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: 1477, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

cdembrey: I don't remember there being such a S-Storm when the g0dz at Fujifilm released the XF56mmF1.2 R APD soft-focus lens. Different rules for different folks, I guess.

As Androole said, a lens with an apodizing element is a very different (and desirable) thing. On the other hand, this lens looks pretty terrible: it's a nostalgia collectible more than it is a camera lens.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 22:03 UTC
On article Nikon D850 Review (1936 comments in total)

Basically, it's a Nikon DSLR wrapped around a sensor that is slightly better than the one in the Sony A7RII (presumably by sacrificing on-sensor PDAF -- a good choice for a DSLR). I wouldn't trade my A7RII for it, but if you have Nikon-mount lenses and like DSLRs, I think there's little doubt that you'll love this. Certainly IQ blows away the best Canon has to offer (which IQ-wise is the 5D IV, not the low-DR 5DS R one compared here)... not that any of the current crop of higher-end cameras is in any way inadequate in terms of IQ. :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 03:46 UTC as 70th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Is this really HDR or is this yet another implementation of ye olde Sony Dynamic Range Optimization, Nikon Active D-Lighting, etc.? To me, the distinction is that true HDR requires some extra sensor tricks and/or merging of multiple exposures. I think this is only doing tweak of exposure followed by tone mapping -- just like DRO, ADL, etc.

Nicolas06: I'm very familiar with computational photography algorithms (I publish research papers in that field), but there is always some artifacting with scene content that moves. The curious thing is that they don't seem to be getting much (any?) enhancement of darker areas, which is below par for true HDR. I wonder if their sensor has relatively poor sensitivity and dynamic range -- that could explain why risk artifacting on HDR...? It's also possible that they only skew towards underexposure (faster shutter speeds) and take most of the image content from the "normal" exposure -- that would be my guess.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 04:26 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Is this really HDR or is this yet another implementation of ye olde Sony Dynamic Range Optimization, Nikon Active D-Lighting, etc.? To me, the distinction is that true HDR requires some extra sensor tricks and/or merging of multiple exposures. I think this is only doing tweak of exposure followed by tone mapping -- just like DRO, ADL, etc.

Ok; bold move. I've normally got that mode on in my Samsung S5 (where it works perhaps a bit better), but sometimes there are motion artifacts.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 17:23 UTC

Is this really HDR or is this yet another implementation of ye olde Sony Dynamic Range Optimization, Nikon Active D-Lighting, etc.? To me, the distinction is that true HDR requires some extra sensor tricks and/or merging of multiple exposures. I think this is only doing tweak of exposure followed by tone mapping -- just like DRO, ADL, etc.

Link | Posted on Oct 15, 2017 at 13:25 UTC as 62nd comment | 5 replies

Now if only DJI drones were trusted not to be doing evil undisclosed things.... You can use them for various things, and I do, but the USA ban on their use within government agencies/facilities is still in effect. This looks like a great camera, but I think DJI needs to solve the more basic security problem first.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 03:02 UTC as 17th comment
In reply to:

walker2000: I know every companies want their own proprietor lens mounts. Besides that, what's the technical advantages of this DL mount that other existing mounts cannot do?

walker2000: not quite. You essentially have to be a member, which ends up being a significant hurdle -- they don't even make a standard process public for how to request to use the mount (I suspect they don't really have a standard process).

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2017 at 02:57 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Ugh. Reminds me of the fake "Nicon" cameras I used to see for sale in Turkish markets for... well... whatever they can get you to pay for them.

Yeah, it's been at least 5 years since I last saw those with their giant flash on top of their pentaprism-shaped straight-through viewfinder and big-barrel, tiny glass, "optical color lens." Used to see a lot of incredibly bad fake products in some of the open markets... but no so much over the last decade.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 10:54 UTC

Ugh. Reminds me of the fake "Nicon" cameras I used to see for sale in Turkish markets for... well... whatever they can get you to pay for them.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2017 at 05:27 UTC as 104th comment | 2 replies
On article Google shares high-resolution Pixel 2 sample photos (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Old Cameras: Watchman :)
These pictures are embarrassingly good.

What's embarrassing about it? In good lighting I expect good IQ... and yes, many of these are better than 135 film could deliver, so they are seriously good.

I think they've done a really great job with "contextual portrait" compositions. However, the landscape shots look seriously overprocessed and the tighter portraits also look a bit off. Basically, I'd bet there is a lot of processing in all of these, and it is pretty obvious what it is trained to optimize for. It can and will get better.... I'd also bet it would be hard to do as well postprocessing the raws as the phone's processing is doing.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 04:23 UTC
In reply to:

AiryDiscus: 17 stops of DR = minimum full-well capacity of 131k e-. Typical FWC for a 5um pixel camera is ~30k e-. That's a read noise of 1e-. With a read noise of 2e- (roughly typical) they would need a FWC of 260k to achieve that DR.

And it wouldn't fit in a linear 16 bit format anyway.

I'm calling "creative marketing" on this one.

The processing I've been doing in my TDCI (Time Domain Continuous Imaging) research typically improve DR by about 3 stops -- very credible that they're doing something similar with a sensor directly recording 14EV.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2017 at 01:04 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: These are not particularly high-resolution finished images, but I usually target 3000x2000 for finished images, and even the difference between my A7RII and NEX-7 + focal reducer is quite small for that too. Notice that I'm talking about using the same lens on both with the focal reducer making the views very similar. In the shots here, I see plenty of differences due to the lens choices, but not much else.

In truth, I think the similarity here is enhanced by the fact it is Sony sensor vs. Sony sensor. There is more variation between, say, a Sony and a Canon... although again, it's not that much. I do see a more significant IQ change going down to MFT or 1", but even then it's not huge. For that matter, the IQ of the 16MP images out of the $130 Canon PowerShot SX530HS (which I use a fleet of, reprogrammed under CHDK) is really not all that far down in many ways -- especially at the long end of the zoom range (equiv. of 1200mm on FF). All are much better than 135 film was. :-)

The PowerShots are used for many things; a good example is discussed in my 2015 Electronic Imaging paper: http://aggregate.org/DIT/ei2015tdciFinal.pdf

I know people debate this, but film generally has very high noise, has coarser tonal gradations, the emulsion is thick and not kept very flat, etc. -- all of which means the best carefully-processed 135 film is IMO comparable to (although different from) clean 6MP images, and commercially-processed was more like 1.5MP.

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 20:18 UTC

These are not particularly high-resolution finished images, but I usually target 3000x2000 for finished images, and even the difference between my A7RII and NEX-7 + focal reducer is quite small for that too. Notice that I'm talking about using the same lens on both with the focal reducer making the views very similar. In the shots here, I see plenty of differences due to the lens choices, but not much else.

In truth, I think the similarity here is enhanced by the fact it is Sony sensor vs. Sony sensor. There is more variation between, say, a Sony and a Canon... although again, it's not that much. I do see a more significant IQ change going down to MFT or 1", but even then it's not huge. For that matter, the IQ of the 16MP images out of the $130 Canon PowerShot SX530HS (which I use a fleet of, reprogrammed under CHDK) is really not all that far down in many ways -- especially at the long end of the zoom range (equiv. of 1200mm on FF). All are much better than 135 film was. :-)

Link | Posted on Oct 4, 2017 at 18:17 UTC as 39th comment | 5 replies
On article 10 macro photography tips for beginners (50 comments in total)

Macro lenses tend to have rather simple formulas -- the old ones are nearly as good as the new ones, and they are cheap. 50mm ones are around $50, 100mm tend to be between $100-$200. Bellows, such as the Spiratone rapid rail models (which have push-in-to-slide focus wheels), are also really nice and cheap, but they do suck a lot of air and dust, so expect to clean your sensor more often.

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2017 at 21:28 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "we'll definitely be keeping a eye out for Hunt's creation."

Why? There are plenty of excellent film cameras selling for under $10 on eBay, and this is *Digital* Photography Review. Too much film junk lately....

apestorm: My first 135-film camera was a Konica C35 -- http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Konica_C35. Great camera; I don't have mine anymore because a thief also thought it was great. :-( You'll find the C35 on eBay starting around $15.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 18:08 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "we'll definitely be keeping a eye out for Hunt's creation."

Why? There are plenty of excellent film cameras selling for under $10 on eBay, and this is *Digital* Photography Review. Too much film junk lately....

The Davinator: "It isnt a rumour."

Read what it says -- it says "it was announced that Bellamy Hunt of Japan Camera Hunter (JCH) is working on a new 35mm compact camera project" -- any details are entirely speculation. This isn't a product announcement. This doesn't contain a release date nor specifications.

A rumor is defined as "a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth." The specifications, vague as they are, are entirely rumor.

To DPReview's credit, they titled this correctly as "Japan Camera Hunter is designing a 35mm 'premium compact' camera" -- they don't say a specific product is coming nor anything like that, but merely quote the presumably factual statement that somebody is designing something, and then give some speculation as to what that might eventually mean.

I read this literally as "a guy is designing a compact 135-format film camera which, if eventually built and marketed, would hopefully sell at a premium price."

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 15:58 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "we'll definitely be keeping a eye out for Hunt's creation."

Why? There are plenty of excellent film cameras selling for under $10 on eBay, and this is *Digital* Photography Review. Too much film junk lately....

Well, I see many of you think that the vague mention of possible future introduction of a not-at-all-high-end point-and-shoot film camera is news -- and news appropriate for DPReview. For the record, it isn't even news yet!

I've shot and processed a lot of film and prints; my best estimate is actually a lifetime total of over 1M silver-halide images (negatives + slides + prints + proof images). I have used film formats from Minox to 30x40" and processed both B&W and color. I still have all my film cameras (I've actually acquired more over the last decade) and darkroom equipment except for the Stabilization Processor I used for press-release prints (no paper nor chemicals available for that anymore).

In sum, I have nothing against film -- but I have a lot against pretending that a rumor about a film camera that wouldn't have gotten a glance years ago is news relevant to digital photography. My advice: don't wait for this, buy a vastly better used film camera via eBay and use it.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 15:08 UTC
In reply to:

tbcass: "Only more time and more testing will tell if the D850 can truly stand up to the D5's autofocus performance, though we should reinforce that D5-level subject tracking is an awfully lofty benchmark to reach for. In our experience, it's a benchmark that has remained out of reach of any camera to date, and whether or not the D850 measures up will be revealed in our full review."

I remember the AF of the A99ii was criticized for the same reason, not on D5 level. It's time for DPR to take the price of the camera under consideration when doing comparisons. It's a $3200 45mp camera with great IQ. Let's leave it at that and not make such a big deal about AF tracking. Mention it? Yes but don't overemphasize it.

Agreed. DPReview has always weighted AF much more heavily than I do. In fact, I strongly prefer manual focus unless I have to be shooting one-handed. Even if AF picks the wrong thing to focus on 1 out of 50 shots, I find that a lot more than 2% annoying....

Manual focus seems by far the most natural way to specify what I want in focus. This is especially true if my focus goal isn't to set sharpest focus on one object in the scene. I'm often focusing stopped down to see and control actual DoF in my still-bright EVF. The TechArt Pro LM-EA7 is really nice in that it can tweak my approximate manual focus, although it's often a little slow to tweak it... no doubt partly because phase detection doesn't really work with the lens stopped down (although Sonys are still good up to about f/8).

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 14:32 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-A10 sample gallery (165 comments in total)

" it looks plenty tempting if you're on a budget and swayed by Fujifilm's lovely JPEGs"

And yet, the image you show above is one that was NOT an OOC JPEG, but edited to taste. ;-) Actually, Fuji's accurately-modeling-film too-contrasty JPEGs are among the things I like least about Fujis....

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 14:06 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "we'll definitely be keeping a eye out for Hunt's creation."

Why? There are plenty of excellent film cameras selling for under $10 on eBay, and this is *Digital* Photography Review. Too much film junk lately....

Film is "off topic" here and the vast majority of film camera stuff here has been cameras that would have been dismissed as "junk" during the period when film was king. Most film photography magazines would not have even bothered reviewing a "point and shoot with a decent 28mm or 35mm lens" -- so now a digital photography site awaits it with such great anticipation that a rumor it is under development is important news? This is filler, not news.

Link | Posted on Sep 30, 2017 at 12:06 UTC
Total: 1477, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »