RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

DPReview TV: Olympus OM-D E-M5 III hands-on preview

21 Oct

Olympus just announced the E-M5 III, the newest in its E-M5 line of enthusiast Micro Four Thirds cameras. In this hands-on preview, Chris and Jordan ask, “Who’s it for?”

Also, subscribe to our YouTube channel to get new episodes of DPReview TV every week.

  • Introduction
  • Autumn photography in Canada
  • Similarities to the E-M1 II
  • Handling
  • Design
  • Displays
  • Compared to the E-M1 X
  • High resolution mode
  • Image stabilization
  • Video features
  • Compared to the E-M1 II
  • Compared to the Panasonic G9
  • Who is it for?

Sample gallery from this episode

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_6440081833″,”galleryId”:”6440081833″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on DPReview TV: Olympus OM-D E-M5 III hands-on preview

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Flickr triples maximum display resolution to 6K for Flickr Pro members

21 Oct

Flickr has announced it’s dramatically increasing the maximum supported display size for its Flickr Pro members, effectively tripling the current maximum resolution.

Until now, Flickr images were limited to being displayed at 2048px on the longest side. Now, the maximum display size is getting increased to 6144px (6K) on the longest side for Flickr Pro members.

According to the announcement post in Flickr’s help forum, ‘All new and previously uploaded photos from Flickr Pros with an original size larger than 6K will automatically be displayed in the largest size possible on Flickr, or the largest size set in your preferences […] Smaller photos will be displayed in the largest size possible for the original media.’

The increased maximum display resolution is already available to all Flickr Pro members. In the event you don’t want your images to be shown at the new 6K resolution, there’s a dedicated option to set the maximum display size. Those who aren’t Flickr Pro members will be limited to 2K resolution.

You can find a number of high-resolution example photos in the announcement post.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Flickr triples maximum display resolution to 6K for Flickr Pro members

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Landscape photography with a drone: disadvantages and limitations part 1

20 Oct

So far, I’ve offered nothing but praise for the drone. It’s a remarkably cheap and widely available tool. You can fly it anywhere, get infinite perspectives and unique compositions. It can easily hover in place to shoot long exposures or wait for the right time to shoot. It will venture where no human will, be it through toxic gases or scorching lava. And it is so much fun.

But the drone has its disadvantages and limitations, and that is the subject for today. Discussing these limitations is important in order to understand where and when one should choose to use a drone and when not to. It’s an important aspect to planning a shoot in a new location or circumstance, and it will help you understand that a drone isn’t a magical tool, as amazing as it is. Let’s review some of these limitations, starting with the easier ones to discuss.

Dependence on batteries

All of today’s drones fly using state of the art Lithium Polymer (LiPo) and lithium polymer high voltage (LiHV) batteries. These batteries are compact, and they last a surprisingly long time, but even the longest-flying drones cannot fly for more than about half an hour. This number is further shortened if the drone is flown “aggressively” (made to perform maneuvers, accelerate, decelerate and change direction often), when flying in sports mode and also if there is strong wind pushing against it.

Half an hour is a whole lot in some situations, but it’s not enough in others. I have had to land a drone in the middle of a shoot in harsh winds, even though the light was amazing, simply because the battery had run out. When the actual shooting location is relatively far away from the launch location, just getting to it and back can eat up half of the battery, leaving a measly ten minutes of shooting time before having to head back and change batteries, even if the sky had just opened up and the conditions became optimal.

Afternoon light on the magnificent cliffs of Suðuroy. I flew the drone in the harsh winds typical to the Faroes, and as a result, the battery drained so fast I only had 10 or 15 minutes to shoot.
DJI Mavic II Pro, 1/80 sec, F5.6, ISO 200. Suðuroy, the Faroe Islands

Dependence is not only on the amount of power one battery can give, it’s also on the number of batteries one has or can carry. In situations where the user cannot charge the batteries (for example, camping trips), there’s simply nothing left to do once the battery capacity has been used. Each battery has significant weight – Phantom batteries are 450 grams each, and even the tiny Mavic batteries weigh almost 300 grams each. When you have to carry those batteries, the drone, plus your regular camera equipment (and camping gear if you’re camping), each item matters, and those 3-4 batteries alone will make your backpack more than a kilogram heavier.

I carried three Phantom batteries for 8 km on solidified lava to shoot these surface flows in Kilauea Volcano. The batteries alone weighed almost 1.5 kilograms, not to mention the drone itself, my DSLR gear, tripod and 2 liters of water. While worth it, the backpack was very heavy and the hike wasn’t much fun. Even so, I would in retrospect bring two more batteries, to be able to use them more sparingly on a rare shoot such as this one.
DJI Phantom 4 Pro, 1/15 sec, F6.3, ISO 400. Taken outside of Volcanoes NP, Island of Hawaii.

Limited range

Drones not only have limited flight time, they also have limited range. The range is not only limited by battery power, but by two other factors: connectivity between the drone and the remote, and legal aspects.

When shooting the 2014 Holuhraun volcanic eruption from a helicopter, I spent more than an hour shooting a mind-blowing sunset over the lava, and stayed well into darkness. A drone wouldn’t have been able to remain airborne for long enough to get these conditions (not to mention get there!).
Canon 5D Mark II, Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC, 1/200 sec, f/4, ISO 1600. The Central Highlands of Iceland

In modern camera drones, radio connection between the drone and its remote is usually excellent when flight distance isn’t too long (I would give a numeric example but it really depends on many factors). But fly further away and the connection might break. If you use drones, I’m sure you know the horror one feels once the screen turns black and white and the app announces that connection had been lost. Even though the drone will attempt to return home and regain connection 99.9% of the times, there’s always the chance that it has just crashed. If, like yours truly, you have crashed a drone in the past, you will forever dread this feeling.

Connection may be compromised not only when flying too far, but when the drone is positioned so it loses direct line of sight to the remote, which can be a bit risky as the drone is left to navigate its way until regaining connection. Harsh weather such as heavy snow or rain my also break the connection, but this is usually intermittent.

Say what you may about manned aircraft, their range is far longer than that of any drone, and lost connection is not an issue.

My drone lost connection for a few moments when this iceberg’s peaks came between it and the moving boat. There was little to worry about, however, as I knew connection would be regained in a matter of seconds. DJI Mavic II Pro, 1/30 sec, f/5.6, ISO 200. Disko Bay, Greenland.

In any case, today’s modern drones have been known to miraculously find their way home even after having lost connection. Equipped with GPS and with an array of sensors to avoid hitting obstacles, I’ve heard stories of drones reappearing after having been deemed lost, even after long minutes of disconnection. I’ll discuss this further in a future article.

Legal requirements in most countries dictate that the drone remain in line-of-sight. What that means could be debatable, but a stricter interpretation might be that the drone needs to be clearly visible to the operator. This means further limitation of the range.

Limited flight altitude

Another limitation to the drone is its inability to fly higher than a certain altitude limit. Again, this limit can be the result of different factors, technical and legal. Technically, drone manufacturers limit the maximum altitude a drone can fly in. In DJI drones this limit is 500 meters above the home point. Higher altitude flights may only be possible after hacking the drone’s firmware, which is sometimes possible but seriously discouraged.

A much stricter altitude limit is dictated by drone laws in most countries. 100, 120 and 150 meters are the common numbers here, with the vast majority of countries not allowing flight above 120m. My home country of Israel officially limits drones to 50 meters (hmmm…). Even though an altitude limit makes a lot of sense, there’s no doubt that it greatly impacts compositional possibilities. Light planes, for example, are usually allowed to climb up to 2-3 kilometers before intruding the airspace of commercial jets.

The gigantic dunes of the Namib Desert can rise 300 meters high – no chance of shooting them with a drone, even if droning were allowed in the accessible parts of Sossusvlei, which it isn’t. I took this image from a helicopter at a height of more than a kilometer in the air.
Canon 5D Mark III, Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC, 1/1250 sec, F10, ISO 800. Sossusvlei, Namibia

Limited flight speed

Finally, drones are limited in their flight speed, which is usually not an issue, but can sometimes be a hindrance to getting the shot. Aerial photography often covers vast distances, and when light breaks faraway, you want to get there fast. A DJI Mavic can fly at 72 km/h (about 45 mph), and even that is on sports mode which quickly drains battery and can sometimes mess with the gimbal.

After DJI lowered its top speed due to stability problems, the faster, much more expensive Inspire 2 now tops at 94 km/h (58mph). Compare that with the 240 km/h of a Robinson 44 helicopter or with over 300 km/h of a Cessna, and the disadvantage is clear.

When seeing this light breaking between the mountains at a distance (and after picking my jaw up from the floor), I asked the pilot to “step on it” to get there as quickly as possible and avoid missing the shot. He asked me to close the window, easily pulled the throttle, taking us to 300 km/h and covering the distance to this composition in less than a minute, before slowing back down to allow me to open the window and shoot for several minutes. A drone would have undoubtedly missed the shot.
Canon 5D Mark III, Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC, 1/2000 sec, f/4, ISO 800.
The Lofoten Islands, Arctic Norway

To sum up, a drone is dependent on relatively heavy, power-limited batteries and the ability to carry and charge them. It has limited range, limited speed and limited flight altitude compared to manned aircraft, all of which limit the photographer’s ability to get to a location, spend enough time shooting it and getting good composition and light. While these problems don’t make the drone any less amazing, they have to be considered when planning an aerial shoot and when selecting the right tool to perform it.

In the next article I will continue the discussion of the drone’s disadvantages.


Erez Marom is a professional nature photographer, photography guide and traveler based in Israel. You can follow Erez’s work on Instagram and Facebook, and subscribe to his mailing list for updates.

If you’d like to experience and shoot some of the world’s most fascinating landscapes with Erez as your guide, take a look at his unique photography workshops in The Lofoten Islands, Greenland, Namibia, the Argentinean Puna, the Faroe Islands and Ethiopia.

Erez offers video tutorials discussing his images and explaining how he achieved them.

More in this series:

  • Landscape photography with a drone: Gear basics
  • Landscape photography with a drone: the advantages – part 1
  • Landscape photography with a drone: the advantages – part 2
  • Landscape photography with a drone: the advantages – part 3

Selected articles by Erez Marom:

  • Parallelism in Landscape Photography
  • Winds of Change: Shooting changing landscapes
  • Behind the Shot: Dark Matter
  • On the Importance of Naming Images
  • On Causality in Landscape Photography
  • Shooting K?lauea Volcano, Part 1: How to melt a drone
  • The Art of the Unforeground
  • Whatever it Doesn’t Take
  • Almost human: photographing critically endangered mountain gorillas

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Landscape photography with a drone: disadvantages and limitations part 1

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III sample gallery updated

20 Oct

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_6393635016″,”galleryId”:”6393635016″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });

Our testing of the Canon G7 X III continues, which means we’ve brought along on plenty of day trips and adventures to get a feel for its performance in a number of situations. Take a look at some of the resulting images while we finish up our testing.

See our updated Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III sample gallery

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III sample gallery updated

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Sandmarc launches hybrid polarized ND filters for DSLR and mirrorless cameras

20 Oct

Back in August photographic filter maker Sandmarc launched a line of hybrid polarized ND filters for smartphone cameras. Now the same type of filter has been released for DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

Like the smartphone equivalent, the Hybrid Pro filter series combines the filter attributes of neutral density (ND) and polarizers into one single filter. Like a ND filter they help improve dynamic range of a shot in bright light, can help add motion blur to moving objects by allowing for slower shutter speeds, and offer more control over exposure and shutter speeds for film makers. Like a polarizer, they also help reduce reflections, protect highlights and boost color.

Sandmarc’s Hybrid Pro filters are made from multi-coated and anti-reflective glass for accurate color transmission. The company says the aluminum frame material makes the filters both durable and lightweight.

A set of filters includes ND16/PL, ND32/PL and ND64/PL variants to cover shooting in a range of light conditions. The filters are available in 58, 67, 77 and 82mm diameters and can be pre-ordered on the Sandmarc website now. Pricing starts at $ 169.99 for the 58mm version.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Sandmarc launches hybrid polarized ND filters for DSLR and mirrorless cameras

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Photographer finds fully-functional Fujifilm lens 4 months after losing it in the desert

20 Oct

Modern camera lenses are durable, but a little anecdote from Steve Boykin, writing for 35mmc, shows just how far weather-sealing has come in the past few years.

Four months ago, in June of this year, Boykin managed to lose his Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR lens while on a hike in the wilderness. This week, he managed to stumble across the lens while out on another trek and after a bit of cleaning up, he says the lens is in seemingly perfect condition, even after withstanding the summer heat, countless thunderstorms and freezing temperatures.

The location where Boykin found the lens

Boykin says he was walking along a path he’s walked ’30 or 40 times over the last few months’ when he looked down and noticed the lens ‘sitting on the ground a few inches from my foot.’ Naturally, Boykin assumed the lens wouldn’t work, due to the harsh conditions it incurred, but after getting home and removing the front B+W filter and rear lens cap, Boykin mounted the lens to his Fujifilm X-Pro1 and ‘it came to life like nothing had happened.’

Despite there being some ‘slight discoloration’ on one side of the lens barrel (likely the side that was laying in the dirt) Boykin says the autofocus works ‘like nothing ever happened’ and both the aperture and focus rings rotate smoothly. Boykin credits much of the survival to the fact the front filter and rear lens cap were still attached, but even then it’s an impressive feat for the lens to survive a third of a year in the desert with essentially zero protection.

To read the full story, which includes a pair of photos captured with the lost lens, head on over to 35mmc (and check out their other coverage on all things film photography related).


Image credits: Photos by Steve Boykin, used with kind permission from 35mmc

Update (October 16, 2019): Updated the first sentence of the article as to better explain the current state of lens weather-sealing.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Photographer finds fully-functional Fujifilm lens 4 months after losing it in the desert

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Google ends free ‘original quality’ image backups for the Pixel 4, Pixel 4 XL

20 Oct

The newly unveiled Google Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL smartphones will not include three years of free ‘original quality’ Google Photos storage, the company has confirmed. Details about the change were quietly listed on the Google Store’s Pixel 4 product page following the company’s press event on Tuesday, revealing an elimination of the perk Google has offered since the launch of its original Pixel model.

All Android mobile devices come with free Google Photos storage for images and videos captured with the handset, but there’s a catch: the content is compressed from its original quality down to ‘high quality.’

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_0948233002″,”galleryId”:”0948233002″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });

The Pixel smartphone line has remained notable among its peers by offering atypically excellent camera quality, particularly in low-light environments. Before the Pixel 4, Google relied on computational photography, not extra lenses, to give its phones an edge. This time around, however, Google has taken steps to remain competitive with Apple by packing more than one camera into its newly unveiled Pixel 4 devices.

Many consumers, particularly photographers who prefer Android over iOS, have anticipated the launch of this phone specifically for its mobile camera capabilities. That makes Google’s decision to end its free ‘original quality’ photo storage particularly baffling. Buyers must either sign up for a paid storage plan or settle for compressed backups.

As recently noted by XDA, the Google Store’s Pixel 4 page reads, ‘Never worry about storing, finding, or sharing your memories thanks to unlimited storage in high quality on Google Photos.’ That feature comes with a small disclaimer that states:

Google Photos offers free unlimited online storage for all photos and videos uploaded in high quality. Photos and videos uploaded in high quality may be compressed or resized. Requires Google Account. Data rates may apply.

Google offers multiple cloud storage plans under its Google One subscription, which starts at $ 1.99/month for 100GB of storage if you pay annually. The Pixel 4 smartphone is available to preorder from the Google Storage now for $ 799.


Update (October 16, 2019): Corrected pricing of the entry-level Google One subscription plan.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Google ends free ‘original quality’ image backups for the Pixel 4, Pixel 4 XL

Posted in Uncategorized

 

UK photo retailer Jessops is reportedly looking for administrators to help salvage the company

20 Oct
Jessops’ current online storefront

British photo retailer Jessops is looking for administrators to ‘help salvage the struggling High Street brand,’ according to BBC News.

Serial entrepreneur Peter Jones purchased Jessops from administrators back in 2013 in a joint venture with restructuring company Hilco Capital, after the photo retailer racked up £81M ($ 104M) in debt and closed more than 187 stores. At the time, Jones said in the below interview with BBC News that Jessops would reopen ’30-40′ of its stores with the intention of charging the same price in stores as it did online.

After not initially reaching Jones’ £80M revenue goal during his first year of ownership (2015), Jessops ended up showing revenue of £80.3M and £95M in 2016 and 2017, respectively. However, recent trade conditions have negatively impacted revenue and as a result the company is reportedly looking for a company voluntary agreement (CVA) with landlords and lenders of the chain’s 46 stores, leased under Jessop’s retail property firm, JR Prop Limited. As explained by BBC News, CVA ‘is an insolvency process that allows a business to reach an agreement with its creditors to pay off all or part of its debts [over an agreed period of time] and is often used as an opportunity to renegotiate rents.’

Sky News has reported store closures and rent cuts are expected, but sources close to Jessops say Jones is still optimistic about the presence of its brick-and-mortar locations, according to BBC News.

Sources close to Jones have also told Sky News that ‘Mr Jones had decided that placing JR Prop into insolvency proceedings would provide the most effective means of streamlining Jessops’ operations to ensure their survival.’

Jessops was established by Frank Jessops in Leicester, United Kingdom in 1935. Currently, Jessops’ headquarters are located in Marlow, United Kingdom.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on UK photo retailer Jessops is reportedly looking for administrators to help salvage the company

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Ricoh shares 360º photos, videos from space captured in partnership with JAXA

20 Oct

Editor’s note: The below video is best viewed in Chrome or Firefox browsers, as they support 360-degree video:


Ricoh has published photos and video captured with a specialized version of its Ricoh Theta 360-degree spherical camera developed in partnership with with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA).

‘The camera was installed to monitor the operation of the biaxial gimbal of the SOLISS (Small Optical Link for International Space Station),’ says Ricoh in its press release. ‘It was carried aboard the H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV8) “KOUNOTORI-8”, the cargo transporter to the International Space Station (ISS), which was launched on September 25 , 2019.’

The specialized Ricoh Theta camera was modified so it could withstand the heat and radiation in space. The images and video from the camera were captured from the Exposed Facility of the Japanese Experiment Module (JEM), nicknamed ‘Kibo,’ and subsequently sent back to ground stations on Earth.

A flattened version of the above interactive image.

In addition to the images in this article, Ricoh has also posted the photos and videos on the JAXA Digital Archives and on its Theta Lab website, where the content can be viewed interactively in 360-degrees.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Ricoh shares 360º photos, videos from space captured in partnership with JAXA

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Which has the best lens? Sony RX100 VII vs Canon G5 X II vs Canon G7 X III

19 Oct

Now that we’re pushing through our full review of Canon’s G7 X Mark III and have published our full reviews of the G5 X Mark II and Sony’s RX100 VII, we wanted to take a look at how all three of their lenses stack up against each other.

Of course, there are some differences here in terms of zoom length and aperture range, but since these represent the latest pocketable zoom compacts on the market, we were curious as to how those differences impact the outright image quality each camera is capable of. So, let’s take a look.

$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-33239397″,”widgetId”:712,”initialStateId”:null}) })

The first thing you’ll notice is that the Sony is much clearer in the central portion of the frame, at each camera’s widest focal length and aperture. Stopping down the Canon$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4831-1065318710”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4831); }); }) cameras to match the wide-open aperture of the Sony improves things somewhat, especially on the G7 X III. As we move out to the corners$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4832–2128444560”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4832); }); }), the Sony shows a clearer advantage$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4833–1286349705”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4833); }); }) over the Canon’s$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4834–1324939535”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4834); }); }).

As we move into the middle of the zoom range$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4835-900509721”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4835); }); }), all three cameras perform very similarly in the center of the frame, which is to say, quite good. Stopping down the Canon’s to match the Sony’s lens at F4$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4836–1208563060”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4836); }); }) does look to give the PowerShots a bit more contrast. The corners$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4837–2128444560”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4837); }); }) likewise look pretty good here, and again, stopping down the Canon cameras to match the Sony’s maximum aperture gives them a bit of a sharpness boost.

Next, at the G7 X Mark III’s maximum zoom length of 100mm$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4838-1814621327”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4838); }); }) equivalent, the Sony shows a bit less fringing right off the bat, but all look pretty decent in the center. It’s in the corners$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4839–2128444560”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4839); }); }) where it looks like G5 X II is really starting to fall apart, unfortunately. Once you reach its maximum zoom of 120mm equivalent, the G5 X II starts to look a little hazy$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4840–1392152557”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4840); }); }) next to the Sony across the frame$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4841-1368515039”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4841); }); }).

So from what we can tell from these copies, the Sony will give you more consistently sharp results regardless of where you find yourself in the zoom range, or across the image frame. But, and this is a big but, you’re giving up an awful lot of aperture (as well as zoom, to be fair) to get that sharpness. If you find yourself wanting to shoot in more dim conditions, the Canons may be a tad bit softer, but their faster lenses will keep your ISO values lower, and therefore noise levels lower. It’s up to you to decide which suits you best.

But poke around the rest of the scene and the other settings we’ve provided, and let us know what you think in the comments.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Which has the best lens? Sony RX100 VII vs Canon G5 X II vs Canon G7 X III

Posted in Uncategorized