March 02, 2015, 07:52:36 PM

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 - lol

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Improved EF to EF-M Adaptor
« on: February 24, 2015, 10:17:01 AM »
"Wobbling corresponding"
"2 group also serves as a focus group and the anti-vibration group"

Not sure how to read that, but one way might be it can also provide IS to non-IS lenses???

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D Classic Good Enough for Pros?
« on: February 19, 2015, 07:57:11 AM »
I'm a big fan of the original 7D and it may even be the camera I took most shots with ever. I've recently got the mk2, must be better right? Yes and no! It boils down to what you can get out of your kit relative to your needs. The 7D classic was by no means perfect, but it could do, let's say 95% of what I wanted. The mk2? Maybe 96%. As things get more advanced, they do more and more, but for a lot of things we reached an area of "good enough" long ago and we are chasing smaller niches of improvement. I could buy 4 used 7D classics for the cost of one mk2. So in that respect, the value of the classic is phenomenal.

Also through the years, I find myself doing more and more, with less and less. For less demanding shots I'd be equally happy using my old 600D as I am the 7D2. But if the going gets tough, then for sure either 7D becomes more interesting.

EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:24:06 PM »
The D810 is a very modest update to the D800, released only ~1 year later, so Nikon users who wanted a high resolution camera bought the D800 and are less likely to buy a D810.  Frankly, I can't see how the 5Ds would not outsell the D810.

Looking forward, it might be appropriate to compare combined sales of D800+D800E+D810 vs. 5Ds + 5Ds R. While there are minor differences within each range as far as the sensor goes, I'd still be inclined to lump them in one bucket in that if you have any one of them, you're unlikely to also NEED another one or switch any time soon.

Lenses / Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 09, 2015, 06:29:08 AM »
Parfocal applies to a zoom.

 Are you asking for the MP-E65 to be in focus as you move the lens in closer or further away?  That's a depth of field issue, and its limited by physics, which is why someone suggested a stepper motor for stacked images.  You will have to focus a lens when you move it closer or further away.

Quote from: Wikipedia
A parfocal lens is a lens that stays in focus when magnification/focal length is changed.

This is nothing to do with changing focusing distances, nor is it directly related to depth of field. As epsiloneri described, "all" I's like is not to have to refocus when changing magnification with an MP-E style lens. I never said it would be easy to implement but it is in theory possible. It would be acceptable if the focal length wasn't constant to make things easier. e.g. if it was a zoom lens.

Lenses / Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 08, 2015, 07:44:38 PM »
I have a love-hate relationship with the existing MP-E65 so would love to see something like that without its current operating characteristics. Biggest ones I'd like are: make it parfocal and can I have more working distance please? Well, any working distance at all. I have hit subjects when trying at higher magnification before... I'd say 100mm focal length minimum, preferably 150mm or more. I would be happy to lose a bit of maximum magnification if it helps, as I rarely find going above 3x to really give much more out.

At the other end of the spectrum, a lower magnification macro zoom would be nice. Imagine a 70-200 f/4 macro! I don't mind losing AF in the macro range, while still allowing the lens to be used as a normal telephoto.

EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: How many mp do you want anyway?
« on: January 30, 2015, 02:43:34 PM »
I wonder: ???
If many here want 36 megapixel, why D800, D810, A7r are not big sales successes? ::) :-X
I'd argue the D800 series is a success, but no use if you have a ton of Canon lenses. How many are willing to either convert or go multi-system with Nikon? You need deep pockets to do that. The Sony suffers from the "not enough lenses" problem with any new mount. MP count isn't the only problem people have.

Personally, before I give an answer to "how many MP", I have to say my answer will rather require a different mindset than is current. I'd say, for an APS-C sensor, I'd like a minimum of 150MP. For the "why" I'd argue not every pixel matters. To me, the bayer pattern sensors have always been a cheat by the manufacturers, but as almost everyone does it, it cancels out. In essence we're not sampling RGB at every single point, and the software has to make it up, sometimes better, sometimes worse. By having a ton of pixels, particularly more than you ever need for output, you get more colour resolution. What about noise you say? Well, noise isn't noise. It will have characteristics. By downsampling to your actual output size, you keep the increased colour resolution and reduce the higher spatial frequency noise. 150MP is roughly what is easily attainable by scaling up compact camera sensors from a few years ago. By today's technology it could be much higher.

Obviously the way we handle this data may need a different strategy also.

The Foveon type sensor doesn't have that problem, but comes with a load of different problems.

Photography Technique / Re: Which eye do you use?
« on: January 27, 2015, 10:56:15 AM »
Interesting one this... I tried a similar question on another forum and results came back near enough 50/50. Will be interesting to see if that is the case here once the numbers go up some more.

I tried to correlate it with handedness and basically there didn't seem to be any pattern.

Canon General / Re: Photographer Petitions Canon for Left Handed Camera
« on: January 27, 2015, 10:09:26 AM »
My first SLR was a lefty camera. An Exacta Varex,  and as Canon makes cameras for astro photography, why not make a lefty camera?
I bet there are far more left handed photographers than astro photographers.
Mind you, I bet that there a few left handed astro togs out there too!

The hardware modification to make a camera more astro friendly is, more or less, change one piece of filter glass. The effort required to make a full "leftie" camera is many orders of magnitude more complicated.

Also, pretty much all astrophotography is done with the camera on a mount of some kind. If you're at all serious, you'd use an external release or USB connection to control the camera. Handedness of the camera then becomes irrelevant in this usage case.

Canon General / Re: Photographer Petitions Canon for Left Handed Camera
« on: January 26, 2015, 08:55:12 AM »
I've always wondered if this is something that could be catered for by the use of battery grips. Yes, it would increase size and bulk, and limit access to the connections. I'm guessing it probably wouldn't be really economic to also sell a native left handed model of everything, so an add on left handed grip might be a workaround.

Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: January 11, 2015, 09:35:21 AM »
Here's my attempt of Lovejoy C/2014 Q2 last night. My Sigma 300 is lent out so I made do with a 150mm macro instead.

Equipment: Canon 7D2, ISO1600, Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro at f/2.8, Astronomik CLS CCD filter, 161 x 30s exposures. Took more but rejected a load due to cloud. Tracking background stars unguided with lousy polar alignment.

Processing: Starting with PixInsight, flats, star align, comet align, stack, stretch, DBE (I messed up that order, should be done earlier), curves, photoshop.

Above is only the comet aligned stack. I've yet to do a star align stack.

I've tried to optimise viewing for the tail in this image. My local light pollution is rather rubbish.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 1100D video for astro work
« on: December 28, 2014, 08:43:24 AM »
In what way can the moon damage the sensor? Light bouncing off it isn't that different from daylight levels.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 1100D video for astro work
« on: December 27, 2014, 10:29:14 AM »
Note the question was for video imaging, not stills. Also the 450D has had its day. I've used both the 450D and 600D for long exposure astrophotography, and the 600D output is visibly better. Sensor generation trumps pixel size there.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 1100D video for astro work
« on: December 27, 2014, 08:47:33 AM »
I've taken video of the moon with the 600D before. I found the mov format to be a pain since most astro software handles avis. Also the video is lossy compressed. I note the 7D2 now has the mp4 option which is a bit easier to handle, but don't know when they might have added this to other models. Dedicated astro video cams can output raw video so you get better quality stills out of it. I think someone made a picture style before which was flatter and more neutral which could help with later processing.

On that note, with planets, unless you have seriously big optics, they are still tiny on sensor. A bigger sensor is wasted. For example, the camera I was using is "only" 640x480 with similar pixel size to the 18MP APS-C Canon sensor. You can easily fit Jupiter on that with 6m focal length. I was trying between 4m f/20 and 6m f/30 and there isn't much in it quality wise. Yup, could use a bigger scope :) Other planets are going to be smaller! Also with a dedicated astro camera, you can run at higher frame rates to increase your chances of getting good moments.

For a rough idea, below are with the astro imaging cam, not DSLR, but gives an example of what you could expect size wise. They are 100% crops. Left is my first and only serious Mars attempt though 6m f/30, and right is Jupiter at 3m f/30 (I was testing out a new scope at the time). That's with 200mm and 100mm aperture optics. If you can go bigger, there is more resolution potential.

Back to DSLR output, I don't think I ever bothered going through processing the moon video I took with the 600D, but I would say the moon would be a better choice to play with in this case.

Lenses / Re: Any ideas on getting good focus when shooting thru glass pane?
« on: December 23, 2014, 05:47:29 PM »
Is the focus off, or is the image distorted? If the glass isn't perfectly flat, it will lead to distortions which both throws off the focus and also negatively affects the image. Only workaround is to move around and try shooting through a different bit of glass. On that note, keep as perpendicular as you can to the glass. Tilted glass will cause an effect like a prism.

Stopping down can help mitigate those effects to an extent.

Lenses / Re: With a new 100-400L, is the 28-300L Next?
« on: November 29, 2014, 12:41:30 PM »
I would think a 28-300 non-L would be a possible candidate, especially if they want to expand full frame more into the (relatively) affordable mainstream.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36