December 18, 2014, 11:41:25 AM

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 - tcmatthews

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Using full frame lens on crop body cameras ?
« on: December 15, 2014, 10:30:38 PM »
Hi -- 

New member and not super techie, so please be nice.  Also, I am a Tony/Chelsea fan, -- they are nice, goofy and earnest, IMHO,  so again, please be nice.  That said, I do get very confused by Tony's explanations.  Here's why -- I think -- prior to digital phtotgraphy, using a 35 mm camera meant that light got to film causing a photochemical reaction which produced a picture.  So, all the math was based on a constant.  Now, there are ff digital cameras, which are "true" 35 mm equivalents and crop sensor cameras, which are camera with sensors that are smaller than 35 mm by varying degrees.  In addition, the medium is not film, so instead of a photochemical reaction, the cameras are taking in information communicated by light and reacting electronically. 

Since both ff and crop sensors are pocessing the same light and then electronically converting that to an image, I don't understand his comments about the same amount of light getting to the sensor.  In other words, if person A is using a ff to take a picture of statue 1 with a field of view of X and person B is using a crop to take a picture of statue 1 and adjusts his position to have the same field of view of X and both are using the same lens and the same focal length, isn't everything the same?  Both cameras are working to take the same eaxact picture, with the same light coming to the sensor.  The only difference I can think of is that if both camera's are 20 MP then the FF pixells are going to be larger.  So, I get confused about his "sensor light collecting" statements, because it seems to me that this would only be relevant if the argument was about comparing a 35 mm film camera to a smaller sized film camera.  It seems to me that the argument with ff versus crop has to do with how a 20 MP ff processes the electronic information versus a 20 MP crop, not about the light getting to the sensor. 

Thanks in advance for the assistance.

Chip

Tony went a little off the reservation when it came to ISO. A full frame sensor only gathers more light because it has a larger area.  Crop cameras are not providing more amplification to get the same brightness because they are smaller.  More than likely the 7d and 5d II provide close to the same amplification per pixel.  ISO performance(noise) is largely a function of the efficiency and size of the image pixels. 

His ISO noise math only works out because all the cameras used have close to the same amount of pixels.  It is true when comparing film cameras.  But it brakes down completely in digital where pixel pitch takes over. 
Perhaps I just made his point that ISO is a bad measurement for digital.  But personally I think that constant exposure behavior between camera formats is more important.   

For an Ideal lens (constant intensity across the image circle)  the intensity of light hitting a full frame, APC or m43 will be the same.  This will lead to the same ISO, same shutter speed etc.   Light intensity effects ISO.  Full frame cameras have a larger Area and typically have larger pixels.  Therefore it collects more total light because of its larger area.  To give a crop or m43 the same total light you have to raise the light intensity. 

It seems to me that the argument with ff versus crop has to do with how a 20 MP ff processes the electronic information versus a 20 MP crop, not about the light getting to the sensor. 

Pretty much.  Furthermore an argument about light hitting the sensor is a bit of an over simplification.  Not really helpful without a discussion of pixel pitch. 

2
Canon General / Re: RTFM. Do you?
« on: December 11, 2014, 09:38:40 PM »
My first Canon DSLR  Rebel XS I read the manual and bought a book aftermarket manual that when into greater detail on featurs.  60D messed with the Camera I think I skimmed the manual once to go over some of the new features.  6D I don't know where the manual is.  It is probably in the box.  Dads NEX 5n skimmed the manual set up camera through in camera help.  Nex 6 no idea where the manual is probably in box turned off in camera help it was annoying me.   EOS M became annoyed had to read the manual to find out how to get it out of idiot mode. I could not even find the menu with out manual.

Olympus OMD EM-5 played with camera settings became confused.  Read manual became more confused.  When in doubt Google.  Found several good guides online covering the settings. 

3
Technical Support / Re: Optimal processing platform of still images
« on: December 11, 2014, 08:51:13 PM »
maybe I'm missing something... what are y'all doing that needs this much power? i use a Mac mini i7 8gb ram and it works great. cost me about as much as the processer and mobo posted. i use a 7D and work with LR and CS6 open at same time. working on a psd file at 135mb with 4 or 5 open and i still have no noticeable slow spots.

You aren't missing anything. Processing of 2D images isn't really that processor intensive. The average 3D video game consumes vastly more processing and GPU power. Support for fast storage solutions and high quality Displays are more important than fast processors. The modern Mac OSX uses memory very efficiently. I can edit on my laptop with 8gb's ram using Bridge, Photoshop and Lightroom simultaneously with no noticeable lag and very little memory pressure reported in Activity Monitor. Video support in Mac mini's isn't great but they are great little computers. Wish I had one.

Windows handles Ram much different than Linux or Mac OSX.  It keeps separate kernel processes space for each of the threads.  The processor has 8 threads.  If you start up a browser in windows 7 on that computer it will say that it is using ~2.7 gigs of RAM.   Mac OSX keeps a single memory space for the kernel.   In piratical terms Windows OS is using 8 times the RAM of Mac OSX for a 8 thread system.  Yosemite may have changed this resent releases of OSX seem to be using more RAM.

I have a very similar computer I built last year.  It is the previous CPU Gen computer 16gb's of ram has proven to be more than enough.  But I might drop in another 16gb's or RAM next year.  I am thinking of buying a SATA card setting up a VM running Linux to act as a NAS/file server.  I doubt that I would notice it slow down at all even without the extra 16gb's of RAM. 

To put things in perspective about cost.   I have been building my desktops for a long time.  I already had most of the components.  It cost me less than a i7 Mac min. 

4
Technical Support / Re: How to remove a filter that is bent.
« on: December 11, 2014, 07:46:32 PM »
If the glass is still in the filter tape it up.  Try not to apply downward pressure if it is cracked.  The main goal at this point is to prevent glass from filter from coming in contact with the front element.  It will also help keep the front element together if it is broken during any repair attempt.   

If you do not have a filter wrench a rubber bands can help increase grip.  Or one of the kitchen jar lid removal pad can help.   

It sounds like it is to bent for a filter wrench.  After taping try to bend it back into shape with needle nose pliers.  I will admit this is farthest I have ever had to go.   In my case it worked.  If this does not work you have a discussion to make.  Take it somewhere, buy special tools (spreaders etc).  Or pull out a hack saw and attempt an emergency field repair. 

If you go slow you can cut groves in the filter around the bend.   This should make it easier to true up the filter or as a last ditch effort break the bent section of the filter ring out.  If the filter tread on the lens is also bent breaking out the filter ring may be the only option. 

Personally if you need to bring out a hack saw and are even a little bit squeamish about it take the lens in.  There is a reason it is considered an emergency field repair.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Petapixel: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless
« on: December 03, 2014, 07:06:15 PM »
Canon is losing quite a few landscape photographers these days, because there is stiff competition to fill all the broad and niche landscape needs. I still use Canon for landscapes because I like their system and I have no complaints with my process. I can still see vast majorities of people wanting to get into landscapes who are not even considering Canon because of lower MP and less DR. I personally stitch and bracket all of my shots (never missed a shot), so I have not much to gain by leaving Canon, but others certainly see the need.

Respectfully disagree, Johan.  Canon isn't really losing folks to mirrorless nearly as much as they are losing folks to Sony sensors -- people are 'switching to mirrorless' just to get their hands on what they think will get them better IQ.

Consider:  one of the Sony a7 bodies with an adaptor is probably the cheapest way to get a "better" sensor for FF work without having to flip all your glass.  Landscapers are the ones willing to give this a try first, as they need AF far less than most photographers and LV can get them by.

But we continue to hear of everyone leaving Canon for a host of reasons, principally due to the sensors, and secondarily due to their avoiding any significant commitment to mirrorless.

Canon will eventually commit large dollars to mirrorless and make a proper go of it -- with APS-C, not FF.  (I don't see a 4th mount happening.  But they'll pony up an EVF, offer DPAF, and (please) offer a greater variety of small, native EF-M lenses and people will buy it.

The big wild card is when.  I've heard a thousand forum-dwelling photography enthusiasts that claim that Canon is falling so far behind and that everyone is leaving them, but I haven't seen a speck of sales data that shows that Sony / Fuji / etc. are converting large numbers of DSLR users from them.  If that starts to happen, Canon will deploy more competitive products in that segment.

- A

+1

Really agree with this. I do not see a FF mirrorless with a new mount from Canon any time soon. They will develop the M platform. Fuji and Olympus are showing you don't need a FF sensor to do mirrorless/compact systems right.

And if others recall earlier rumors about a possible Mirrorless Rebel. I picture the Rebel ergonomics, look and feel to stay the same, aka take out mirrorbox, etc and go to a EVF and maintain the current EF-S/EF mount. This seems like a strategy a conservative company like Canon would go for.

Personally I think if they were going to do a Mirrorless Rebel I think it would be better to keep the grip and the back about the same.  Add a EVF where the OVF is.  Then make the main body thinner put a M mount on it.  It would be about the same size as current Rebels use EOS M lens.  If they create a packages with the converter to the EF-S/EF mount. 


6
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 29, 2014, 12:44:26 PM »


As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested :P
Sure. I accept that as I get older I may want to stop carrying big gear. I accept that may be the end of my bird photography, too. Unless there's some revolutionary technology - my lens accounts for around 4/5 of the weight of my usual setup. Even if smaller bodies were ergonomic (which as I say, I doubt), it's only shaving a small amount off the total.

I realise this has all been said above. We seem to be going in circles. It boils down to, naturally, your needs and expectations shape your view of them as a company. I guess I'm lucky in that my favourite areas are their strongest.
I'm older.... I know better.... and I am still hauling around a cedar-canvas canoe and the pelican case from hell... I guess I missed out on the wisdom that comes with age :)
I'm older too ... I still hawl a 50 pound backpack with me, on long hikes in the mountains, including the 1DX/600mm and tripod. I believe I would have to be tied to a wheel chair or something similar, before I'd give up the ergonomics of a good SLR and my long whites. I have just held an A7r for the first time and to me, the view finder and ergonimics were total turn-offs.

Yay! That gives me hope :)

Will you stop miss quoting me already.  :)   scyrene  said that.  I am more than happy to sacrifice some ergonomics  for a lighter package.  As for shot per battery.  Never really an issue even with mirror-less.  I not shooting birds or sports for current mirror-less.  So 200-300 shots is more than enough for most people.  You  can break you back or hire a mule if you want. 

For me the size of a 1D is an ergonomic turn off.  It is simple to large for my short fat fingers.  So for each their own.

Haha sorry to include you in the endless nested quotes. There's room for both types of gear. That's one reason I got an EOS-M, for social events where a DSLR is too big. But for birding, it's hard to part with the big stuff.
I do not relay mind being in endless nested quotes but Sportsgal501 hacked up the quotes.  I kept seeing your comment attributed to me over and over again.  That is a little annoying. 

7
Lenses / Re: I *HATE* UPS.
« on: November 29, 2014, 10:25:03 AM »
Just about every computer, camera, monitor, etc bought in the US is treated about the same before it goes to retail. If not worst.   For a short time I worked a Comp USA.  DHL delivered TVs in the back of a pickup.  If it was raining the delivery guy may put a tarp on it or he may not. 

I would not worry about it unless the box is crushed, opened, etc.  If it does not work send it back.  I usually have more trouble with FedEx.  UPS consistently shows up 5:00pm or latter.  Fedex can show up anytime. 

8
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 29, 2014, 10:08:22 AM »


As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested :P
Sure. I accept that as I get older I may want to stop carrying big gear. I accept that may be the end of my bird photography, too. Unless there's some revolutionary technology - my lens accounts for around 4/5 of the weight of my usual setup. Even if smaller bodies were ergonomic (which as I say, I doubt), it's only shaving a small amount off the total.

I realise this has all been said above. We seem to be going in circles. It boils down to, naturally, your needs and expectations shape your view of them as a company. I guess I'm lucky in that my favourite areas are their strongest.
I'm older.... I know better.... and I am still hauling around a cedar-canvas canoe and the pelican case from hell... I guess I missed out on the wisdom that comes with age :)
I'm older too ... I still hawl a 50 pound backpack with me, on long hikes in the mountains, including the 1DX/600mm and tripod. I believe I would have to be tied to a wheel chair or something similar, before I'd give up the ergonomics of a good SLR and my long whites. I have just held an A7r for the first time and to me, the view finder and ergonimics were total turn-offs.

Yay! That gives me hope :)

Will you stop miss quoting me already.  :)   scyrene  said that.  I am more than happy to sacrifice some ergonomics  for a lighter package.  As for shot per battery.  Never really an issue even with mirror-less.  I not shooting birds or sports for current mirror-less.  So 200-300 shots is more than enough for most people.  You  can break you back or hire a mule if you want. 

For me the size of a 1D is an ergonomic turn off.  It is simple to large for my short fat fingers.  So for each their own.

9
Lenses / Re: Landscape Lens for Crop To Make Me Go Wow!
« on: November 26, 2014, 09:24:33 PM »
Tokina 11-16 is the way I'd go. Sharp lens that gives you a decent range for wide-angle. And its the only lens that works at f/2.8, which if you ever decide to get into night photography, is the difference between getting useable shots and not (the 10-18 starts a full stop slower, and even the 2/3 stop of the 10-22 makes a difference).

My sense is that the 10-22, 10-18, Tokina 11-16 are all about equal in sharpness in standard landscape apertures (f/5.6-f/11). But, only the Tokina can do f/2.8.

Sigma 18-35 would also be a nice lens, but, I think you'll find going from 18mm to 10-11mm opens up your repertoire more than going from 18mm f/3.5 to 18mm f/1.8 does.

The Tokina 11-16 f2.8 is the only crop ultra-wide zoom that has ever had a wow factor to it for me.   If I was still  shooting primarily crop I would buy one to replace my drowned Sigma. I actually know someone who used to shoot with it on a 7D as a secondary to his 5DII with 70-200mm.  I asked him why he did not have a full frame wide angel. He told me that it was better than all the full frame ultra-wide he had tried.  (17-40,3 copies 15-35f2.8 I and 15-35 f2.8 II)  The mark 15-35f2.8L II was marginally better but not enough to justify buying a full set of 82mm filters. 

 All of the other 10-2xmm zooms are about the same.   I just bought the new Canon 10-18mm STM to on my old rebel or EOS M while kayaking.  It was cheep but I think my old Sigma was sharper once you learned its quirks.   I have not really used it enough to know for sure if I like it. 

For landscape I would use the Sigma between 15-20mm.  I actual preferred to us it over my EFs 15-85mm because of the distortion of the 15-85 at the wide end.   You cannot go wrong with the 15-85 it is a very good lens for crop.  But I do no know if it is wow. 

It has been said that the Sigma 18-35 can replace every prime in its range for crop.  It may be the better buy if you do not want to go ultra-wide.  I should note that before I bought a ultra-wide and really learned how to use it I was not interested in ultra-wide lens.

10
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 07:05:07 PM »
This is an interesting time to be a photograph enthusiasts.   The rapid developments in software and hardware of the mirror-less cameras is quite frankly amazing.   It is not so interesting if you are Canon.  They seem to be doing their own thing. ...
As has been pointed out by a few of us, until and unless mirrorless gets the form factor and battery life we're used to in DSLRs, we're not interested :P
Speak for yourself as you get older your old bones and limps are not going to be too fond of lugging heavy DSLR's around, whether it be on your neck, on your shoulders (Black Rapid) or in a backpack. But Advil and Aleve will be happy as two peas in a pod.  :o

Had to fix this because I do not like Giant 1D sized DSLR. ;)

I prefer smaller cameras like the 60D and 6D at the largest.  But even they are a little large when traveling light.  There is room for improvement in ergonomics in the Canon Rebel line cameras can be both small and ergonomic. Current Rebels are just to roundish. The EOS M would have been much better if it was a little longer.  The battery was turned sideways (or made lager) and turned into a grip. 

I think that cameras are best when they can balance out with the lens. It is ridiculous to expect good ergonomics with a giant lens and a tiny camera.  That said cameras like the Nex 6 are great with prime lens no longer than 135mm-200mm. 

The supper-telephoto lens user is always going to want something larger.   

11
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 25, 2014, 08:40:24 PM »
This is an interesting time to be a photograph enthusiasts.   The rapid developments in software and hardware of the mirror-less cameras is quite frankly amazing.   It is not so interesting if you are Canon.  They seem to be doing their own thing.  The lack of interest (apparent or imaginary) or inability of Canon to change with the times is concerning.  The half baked EOS M system which actual sells well in Japan is a poor excuse for a mirror-less system.  It could even be forgiven if it was released around the same time as the Sony NEX system.  But they learned nothing from Sony's early missteps.  If the Rebel sales go to mirrorless Canon is poorly positioned.  The camera market is shrinking. Canon could possibly profit by reducing the number of Rebel models to one.  Consolidating features into fewer APC cameras.  Lowering R&D cost. 

I expect that Canon will eventual get mirror-less right.  It could fill in the low end right along the Rebel cameras with one prosumer model (with EFV) so satisfy the critics.  I do not thing they can do it without eating into there own Rebel sales.  The question is when.  I say get on with it already.

Canon OWNS the pro full frame Market.  That will not change anytime soon. 
I fully expect that Canon will release a true full frame rebel. 


On a side note: (but I may be misremembering it was a long time ago.)
I vaguely remember reading an interview of one of the Canon executives.   I read around 9 years ago.  Most of it covered the recently released 5D. In it the Canon executive basically stated that he expected most DSLR to eventual be full frame.  That as soon as the manufacturing could was perfected that ASPH would be fazed out.  Eventual the full frame sensor could be cheep enough to put in a Rebel.  He just shrugged when asked what would happen to the EF-s mount. 

It basically covered Canons road map from then to the present.  It was also part of a 10 year plan.  So focusing on full frame is right in line with early Digital camera plans. 

12
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 22, 2014, 12:51:45 PM »
I think Canon satisfies photographers. I think the majority of complaints come from consumers that are way more interested in the latest and greatest gear and technology, and like the science of the technology that goes into making cameras and lenses.

But go over to Nikon Rumors and you will see endless complaints about Nikon not listening to their forum experts and how all every Nikon shooter ever wanted was a "true" D700 replacement and a D300 replacement... Basically people will just complain over what they dont have.

While very true my main concern is that the market for people who are not photographers (normal camera consumers) was very large.  These are the people who generally bought P&S and rebels.  Many are moving to Smart phones others are moving to mirror-less.  If Canon losses completely to others in the mirror-less market or becomes a joke in the eyes of consumers.  We all lose.

If Canon sells fewer low end cameras the cost or R&D will have to be spread over fewer cameras.  That means the cost of all Canon the gear we care about goes up.

I am currently very satisfied with my 6D.  I was satisfied with my 60D when I bought it.  I was seriously pissed off when they released the EOS M instead of a 70D.  My 60D was trashed a month before.  The 6D was two expensive at launch so I had to buy a second 60D.  I was on the market for a mirror-less camera so I pre-ordered a Nex-6.  It could have been a mirror-less Canon to tie me over until the 70D.  Over the next year I used my Nex-6 80% of the time the 60D 20% and if it was not for ML it would have been 10% or less.

I plan on using Canon cameras for my wildlife photography and the 6D in low light.  But I also plan on buying a few Sony FE lens for my eventual purchase of a full frame Sony mirror-less camera for everything else.  Unless things change.  I am intentionally moving slowly hoping Canon will do something.  But all I see is others releasing innovative products. 

For me Does Canon really deserve it? Yes some of it.  The 7D was 2-3 years late.  The 70D was a year late.  The EOS M really should have had a EVF as a option.  The 6D is on paper boring even if the image quality if fantastic.  Released after the Nikon D600 it just looked plain bad.  At the time nobody knew the Nikon was critically flawed oil slinger.   Canons WiFi app to remote control is so bad I often think of hacking my own.   I thought the Sony WiFi App was bad little did I know Canons was laughably worst. The EOS M is a glorified P&S.  I could go on but the complaints about the EOS M have been made elsewhere and do not see the point.

Who knew a company who used to be known as a market leader in innovation could become so conservative.  For full frame photographers Canon make excellent gear.  Nikon is really only competition at that level.  I would chose Canon every time over Nikon.  But in the lower end enthusiast cameras everyone is out innovating Canon/Nikon.   

13
Around flagstaff there are a number of photo sights:

  • Sunset Crater and Waputki National monument offer unique photo opportunity and Native American ruins.
  • Walnut Canyon National Monument

All three can share a single park pass and feature fairly easy hiking paths. Flagstaff has a compact down town it is easy to walk from bar to bar if that is your thing.  It has been a few years so I do not know about were to eat.

The petrified forest/panted desert and Meteor Crater can be work a look. 

If you are passing through Winslow AZ meal time I suggest the Turquoise Room at the La Posada Hotel.  In fact if you can plan around defiantly eat at the Turquoise Room.   We stopped for lunch when going to the Petrified Forest and Meteor Crater and had to return for dinner.  It is a unique dining experience and interesting hotel. 

Winslow's down town statue and mural playing tribute to Eagles song "Take it Easy".

Personally I would leave the 100L and take the 70-200L if I could.   Sometimes it helps framing long distance landscapes and
 
Take a coat and dress in layers Flagstaff can get cold this time of year. 

14
Photography Technique / Re: contrast in settings on camera
« on: November 16, 2014, 07:48:09 PM »
I do not think it effects the exposure or anything like that.  However it can obviously effect the picture preview.  In some circumstances it can make a picture look darker than it is. 

I have accidentally overexposed before because in the sunlight the picture review looked under exposed by a stop.  I should have left it alone. 

15
EOS Bodies / Re: what is the body you want to see canon release next ?
« on: November 16, 2014, 11:26:43 AM »
I chose other.  I would like to see one of the following in no particular order:
  • Full frame rebel based on current 6D sensor stuck in a rebel body.
  • Landscape oriented high MP Camera at a reasonably price. (No 1D for me I will never buy a camera that is that big.)
  • Serious mirror-less M entrant with A6000 competitor.

I think if canon releases a high MP camera there is no need to immediately release a 5D IV.  I also do not think that the 5D IV needs to be a high MP camera.  I expect the 5D IV to have Canon's dual pixel CMOS AF and keep around the same MP.

I think that Sony and Canon are looking at longer release cycles for their top of the line cameras.  Nikon seems to be throwing things at the wall to see what sticks. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13