Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       5       6       end
  

Next GFX camera?

  
 
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Next GFX camera?


atracksler wrote:
I just wish they’d do a CCD version


Oh, yay! Lots more noise, lots less DR. No live view. Where do I sign up?




Nov 12, 2022 at 10:01 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Next GFX camera?


Peter Figen wrote:
It's not so much the hard drive size or cost but often multi-layered files from 100mp+ cameras can add up quickly when you might have a hundred layers or more, or when you're focus stacking 300 images together. No matter how fast your new computer is, it's going to slow down when you're working on a 25 gb .psb file. They take a long time to open and an even longer time to save and you've got to save early and often.



To be sure, I think that the performance of current camera is excellent and if the MP resolution, etc of cameras advanced no more at all we would continue to able to photographs of outstanding technical and aesthetic quality. So my point isn't that we "need" higher resolution or anything else.

In fact, few (almost no one really) are handicapped by the resolution of modern digital camera sensors. (There are other improvements that could make more important differences, at least to some photographers — for example, things like global shutters.)

What I'm acknowledging is that despite the logic of the position that "we already have enough," it is likely that we'll continue to get more anyway. To some extent is an issue of human nature. For example, virtually no one has a need for a car that goes 90mph or faster, but the least capable version of the last car I bought supposedly has a top speed over 150mph. Some people won't buy that model because some other one has a higher top speed!

So as long as capability can be increased without performance costs compared to the previous generation of a thing, that performance is likely to continue to be improved, almost regardless of the value of the improvement in objective terms.

Regarding the huge file size and computer speed issue, it is true that processing a gigantic file takes longer than processing a smaller one. But it is also true that, given the vast improvements to storage and processors, the file size at which that becomes an issue is way bigger than it was before.

My academic field was electronic music. The first time I was able to use a computer to actually make music was during a workshop at a university that had a Department of Defense funded artificial intelligence lab. (It also was one of the very small number of nodes on the "DARPA-net," the predecessor of the internet, which is another story...) If I recall, the entire multi-million dollar center used washing-machine-sized 5 MEGAbyte hard drives. A facility like this one was the only kind which, in that early 1970s era had sufficient computer and storage power to make computer-generated audio... and then we were only allowed to compile sound files in the middle of the night (between midnight and 6:00 AM) because each process required essentially the entire capacity of the whole center for several minutes!

I'm trying to imagine how the conversation would have gone if someone had said that someday we'd have orders of magnitude more computing and storage capacity in the hands of every person's handheld phone, most of going largely unused. ;-)

The case of focus-stacking 300 images is an interesting one, for more reasons that I'll enumerate here. But one is that, even though that pushes computer capacity (and patience) today, it wasn't long ago that such a thing was unimaginable. And back then there were people telling us that the kind of computing and storage capacity to do such a thing was such an edge case that no one would ever actually need that kind of power. And they were wrong.

So, what I'm saying is that whether you or I believe that we "need" things like 800MP sensors for our photography (I'm betting the both of us would agree that we don't), as performance capabilities continue to improve and costs per unit of performance continue to decline, capabilities that we can't fathom today will become normal and cost-effective going forward.

Admittedly, this digression is pretty far removed from actually making photographs. :-)

YMMV.



Nov 12, 2022 at 10:02 AM
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Next GFX camera?


Peter Figen wrote:
Maybe you could post a few examples for people to see what you're talking about.



At the bottom of this post is an example where the aliasing is sufficiently subtle that you may not notice it until you look at the GFX 100 image.

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/visibility-of-aliasing-gfx-50r-100-aliasing-in-prints/

The flip side is that it's difficult to do sharp architectural work or fashion with fabrics and avoid aliasing.





Nov 12, 2022 at 10:07 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Next GFX camera?


atracksler wrote:
I just wish they’d do a CCD version


As a former M9 and P45 user I get what you're saying but you must either not have used a half-decent CMOS based camera or have very rose-tinted memories of CCD. The technology is so far behind modern CMOS it's not funny. The old Kodak CCD's had some great accuity and likeable colour reproduction but forget anything more than about 2 stops above base ISO.



Nov 13, 2022 at 06:31 PM
Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Next GFX camera?


JimKasson wrote:
At the bottom of this post is an example where the aliasing is sufficiently subtle that you may not notice it until you look at the GFX 100 image.

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/visibility-of-aliasing-gfx-50r-100-aliasing-in-prints/

The flip side is that it's difficult to do sharp architectural work or fashion with fabrics and avoid aliasing.



I looked at your images and quite honestly, it feels like those are not 100 percent crops but more like three or four hundred percent, and if they are 100 percent crops, then they're so far out of focus as to be rather useless.

I've shot many hundreds of architectural images with a 5DSR since I got it in the fall of 2015 and have never once had an issue with patterns in the scene conflicting with the sensor grid. Not once. Of course, almost all architectural photographers shoot at f/11 in order to have sufficient depth of field and sometimes you still have to focus stack two or three shots, but not to the extent you do with macro, and that aperture will smooth things out a tick. The more limited experience I have with the 100s I've had no visible anything yet but the night is young.

I've had a few specific moiré issues with fabric shooting people with the Canon, but in seven years you could count those times on one hand. And that's when you're looking at the full 5DSR image at 100 percent on screen. By the time you size it down for output, the moiré is almost always completely gone or so close to being so that it's a very easy fix. Probably because I'm often shooting people at f/4 - f/8 where you're more apt to catch a moiré in your net. Does it happen? Yes. But not very often.




Nov 13, 2022 at 06:52 PM
Sauseschritt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Next GFX camera?


JimKasson wrote:
Now you know.

Hooray !

My question was rhetorical / ironical though, I dont actually care.



Nov 22, 2022 at 09:22 AM
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Next GFX camera?


Peter Figen wrote:
I looked at your images and quite honestly, it feels like those are not 100 percent crops



What makes you think they are 100% crops?




Nov 22, 2022 at 10:20 AM
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Next GFX camera?


Peter Figen wrote:
I looked at your images and quite honestly, it feels like those are not 100 percent crops but more like three or four hundred percent, and if they are 100 percent crops, then they're so far out of focus as to be rather useless.



How could they possibly be simultaneously far out of focus and show aliasing?




Nov 22, 2022 at 10:22 AM
Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Next GFX camera?


JimKasson wrote:
What makes you think they are 100% crops?



Because they're so soft and out of focus.




Nov 22, 2022 at 10:24 AM
Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Next GFX camera?


JimKasson wrote:
How could they possibly be simultaneously far out of focus and show aliasing?



Exactly.




Nov 22, 2022 at 10:25 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Next GFX camera?


Peter Figen wrote:
Because they're so soft and out of focus.



That is circular. They are not 100% crops. They are magnified far more than that.




Nov 22, 2022 at 02:50 PM
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Next GFX camera?


Peter Figen wrote:
Exactly.



I'm missing your point here. You can see the aliasing, right? So how can you proclaim that they are out of focus?



Nov 22, 2022 at 02:52 PM
leonasj
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Next GFX camera?


gfx100s prices runs down last few month,next gfx50r ii with ibis vs heavy bulky 100s or 50s(ii)


Nov 25, 2022 at 02:13 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Next GFX camera?


Maybe Fuji will make the next GFX camera with a Pentax m42 thread mount and shooting small JPEG files only, just for leonasj...


Nov 29, 2022 at 10:05 AM
leonasj
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Next GFX camera?


molson wrote:
Maybe Fuji will make the next GFX camera with a Pentax m42 thread mount and shooting small JPEG files only, just for leonasj...


for me lighter then now with built in grip same ergonomic gfx50r with ibis enough



Nov 29, 2022 at 11:13 AM
Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Next GFX camera?


JimKasson wrote:
I'm missing your point here. You can see the aliasing, right? So how can you proclaim that they are out of focus?


The problem is your unorthodox way of showing crops in test scenes. I'm probably not alone thinking it's a strange concept, and you seem alone using that method. Therefore it's natural that most people assume crops are 100% crops. Not some random extreme enlargement that requires special methods to be viewed as intended.

I'm also probably not alone having read your instructions but never bothered. Why having the viewer back away from the screen instead of just publish less magnified crops? Makes no sense.



Nov 29, 2022 at 12:45 PM
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Next GFX camera?


Makten wrote:
The problem is your unorthodox way of showing crops in test scenes. I'm probably not alone thinking it's a strange concept, and you seem alone using that method. Therefore it's natural that most people assume crops are 100% crops. Not some random extreme enlargement that requires special methods to be viewed as intended.

I'm also probably not alone having read your instructions but never bothered. Why having the viewer back away from the screen instead of just publish less magnified crops? Makes no sense.


Gets around JPEG compression artifacts.

http://alvyray.com/Memos/CG/Microsoft/6_pixel.pdf



Nov 29, 2022 at 10:55 PM
Jesse Evans
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Next GFX camera?




Makten wrote:
The problem is your unorthodox way of showing crops in test scenes. I'm probably not alone thinking it's a strange concept, and you seem alone using that method. Therefore it's natural that most people assume crops are 100% crops. Not some random extreme enlargement that requires special methods to be viewed as intended.

I'm also probably not alone having read your instructions but never bothered. Why having the viewer back away from the screen instead of just publish less magnified crops? Makes no sense.


He explains the magnification in each article. His articles are much more useful than most others. When analyzing the minutiae of differences of various high quality sensors and optics his methods make more sense than most.



Nov 30, 2022 at 01:52 AM
Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Next GFX camera?


JimKasson wrote:
Gets around JPEG compression artifacts.

http://alvyray.com/Memos/CG/Microsoft/6_pixel.pdf


Why not save less compressed JPG's instead? The link is broken by the way.



Nov 30, 2022 at 04:47 AM
JimKasson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Next GFX camera?




Why not save less compressed JPG's instead? The link is broken by the way.


This way is a better tradeoff between load times and artifacts. Also, reproducing files at 100% magnification wouldn't allow visual comparisons between sensors of different resolutions.

Alvy Ray Smith has not updated his site to use secure connections. If you tell your browser to ignore the fact that the link doesn't start with https:// you'll be able to see it.

Understanding what role the pixel plays in image sampling is important to understanding how to present the data from a sampled image.




Nov 30, 2022 at 10:50 AM
1       2      
3
       4       5       6       end






FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       5       6       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password