Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 69 of 69

Thread: A must read comparison

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Yeah, I wrinkled a brow over that myself. Is the Pentax 16 bit? And I wonder if having to use DNG RAW software has anything to do with that? I know that opening Hassey files in LR doesn't seem to have as much latitude as when processed in Phocus. I can make up for it a little bit in LR by using selective tools to pull out more in areas ... but it can get dicey.

    -Marc
    14bit

    Attachment 37496

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1287103383.html

  2. #52
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtKamka View Post
    Still impressed with what that little M9 can produce. Fantastic lenses, little or no anti-aliasing filter and a CCD sensor are a great combination.
    Get facile with three frame stitches to overcome the pixel deficit and you've got an MF in your pocket

  3. #53
    tokengirl
    Guest

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Is the Pentax 16 bit?
    No it is not, it's 14 bit. Could that explain it?

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Dallas/Novosibirsk
    Posts
    632
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by tokengirl View Post
    No it is not, it's 14 bit. Could that explain it?
    in part.

    I did comparition between D700 and ZDb , both runnin' at 14 bits, a while back, and ZD still would pull out a bit more "umph" in 3D feel of image.

    As does 645D, from what we seen so far. You cant beat simple thing called "physics".

    Bigger sensors / bigger film wins on larger prints.

  5. #55
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: A must read comparison

    It would be great if you could simply read a spec on the number of bits of conversion in the A/D filter and that would tell you everything.

    It IS an important part of the puzzle. But the quality of the A/D convertor (not all 12 bit converters are equal, not all 14 bit converters are equal, not all 16 bit converts are equal), the heat sinking, electrical isolation, and quality of wiring between the sensor and A/D convertor matter, the use (or non use) of dark frame calibration and the quality of that dark frame calibration matter, the type/quality of demosasicing, noise reduction, and sharpening math matters (most raw developers start with relatively generic math which is open-source or university-researched but spend lots of time and money on tweaking them).

    So sure, you can blame the bits (it does play a big role) but the dynamic range, and importantly how natural the outer range of the dynamic range can be rendered (tonal smoothness, shadow color accuracy etc) cannot simply be reduced to one thing.

    Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
    __________________

    Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
    Phase One Partner of the Year
    Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

    National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
    Newsletter | RSS Feed
    Buy Capture One at 10% off

  6. #56
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A must read comparison

    I taught a photographer how to use LR a couple of days ago. He's a big name in this town but he tells me he's a photographer not a technician and changed to digital thinking he could shoot and develop like film and got a rude awakening so he employed me to show him how to do it properly.

    I calibrated his screen for a start. I then showed him how the different tools worked, when to use what for which usage, etc. He kept asking me how I knew what numbers to dial in, how far to push the slider. He kept asking me whether the histogram was correct. In other words he'd been reading too much.

    The simple answer was 'when it looks right'. You use the tools for the correct purpose but when you know what to use when, just twiddle it until you like how it looks and screw what people tell you should be right.

    There was an interesting article by Andrew Rodney on LuLa recently about calibrating a screen to print. He shrugged off all the conventional wisdom and put it in a nutshell 'when it looks right'.

    I remembered this when I read Marc's post. The numbers don't mean squat. It's what it looks like and how it resonates with you personally for your needs. Anything else is just measurabating.

    One persons needs cannot dictate your specific needs, what you try to achieve. I like good tonality and facial tones but couldn't give a bleep about accurate colours elsewhere. For someone else this is essential. Heck you could find a million other examples.

    That article by two people who are neither pro photographers, neither skilled reviewers and neither experienced with the systems or software they used told me nothing. They weren't sure it even told themselves anything at the end of the day!

    Bottom line, only opinion that counts is when you've shot it your way, processed it your way, printed it your way and you say whether it 'clicks' for you or not. Anything else is just an entertaining use of time reading academic studies of an subjective opinion about a camera based on the users specific personal needs, chips on shoulders and personal bugbears.

    I like DPReview, he tells me what features the camera has with screenshots (nothing else). LuLa is amusing and entertaining but it tells me practically nothing about the fulfillment of my own needs.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  7. #57
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A must read comparison

    Ben my theory numbers really count when you DON'T have a calibrated system otherwise they are nice guides to go by than do what looks the best. I ALWAYS tell folks on the workshops when they are processing WB means very little if you like a certain look in your files go with what feels good to yourself. People it is obviously a little more critical but again even after WB i will sometimes adjust to my liking. This is not to say though you should not know your raw processing better than you know yourself far from it become a master at it. If you know the software there is always a little gold token at the end of the process. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  8. #58
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A must read comparison

    Marc, Pentax is 14Bit as I remember.

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Dallas/Novosibirsk
    Posts
    632
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    If you know the software there is always a little gold token at the end of the process. LOL
    and here i was - thinking its just a wee golden cog pictogram in C1...

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    271
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    46

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtKamka View Post
    ..... It's really a shame that Leica's managerial and financial issues at the time prevented the company from developing a serious replacement......
    There was no financial issues, otherwise they wouldn't produced the S2 !
    It would have cost far less to produce a 10 !
    No it was a missed management which in return can raise up financial issues now. The sales of the M9 are done and the S2 looks like a flop, hard times ahead probably.

  11. #61
    Subscriber Member KurtKamka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,232
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    26

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by sinwen View Post
    There was no financial issues, otherwise they wouldn't produced the S2 !
    It would have cost far less to produce a 10 !
    No it was a missed management which in return can raise up financial issues now. The sales of the M9 are done and the S2 looks like a flop, hard times ahead probably.
    From all that I've seen, the supply of M9s has just recently caught up with demand. Also, the anecdotal information I've heard on the S2 also runs contrary to what you've heard. I've heard that the S2 has sold very well with the caveat that Leica could've probably sold a few more S2 lenses should they have been available.

  12. #62
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: A must read comparison

    ON NOES!
    Lets not turn this into another S2/R10/Leica/shoulda woulda coulda thread.
    We have enough of them already.
    -bob

  13. #63
    Senior Member David Schneider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    509
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    David,
    As an ex 5D Mark II owner I disagree.
    The step from 5D to mark II was an improvement, but the trade off in the 5DII produced images that had smeary color at almost all isos which grew worse with increasing sensitivity. ok, sure it allowed you to get something but at the loss of several bits of image information depth and increases in banding. Of course if what you shoot is all about low light, then it is a must for you, but for what I shoot ISO above 800 was unusable.
    -bob
    Bob,

    My experience is different. I went to 5dmk2 from 5d in the middle of my senior session and I didn't see loss of info or banding, but I don't claim to be an expert in that kind of thing. I just compare what I've done with one camera to what I'm doing with another camera.

    I'm not sure my H3d2-39 at 800iso is better than my old Canon 20D. Certainly not better than my old 5d. I'll have to do a comparison during my winter slow season.

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A must read comparison

    MODERATOR PLEADS
    Lets not turn this into yet another S2 thread


    Quote Originally Posted by sinwen View Post
    The sales of the M9 are done and the S2 looks like a flop, hard times ahead probably.
    Sorry but they have already sold a 4 figure number of S2 already... and this is a flop ?...
    Last edited by Bob; 17th November 2010 at 22:54.

  15. #65
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by David Schneider View Post
    Bob,

    My experience is different. I went to 5dmk2 from 5d in the middle of my senior session and I didn't see loss of info or banding, but I don't claim to be an expert in that kind of thing. I just compare what I've done with one camera to what I'm doing with another camera.

    I'm not sure my H3d2-39 at 800iso is better than my old Canon 20D. Certainly not better than my old 5d. I'll have to do a comparison during my winter slow season.
    Perhaps I did not make myself clear.
    I was not referring to the 5D to 5DII transition, what I was meaning to say is that with the 5DII (for example) at the higher range of iso settings (and to a lesser degree the lower although it is still present) one can see a considerable amount of color smearing. This is one of the tricks of the trade that engineers do to improve the apparent high iso performance of the camera. The trade-off is that if they had not done that, and it is a deliberate choice, then the over-all look of the images would have been better but the high iso specsmanship would have been harder to assert.
    Think about the physics for a moment, the photon flux at the sensor limits the potential signal to noise ratio based on the number of levels of quantization desired, the size of the pixel, the exposure/sampling time, the well saturation limit, and the quantum efficiency of the sensor. Quantum efficiency of back lit sensors can approach 90% but is more typically about 70% and front lit sensors are about 20%. A 20% Qe sensor effectively throws away 80% of the light falling on it. When sensors are "pushed" they really don't get more sensitive, they merely crank in more amplification (a combination of digital by shifting and analog by increasing gain). The base sensitivity is determined by the flux density and the number of photons necessary to saturate the sensor cell. So as you peer at your images, looking for the evidence of noise, just do it with the knowledge that each time iso sensitivity is doubled, you lose a bit of quantization level. A 100 iso base sensor that produces 12 "real" bits of information that is pushed to iso 16400 has only 6 bits left. The result is banding, maybe you don't see it because noise tends to obscure it, but it is there and can be measured.
    -bob
    Last edited by Bob; 18th November 2010 at 02:05.

  16. #66
    Subscriber Member jotloob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    KEMPTEN / GERMANY
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    116

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post

    Think about the physics for a moment, the photon flux at the sensor limits the potential signal to noise ratio based on the number of levels of quantization desired, the size of the pixel, the exposure/sampling time, teh well saturation limit, and the quantum efficiency of the sensor. Quantum efficiency of back lit sensors can approach 90% but is more typically about 70% and front lit sensors are about 20%. A 20% Qe sensor effectively throws away 80% of the light falling on it. When sensors are "pushed" they really don't get more sensitive, they merely crank in more amplification (a combination of digital by shifting and analog by increasing gain). The base sensitivity is determined by the flux density and the number of photons necessary to saturate the sensor cell. So as you peer at your images, looking for the evidence of noise, just do it with the knowledge that each time iso sensitivity is doubled, you lose a bit of quantization level. A 100 iso base sensor that produces 12 "real" bits of information that is pushed to iso 16400 has only 6 bits left. The result is banding, maybe you don't see it because noise tends to obscure it, but it is there and can be measured.
    -bob

    Thank you Bob .
    Very interesting and I never thought about these details .
    One never stops learning .
    Regards . Jürgen .
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  17. #67
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: A must read comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by sinwen View Post
    The sales of the M9 are done and the S2 looks like a flop, hard times ahead probably.

    the cup has almost nothing in it at all! (well, 3/4 is as good as none).

    Just this guy you know

  18. #68
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: A must read comparison

    I can't speak for M9 camera sales, but I can say that ANY of the Summilux M lenses are very hard to find new - production is not keeping up with demand.

    If this is a flop, bring it on!

    Bill

  19. #69
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: A must read comparison

    Regarding Leica, to quote Mark Twain, "The rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated"

    Actually, I think that applies to Pentax too.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •