Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
 61 
 on: Today at 02:31:26 PM 
Started by Josh-H - Last post by AlterEgo
Increasing ISO means fewer photons collected
ISO is not a part of exposure, which is exposure time and aperture...

 62 
 on: Today at 02:25:00 PM 
Started by Josh-H - Last post by shadowblade
Hi Rory,

When comparing ISO 3200 shots, the photon shot noise is the same between models and that noise still dominates a lot of the total noise footprint. When you start pushing such files, the Readnoise will start to show itself more clearly. The same would happen if you use much higher ISO settings, which will get less and less photon signal, and relatively more of the constant Readnoise floor.

I haven't had time yet to compare the files in detail myself, so I don't know what higher ISOs do, but the 1DX Mark II should be better.

Cheers,
Bart

You've got it the wrong way round.

Increasing ISO means fewer photons collected and more amplication, which means increased photon shot noise. If you want less photon shot noise and more contribution from read noise, you need to look at lower ISOs - at ISO 100, there will be minimal photon shot noise, with most noise being read noise.

 63 
 on: Today at 02:10:02 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by TomFrerichs
I, too, prefer the first one.  For me, the contrasting hues on the top and bottom help to divide the image into two and accent the highlight on the center right.  Also, the sun reflecting on the fields makes a nice line to draw my eye to the same place.

Tom

 64 
 on: Today at 02:08:20 PM 
Started by gonzalo - Last post by Mark D Segal
if you cant' see it, it's not there.

What ever "it" is, if you can't see "it", I'd agree "it" doesn't matter to you; but that doesn't mean "it" isn't there - again depending on what "it" is. Anyhow this is beside the point. You posed a questionable dichotomy between people who measure and people who create. I was simply saying that numerous very creative people use numbers and measurements for crafting what they create, while of course others may not. The reality of creative processes is highly varied and nuanced.

 65 
 on: Today at 02:05:27 PM 
Started by EinstStein - Last post by TomFrerichs
Aside from the depth of field issues already discussed, the FF (24 * 36 mm, 367 mm^2) has over twice the surface area of APS-C (15.6* 23.5 mm, 366 mm^2) and thus, for a given aperture, the FF collects more than twice the number of photo-electrons than the APS-C. Since signal:noise varies as the square root of the number of photoelectrons collected, the FF will have about 1.4x the S:N as the APS-C. With APS-H as with Canon (18.6*27.9 mm), the difference is somewhat less.

This difference is confirmed by DXO for the latest generation of Nikons (6 dB = 1 f/stop)

Bill

I'm not disputing the DxO curves, nor am I saying that this assertion is in error, but I would like some clarification.

I'm assuming we're talking about shot noise here; the camera contribution is not counted. 

In that case, isn't our "signal" the measurement from one photosite, and not the aggregation from all photosites?  What I'm trying to say is that visible noise appears to me to be localized to pixels.

I understand with a larger sample, the effects of variation within the sample become smaller.  Flip a coin ten times and you may end up with ten heads.  Flip it a hundred times, and if you got 100 heads I'd worry about the coin, giving Rob C his coin back and asking for a different one.  For this reason, a FF sensor would show a lower aggregate S/N ratio.

So, with equal photosites, the chances of getting too many or two few photons at a _single_ photosite are the same, regardless of how many total photosites you have. Therefore, given equal photosites--leaving out the biggest variable: camera performance--a FF and cropped-frame sensor would seem to have the same shot noise performance on the pixel level.

Now, where am I wrong?

 66 
 on: Today at 01:29:57 PM 
Started by alatreille - Last post by Arlen
I built a system very similar to yours a few months ago. Used the first 5 items on your list, as well as the Coolermaster CPU cooler. 32GB of GSkill DDR4 Ram, EVGA Nvidia 650 graphics card. I also added a 500GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD drive for my image-storing working drive. Reused some of my existing HDD and optical drives for longer term storage etc., rather than buying new ones such as those on your list. The cost for the new parts was about $1600 U.S., and I put them together myself. I'm very happy with this system. A quite noticeable improvement in speed; LR and PS move along lickety-split now.

 67 
 on: Today at 01:21:26 PM 
Started by Paul Ozzello - Last post by Paul Ozzello
Hi all,

I've had problems with the CYAN channel on my Epson 9890 since the day I bought it - the printer is two years old now and on it's 3rd head, and today I'm having problems again with CYAN...

I can print a perfect nozzle check after a power cleaning, in fact I can print a dozen perfect nozzle checks one after another but as soon as I make a print, I get CYAN banding and the nozzle checks are bad until I do another Power cleaning. Is this a problem with the head, air in the lines, a problem with the capping station ?



Thank you,


Paul

 68 
 on: Today at 01:01:41 PM 
Started by Josh-H - Last post by BartvanderWolf
Thanks very much for posting this Josh.  Have a great and safe trip to the South Island.

For what it is worth, I really can't see much difference between the 1DX and 1DXMKII files, viewing with default color noise reduction, no luminance noise reduction and default sharpening in Lightroom.

Screen grab at 100% comparing 1DXMKII ISO 3200 (left) vs 1DX ISO 3200 (right)

[...]

Perhaps those with more expertise can evaluate how much improvement there is between the two cameras.   

Hi Rory,

When comparing ISO 3200 shots, the photon shot noise is the same between models and that noise still dominates a lot of the total noise footprint. When you start pushing such files, the Readnoise will start to show itself more clearly. The same would happen if you use much higher ISO settings, which will get less and less photon signal, and relatively more of the constant Readnoise floor.

I haven't had time yet to compare the files in detail myself, so I don't know what higher ISOs do, but the 1DX Mark II should be better.

Cheers,
Bart

 69 
 on: Today at 12:59:01 PM 
Started by the_ether - Last post by Alan Smallbone
I don't have the iPad Pro, I just have a regular ipad, normally I do not use Apple products, I have it mostly for my drone. However I am playing with some of the photo apps. I did find a way to transfer pictures from anything to anything without having to use itunes, which I dislike. It is called phototransfer app.
http://www.phototransferapp.com/

It is free for windows, the apps for android and apple cost a few bucks. I can move photos from my new Android Galaxy S7 to my PC or my iPad directly using wifi, no the fastest method but it works. You can try the apps before buying them. The only problem I have found is that it will not transfer the DNG files from phone to the PC but the developer has been contacted about it and was not aware of the raw formats now, so I think he is working on a fix for it.

Alan

 70 
 on: Today at 12:53:31 PM 
Started by Boris Pasman - Last post by Boris Pasman
Hi guys!

I have a following medium format bundle that I want to trade to Leica M. I'be bought a Leica M9 one year ago and since then hardly ever pick up my Phase One and that's a shame because it's a marvelous system.

1) Phase One 645DF + Phase One IQ180 + Schneider-Kreuznach 80 LS, mint. 4000 actuations.
2) Schneider-Kreuznach 110 LS, mint
3) Schneider-Kreuznach 55 LS, lnib
4) Schneider-Kreuznach 28 LS, excellent
5) Mamiya 300 4.5, ln
6) Mamiya 200 2.8, ln
7) Hasselblad FE 110/2, excellent
8) Hasselblad FE 80/2.8, excellent
9) Mamiya 150 2.8, excellent
10) Phase One V-Grip, ln

I'm interested in Leica M9-P, Leica M240, Noctilux 50 0.95, Leica 50 APO, 28 1.4, 35 1.4, 90 APO, 35 f/2 ASPH etc.

If you're interested PM me and we will figure something out. I'm located in Russia but will happily travel anywhere in Europe or USA so we could carefully inspect all gear and person before making a trade.

I'm a passive Luminous Landscaper, but I have a good friend who is respected member of that beautiful forum (I will ask him to vouch for me).

I will provide RAWs on demand, photos of a gear will be a little later.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10