September 16, 2014, 05:48:49 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 - raptor3x

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 02:21:00 PM »

I reset the camera, and tried that, and it still did not work. Then, I just hit the AF mode button (the one on the back, which you press first, before pressing M-Fn to actually switch modes), and moved the joystick. That worked. So, in most AF modes, you can just move the joystick, and the selected AF point moves. But in all points mode, you have to first hit mode, then use the joystick to move the AF point? Seems very tedious...

But, it does seem to work...mostly. It does initially lock onto the subject under my selected point...but it jumps a lot. As I track, it doesn't seem to really STICK to the originally selected subject...which is kind of annoying. I am not using my 600mm lens, though, so maybe it will work better on that.

What are your tracking sensitivity and AF point switch values?

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:11:45 AM »
In the text there are bits like this:

Quote
65-point* all cross-type AF system for high-performance, accurate subject tracking with EV -3 sensitivity (center point) for focusing in extreme low-light conditions

I haven't seen anything indicating what the *'s are for?

Me, either.  But I suspect it's a footnote that you don't get 65 points with all lenses.  Similarly, with the 1D X/5DIII's 61 AF points, you get only 47 points with the 800/5.6L and only 33 points with the 180L Macro.
"

May I ask? What's the science and logic behind this??

If the DSLR have 65 points hardware wise, what physical limitations contributed to the reduction of working AF points?

The cross-type sensors need at least an aperture of f/4 to get an accurate measurement.  Not sure why the 180L is so limited though.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:54:10 AM »
my Fuji X-T1 (my travel camera, no good for sport) is much cleaner and usable at all ISO (at least up to 3200).

I thought the same thing until I noticed some strange differences with the X-T1 during my DualISO test.  Basically, the ISO number Fuji shows are complete BS.  Try taking a shot of a grey card or something similar at ISO 3200 for the X-T1 and a Canon or Nikon camera and try to match the histograms.  See how the shutter speeds compare.  I've found that the Fuji pretty consistently requires 2/3-1 stop more shutter speed to get the same exposure.  Also, I'm pretty sure Fuji's doing some pretty heavy handed chroma noise reduction in camera on the RAW files.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:17:00 AM »

But that battery - looks like this beast will need more juice if the battery "only" lasts for 670 shots. More grips sold shortly...


I thought I saw 800 somewhere- might've been B&H's spec comparison to the 7d. Regardless, I got about 2000 on Saturday and only went through half an LP-E6 before swapping it out- that's about 4x as many shots as Canon claims for that battery in the 7d. If that holds true, I won't worry too much about the new battery...

Yeah, Canon's battery life estimates are extremely conservative.  I shot an event yesterday with a gripped 5D3 and after 6,000 shots both batteries still had 70% in the tank.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:05:02 AM »
Quote from: Imaging Resource
Also new for the 7D-series are interchangeable focusing screens. The default screen is calibrated to display approximately a f/5.6 depth of field, however for precise manual focusing with f/2.8 lenses or faster, a Super Precision Matte screen is available as an optional accessory that will show the true super-thin depths of field through the viewfinder.

Looks like Canon is bringing back interchangeable focusing screens, nice.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 08:33:20 AM »
And this from Canon USA:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/eos_7dmkii_feature

Oh man, that demonstration of the anti-flicker is awesome.  That feature alone will put Canon head and shoulders above everyone else for indoor sports.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 08:05:12 AM »
Anti-flicker shooting

The EOS 7D Mark II features a new flicker detection system that not only alerts the user in the viewfinder, but with the camera’s Anti-Flicker Shooting function can compensate for flickering light sources, taking shots only at peak light volume. This feature is useful for minimizing disparities in color and exposure, especially during continuous shooting in sub-optimal lighting situations.</p>


I find this super interesting as this is a huge problem for me when shooting indoor sports in really awful lighting.  I hope to see this feature on the next 5D model.

Quote from: DPReview
v The EOS 7D Mark II is compatible with the optional WFT-E7A Version 2 Wireless File Transmitter.

So maybe Canon will release a new wireless transmitter that doesn't suck so much.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 07:09:28 PM »
I'd lean more towards the camera having a built in radio commander that can act as a wireless trigger than a true wi-fi setup.

I'd lean more towards you needing to buy a WFT-E7 II for each camera on which you want to sync the time.  I know you think I'm probably joking, I wish I could say that I was...

Ugh, I'd really like to think that they'll include at least some basic RT functionality built into the body but you're probably correct.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 05:42:41 PM »

you know this no wifi thing has got me pondering a bit.  If the rumor is true that multiple 7DII can sync time with each other, it would seem that they have to have some kind of wifi going there to make that happen.  One could assume that a GPS enabled camera could get it's time from the GPS sats and all should be within 50 ms of each other.  However it was specifically mentioned that the cameras can sync time together.  That to me means some kind of wireless communication is going on.  Wifi would be the easiest way to do that with current tech.

I'd lean more towards the camera having a built in radio commander that can act as a wireless trigger than a true wi-fi setup.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 05:41:30 PM »
c) AF technology form 1DX and dual pixel technology - no efforts from Canon side. They just simply included very good autofocus in this camera. I expected a bit more from them.

It's not the same AF module as on the 1DX/5D3, it's completely new and I'm really hoping it leverages the patent posted a while back that showed the dual pixel AF working in conjuction with the mirror based AF system.  In terms of number of cross type points, this is the most advanced AF system we've ever seen; not fair at all to say no effort from Canon's side.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 05:37:48 PM »
The children in the design department at Canon do stupid things and this time they did exactly what I feared... they removed the zoom +/- from the right side just like they did in the 5D II... HOW STUPID IS THAT? Having to reach to the other side of the camera to review a picture is pure stupidity when you use the big lenses like 500mm f4 etc. I hope the lever by the joystick is going to do just that.

The question is ... why remove something useful that did not imply extra buttons etc? They should let you chose any function for any button and that would solve the problem in a way.

The other improvement I hope for is the AUTO ISO function with ISO bracketing plus the multiple exposures.

And by the way... a grip with a joystick ... is that too much to ask?

Cheers

Change the set button to zoom and you'll find it works much much better than the old setup ever did.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Digic 7 Development
« on: September 13, 2014, 10:34:35 AM »
This new processor is the key to high MP cameras.  Doubling the resolution will require 1.414 times the processing power.  The current Digic 6 will drop the 1Dx to 8FPS.  The Digic 7 is going to be a dual Digic 6 in one package which will allow 4x the processing power for high MP, high frame rate bodies.

That's not true, processing effort will scale linearly with number of pixels.  If you're talking about doubling the linear resolution, then you'd need 4x the processing power.

13
http://thenewcamera.com/canon-7d-mark-ii-vs-samsung-nx1-specification-comparison/

I love when websites compare the 70D/7D2 against mirrorless and give the advantage to the mirrorless camera because they have "200" AF points on the sensor while forgetting that the 70D/7D2 have 20 million (~16million selectable) AF points on the sensor.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 07:38:34 PM »
Exmor does not have 14 stops. That's physically impossible given a linear ADC and 14-bit depth. We will not see 14 stops without improvements in noise beyond Exmor plus 16-bit ADCs.

In my capacity as self-proclaimed ML ambassador: Their dual_iso module outputs 16bit dng raw files because 14bit wouldn't do it.

Dual ISO is like having a non-linear ADC. So yeah, you can easily break the 14-bit barrier and achieve more then 14 stops.

I've always wondered why Canon hasn't redesigned/redefined HTP to be dual ISO. From what I've seen resolution losses are minimal and DR gain, both in terms of total DR and shadow latitude, is quite impressive. It seems like it would be a relatively easy firmware change for them that would result in glowing feature reviews.

ML's DualISO is a great feature and I'm a huge proponent of it, but the version that currently exists really isn't good enough to be released to users as a commercial product.  If they were to utilize the concept along with the dual pixel nature of the newer sensors, however, then I think they could have a winner on their hands.  If they could do this with dual pixels then you should get all the gains, but essentially none of the downsides and since no high order interpolation schemes would be necessary in camera processing should be minimal.

15

By that sentiment, the D800 was a FAR more popular camera than the 5D III when it came out:

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Canon%205d%20mark%20iii%2C%20D800&cmpt=q

I'll bet good money that it's because there's way more variations on the 5D3's name than the D800.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11