Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Lens Design - should it rely on software  (Read 12895 times)

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2007, 03:54:19 am »

Quote
i would really hate to see the next generation of chips going up to 3200 and finding out that this is done purely by applying software....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144971\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quote
hasselblat already doing that w/ their new Flexcolour or Phocus, older backs are gaining a stop or something...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145026\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is a firmware upgrade, not a software upgrade. If you would like an explanation of the difference, Jim–all you have to do is ask. There are plenty of people here to help you. Really.
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

TechTalk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3612
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2007, 04:51:04 am »

Quote
Further this issue is clouded by hasselblad not making this lens and the distortion algorimths apertaining to that 'open source'
SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144886\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Let's see... Here's a project designed to optimize a system that starts with thousands of measurements being made and assembled into a data base, then software and firmware have to be written for the body and back requiring many hours of coding, followed by additional time and effort and expense to create a software module in the RAW conversion program to complete the process.

The 28mm is an extension of this project that incorporates 21st century abilities to correct certain types of lens aberrations extremely well by means of automatic digital corrections to the RAW data and incorporates that into the initial lens design in order to enhance lens performance in areas that cannot be corrected or improved by digital means. (More on this later.) To do this, in a seamless and automatic fashion, requires that the lens, body, back and software be integrated in a seamless way.

All in an effort to have a competive edge in the market by offering added value. This is seen by some as terrible thing by not sharing it with competitors.

Any photographers that would like to shoot thousands of images, do the post production work, add in retouching and build a searchable data base–then give them to their competitors to sell. I'm sure you'll find takers on that offer.

Of course there is licensing. Anyone here licensing their creative efforts to other photographers to enhance their competitors position in the market?

Why shouldn't Hasselblad keep their own work proprietary? Because someone purchased another companies product and mounted it to some of Hasselblad's products?
« Last Edit: October 10, 2007, 05:13:36 am by TechTalk »
Logged
Respice, adspice, prospice - Look to the past, the present, the future

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2007, 05:03:52 am »

Quote
If you compare the image before / after correction there is no noticeable difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144901\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's not what Khun_K said!
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2007, 05:08:38 am »

Quote
Yeah, but the Mamiya 28mm is well over $5000, and considering the average price of Hassy lenses are twice as much as the Mamiya lenses, I guess they did pass the savings along!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=144985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I wonder has anybody got access to both 28mm's (and bodies) to do a comparison. I've seen Mamiya 28mm pics posted here, but not the Hasselblad. Having said that, is there any point?... nobody's going to change system, just for one lens being a little better, are they!  
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2007, 05:14:56 am »

Quote
on my quest to find out, if it´s worth it to get the 28mm mamiya, yesterday I bought an old ukrainian 30mm arsat for 80 euros. first tests left me quite suprised how sharp it is. after the image is corrected for CA and defished I get a very undistorted picture. its actualy easier to deal with, than a normal wideangle with a unsymetrical distortion (wave, moustache..). the problem is, after its defished it looses some angle of view - from about 120 down to 100. still slightly more than a 35mm wide angle.  perhaps about the same aov as a 28mm lens?

would i pass the savings - if I would use the arsat instead of the 5000$ mamiya - onto my clients - just like hasselblad - yes course ;-)
stefan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145036\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Stefan, Good to hear that. I have that Arsat lens as well, and a Mamiya 24mm (although no back; courier company have lost a P45 coming to me, otherwise I'd be testing too) Can I ask which software you used to correct CA and defish. This is something that had crossed my mind, but I hadn't started exploring the details of how.
Thanks
Jon
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

josayeruk

  • Guest
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #25 on: October 10, 2007, 06:05:33 am »

Quote
That's not what Khun_K said!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am looking at my screen now and there is no difference.

But don't take my word for it - look yourself before forming an opinion!

Jo S.x
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #26 on: October 10, 2007, 06:18:57 am »

Quote
Let's see... Here's a project designed to optimize a system that starts with thousands of measurements being made and assembled into a data base, then software and firmware have to be written for the body and back requiring many hours of coding, followed by additional time and effort and expense to create a software module in the RAW conversion program to complete the process.

The 28mm is an extension of this project that incorporates 21st century abilities to correct certain types of lens aberrations extremely well by means of automatic digital corrections to the RAW data and incorporates that into the initial lens design in order to enhance lens performance in areas that cannot be corrected or improved by digital means. (More on this later.) To do this, in a seamless and automatic fashion, requires that the lens, body, back and software be integrated in a seamless way.

All in an effort to have a competive edge in the market by offering added value. This is seen by some as terrible thing by not sharing it with competitors.

Any photographers that would like to shoot thousands of images, do the post production work, add in retouching and build a searchable data base–then give them to their competitors to sell. I'm sure you'll find takers on that offer.

Of course there is licensing. Anyone here licensing their creative efforts to other photographers to enhance their competitors position in the market?

Why shouldn't Hasselblad keep their own work proprietary? Because someone purchased another companies product and mounted it to some of Hasselblad's products?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145047\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I said the issue was clouded - I didnt say Hassy was wrong

The issue is whether the technology of using digital and analoge correction, not just analoge is pure or not

Hassies descision right or wrong seems to have biased various posters angainst the whole technology

-----

In terms of that lens - I own an H camera and didnt opt to buy an hassy back at the time because they only offered a tethered solution - the imacon

I am still a hassy customer

I am in the market for a 50 or a zoom right now

And I feel that thier system has been closed from me - one of thier own customers - it was a most unusual if not unique move

I would like to be a able to buy that lens and try it on my current back sinar54 uncorrected

I would then be pleased for a hassy rep to visit me show the the amazing impovemets offered by DAC

And then I might persuaded to upgrade my back given a suitably attractive trade path

Maybe one of your hassy buddies wants to call me on this

DBs in case no one has noticed are quite expensive, and anitiques like my piddly 22mp sinar are also great for taking images - changing backs is not in my business plan

So I am a customer with lens money to burn 28, 50,  TS and ultra wide but no place to spend the cash (apart from on a D3 which I have ordered)

SMM
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2442
    • Pepperanddust
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #27 on: October 10, 2007, 06:25:14 am »

Quote
Let's see... Here's a project designed to optimize a system that starts with thousands of measurements being made and assembled into a data base, then software and firmware have to be written for the body and back requiring many hours of coding, followed by additional time and effort and expense to create a software module in the RAW conversion program to complete the process.

The 28mm is an extension of this project that incorporates 21st century abilities to correct certain types of lens aberrations extremely well by means of automatic digital corrections to the RAW data and incorporates that into the initial lens design in order to enhance lens performance in areas that cannot be corrected or improved by digital means. (More on this later.) To do this, in a seamless and automatic fashion, requires that the lens, body, back and software be integrated in a seamless way.

All in an effort to have a competive edge in the market by offering added value. This is seen by some as terrible thing by not sharing it with competitors.

Any photographers that would like to shoot thousands of images, do the post production work, add in retouching and build a searchable data base–then give them to their competitors to sell. I'm sure you'll find takers on that offer.

Of course there is licensing. Anyone here licensing their creative efforts to other photographers to enhance their competitors position in the market?

Why shouldn't Hasselblad keep their own work proprietary? Because someone purchased another companies product and mounted it to some of Hasselblad's products?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145047\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


How about having bought Hasselblads products and not being able to use it? That is also a result of the current strategy. People with the flagship back (CF39MS) are not able to use the 28.

Adobe can hardly be called a competitor for Hasselblad and they cannot support 3FR with DAC either. Unless you consider Adobe a competitor for Flexcolor? Same applies for other RAW converter programs.

You are talking about this massive intellectual property that Hasselblad is supposed to share but what exactly would be the use for competitors? Can they use all of this? No, not really. It cannot be used on other things than Hasselblad lenses and bodies. Competition could be using DAC and the 28mm algorythms but they still can only use it on Hasselblad equipment.

As I said before. It might eat away some back sales but would generate more in bodies and lenses.

Hasselblad probably made these calculations as well but did they take into the equation the effect of people shying away from the system because of this? Or the bad publicity they get from it?
Logged

stefan marquardt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • http://www.stefanmarquardt-architekturbild.de
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #28 on: October 10, 2007, 06:56:00 am »

Quote
Can I ask which software you used to correct CA and defish. This is something that had crossed my mind, but I hadn't started exploring the details of how.
Thanks
Jon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145054\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


jon, i use the little free software defish for mac.  
or - when i only want to partly defish the image I do it by hand (photoshop-wrap). very easy and even quicker. when you have no straight lines -lets say- in the bottom half or corners of your picture, you dont need to defish this part. which means that even a round object in the corner stays absolutely 100% round. something you dont get with a normal very-wide lens, where a round objekt always gets badly distorted.
I correct CA in ps or acr.

stefan
Logged
stefan marquardt
stefanmarquardt.de arch

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #29 on: October 10, 2007, 07:12:59 am »

Quote
You are talking about this massive intellectual property that Hasselblad is supposed to share but what exactly would be the use for competitors
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145061\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I dont think they even need to share the IP - just unloking the lense would be nice - you still need a H body to use it and are likely to buy more of thier lenses which is all money for them.

If the lense was unlocked the corrections you be done by a third party

Either DXO, C1 or me

Photograph a wall - correct in PS -   save as an action

If the DAC is so much better than that then a demo from a hassy dealer will persuade me that thier back is a 'must have'

S
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #30 on: October 10, 2007, 07:26:32 am »

Quote
I am looking at my screen now and there is no difference.

But don't take my word for it - look yourself before forming an opinion!

Jo S.x
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145059\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So, would you be good enough to post the 'before and after' shots and let me see for myself?
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #31 on: October 10, 2007, 07:29:38 am »

Quote
jon, i use the little free software defish for mac. 
or - when i only want to partly defish the image I do it by hand (photoshop-wrap). very easy and even quicker. when you have no straight lines -lets say- in the bottom half or corners of your picture, you dont need to defish this part. which means that even a round object in the corner stays absolutely 100% round. something you dont get with a normal very-wide lens, where a round objekt always gets badly distorted.
I correct CA in ps or acr.

stefan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145065\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Stefan, got that. Must go and try it out.
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

josayeruk

  • Guest
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #32 on: October 10, 2007, 07:47:14 am »

Quote
So, would you be good enough to post the 'before and after' shots and let me see for myself?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145067\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yep!  
Logged

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #33 on: October 10, 2007, 08:05:43 am »

Quote
Yep! 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145071\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Jo, just let me know where when you get a chance
Jon
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

josayeruk

  • Guest
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #34 on: October 10, 2007, 08:29:27 am »

Quote
Thanks Jo, just let me know where when you get a chance
Jon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145075\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just need mother nature to stop the rain for a bit!
Logged

jonstewart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 435
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #35 on: October 10, 2007, 09:04:57 am »

Quote
Just need mother nature to stop the rain for a bit!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145078\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's lovely and sunny here in Northern Ireland....no, wait, there's the rain coming!

(As they say, just wait 15 minutes for a change in the weather here!)
Logged
Jon Stewart
 If only life were so simple.

Graham Mitchell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2281
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #36 on: October 10, 2007, 10:03:24 am »

Quote
You are talking about this massive intellectual property that Hasselblad is supposed to share but what exactly would be the use for competitors?

Exactly. It could use help Hasselblad customers. Btw the IP involved here is pretty minimal.
Logged

jimgolden

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
    • http://
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #37 on: October 10, 2007, 11:03:34 am »

no vendetta TechTalk. I love Hass V system, I just find the H, personally, overated for the cost.
I like Imacon backs too, all the way back to the 96/132 - the ability to use adapter plates for almost any camera is genius. but the H, the viewfinder distortion, the expense, blah.
Logged

samuel_js

  • Guest
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #38 on: October 10, 2007, 12:55:08 pm »

I also find the H system too expensive, but not overated. I think the functions make it the most advanced camera, of course it depends on how you work. My favorite camera was the Contax but the AF was too slow. Also the fact that it was discontinued made me switch as investing in a DB for it was not an option. Contax is not so popular in Sweden. I simply had to let it go....
 I don't know how much the H2 cost in USA or other countries but I paid 1/3 of the price for  buying a DB with it. Some people complain about the mirror slap, I personally don't see it a problem but even that is fixed with the last firmware. Of course, this is not version 1.0. Is the last version of the H2 so bugs and problems are gone, a least in my system. Is 100% stable.

Quote
no vendetta TechTalk. I love Hass V system, I just find the H, personally, overated for the cost.
I like Imacon backs too, all the way back to the 96/132 - the ability to use adapter plates for almost any camera is genius. but the H, the viewfinder distortion, the expense, blah.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=145100\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

jimgolden

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
    • http://
Lens Design - should it rely on software
« Reply #39 on: October 10, 2007, 04:33:17 pm »

My disdain for the H has nothing to do w/ issue w/ the functioning of the camera itself. the H series that often rent is an H2 w/ a 22MP Hass back, never had any issues w/ it....
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up