Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Nikon1

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 21
Chronos User Discussion / Re: Extracting still images
« on: June 22, 2020, 04:10:51 PM »

I could still try the to use extension tubes with my lens on the Kronos 1.4, couldn't I?
Sure, you can use anything you would be able to use on the Nikon Camera, except autofocus and such.
 I also searched a bunch more, and found some seemingly propper solution for the Iris Problem with Nikon lenses.
 Search up "reverse protect ring nikon" In an Search engine or "Nikon BR-6", those are propably the most propper way to do retromounting of lenses, that i found so far. The Reverse Protection ring will allow you to mount an Clear Filter in front of your lens assembly, so that the part thats usually inside of the Camera isnt exposed to the elements or your liquids. Just mount an Standard clear Protection filter there. The BR-6 does even more and seems to allow for full control of the Apperture via an lockable meachanical cable remote. not 100% sure, if the BR-6 also allows for Filters to be mounted, but i would hope so, since its original Part from Nikon? You would need to do your own research on that, if you are really interrested in this BR-6. Otherwise There Could be Diopters, which are kind of good out there, as mentioned my Russian ones, and i also never really tried higher priced new ones, but anything that avoids putting additional optics in front or behind your lens should generally give sharper and higher Quality images, given an High Quality Lens to beginn with. So Macro tubes and Retro-Mounting Lenses is usually the way to go, if a dedicated macro lens is for some reason not worth owning or to expensive.

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Extracting still images
« on: June 22, 2020, 03:50:26 PM »
There Are Professionaly made Adapters for Canon, which will just connect the [now in Free Air] Contacts of the Lens with the Original contacts with the Body with a Cable, but since The G-Style Lenses without apperture Ring also Require Mechanics, i seem not to be able to find any of those for Nikon F G-Style.  However, there ist this (Also german again, sorry):
 if that doesnt work, when in doubt, use this:
 Or come op with something else yourself, its just a lever opening the iris.

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Extracting still images
« on: June 22, 2020, 02:44:30 PM »
Interesting that when googling the retroadapter ring, most of what comes up is from Germany.  Even on American eBay I only saw these rings, by themselves, sold from Germany. Further, virtually all of the videos  explaining the concept that result from a search are in German. Not that it matters, just curious if American sellers do not support this type of ring or is there some other reason. 

Anyway, I watched a German video where the guy compared this retroadapter ring with the raynox dcr-250. I understood most of it although I'm not familiar with  most of the "camera-specific" German words.  If I understood correctly, the raynox dcr-250 just snaps onto the front of the lens and does not mess with the contacts, so I can continue to set the aperture as I do now.  The retro adapter requires the lens to be reversed, which seems strange, but I guess also means that I will have an issue with the aperture since my 50 mm lens does not have an aperture ring.  What's your opinion of the raynox dcr-250?  Below is a link to the video I watched.
I also had trouble to find anything according to Retrofit-Adapters for Lenses in english, but knew about them for Years. Seems to be a german thing, maybe the orgin is Novoflex, a german company, that still exists to this day, they came up with a ton of strange and obscure Camera Adapters and such, aswell as all the other German Optics Companys, which had been and still are making some Special Stuff i never seen anywhere else. 
 So i just linked to the German Ebay. 
I generally am not strictly against diopters as the one you mentioned (but never heard about it, and also havnt watched the Videos about it), but they do lower your Image Quality.  I will try to explain it like this: A optical system is generally optimized and built for one particular use, in the Case of something like the 50mm 1.8 AF-S, its a Rather sharp Normal short-Focus Gauss-Type Lens for 43 to 28mm Image Circle, meaning it will perform best on DX-Format Nikon Cameras and FX-Format Cameras with Focus from Infinity to around 50cm Distance. but since its image Quality can only truely optimized for one particular distance, its mosly somewhere Between infinity and 0.5 Meters, at wich it will perform BEST. It will, for most situations still perform "good enough" at infinity distance and close Focus distance 0.5m.
 Now if you go really close, like 0.1m or closer, on some Lenses Image Quality will significantly drop, because the Lens is just not meant to do that. You CAN build lenses, which are not affected as much by focus distance, or just are better optimized for closer focusing distances, such are actuall macro lenses (beware of lenses with "MACRO" in the name or ones that just state they are macro, most are technically not, Macro starts at 1:1 Magnification, and a lot of lenses which Have Macro in the name dont come Close to that, so always look up, what kind of Magnification the Lens is built for), but that usually makes the Lens more expensive, and since by far not everyone needs a lens that can do this kind of stuff, its usually left out or worked around in a way to work somewhat acceptable for general use. They are either Calculated in their designs to have about the Same image Quality independent of Focus distance or will be optimized for a Rather Close Focusing point, at which they will perform best, those may not give best image Quality at Infinity Focus for example.
 Now, every optical System (For this matter read "Lens") is optimized in it self to produce a image as good as possible as given By the Price Point and other criteria considered by the Designer, such as Zoom Range, available Glass-Types, Weight, Sharpness, Lens Speed and quite a few more. If you now add an Additional Optical Element to the Front, you kind of mess up the Optical System. Those Diopters are usualy made to fit a large range of Lenses, and therfor will never be a perfect fit to any of the Lenses and lower image Quality. There are a few Diopters especially designed for certain lenses, but most are universal. That beeing said, some Lens-Diopter Combinations can still work well, and i actually use a pair of really Old russian Diopters with good coatings of to-me-unknown-brand which give superb Image Quality in combination with my 32mm 1.2 1Nikkor, which is mostly used for Product-Shots. The diopters cover the Magnification ratio nicely, which i cant really can get with the Lenses Natural Close-Focus distance and for which the Macro tubes are too high Magnification allready. Those Two diopters (+1 +2) really nicely fill in that Gap and give me a Magnification Range from Infinity down to the Point where i can fill the Frame with an Ant.
 These Old russian Diopters give good enough results for me, and you cant really tell any drawbacks in image Quality when using them on this lens, but (the only other ones i ever tested) i also bought a bunch of Cheap (~30 or 40 for a Set of 5) China diopters New, those are just bad, no matter what lens they are used on. As Far as i can tell, they are not even Coated.
 So in generall, Diopters are Worth a try if you really need to, but it will always be a compromise in image Q.
 Now about the "Strange" Idea of just flipping a lens inside out to get higher Magnification ratios. As i explained in the beginning of this Reply, a lens is optimized for a certain Magnification Ratio, which could, for a lens like the AF-S 50/1.8, be something like Waist-Head Portrait-Distance on DX or full-Body Images on Full-Frame, which should be about the Same distance. Now Lets assume Horizontal Field of view for this would be about 80cm and Horizontal Sensor Width would be 23,5mm (Nikon DX), then your Magnification would be something around 1:30. That means the Lens is Optimized to render an big image onto a 30x Smaller Area. now since the Image in the Sensor Plane is calculated to be color-Corect and otherwise intact, the Lens can witout any problem be inverted, meaning it will now work best for rendering something small 30 times bigger onto the Sensor. This is actually really extreme, and i dont know, if the 50/1.8 will still perform that well at that Magnification, but the Principle works about like this. Lenses Dont really care, which direction the Light goes, thats why you can use most Projector lenses for image Capturing as well!
 Its not that Strange, if you think about it twice and understand, whats going on. Most lenses Are just usualy built to project something Rather Large onto a Sensor, which is usually a lot smaller than the Object its Trying to capture, and the Lens is made to perform best for those situations. If you try to capture things of the Size of your Sensor or smaller, you then either need special optics made for that purpose, calculated to perform best in this kind of scenario, or flip a lens and make it project the other way around.
Hope this was kind of understanable of an Explaination about the Retro-Adapter-Thing.

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Extracting still images
« on: June 22, 2020, 01:02:37 PM »
For the Adapter, i would reccomend this Adapter Above for Any Nikon AF-S Type Lenses without apperture Ring..If you want to get even more Magnification out of your 50/1.8, maybe try using it inverted with an Retro-Adapter like this (make sure to get one with an 58mm Thread on it, since it will not fit the AF-S 50/1.8 otherwise without an additional adapter, also make sure to find a way to keep the Apperture open, since the Apperture-Control tab on the Back of the Lens is then just free, and Apperture will close down completely to f/22 or something):

 This Retro-Adapter will help you get higher quality images at very high magnification ratios, like the shots with field of view of only a few millimeters (talking around Magnification 1:1 and beyond, 1:1 Magnification on the 2.1 will give a field of view of 19,2x10,8mm if the Full sensor is used). This can also be combined with the Macro-Tubes you allready own to get even Higher Magnification, but you will end up with your lens very near to the Subject of interrest.Since i know you work with Liquids and would like to have more distance to Subject, you need higher Focal length for more distance.Basically the two options you have for a Macro lens with longer Focal length are to get an actuall Macro lens, i would reccomend something with 100mm or even longer, if you can find anything good with longer focal lenght for reasonable price. Calculate Magnification you try to achive based on your Subject size compared to sensor size and check the Lens, if it is built to do that kind of magnification.
The other option is a bit more complicated, using Enlarger-Lenses and Macro-Bellows. This can get a bit more Expensive, but you can find them in longer focal length more easily (most are however Vintage and not very sharp or they get expensive rather Quickly, but there are really affordable and good ones out there).

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Extracting still images
« on: June 22, 2020, 12:09:02 PM »
Hi Photopage:

Sorry for the late reply.  Thanks for taking the time to try to verify the exposure.

In looking at the pictures, I am confused.  If each still is one microsecond exposure, why aren't the images much clearer.  In looking at the images, I have no idea what I'm looking at.

Well, its High Magnification, and you need crazy good lenses, to get REALLY sharp images at High Magnification ratios.
 Almost any usual lens will give rather blurry results and/ or other image Artifacts, such as color abberations.
 From what i can Tell, field of view is smaller than 5mm, which is pretty high magnification compared to most every-Day Photography or Video.
 Not sure, if thats all, but i think its a considerable part of the Reason, why the image Quality is rather low.
 Also lighting can get difficult for such kind of scenarios, not only because Macro needs a lot light on its own, but because you can easily run into problems to actually get your Lamps and Lenses close enough and such.
 And a ton of other challenges of high-Magnification, high framerate Shooting.

Software Dev / Re: Chronos V0.5.0 Full Release
« on: June 21, 2020, 12:57:30 AM »
ok, that Quote from the Datasheet is somehow broken, and i cant really fix it with an edit, here another Try as an Screenshot:

Software Dev / Re: Chronos V0.5.0 Full Release
« on: June 21, 2020, 12:55:21 AM »
#EDIT#:I was wrong about the Internal Mic, correction.
I'm not sure if the camera even has an internal microphone, I do not remember seing one last time I took it apart. But I might have overlooked it. The camera certainly has an (as of yet) unused speaker. Some confirmation from the Krontech guys would help here.
2.1 only has an MIC-IN, i did read that wrong. Datasheet says +-1V on the analog input, thats why i would indeed be carefull with Headphone outputs on pcs, if you turn volume up, they can easily go to +-5v or even -+10V, ar way beyond on open gate (No speaker plugged in) I am pretty sure you will be able to fry that analog input with some pc soundcards, if the Specs are as stated in the Datasheet, and you try hard enough!
Quote from 2.1 Datasheet:
Audio*Microphone/Line input, headphone outputVideoHDMI monitor outputUSBUSB type A (host) and micro B (device)SATAeSATA 3GbpsAnalog input*1MSa/s 12-bit, 200kHz bandwidth, +/- 1V full scale

Software Dev / Re: Chronos V0.5.0 Full Release
« on: June 20, 2020, 05:00:51 PM »
- I hear wierd noises (almost sounding like a fan) on the live video audio, even without  microphone being plugged in
 - I'm sofar unable to record audio is there a special microphone needed? I tried a regular PC Headset without any amplification.
Well, since the Camera has a built-in fan also, thats maybe where the Fan noises come from. I think the built-In microphone is pretty much unuseable for actuall high-Quality Audio for almost anything serious because of that, but could be a live-Saver to sync Any kind of High-Quality Stand-Alone Recorder or other Audio. If you only get fan noise, did you try to record something louder? maybe the fan was just much louder for the camera, than whatever Sound you tried to record because its a lot closer....
 As for the external microphone, i am pretty sure, you need a powered microphone with an internal amplifier. As far, as i know, its just an analog input, which will basicaly just record a Voltage over time. And you just wont get a voltage from an standard-non-Powered Microphone. The best you could try to test the Audio-In without buying some Powered Microphone or an Mic-Amp would propably be to feed the camera Audio-In with an Audio-Out from a PC and play music or something to get an actuall voltage to the Camera-input. Would propably be smart to start a lower volume and turn up the audio if needed slowly.
I dont know if thats implemented yet, but i think some kind of indicator of the input level of the Audio-In would propably be VERY helpfull to have for a lot of people. Most cameras with Audio-In have one. I dont know if there is space to put it on the main screen over the actuall video feed (i mean one Line/ Row of pixels for Left and one for right would maybe allready be enough), otherwise it could live in some Menu, where you would go to check audio. Still better than not having an indicator at all... Just an idea however, which could save someones day in video production.

Could this be caused by a SD-Card thats gone bad possibly?
 Does this happen on different Memory devices in the Same Way always?

Software Dev / Re: Chronos V0.5.0 Full Release
« on: June 17, 2020, 05:20:20 PM »
Huge thanks for the 60fps continous recording with audio!Will this come Pre-Installed on the new 2.1 Chonos Cameras which are preordered?

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Chronos 1.4 Footage Thread
« on: June 17, 2020, 07:08:35 AM »
If you have a powerful GPU card, you can test it out.
Not really, by todays standards (you wont impress anyone with an GTX960M or an GTX780Ti SSOC+GTX770 today anymore, Laptop, which gets more use is from 2015 and My workstation, which only does Heavy 3D-Render Stuff usually is even older. i dont upgrade Hardware that often, Next upgrade is planed in about 5 Years, that will have to do untill then). thats another nice thing about Twixtor, it runs fine on CPU only and does that pretty fast actually considering what its doing and the Hardware its running on.
 Thanks for the Link anyways. Will take a look at it.

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Chronos 1.4 Footage Thread
« on: June 17, 2020, 06:58:52 AM »
Edit: By the way, you should try using DAIN. It uses AI, depth awareness when doing motion interpolation so it should be better than Twixtor. It's also a free program but you can donate too. The downside is that it only runs on certain GPU cards and the render time can be quite long. I actually have been doing motion interpolation tests as well. While neither are perfect, I think it has less artifcacts than Twixtor.

I just saw the banding you speak of. That actually a highlighting artifact from Lightroom for one of the sliders. Forgot to disable it.
Never heard about DAIN, will maybe check it out at some point, but Twixtor, even though not perfect seem like a VERY solid Plugin, just like AE itself, and while not crazy fast, its also not THAT slow. Artifacts are kind of expected with that kind of stuff like you would use Twixtor for, and i think a lot of it comes down to how you shot whatever you try to edit with it, just like Neat also cant magically convert a crappy, shaky phone Snapshot from a dark Backyard at night into a high-res well-Lit Stock-Photo.... If you feed Twixtor right, it produces very good results, i used the Free Test-Version now quite a bit, but that one has either a Watermark or takes some Serious rendertime (Talking 10x to the full version) if you work around the Watermark with some nifty tricks. Otherwise pretty happy with it. Anyhow, i will see what that DAIN is all about if i find some time, maybe its just actually better?

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Chronos 1.4 Footage Thread
« on: June 17, 2020, 06:50:23 AM »
That's the downside of Neat Video 5 is the speed. The render times can increase about 4X especially when rendering out to 4K. 1080P rendering is not too bad but still expect about a 1.25X increase when rendering with Neat Video than without it. Having a powerful GPU and CPU will help a ton. The program has an option to use both to increase speed. My system has a six-core i7 8700K CPU and a NVIDIA GTX 1080 mobile card.

Yeah, I mean as long as you aren't pixel peeping and zooming in the upscaled footage, it looks pretty decent. It's weird cause I'm not seeing any serious banding on mine. Are you watching it on an HDR TV? I'll have some more footage in the coming days. I took note of the shots you wanted to see. Thanks again for the feedback.
4x Rendertime is not that bad honestly. Rendering / Editing 4k on its own is quite the task itself, not to even mention effects like upscaling, even for a decent modern PC of any sort.The Banding isnt super visible on an average monitor, but i have two TN-Panels and an IPS (All uhd, some of the First reasonable ones that were made, only the IPS is newer and reasonable color-Accurate, but its smaller size), the TNs Have some Strange, tight viewing angles and on top of them, one of them is Mounted upside down (dont even ask why, that would take to long to propperly explain  ;D ). So, with those Monitors you will instantly notice anything wrong in the Higlights or shadows if you move your head the smalles bit. I put them Into AE and put some curves on it, to see it better and its definatly there, but not the end of the World. I guess most people wont even notice unless you asked them about it and they looked for it. Left is the Upscaled File, right is the Original Footage File. I guess the Banding comes from the Neat-Plugin trying to also Sharpen the edges of the seperate tones in the Sky or some other additional Processing its doing apart from Sharpening. Its kinda hard to notice i guess, but i just saw that instantly on my Monitor.

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Chronos 1.4 Footage Thread
« on: June 17, 2020, 06:12:37 AM »
Thanks for sharing that file. I can play around with it too. Yeah, I heard a lot about the Nikon J5. I wonder why they never continued making newer models based on it. I think a year or two after they discontinued it, the Sony RX100 IV and Sony RX10 II got released that could do similar frame rates but at a higher resolution. One advantage that it has that you mentioned is that it is an interchangeable body.

So here are two clips I did. One was shot at 1280 X 1024 and the other was upscaled to 4096 X 2304. You can see a little difference. Definitely not as drastic as the other one, but I think it is cleaner. Again, I shot DNG sequences for this one. The files are below. I'll shoot more challenging scenes.
Played around with the two files a bit, and the Upscaling result ist definatly something else than anything i can do with basic effects quickly. Doesnt look too natural when zoomed in, you can definately tell some kind of serious image processing is going on, but still no sign of that typical over-Sharpened look you get when trying to forcing sharpness and not too distracting overall for the average viewer, with still a ton more details than the plain footage.A thing i really dislike is, what it does with the out of focus-Highlights. Serious banding going on there. but that could be worked around with some Kind of masking rather easily if nessercary. Neat is not that bad after all it seems. I might think about buying it, when i end up needing to upscale more often in the future. i would propably end up using it at 150 to 200% Scaling at most times, but first i need to get some other stuff as far as software goes, an actuall legit licence of Twixtor pro is way higher on the list... but still, i will keep that in mind. Last question i had about Neat Video was how it compares in render Times? So, Exporting the Footage blank, without any effects at native Resolution at compareable Bitrate to the Reder Time of the Same File with Just the Upscaling applied (no other effects).

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Chronos 1.4 Footage Thread
« on: June 17, 2020, 05:42:56 AM »
The Most sad thing about the Whole 1-Series from Nikon is, just HOW far ahead of its time it was. I think people where just not ready for it, and also Nikon did a pretty bad job at marketing with those cameras and propably caused a lot of wrong expectations and confusion and propably also held back a bit too much in some aspects. Just remember the J1 from that series, the original "1" Nikon (Which came out 2012, but dont quote me on an Exact date...), that one did Full Resolution bursts of photos at 10MP Sensor Resolution and 60 Frames Per second. And that camera also allready did 400fps and 1200fps (Just like any 1-Series Nikon) back then on an (kinda) affordable, VERY portable and small, user friendly interchangeable Lens Camera, which is pretty crazy. Problem with the whole system was mostly, that Nikon somehow allways ended up intentionally crippling the Cameras for Whatever reason and somehow never fully commiting to it. That made them Never really catch too much popularity. Problems included, that they never really made a lot of lenses for the System (though the Lenses that are available are INSANELY good!), and also tried seemingly everything to make it difficult for you to use other lenses With the Sysem (For example, the Camera clearly has Focus Magnification, Auto-ISO, Auto Exposure, Focus Assistant and many other things, but they dont work unless with orignal Nikon Glass). And also a few other "little" things like this. This propably ended up frustrating true full-Time professionals who tried it as Workhorses and more serious users (though the system clearly never was intended for that according to nikon), and it propably also was too complicated for those who just wanted to get an point-And Shoot. The small group of people Left to buy the Cameras (at a still rather high price point if you just look at it as an small Photo-Camera in comparison to what was available at the time), then ended up not producing enough sales apparently. You can really tell, that a lot of R&D went into making these Cameras. I took apart quite a few from the J-Series and Modified them, and all of them Are very well made and surprisingly well and Strong built. There is no tiny bit of space Wasted inside, packed full, really nicely built cameras. Then, as they saw that the system somehow never really took off after multiple attempts, they seemingly started an last attempt to kickstart the Sales for the System with the J5, the Last one of the System. They got a ton right with this camera (Ergonomics for the size of camera and general layout is the Best ive ever seen on a camera that "small") and sold it at an rather agressive, competitive price point, but still ended up crippling it to death, and with that, not much later, Nikon sadly decided to discontiue the System Completely. biggest fails in the J5 were that they still continued to disable focus assistants and Automatic Exposure functions for third-Party lenses (the Exposure Meter finally worked with this one), didnt allow for external Flash, the Weird limitations on video (just 15fps on 4K video...? 1/60s Maximum exposure, even at 15 and 30fps...? again no auto-Exposure or auto-Iso -anything for Manual Lenses...and some more), no audio-in and a lot of other seemingly intentionally missing options in the Menu. I know that thats kind of what the V-Series was for (external Flash and Audio-in) but those wherent much better in terms of overall missing functions and also way more Expensive. I never missed the Viewfinder on any of the J-Series however. The Fact that Viewfinders where optional or not even availble on this series of cameras triggered so many people for some reason... As Far as the J5 goes, the Screen is actually that good that you dont even really ever need one and also are WAY more Flexible than if it had one.
 However, its a great system, and they really could have taken this System places with newer sensors and new processors nowerdays. Remember, all the 1-Series Sensors are Sony-Chips from what i know, Nikon usualy gets acces to them after Sony is done building a camera with them (RX-Series in this case) and somehow still end up getting better results out of them then, so, as you said, imagine the Sony RX-Specs on an Camera body of the Same Size with interchangeable lens mount and an Reasonable Amount of buttons and options to make it very useable! I never quite understood, what they actually tried to achive with all the Limitations on those cameras...? Maybe something like Canon is known for doing since many Years, where they intentionally left out functionality on Small, Cheap Cameras to force you buy the Big Cameras if you want certain functions to not make everyone just buy the Cheaper option instead? Never really figured that out, anyways, thats one of the things that killed the System in the Long term. Apart from all the Flaws (which any system in Existence has btw.) ist an amazing, yet rather Pricey System. The System gets a lot of hate in some Places, some is justified, as i explained above, some really not. But anyone i know who actually looked into it and tried it himself, loved it.
 For me (and i looked at quite some Cameras) the J5 is just THE Camera to use. Its not quite "up to date" in terms of latest features anymore, but its also still holds up very well. Overall its a very fun to use and very streamlined Camera. Still havnt found anything nearly as good/nice to maybe replace it at some point, guess ill just stay with the J5 for a while.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 21