IS, Fuzzy logic, EVF – What do we now see

[BillN]

IS, Fuzzy logic, EVF – What do we now see

More “bells and whistles” are appearing each day

In camera IS - in lens IS – to reduce camera shake, OR is it to allow lens manufacturers to build (cheap) poor quality lenses

Computer correction programmes to correct unstable images created by modern lenses in the hands of shaky western decadence

LCDs and Electronic viewfinders – to let us see what some computer engineer (in Japan) has decided that we need to see

Light through a poor quality lens, that needs computer programs to correct it being projected onto an electronic sensor that sends a computer image to a LCD, for us to view and copy onto our computer so that we can change it again with Photoshop.

I know I am exaggerating but, what does the photographer see these days?

I suppose that you will all tell me that it's no different to Kodak - dark room and chemicals

My wife must have put something in my morning coffee

 

[OzRay]

My wife must have put something in my morning coffee

Yep! But I tend to agree with some of the points made. It is much easier to make a slow lens and then try and compensate with IS, and possibly the same with non-highly corrected lenses and then compensate with software.

Cheers

Ray

 

[Bokeh Diem]

I was thinking the exact same things last night falling to sleep. I really miss those old Pentax K's from university, and my Minolta Maxxum 9000 pro setup form the '80's. I am still fighting the computer I use every day. I still fight the automated drawing programme that I tried to embrace in 1987, used full time since and always felt as if a part of me was lost thereafter. I cannot feel myself through these mediums the way I used to. I still draw by hand, for therapy.

My last thought as I drifted away was... it was beautiful that we had it, and that those coming after us won't know what it even means.

Bokeh D

 

[hanzo]

In other news.. Adobe released Photoshop CS5.
More fake photos coming

 

[Djarum]

In other news.. Adobe released Photoshop CS5.
More fake photos coming

^^^^^

 

[cosinaphile]

no bill , your take is correct from my perspective, chemical based photography is an analogue process to capture the light of an analogue world..

although sensors start out the recording process as analogue [ i think ] they are soon converted to 1`s and 0`s and yes, i think fast lenses are relegated to exotica by the camera manufacturers who think that because of all the digital trickery they can get by with slow lenses cheap lenses

coffee wakes you up , your post is a perfect example of coffee goodness:smile:

 

[grum]

I was thinking the exact same things last night falling to sleep. I really miss those old Pentax K's from university, and my Minolta Maxxum 9000 pro setup form the '80's.

Is there anything stopping you from using them again?

 

[Djarum]

no bill , your take is correct from my perspective, chemical based photography is an analogue process to capture the light of an analogue world..

although sensors start out the recording process as analogue [ i think ] they are soon converted to 1`s and 0`s and yes, i think fast lenses are relegated to exotica by the camera manufacturers who think that because of all the digital trickery they can get by with slow lenses cheap lenses

coffee wakes you up , your post is a perfect example of coffee goodness:smile:

I'm not sure how digital makes any difference when it comes to fast lenses. The faster the lens, the more light that comes through, regardless of the medium being used.

Software can take an underexposed image and improve it, but not drastically. I will many times underexpose an image to get less noise and faster shutter speed and process later, the effect still is not the same.

And of course, there is DOF. Some advances are now able to simulate Shallow DOF, but since each lens design is going to have a "unique" bokeh, it is still difficult to get the exact result.

People want cheap, fast, wide or long, and stabilized lenses. I don't think it will ever happen, though.