December 17, 2017, 01:34:22 AM

Author Topic: UCSD Science FAIL  (Read 10908 times)

Pi

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 912
    • Math and Photography
Re: UCSD Science FAIL
« Reply #15 on: September 27, 2013, 01:03:51 AM »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: UCSD Science FAIL
« Reply #15 on: September 27, 2013, 01:03:51 AM »

AlanF

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3187
Re: UCSD Science FAIL
« Reply #16 on: September 27, 2013, 02:31:22 AM »
The article is about work from UCSD, the University of California San Diego, a part of the the Californian state university system.

Technically, UCSD is part of the University of California (UC) system; the California State University (CSU) system is a separate system although both are public university systems supported by the State of California.  Generally speaking, the UC's are the highest tier of the public university in the state, with the CSU's being the next tier down.  When you see a city name after the UC designation (e.g. UCSD) it's referring to that campus, while "the University of California" refers to UC Berkeley (aka Cal), which was the first campus in the system (and the genesis of others - their medical school became UC San Francisco, their university farm became UC Davis).

Probably TMI, but then, I went to UC Berkeley (and as we said at UCLA games, "There's only one Cal, and it's in Berkeley.  Get your own colors, get your own fight song, get a real bear!").
I hope to get into Cal in 2 years!  8)

UC Berkeley is a very great institution, and I have been fortunate to have been hosted there on several occasions, as well as UCSF, UCSD and UCLA. In general, the UC system is one of the treasures of the USA and a scientific powerhouse. I hope you are successful in getting into Cal.
5D IV, 5DS R, 400mm DO II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, EF 1.8 STM,  EF 24-105, 100-400 II, EF-S 15-85, Sigma 150-600mm C, EOS-M5 15-45, f/2 22, 11-22, Samyang 8mm f/2.8 fisheye: sold 7D II, EOS-M, Powershot G3 X,  Sigma 10-20, EF 300/2.8 II, 70-200/4 IS.

KyleSTL

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 422
Re: UCSD Science FAIL
« Reply #17 on: September 27, 2013, 08:37:46 AM »
OK, now it's starting to make sense.  Thanks for sharing the link, Pi.  This does seem like an interesting technology.  I just wonder what that section of the image would look like if you put a Pentax Q + shift adapter (for the higher pixel density ~ 250MP FF equivalent) on the Canon 8-15mm.

Also, here's a presentation:
http://psilab.ucsd.edu/publications/(presentation_2013)_stamenov_(OSA_IS).pdf
« Last Edit: September 27, 2013, 08:57:46 AM by KyleSTL »
Canon EOS 5D | Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 DG | 24-105mm f/4L IS USM | 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM
15mm f/2.8 Fisheye | 28mm f/1.8 USM | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 85mm f/1.8 USM | 550EX | 3x 420EX | ST-E2 | Canon S90 | SD600 w/ WP-DC4

Pi

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 912
    • Math and Photography
Re: UCSD Science FAIL
« Reply #18 on: September 27, 2013, 10:21:39 AM »
OK, now it's starting to make sense.  Thanks for sharing the link, Pi.  This does seem like an interesting technology.  I just wonder what that section of the image would look like if you put a Pentax Q + shift adapter (for the higher pixel density ~ 250MP FF equivalent) on the Canon 8-15mm.

Also, here's a presentation:
http://psilab.ucsd.edu/publications/(presentation_2013)_stamenov_(OSA_IS).pdf

Thanks for that link.

Their lens is interesting but the comparison with conventional lenses is misleading and shows no photographic experience. I am not sure how they get that awful pixelated image with the EF lens - you can see somewhere the lens mounted on their device, and in the presentation - mounted on the 5D. Also, their lens is small on the front but huge on the back, and in a huge enclosure, as far as I can tell. Light gathering is good only in relative terms - compared to its size but I do not see why is that of any interest. It still gather much less light than an EF lens. And finally - they say no geometric distortions, which is very misleading as well. You project (say, a plane) to a sphere. If you final goal is to have a planar projection, you got a huge distortion already. The way the fix it is not clear - either mechanically (with the fibers) or with software but that would create the known problems near the borders.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: UCSD Science FAIL
« Reply #18 on: September 27, 2013, 10:21:39 AM »