[LRflex] Blue Jay and Canon
- From: KEITH LONGMORE <keith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 18:18:07 +0100
Hi David
The Jay: I had a few bird shots like this, and I'm certain that the bird
has moved its head just at the wrong moment. I think you'll find that
many birds are able to keep the eye 'locked on' to its target, but the
head sort of moves around it. Needs very little movement to create this
effect. Might even have just twitched its feathers. Have you tried
smart sharpen in Photoshop, with motion blur mode? Might be worth some
experimenting.
Canon: I'm well aware of the mechanical filter on the surface of the
sensor, but I'm equally certain that most filtering - especially
anti-aliasing - is done in software. I'm almost 100% certain that
cameras use DSP processors for anti-aliasing, as we do with
audio-frequency anti-aliasing, and this where you can make or break a
design. These filters use algorithms such as feed-forward predictive
filtering, in order to get the speed and flexibility needed for fast
multimode, multifrequency correction (don't forget that light is a whole
myriad of frequencies, just like audio). You can see exactly the same
issues in vehicle handling enhancement or aircraft fly-by-wire controls:
if you want the absolute maximum performance from the car or plane,
that software operates on a knife-edge, and most software developers
tend to prefer to play it safe, and by doing so, take away the 'edge'
that makes the difference between excitement and mundane. My
(educated) guess is that camera software designers allow the customer to
select the damping component that suits them, but never let it get too
near to the unstable region. The consequence is reduced sharpness, but
the majority of customers will be happy. Indeed, when you give the
customer control over the characteristics that he/she wants, you rarely
find that the customer opts for the additional 'edge'. It may, of
course, be that Leica customers are different from all others; but given
that Leica is rather more niche market than mass market, that wouldn't
be surprising.
David and Doug: autofocus. Please re-read my words. I didn't say that
autofocus ELIMINATES the need for manual focus, but that AF REDUCES the
need for it. I bet not one customer in 1000 bothers with manual focus
if the camera is equipped with AF! We all know AF isn't perfect (just
as ABS isn't in a car) but once you have it, and get used to using it to
the best advantage that you can, it goes against the grain to give it
up. That's human nature. Do you drive automatic gearbox cars? I bet
you do! And how many times do you think to yourself 'I can do it
better'? Not many, I bet. If the technology is available, most of us
will use it regardless. Let's put it this way: however much you adore a
Model T Ford, and however much you refine the Model T, after you've
driven a current Focus or whatever you have over there, you aren't going
to go back to a Model T, even if the Focus is less than perfect!!
Cheers
Keith
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
