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 and creatively using camera systems to provide new abilities and improved quality.

Comments

Total: 1530, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Not really a problem -- I use 256GB SD cards, and I dare say one of them will outlast the battery on any digital camera. There is also the fact that SD cards themselves are remarkably more than "splash proof"; I don't recommend it, but several times I've had SD cards in my shirt pocket when my shirt went into the washing machine and found STILL WORKING SD cards when emptying the dryer. If I cared, I also could 3D-print this type of SD card holder for about $0.05 each....

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2017 at 01:11 UTC as 10th comment

Olympus has done well with their tough cameras, and I get why folks like the TG-5, but I still prefer my TG-860. Why? The zoom goes 21-105mm equiv. and the rear LCD tilts up -- even all the way up for selfies. It's a huge deal not to have to have your face right behind the LCD to see what you're shooting underwater or close-up in other "unpleasant" environments. I just wish they made a version of the TG-860 with better IQ.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2017 at 02:06 UTC as 16th comment

Actually, it took a while before DSLRs were really beating compacts on things like resolution or availability of wide-angle view lenses (FF wides aren't very wide on APS-C). In fact, the first clear win for a DSLR I used was the Sony A100 + Sigma 10-20mm. I also don't have a big problem with the IQ of even shots from my Canon G1. I also still use lots of compacts, but it's mostly because I can use CHDK to reprogram Canon PowerShots.

In sum, I get it. However, using these all the time is a bit of a gimmick. For example, an A7RII is a lot better suited for most landscape shots than any of the compacts is. Then again, my A7RII cost a lot more than $6 -- although some of the lenses I use on it didn't. ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2017 at 23:33 UTC as 92nd comment | 1 reply

The Deep Image Prior work looks very interesting. I've done a lot of constrained texture synthesis, and this seems to be a viable way to similar goals.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 18:11 UTC as 23rd comment
On article 2017 Buying Guide: Best cameras under $1500 (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Yet again a sloppy-by-price list with some cameras listed out of the price range (Sony SLT-A77 II, Canon EOS 7D Mark II, and Nikon D7500 are all over $1500 with lens) and obvious omissions, such as the Sony A7II (which is just under $1500 including the 28-70mm kit zoom). The A7II is from 2014, but it is still available new and uses an excellent 24MP FF sensor with IBIS. Incidentally, the intro even says "These cameras have excellent sensors (some full-frame)" but then you don't have any FF ones listed... as though they were inferior to all the ones listed... which they aren't.

Perhaps done in a hurry Nov. 21 and posted a week later? The whole thing is really a grouped reposting with just a few paragraphs new.
This is not DPReview at its best. :-(

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2017 at 14:49 UTC
On article 2017 Buying Guide: Best cameras under $1500 (59 comments in total)

Yet again a sloppy-by-price list with some cameras listed out of the price range (Sony SLT-A77 II, Canon EOS 7D Mark II, and Nikon D7500 are all over $1500 with lens) and obvious omissions, such as the Sony A7II (which is just under $1500 including the 28-70mm kit zoom). The A7II is from 2014, but it is still available new and uses an excellent 24MP FF sensor with IBIS. Incidentally, the intro even says "These cameras have excellent sensors (some full-frame)" but then you don't have any FF ones listed... as though they were inferior to all the ones listed... which they aren't.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2017 at 12:31 UTC as 17th comment | 6 replies
On article 2017 Buying Guide: Best cameras under $1000 (118 comments in total)

Another sloppy list, with some of the cameras out of the stated price range. There are also obvious omissions, the most obvious being that the original Sony A7 with the 28-70mm kit zoom, a full-frame sensor camera, is available new for under $1000 (including from Amazon). I know, the A7 is not a new design, but....

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 15:18 UTC as 19th comment
On article 2017 Buying Guide: Best cameras under $500 (105 comments in total)
In reply to:

adventure_photo: I would have chosen Sony A6000. That’s an amazing little camera and it has an EVF which is huge. Plus sensor image quality is better than the Canon. I think the A6000 is one of the best values out there in terms features, quality and price in the entire camera world.

I agree about the A6000 being better (not about the lens issue) -- except for the price thing. DPReview often contradicts itself in defining these price groupings, and it happened here again....

The M100 starts at $499 with lens (not counting tax), so it sort-of meets the under $500 title. Of the cameras presented here, only the Fujifilm X-A10, Canon EOS Rebel T6, Nikon 1 J5, and Sony Alpha a5100 are also below $500 including a lens. It's a closer call between an M100 and an A5100, but the A6000 is only $30 over the $500 mark with the kit zoom, which I'd say is well worth it. ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 16:50 UTC

Clever idea. It looks like they're just letting you do shaped masking of the individual light sources, not arbitrary relighting based on recovering a 3D model... but that's probably good enough for many photographic purposes. In theory, they should be able to recover and relight color images, but what they're doing with B&W is a piece of cake computationally and far less likely to show bad artifacting. I can see a few easy ways to implement this....

Basically, it's a hack on the usual structured light 3D capture approaches (which I'm familiar with -- I have a patent in that field). What they do nicely leverages conventional lighting practices of photographers, and it's computationally simpler than building the 3D model. It still has the same problem with surfaces that have unfortunate reflective properties. It seems they're using color to encode the different light sources, so they'll also have problems with very colorful scenes.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 04:58 UTC as 17th comment | 2 replies
On article Gear of the Year 2017 - Richard's choice: Sony NP-FZ100 (247 comments in total)

An interesting twist on the gear-of-the-year concept. However, one still has to think about batteries on ALL digital cameras: they all need to be regularly charged. To me, the difference between DSLR and mirrorless battery life never was all that significant.

I used to go for YEARS without having to change the battery on my Minolta SRT-101. Beyond that, if the battery was dead, all I lost was the light meter; the rest of the camera continued to work fine and I was pretty good at estimating exposure.

My point is that carrying a couple of extra batteries and 256GB SD cards is actually less annoying than carrying extra film was, and finding a way to recharge batteries is easier than finding more film was. I suppose one higher-capacity battery is better than multiple smaller ones in terms of airline restrictions on carrying multiple Lithium batteries, but it's not really a big deal and I always would carry a backup in case a battery fails (as in starts to swell, not runs out of charge).

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 01:32 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: God reading those comments it's embarrassing being the only backer on DPR! :D

David Mantripp: I said "I bet" not "I know." I do know that their original video was misleading, and they apparently had enough grief about it to explain more in the FAQ and to remove the most misleading stuff from the new video. So, I have the superpower of being accurate in my statements. ;-)

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 18:07 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: God reading those comments it's embarrassing being the only backer on DPR! :D

I understand -- you figure $125 isn't enough to worry about and it looks different and maybe fun. That's your call.

The catch is, I bet a majority of the backers don't actually understand what they're backing. In the original video (but not in the above one) at 1:29 it says "Coupled with the masterpiece design of the first electronic controlled shutter camera in the World YASHICA Electro 35 Featuring with the Unprecedented digiFilm system Y35 brings in an extraordinary photography experience" -- I bet a lot of folks read that as digital Electro 35, which this isn't. Certainly, their FAQ sounds like people don't expect this to be a fixed-focus, digiFilm doesn't hold images, plastic-body point-and-shoot (and they post no unedited images because the Exif data is their Intellectual Property -- huh?). I bet there are backers who will be shocked that, despite the video-centric presentation, the camera doesn't do video. This is not the way to Make YASHICA Great Again.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 00:48 UTC

Well, the D850 was clearly a good move for Nikon: **EVERY** body/body+lens listed in the above "Shop with amazon" links says "OUT OF STOCK."

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2017 at 13:11 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies

TIME's Gadget list is basically feature fill material, simply echoing sentiment seen in various reviews... it's not really news. That said, the fact that the A7RIII is the ONLY camera on the list is mildly interesting and a big step for Sony.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2017 at 01:39 UTC as 98th comment
On article 2017 Buying Guide: Best cameras over $2000 (35 comments in total)

Well, this is a Sony-dominated list... and it should be. Sony-made sensors are excellent, including when they're in a differently-branded body (e.g., Nikon or Fuji). I have a Canon 5D IV (which I got for the unfortunately botched dual-pixel raws); it feels very finished with a pretty UI, but in most ways my old A7II beats it. Sadly, until Magic Lantern supports the 5D IV (which, of course, Canon does not help in any way), I don't think Canon really has a horse in this race.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2017 at 01:28 UTC as 15th comment

DCResource was good work; you can be proud.

As for computational photography being the next big thing, well, people just don't realize it's already inside everything. For example, did you know there's data in the JPEGs from those little Canon PowerShots that tells you where faces were found by the camera?

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 15:14 UTC as 83rd comment
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (469 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: I think it would be reasonable for Sony to offer an "I'm taking pictures of stars" option with different filtering (to synthesize more natural star appearance), but the truth is that a "single pixel star" really isn't able to be imaged correctly by a Bayer-filtered sensor. We're talking about features very much on the wrong side of a Nyquist sampling, so most of us engineers simply sit back and mutter "well, of course it does that." ;-)

Incidentally, the real question is "Does it eat one-pixel stars when in pixel shift mode?" It still wouldn't meet Nyquist sampling constraints, but it would be easy to make it credibly preserve "single pixel" points in the image.

Najinsky: 4+ second exposures are already pushing it without a tracking mount (depending on lens focal length, of course). The only issue would be if the camera senses the motion of the tracking mount and tries to compensate, but I don't think that's how pixel shift is implemented.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 12:57 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (469 comments in total)

I think it would be reasonable for Sony to offer an "I'm taking pictures of stars" option with different filtering (to synthesize more natural star appearance), but the truth is that a "single pixel star" really isn't able to be imaged correctly by a Bayer-filtered sensor. We're talking about features very much on the wrong side of a Nyquist sampling, so most of us engineers simply sit back and mutter "well, of course it does that." ;-)

Incidentally, the real question is "Does it eat one-pixel stars when in pixel shift mode?" It still wouldn't meet Nyquist sampling constraints, but it would be easy to make it credibly preserve "single pixel" points in the image.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 04:30 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
On article The Leica CL is (almost) what the TL should have been (421 comments in total)

Looks reasonable, but why re-use the CL name? Or, if you wanted to recall the CL (which might be worthy of that honor), why not follow the form of that happy Leica/Minolta collaboration? Some odd decisions here in terms of features too. Bottom line, it's a $3K APS-C mirrorless... not too exciting.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 04:09 UTC as 32nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

stunev: What a stupid, pointless idea!

Color film has been widely available since the 1930s -- long before most of these images were taken. B&W was used for any combination of three main reasons:
1. Faster, easier, cheaper with greater flexibility about exposure.
2. Newspapers were B&W; color wasn't considered necessary for reportage.
3. B&W is a more abstract medium with better creative control.
I suspect #2 played a dominant role in the choice to use B&W, but in the 1970s when I was a photo editor (high school paper + yearbook, Columbia University's Broadway magazine), reason #3 was nearly always why I shot B&W. Digital postprocessing has enabled color to have excellent creative control, but even processes like Cibachrome really didn't allow much creative control.
In sum, I really doubt if the photographers would consider colorized versions of their images to be an improvement; it's more like graffiti. The fact that some colors are probably wrong guesses also corrupts the images as reportage.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 15:52 UTC
Total: 1530, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »