December 22, 2014, 07:22:41 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 - BozillaNZ

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
That's... sort of the opposite of what I was trying to explain, heh!

The projected image gets physically larger, hence acting like a zoom if you were to collect the light projected on to a 24mm x 36mm selection at the centre of the projection - the entire image is enlarged, you'd be collecting much fewer photons but the image is optically "zoomed in" and very sharp, sort of like a variable aperture zoom :)

Ok, then what's the different between your way vs say, extension tube? tele-converter? APS-c sensor? cropping in PP?

Either way you are cropping into the image circle, digitally or optically, which will inevitably reduce sharpness. If optically cropping does not reduce sharpness when a 2x TC won't give you any worse image quality compared to no TC, which is not true. You can't divide resolution without facing softness.

I just talk to my Photographer friends at the Town Camera club, and One recommend me to get This Fastest Lens CANON EF 50 mm F/ 1.0 L USM= $ 2500 to $3500.

"Fastest" :-) ... they say the af is crawling slow, and that's one reason why Canon dumped the lens.

Also note that you cannot much more light from very fast lenses on digital, part of the light coming from steep angles is lost on the digital sensor - so it's for thin dof only.

Slow AF = true

but oblique angled light, I believe we can fix it in newer generation of sensors so it's only temporary.

One major down side of this lens is the flare issue. You know, old coating and stuff, use it in day time is fine, but use it in the night is a complete mess, which defeats the purpose of a f1.0 lens isn't it?

Also when motor or electronic dies, you can't event focus it so it indeed becomes a paper weight, unless some very able man DIY modify it and gives it mechanical focus ability.

So in short: you are buying a historical artefact, a museum piece. If you are happy about that, when go right ahead.

RAW = fresh ingredients

s/mRAW = cut up and marinated ingredients

JPG = done dishes

It's obvious which one makes better dish, if you know how to cook...  8)

Landscape / Re: Beautiful sunsets
« on: Today at 06:43:05 AM »
5 shot vertical handheld panoramic from an awesome sunset in Auckland, New Zealand tonight, 22.12.14

sunset panoramic by gaabNZ, on Flickr

I saw it too! in Auckland around the same time:

No time to set up tripod so hand hold...

1Ds3, 16mm, ISO 400, f5.6, 1/13s, Exposed for highlight and pushed foreground 2 stops  ::)

This is fun! I'm sure lots of you do (or don't) get the whole "lenses focus light" thing and are aware (or aren't) that if you hold a Canon* lens between a light bulb and a piece of paper you'll likely see an unfocused blob of light projected onto the paper, which with a bit of jiggling will turn into a projection of the lightbulb and its fittings... try this with the 400mm f/5.6L and you can get sharp projections of relatively close things with a foot or so between paper and lens - I was quite surprised to find that as you move the lens further from the paper and adjust the focus ring you can start to sharply focus a much larger projection and of closer subjects!

Even if you can get it to work at some degree, the peripheral of image circle will give pretty bad quality (aberrations, vignetting, etc), as the optical formula was not designed to deal with collecting wider angle of light .

With all this talk of a possible 50mp camera I am starting to think how I would utilize a camera like that for my work (mostly weddings).  I would definitely not mind having access to 50mp for portraits, but for other aspects of the wedding day, like shots at the reception, it would probably be my preference to switch to mRAW which with a 50mp sensor would be what? Around 20mp?  However, I have never used those formats and am wondering how much, if any, IQ you loose from compressing the image in camera like that?

I worked extensively with the Canon CR2 format, the m/sRAW all have white balance pre-baked into the data, and de-mosaic processed so they are in theory not really "RAW".

Where real RAW format has the raw bayer data like RGRGRGRG, GBGBGBGB in each row;

m/sRAW has data demosaic processed and WB applied, then converted to Y-Cb-Cr format, and -

mRAW stores as YCC 4:2:2 format, and sRAW stores as YCC 4:2:0 format

If you ever worked with video codec you will see that they are not really "RAW" format anymore, so tonal range and DR will suffer, and the file will not be as mallable as the real RAW data.

Hope this helps.

Lenses / Re: Next Lens Purchase...where is the gap in my gear?
« on: December 21, 2014, 10:35:36 PM »
Ok. Rephrased, I get it. What I suppose I should have asked is given my present gear, which lens would increase my utility the most, ignoring superteles bc I intend to buy later.

What do you want to do with your supposed new gear?

Landscape? Sport? Portait? Bird? Underwater? They are all valid 'utility' yet the gears required are vastly different.

Lenses / Re: Next Lens Purchase...where is the gap in my gear?
« on: December 21, 2014, 10:16:00 PM »
You must buy 24L II, 35L, 50L, 85L II, 135L, 200 f2L, 300 2.8L, 400 2.8L, 500 4L, 600 4L, 800 5.6L, that ought do it.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 18, 2014, 08:18:10 PM »
Considering their current pricing: I estimate 4500-6000$.

$6000 = D810 + 2 Nikkors, and that will be what most user choose.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 18, 2014, 07:38:23 PM »
Any word on whether this will be Bayer or Layered?

Can't be a layered, if 3 layers 50MP, it is only a 16MP sensor in terms of real geometrical pixels, which is too low in today's standard.

Of course unless it a 50MP x 3 layers, which will be a big jaw dropper  ::)  :o

Or a 25MP x 2 layers? With 1 G layer in full resolution and 1 R/B layer in half resolution, but it would be very hard to selectively let both longer and shorter wave light pass through and stop a mid wave light or vice a versa.

Photography Technique / Re: EC - adds or subtracts light?
« on: December 18, 2014, 07:33:07 PM »
First, thanks for the good laugh!

Second, if you can't grasp the fact that 1/250 is bigger than 1/500, or 1/4 bigger than 1/8, I suggest you read 1st Grade Math, Chapter Fractional Numbers  ::)

If a f/1 lens with 1 second shutter gives you 1 dose of light

then a f/2 lens with 1/2 second shutter gives you a quarter dose of light, since 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4, how magical is that?!

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 11:22:32 PM »
Good news, just in time for a decision.

I will hold on to my 7D and 1Ds2 which don't worth much, and sell the 1Ds3 soon.

When the new Canon comes out there will be a decision to make:

1. It has the best sensor in the world, better than Exmor: Get the Canon and be happy, stay in Canon camp.
2. It has the same old 11-bit sensor only more pixels (i.e. FF 7D2): Get a Sony body and dump many of the L lenses, gradually move away from Canon camp.

Canon, many of your long time customers are giving you the last chance to redeem yourself.

Focal length itself does not mean anything.

Focal length combined with sensor size (diagonal) determines the angle of view. Angle of view determines "telephoto compression"

So, 135mm on APS-C (1.6x) and 216mm on FF will give you the exact same "telephoto compression".

And 135mm on 20MP APS-C and 216mm on 20MP FF will give you the same degree of angle of view per pixel, hence being affected by camera shake exactly same too.

Note that we haven't touched about depth of field yet, which is another big can of worms.

" I use the center point 99% of the time anyway"

Whenever I see this, sigh and click away.

"I use my hand anyway so who needs a wife!"

You don't know what you miss till you try it out.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13