Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 »
 71 
 on: Today at 04:09:13 PM 
Started by Hans Kruse - Last post by Hans Kruse
Thanks very much for the comments. I still have space on one of the Dolomites workshops in 2014.

 72 
 on: Today at 04:06:32 PM 
Started by Telecaster - Last post by jferrari
C'mon you guys. Everyone knows that LightRoom Mobile is just a stepping stone to get users prepared for the release of LightRoom IC (in camera) where you simply do your edits right in the camera while staring at the tiny touchscreen then dump the results into the cloud, laptop, desktop or other destinations via WiFi, Bluetooth or Aquatooth (if it's raining.) You'll also be able to call people on your DSLR...

 73 
 on: Today at 04:00:00 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by eronald
deleted

 74 
 on: Today at 03:58:30 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by tsjanik


P. S. Am I right that lenses designated "FA 645" without any "D" are designs from the film era? If so, I see just the four digital era Pentax 645 lenses mentioned above.


Yes, and if you recall we made a five-year bet two years ago about MF sensor prices; I'm not sure who's winning.  Smiley

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=65392.msg520976#msg520976

 75 
 on: Today at 03:54:39 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by Telecaster
Actually, if I worked only for pleasure i'd buy another M8 or two M9's a few lenses and never look back, because they do about everything I would need for personal work. For commerce things like tethering come into play.

I just bought a second M8(.2) and have arranged to sell my A7r, FE lenses & various adapters to a friend-of-a-friend (at close to cost). For me the M8's pleasure factor is off the charts. My favorite M lenses just sing with it too. Unloading the Sony also frees up time & opportunities for using the 645D. Sometimes ya gotta do the wrong thing to find out what the right thing is.   Wink

-Dave-

 76 
 on: Today at 03:52:37 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by Jim Kasson
Nothing stops a CCD design from adding an on-chip AD at the end of each half line or half column, on chip or off chip.

In order to do that, the CCD semiconductor process has to allow the construction of the devices required by the circuit design of the ADC. Not always easy. Getting analog devices on mostly-digital CMOS chips was, as I remember, somewhat of a struggle.

Jim

 77 
 on: Today at 03:45:59 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by eronald
I think your fine with what you have, given what you shoot.  

I don't think your going to see a Lecia S anything or a Pentax 645 drop that much in price.   The people that use medium format generally have no issue lighting a scene or using a tripod.

Also you didn't factor in the price of lenses.

Actually, if I worked only for pleasure i'd buy another M8 or two M9's a few lenses and never look back, because they do about everything I would need for personal work.  For commerce things like tethering come into play.

IMO

BC

As you say, I seem to be doing alright with what I use, namely a $1500 1Ds3 that I bought used, about as clapped out as an old yellow cab Smiley
There's a bunch of them being sold locally with replaced shutters now, and I'm seriously thinking of picking one out of the bunch that has a good sensor. Mine cannot really do 160O ISO.

I don't know about the 645D which as you say was probably bought by pros who light, or landscape guys who shoot by day, but the Leica S are sure to flood the used market in due course as they were bought by amateurs; it's happening now with the M9s here in Paris, all these guys who bought them as toys are dumping them - if an M9 has scratches it is now unsaleable. BTW, a lot of M9 samples have had their sensors changed, there must have been an issue.

Edmund

 78 
 on: Today at 03:29:24 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by bcooter
Actually, I think I'll probably also buy one of the old CCD Pentaxes or a Leica S when the prices have fallen.

I think your fine with what you have, given what you shoot. 

I don't think your going to see a Lecia S anything or a Pentax 645 drop that much in price.   The people that use medium format generally have no issue lighting a scene or using a tripod.

Also you didn't factor in the price of lenses.

Actually, if I worked only for pleasure i'd buy another M8 or two M9's a few lenses and never look back, because they do about everything I would need for personal work.  For commerce things like tethering come into play.

IMO

BC

 79 
 on: Today at 03:20:35 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by eronald

With the CCD cameras I've owned and still use, I see a difference, our crew sees a difference, our retoucher sees a difference, when client's select images from our portfolio about 70% are from CCD images and since more than half of what we show is from cmos cameras, that's interesting.  

I know the assistants see a difference because they all ask to borrow the contax/phase and now the leica and they don't ask unless they really want something.

Though except for certain situations, I'm off the ten billion iso, 600 frames a set squirrel wheel.  

Due to budget and time restraints I got into that but 400 frames of junk is 400 frames of junk.   I'd rather have 20 good options that work.

I'm also off the we'll fix it in post style of working.    That only goes so far and post production should be a part of the beginning creative brief, not a band aid to fix something.

To me CCD cameras work great in post processing.

Whether the look comes from a filter array, the convertor or the sensor I don't really care.   I just know what I see and I see it from the cropped sensor M8 to the p21+, p30+, Aptus 22 and the Leica S2.

In fact I bought the Leica because I knew cmos was coming and I thought I should get in while there was still something left to get.    

A great byproduct of the S2 was how well it handled HMI and even LED lighting.  We do a lot of parallel productions with motion and stills and usually my cmos camera files look washed out and thin with hmi lighting, the ccd has bit and color.

All of the samples I've posted from the S2 were continuous lighting, mostly hmi.



and this is the original crop



This was a one off from the same session with the oly em-1 and it's pretty it worked, but it's a much more fragile file than the Leica and much more difficult to separate colors.


Anyway, we shoot a lot of images, This is 9 months of master raws

and I stopped counting numbers when we crossed the 300 terabyte count.  (which obviously covers a number of years). though I based my opinion ONLY on my experience.  

I don't know or care how other photographers get their results, that's none of my business.

But let me be clear, that doesn't mean I'm right, it just means I'm right for me.   We all work differently, we all have different end agendas and obviously different opinions.

IMO

BC


Actually, I think I'll probably also buy one of the old CCD Pentaxes or a Leica S when the prices have fallen. These two cameras seem usable in practice for an occasional amateur like me; the old prices of Phase were nowhere sustainable, because of the lousy body and because half those backs are actually quite rotten in practice.  It's clear that CMOS is now getting really good, esthetically I'd say the yellow file is the one I like most out of this bunch. But of course the way the scene is set and lit counts for a lot.

Edmund

 80 
 on: Today at 03:14:27 PM 
Started by Atina - Last post by eronald
The primary difference between CCDs and active pixel CMOS sensors is not where the A/D is done: Canon for example still uses off-board ADC, like all CCD cameras do.

Instead most basic difference is that an active pixel CMOS sensor reads out each photosite by transferring the signal directly to the edge of the sensor, and amplifying it in the process, which helps to reduce the effect of subsequent noise in the analog electronic signal path.  I see no good reason why anyone remains nostalgic for the older, slower, noisier, unamplified approach of a CCD.  In particular, Ronald's idea of a CCD with on-chip ADC might be viable, but it would not address the primary disadvantage of CCD's.

On the other hand, most recent active pixel sensor designs [Sony EXMOR, recent Panasonic 4/3" sensors, the Aptina sensors in Nikon One cameras, the CMOSIS sensor of the newest Leica M, etc.] also then do the ADC on the sensor, and in fact do it with an ADC unit at the end of each column of photosites, and this early ADC seems to help further with noise reduction, by avoiding the need for the analog signal to be transferred along the sensor's edge and beyond.


CCDs might be better suited to small volume products: apparently, once a basic CDD photosite is designed, it is relatively easy to lay out sensors of various shapes and sizes using that photosite design, whereas each different shape and size of active pixel CMOS sensor requires more new design work.

Nothing stops a CCD design from adding an onchip AD at the end of each half line or half column, on chip or off chip.
Existing designs have 4 readouts, I believe.

Edmund

Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 »
Ad
Ad
Ad