A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old January 8th 19, 04:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


This is DxO's own account of the
situation at:
https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-came...ol-and-scores/

"Dynamic range corresponds to the ratio between the highest
brightness a camera can capture (saturation) and the lowest
brightness it can capture (which is typically when noise becomes
more important than the signal Ð that is, a signal-to-noise ratio
below 0 dB). A value of 12 EV is excellent, with differences below
0.5 EV usually not noticeable. Dynamic range is an open scale."

This appears to confirm that the situation is as I deduced: they are
not testing the dynamic range as recorded in a raw file. They are
testing the range that a camera can capture. i.e. it is the dynmaic
range of the sensor. It is not the dynamic range of the raw file.


no, it doesn't confirm that, nor does it explain how they get numbers
that are greater than the theoretical limit of the camera.


If you read the whole of the article you might get to understand their
methodology. It starts off with measurement and finishes with:

"We measure the luminance of each uniform area (patch) on the chart
using a certified luminance-meter, and then input the values into
DxO Analyzer software. Once we have measured the target and
calibrated the DxO Analyzer software, we shoot test images of the
noise target at different ISO settings, and measure the Noise for
each color channel of the target image (R, Gr, Gb, B). We compute
the mean gray level and noise values for each patch and for all
images shot at different ISO settings, and finally interpolate
these numerical values for all gray levels to calculate and plot
signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) curves, from which DxO Analyzer
extracts the SNR 18%, the dynamic range, and the tonal range."

Theey do not specify their algorithms in the article.


because their algorithms won't withstand scrutiny.

without knowing what their algorithms are, they're worthless.
  #132  
Old January 8th 19, 04:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


I have always found it best to use language with precision when
discussing technical matters. Otherwise one is at risk of becoming
involved in endless convoluted arguments where neither party properly
understands what the othr party is saying.


Nothing in photography is clearer than the meaning of a stop to any
variable related to exposure.


It is a measure of lens aperture but people insist on using it for all
kinds of parallel meanings.


no they don't.

f/stop is a measure of lens aperture.
stop is a unit of exposure.

f/4 is 1 stop faster than f/5.6.
  #133  
Old January 8th 19, 04:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

It may be hair-splitting but none of my lenses are calibrated in EVs.

They most definitely are, and probably 1/2 or 1/3 steps of EV as well,
or possibly very fine steps in speed priority or auto modes.

I bow to your superior knowledge of my equipment.


your equipment is nothing special. many people have the same stuff.

for modern lenses, it's user selectable at 1, 1/2 or 1/3 stops. not all
options may be available on all cameras. it appears that nikon no
longer offers 1 stop anymore (there's no reason to) but older nikon
slrs did. i assume canon, pentax, etc., are similar.

examples:
https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D7000/screens/DSC_0211.jpg
https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/a...ages/Captures/
d1x_41.gif
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/d70/d70_custom_menu2.jpg

for older lenses with a mechanical aperture ring (manual lenses and
early autofocus), the aperture ring will normally click at 1 stop
increments, sometimes 1/2 stop. occasionally, it's both on the same
lens, i.e., the widest and smallest are 1 stop, rest 1/2 stop. there is
no point in 1/3 stops since the mechanics aren't good enough.

some lenses, such as mirror lenses, have only one f/stop, with no
adjustments to be made, although they sometimes accept an nd filter in
the back.


This illustrates the disadvantage of not using the language with
precision. As I said, all my lenses make use of f/numbers which are a
measure of stops. Your thoughts have jumped the rails and are now
talking about the intervals of Exposure Value of which the camera is
capable. The exposure value may be used to set lens aperture, shutter
speed or ISO. They are not identical to stops.


they absolutely are.
  #134  
Old January 8th 19, 07:55 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On 1/7/2019 4:57 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2019-01-07 16:19, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 10:13:09 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-04 18:58, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 16:16:05 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-02 04:16, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 07:48:13 +0000, RJH wrote:

On 02/01/2019 01:38, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric
Stevens
wrote:

You are obviously wedded to 1 stop per bit. Why is that?

math.

Why for example can you not have 2 stops per bit, or pi stops
per bit?
As long as you scale the entire brightness range with the
available 14
stops.

because it doesn't work that way.

think about what a stop means.


FWIW, I don't follow the linearity - in fact I've often wondered why
aperture, ISO and shutter speed aren't infinitely variable,
especially
with digital. This article takes me closer to understanding:

https://expertphotography.com/understanding-fstops-stops-in-photography-exposure/


The author of that article is using 'stop' when he should be using
'exposure value'. But lets not get into that in this thread. It's
confused enough already.Â* :-)

There is no difference at all between an EV and a stop of any of the
three independent variables of ISO, exposure period and aperture.

It may be hair-splitting but none of my lenses are calibrated in EVs.

They most definitely are, and probably 1/2 or 1/3 steps of EV as well,
or possibly very fine steps in speed priority or auto modes.


I bow to your superior knowledge of my equipment.


Do your lenses have stops?


I wish this NG had stops.

--
PeterN
  #135  
Old January 8th 19, 07:58 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On 1/8/2019 8:31 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2019-01-08 03:54, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 23:42:07 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

But a moot point IMO.Â* I doubt the sensor mentioned has
14 bits of DR in the first place.Â* Esp. once you account for noise.

Well, DxO measure 14.3 but what exactly that means is unknown. But if
they made that specific statement then I would expect they must have
grounds.

it means their test methodology is worthless or they're intentionally
lying.


Or that you have failed to understand what they are doing.


Your other post ends with a statement to the effect that DxO don't say
what their algorithms are doing, so nospam certainly didn't fail anything.

In the end physics is physics and there is no way they are getting more
DR than the sensor offers.Â* Not even the bit depth of it.


HDR?

--
PeterN
  #136  
Old January 8th 19, 08:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

On Jan 8, 2019, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 1/7/2019 4:57 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2019-01-07 16:19, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 10:13:09 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-04 18:58, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 16:16:05 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-02 04:16, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 07:48:13 +0000, wrote:

On 02/01/2019 01:38, nospam wrote:
In , Eric
Stevens
wrote:

You are obviously wedded to 1 stop per bit. Why is that?

math.

Why for example can you not have 2 stops per bit, or pi stops
per bit?
As long as you scale the entire brightness range with the
available 14
stops.

because it doesn't work that way.

think about what a stop means.

FWIW, I don't follow the linearity - in fact I've often wondered why
aperture, ISO and shutter speed aren't infinitely variable,
especially
with digital. This article takes me closer to understanding:

https://expertphotography.com/unders...s-in-photograp
hy-exposure/

The author of that article is using 'stop' when he should be using
'exposure value'. But lets not get into that in this thread. It's
confused enough already. :-)

There is no difference at all between an EV and a stop of any of the
three independent variables of ISO, exposure period and aperture.

It may be hair-splitting but none of my lenses are calibrated in EVs.

They most definitely are, and probably 1/2 or 1/3 steps of EV as well,
or possibly very fine steps in speed priority or auto modes.

I bow to your superior knowledge of my equipment.


Do your lenses have stops?


I wish this NG had stops.


If you have a Usenet client with the appropriate tools, any NG, thread, or
poster can be cleaned up with judicious ignoring, flagging, deleting,
filtering, and kill filing.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

  #137  
Old January 8th 19, 09:46 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David B.[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 117
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On 08/01/2019 19:18, Savageduck wrote:
If you have a Usenet client with the appropriate tools, any NG, thread, or
poster can be cleaned up with judicious ignoring, flagging, deleting,
filtering, and kill filing.


Is Hogwasher working satisfactorily with macOS Mojave?

--
David B.
  #138  
Old January 8th 19, 09:51 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering)

In article , David B.
wrote:

On 08/01/2019 19:18, Savageduck wrote:
If you have a Usenet client with the appropriate tools, any NG, thread, or
poster can be cleaned up with judicious ignoring, flagging, deleting,
filtering, and kill filing.


Is Hogwasher working satisfactorily with macOS Mojave?


stop hijacking threads, especially since you've already asked that and
it has been answered, multiple times.
  #139  
Old January 8th 19, 10:35 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On 1/8/2019 2:18 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 8, 2019, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 1/7/2019 4:57 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2019-01-07 16:19, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 10:13:09 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-04 18:58, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 16:16:05 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2019-01-02 04:16, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 07:48:13 +0000, wrote:

On 02/01/2019 01:38, nospam wrote:
In , Eric
Stevens
wrote:

You are obviously wedded to 1 stop per bit. Why is that?

math.

Why for example can you not have 2 stops per bit, or pi stops
per bit?
As long as you scale the entire brightness range with the
available 14
stops.

because it doesn't work that way.

think about what a stop means.

FWIW, I don't follow the linearity - in fact I've often wondered why
aperture, ISO and shutter speed aren't infinitely variable,
especially
with digital. This article takes me closer to understanding:

https://expertphotography.com/unders...s-in-photograp
hy-exposure/

The author of that article is using 'stop' when he should be using
'exposure value'. But lets not get into that in this thread. It's
confused enough already. :-)

There is no difference at all between an EV and a stop of any of the
three independent variables of ISO, exposure period and aperture.

It may be hair-splitting but none of my lenses are calibrated in EVs.

They most definitely are, and probably 1/2 or 1/3 steps of EV as well,
or possibly very fine steps in speed priority or auto modes.

I bow to your superior knowledge of my equipment.

Do your lenses have stops?


I wish this NG had stops.


If you have a Usenet client with the appropriate tools, any NG, thread, or
poster can be cleaned up with judicious ignoring, flagging, deleting,
filtering, and kill filing.


That pun went right over your head. ;-)

--
PeterN
  #140  
Old January 8th 19, 11:44 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David B.[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 117
Default *IS* Hogwasher working satisfactorily with macOS Mojave?

On 08/01/2019 20:51, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:

On 08/01/2019 19:18, Savageduck wrote:
If you have a Usenet client with the appropriate tools, any NG, thread, or
poster can be cleaned up with judicious ignoring, flagging, deleting,
filtering, and kill filing.


Is Hogwasher working satisfactorily with macOS Mojave?


stop hijacking threads, especially since you've already asked that and
it has been answered, multiple times.


No, it has NOT been answered satisfactorily.

*IS* Hogwasher working satisfactorily with macOS Mojave?

--
David B.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest (waiting for specific offering) Alfred Molon[_4_] Digital Photography 2 December 24th 18 03:37 PM
Please, tell me Zeiss's offering to the camera world won't be areskinned SONY!! Neil[_9_] Digital Photography 1 August 27th 18 01:00 PM
Need a camera with specific features: Gary Smiley Digital Photography 1 May 22nd 06 02:31 AM
Canon Offering $600+ Rebate on Digital Camera Equipment (3x Rebate Offers) Mark Digital Photography 6 November 4th 04 11:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.