Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

« on: February 20, 2013, 03:21:07 PM »

Once you are below the DLA of the lower-resolution sensor, you won't get any more "resolution", however the detail resolved should still look better on the higher resolution sensor, as it will be more finely delinted. Beyond the DLA, you experience diminishing returns...that means things could still look better, however as you approach the minimum aperture of the lens, the improvements of the higher resolution sensor over the lower resolution sensor will diminish (not disappear, just diminish).

All of the current APS-C sensors are diffraction-limited by f/8, however diffraction is still so low at that point that it rarely matters unless you really need to resolve something with obscenely fine detail (i.e. you want to resolve the individual barbules on each barb of a birds feathers at a distance of a few feet...you are going to need something closer to a PERFECT f/4 or wider lens along with the highest resolution sensor you can possibly get your hands on...24.1mp would be pretty excellent in that situation.)

I'm still not quite convinced. So I took a image with a 7D and a 50 mm 1.8 II, aperture f/11. I scaled it down to 13.5 Mpixel and up again to 18 Mpixel. Then I compared it to the original image. Even with pixelpeeping I can't recognize that the original has better image quality.

2

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

« on: February 20, 2013, 01:51:01 PM »

I really have to emphasize this: In no way, ever, can diffraction produce worse results on a higher resolution sensor than a lower resolution sensor. EVER.

I still doubt that 24 MPixel will deliver higher resolution at f/8 and smaller apertures than 18 MPixel. But I agree, it won't be worse either.

The biggest advantage of high MPixel sensors is IMO that they deliver more information that can be used for denoising and getting cleaner images at high ISO.

3

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DPReview: Canon EOS 6D Reviewed

« on: February 14, 2013, 11:43:39 AM »

As someone who is anxiously waiting to see what they do with the 7DII, I'm now expecting two things to happen. First, whatever Canon produces will cause all sorts of trolling on the internets from the usual suspects and, Second, once the 7DII is out for a few months, real users will be impressed with what a solid performer it turns out to be.

And finally it will be considered as what it is: a decent camera. That's Rogers law: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/rogers-law-of-new-product-introduction

4

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - Worth Buying ???

« on: February 14, 2013, 11:21:12 AM »

Note:  Main area of photography fashion/product + some event/indoor and occasional Wild life.

My doubts are like what are the things I will gain in 7D – other than 
Better Focusing system           [+++]
High FPS                                  [++]
Great Build                               [ + ]

You also will get AFMA, better viewfinder, better controls and more customizing options. Shooting with the 7D is definitly more fun than with the 600D - but you probably won't get better images.

As for FF: I suppose you usually shoot fashion and product with off camera flash and ISO 100 or 200 - so you will not gain a huge difference when going FF - it's rather a question of the lenses you use. Indoor events is a different stoy, FF is a big advantage here, compared to crop.

5

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Against the odds?, or Common sense...

« on: January 26, 2013, 10:04:51 AM »

So to anyone who is thinking that the grass is greener on the other side(maybe on the lcd yes:P), I would advise to also think about the ergonomics, costs of switching and other things then only the superiority of a camera(sensor)!

Actually, I think most people discussing sensor quality are aware that the sensor is just one factor of a whole system. That's why there are also discussions about lenses, AF etc.  Also, which camera is right for someone depends pretty much on what they are shooting. If you shoot animals you want good AF and a high framerate. A landscape photographer doesn't care much about that, he want's as much resolution and dynamic range as possible.

Anyone who has some good links about the auto focus system in the canon cameras or some other tips that can be useful to me, please don't hesitate to post them!

Roger Cicala did very interesting AF investigations: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here

« on: January 24, 2013, 05:28:18 PM »

Until relatively recently, comparing formats was commonplace and trivial. The exact same film you loaded in a cartridge into your SLR was being used in large format backs. And you really had to be clueless in those days to insist that you could get the exact same quality out of the smaller format.

And yet many people very shooting 35 mm film instead of large format, because it had it's own advantages. But I agree, in terms of IQ larger format is usually better.

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here

« on: January 24, 2013, 03:48:15 PM »

But, if you have a choice between two cameras of different formats and different megapickles, go with the bigger format. (With, of course, the usual caveats that sufficient technology age can skew the results.)

Except 1D MK III vs 7D.

Oh wait, the 1D MK III ist two years older, I can't compare them ... 

Just joking... as you said, due to technology developments (and other reasons, as discussed) it doesn't make sense to compare sensors only in regard of size. (And likewise the whole thread doesn't make much sense IMO).

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D Noise Reduction Tips

« on: January 23, 2013, 04:13:39 PM »

- shoot RAW
- only use 'full' ISO (like 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 ...)
- turn off 'long exposure noise reduction' in custom settings (yes it removes hot spots on the sensor, but it also adds noise)
- turn off 'high ISO speed noise reduction' in custom settings
- I've not tested this, but this is recommended on other forums: don't use ISO 6400. Instead use 3200 and underexposure 1 stop. Turn up brightness 1 stop up again in post processing.
- google ETTR (sorry, I don't have time to explain it right now  )
- turn of noise reduction in DPP (especially luminance NR makes it only worse)
- use third party noise reduction in post. I use NeatImage - maybe it's not the best, but results are impressive. It's also free and very easy too handle. You don't have to bother about settings (but you can when you want).

9

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here

« on: January 23, 2013, 03:56:16 PM »

Sharpness has got nothing to do with perspective, or DoF.

I disagree. That's not even true when you only shoot ISO test charts. The larger DoF, the smaller the circle of confusion and the higher the resolution/sharpness (disregarding diffraction etc.).

10

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - How bad is it? Really?

« on: January 23, 2013, 10:52:22 AM »

Sorry my bad, but why would somebody not want to go FF?

You tell us. According to your signature you shoot APS-C by yourself 

11

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - How bad is it? Really?

« on: January 23, 2013, 07:05:57 AM »

but I also realize that the standards on this forum is VERY high.

Wrong. Most of the people on this forum are pixel peepers who don't enjoy photography.

Haha. Yes there are pros here who shoot for living, but many people here are pixel peepers who just love photography.

12

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - How bad is it? Really?

« on: January 23, 2013, 06:58:33 AM »

So, the question is: How bad is the 7D on high ISO (1000-6400)? Really?

That depends on your post processing routine, how large you intend to print, and how high your standards are. I wouldn't ask anyone - best thing is, get high ISO JPGs or better raws from the internet and do your post processing on them and make your own decision.

I bought a 7D myself last week, and I'm very happy with it. ISO 6400 is totally usuable for 8x5 inch prints (raws, JPGS I haven't tested yet).

13

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here

« on: January 22, 2013, 08:54:59 AM »

I suspect that in the long term the APS-C format may disappear - but maybe not!

Canon doesn't think so, they just came up with the M mount which can only be used for APS-C. APS-C has it's advantages, like less size and weight, which is a plus for traveling or photojournalism (supposing one doesn't want to do very large prints).

But indeed, I would also not be surprised when they will stop releasing EF-S mount cameras and lenses in 10 years or so.

14

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here

« on: January 21, 2013, 03:41:10 PM »

If we're talking about two cameras, both with 18MP of digital perfection, then presuming each has a lens up to the demands of the sensor, there will be no difference.

Eh, no.

Not even close.

Camera A has a square sensor, 1" x 1". Camera B has a square sensor, 2" x 2". Both cameras have a 1024-by-1024 pixel array, for a grand total of one megapickle. Both sensors are digital nirvana, counting photons at the very limit of what quantum mechanics allows.

Each of camera B's pixels can gather four times as many photons as camera A's pixels. Camera B has two stops more dynamic range and the gradients it captures are two stops smoother, with two stops less pixelation. Make a 2" x 2" print from both, and the one from camera B will show two stops more detail and appear that much sharper.

Sure, but you are not always dynamic range limited, for instance in a studio or in a foggy landscape situation. The only difference will be that camera B's sensor needs four times less exposure (and even that doesn't matter when using lighting or a tripod).

15

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D5200 review

« on: January 21, 2013, 05:17:00 AM »

Very interesting, because the D5200 has a Toshiba sensor and not Sony like the D600/D800. So if there are at least two manufacturers that can build such good sensors, Canon will likely be able to come up with such sensors too in the future. I think they finally will, otherwise they would have already begun to buy third-party sensors like Nikon does.