to see the capture immediately after taking it I would take a picture and then show it to anyone with me - and sometimes complete strangers. I was such a dork.

Not true about raw conversion... see Dave Coffin's DCRaw.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 23:37 UTC
On article Leica-branded instant camera rumored to launch soon (43 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: What's next? A revived Holga with the Leica badge? How about a disposable Leica camera?

Hey, at only $310 Leica probably views this as disposable. ;-) Actually, film for it is between $0.50 and $1 per shot, so it doesn't take long for film cost to exceed cost of the camera.

In any case, I don't get it. This is the kind of marketing decision that could really do Leica's brand some lasting harm. I don't think I'll be able to unsee that red dot on the aquamarine and orange bodies in particular....

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 00:29 UTC
On article Petzval 58mm real-world samples (58 comments in total)

I have to say, I consider swirly bokeh a fairly serious defect, and the same goes for the rainbow flare, but the Bokeh Control Ring is a great idea. Unlike Lomography's 85mm, this really does have the ability to make a wide range of very distinctive renderings that can't be matched by any other lens I'm aware of. Don't go JJ Abrams and give every shot one of these looks, but I think there are times this lens could be a very useful tool....

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 12:22 UTC as 30th comment
On article Getty Images asks court to throw out $1B lawsuit (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim Hully: So Getty argue that Carol Highsmith "can no longer make copyright claims about the photos because they have been entered into the public domain" yet isn't that what Getty is effectively doing by asking customers to pay a license fee? Are they not representing themselves as the copyright owner?

No real news here; of course Getty wants this case to disappear. I don't think it will... nor should it. Getty pretended to represent the copyright owner and attempted to collect usage fees on that basis; that sounds like fraud to me.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 01:22 UTC

I use lots of manual-focus lenses on my Sonys, but old ultra-wides are virtually non-existent and of marginal price/performance when you do find them. Thus, I'm very happy to see several companies producing high-spec modern ultra-wides. These Laowa lenses seem not only technically very strong, but also well-targeted in that they fill somewhat different market niches -- they aren't "me too" lenses. Very nice!

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2016 at 01:12 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
Total: 1080, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »