January 29, 2015, 05:28:53 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 - photonius

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 31, 2014, 07:17:40 PM »
Let me propose, again, another approach Canon could potentially use.

Let's say this camera has 7DII pixels, and 52 million of them.

That means it has 104 million separate pixels because of the dual pixel design of the pixels.

The pixels can obviously be read separately or they wouldn't work for phase detection focusing in live view and video.

So, let's say the camera has a mode where the two halves of each pixel are read at different ISOs.  For sake of argument, let's say ISO 100 and ISO 1600 are used.

The result would be that the top four stops would have twice the shot noise they would have if you didn't do that because half of your data is clipped there.  But who cares?  The top four stops have so much signal that it really doesn't matter.  The overlapping range would be the same.  The bottom of the range would have something like 3-4 more stops of shadow performance due to the far lower read noise at ISO 1600.

Combine these two in a way similar to the way Magic Lantern dual-ISO works and you have a 15 stop or so DR image at 52MP.

Now, that 15 stop image won't fit into a 14 bit raw so you generate a 16 bit raw from your 14 bit * 2 raw data sets.

Now you have 80+MB raw files, give or take, with 52MP and 15 stops of base-ISO DR.

i proposed that already a long time ago when the 70d came out.
It seems canon is aware of this, but maybe cant make it work that easily (from some cryptic comments in interviews)
They may have even tried for the 7D II (causing the delay, extra firmware update for 7D).

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 30, 2014, 10:07:43 AM »
There is no problem of pixel size.

<physics>There is. </physics>

Yeah...let's talk about that.

I decided to calculate diffraction-limited resolution.  Here are the assumptions:  Green light (550nm), Bayer full-frame sensor, AA filter, MTF10 cutoff.  Here are the results:

f-stop Maximum MP count
1.4     8,333
2.0     4,167
2.8     2,083
4.0     1,042
5.7     521
8.0     260
11.3   130
16.0   65
22.6   33
32.0  16

So, does that seem like a problem to you for the foreseeable future?

your calculations seem off. For FF at f/4.0 a 115 Mp sensor would be diffraction limit.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 26, 2014, 09:02:50 AM »
"We are extending interchangeable lens groups (unsure what this actually means). We want to add one line to our EF lenses...I can't say any more than this. Please don't ask anymore (laughs)."

My interpretation is rather basic:
We are adding new lenses to our existing lens groups (ef, ef-s, ef-m). (not create a new range). Some announcements, patents, hints for such lenses have already been made.

The one lens that needs to be added to the EF lens group is a high-resolution UWA lens that can deal with the high res senors. Tele's and standard range have been updated already. The missing lens is probably the rumored/patented EF 11-24 (? I forgot the upper end focal length) zoom that hopefully would provide better sharpness in the corners.

Lenses / Yongnuo 50mm f1.4 AF lens
« on: September 29, 2014, 10:54:05 AM »
Looks similar to the Canon, same specs in terms of elements as the canon.


Are the Chinese lens copies now coming?

PowerShot / Re: Official: Canon PowerShot SX60 HS
« on: September 20, 2014, 07:12:14 AM »
an interesting all-in-one travel camera with 21mm wide-angle, but no GPS....  :( no deal.

These are interesting rig-ups; I got a Reflecta CrystalScan 7200 a few birthdays ago but have been too occupied/lazy to use it so far. :-[ I am however saving it for the day when I feel motivated to scan some old (or new) material.

I wonder why nobody has so far posted any pictures that show the photographed and processed results.


based on this review it's not so useful for scanning thousands of slides because of the speed http://www.filmscanner.info/en/ReflectaCrystalScan7200.html
that's why copying slides at least with camera is faster. now, I still need some time... ;-)

good comments by eos650 and frodo.
I also made a slide copier set-up for similar reasons, see here: http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Slide+copier

The issue I haven't solved either yet though is how to do a good correction profile for negatives. (I have mostly slides, so negatives not a priority)


Congrats JD, but I'd advise staying away from either of those if all you've got is $15.  The drink is likely to come in a 1.75L plastic bottle and won't leave you feeling too well.  The other could result in a nasty legal or medical bill :o, if you don't get mugged in the process.

Natty Lite and Taco Bell might be more realistic and a tad bit healthier. 

On the other point, welcome to selling your photography.  You'll find out how individual taste really is when you sell your work.  The stuff you love rarely sells well, and vice versa.  The effort you spend taking a photo and editing it means almost nothing in most genres.  Only the final image matters.  If you don't believe me, here's a sampling of my work that one of longtime clients has chosen, and let me tell you, the rest of the work I've sent them for consideration is MUCH better. All of these shots were actually what I'd consider "outtakes" - shots that I took because I was there, not because I intended them for use/sale.  And they have used them for magazine ads, billboards, and huge prints in their branches!:

well, perhaps sometimes a more bland picture is desired in ads, to avoid taking away the focus from the message.

Lenses / Re: Filter for Tamron 150-600?
« on: June 13, 2014, 09:08:36 AM »
Hi guys,

thanks for your feedback - especially about the Marumi, as I hadn't heard much about them before.

I prefer Melitta or Folgers filters. Disposable, and inexpensive. they have some vignetting though  ;)

photonius, thanks.  You forgot to mention they biodegrabable too!  Not too sure about their UV filtering ability, but might make for a romantic misty feel to the shot as the lion is tyrying to rip my face off  ;)

Cheers guys!   :)

And you can use them to pad your wounds... ;)   

Seriously, from all I've seen, a UV/protector filter on these big teles is best avoided unless you have a special reason.
I've compiled filter info a while back, including links to the lenstip.com tests http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Filters
as pointed out, the marumi seems quite ok.

Lenses / Re: Filter for Tamron 150-600?
« on: June 12, 2014, 06:03:54 PM »
I prefer Melitta or Folgers filters. Disposable, and inexpensive. they have some vignetting though  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: When Does the Year of the Lens Start?
« on: May 02, 2014, 05:35:11 PM »
As Eldar points out, the year has started.

We have:

Tamron 150-600 for Canon
Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art for Canon

more to come...

And then they wonder why the dSLR market is stagnating, shrinking.   10 Million lenses in 11 months, that's a bubble that can't be maintained if one compares to the sales from 1987 to 2001.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang 650-1300mm
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:52:27 AM »
Lots of hate towards this lens (rightly so perhaps) but not many suggestions other then buying another camera or just using a 300m and cropping.

Are there no other decent long lens/scope alternatives to consider?

The new Tamron 150-600 is your best bet

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang 650-1300mm
« on: April 13, 2014, 05:44:44 PM »
Hi All, has anyone used a Samyang 650-1300mm lens,


I'm just after an opinion if it's good/bad?   :-\

one thing to remember about this lens and the catadioptric ones from samyang: they are from the area before they started to release the well received new primes for dSLRs  (85mm, 35mm, 14mm, 8mm fish eye and more). so they are not in the same category

I haven't made a living by photography in a very long time (I find more joy in being a hobby shooter) but it seems to me that you were present at the wedding as a guest of the contracted photographer for a learning experience.  I sense an ethical dilemma in "poaching" sales even though the bride preferred your shots.  In fact, I would have turned down her request to view them.  If you had been a guest of the bride or groom at the wedding then I wouldn't see the same problem.

I agree. This is an ethics problem.

You are going to have to chalk this up to being a learning experience... if you are doing a job, find out what your responsibilities are beforehand and who your images belong to....

There are two big questions here that will decide your actions:

1) Do the images that you shot belong to you, or do they belong to the event photographer?
2) Will you be taking money away from the event photographer? Should you be sharing the revenue from any extra work with them, and in what proportion?

In the end... the bride MUST get the pictures, regardless of who she has to pay or even if it is free. The last thing you want is to have your name attached to an angry bride who has been denied pictures of her wedding day. This will create a situation that can destroy any good will and reputation that you are trying to build... even if you have to give them away for free, chalk it up to good marketing....

Right, the last thing you want to do is deny the photos to the bridge, that would just be atrocious

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9