December 20, 2014, 09:46:21 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 - bdunbar79

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 174
1
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 05:57:18 PM »

Quote
And they're filled with jaggies, false detail, and false resolution.

I see it better shadow detail, sharper images, better colour rendition.

Quote
A 50MP with an AA filter will wipe the floor with a 36MP with no AA filter, and that's the right way to do it - more pixels with proper sampling rather than fewer pixels with lousy sampling.

il then the sensor with jaggies and false detail wins.

So the ONLY reason, the ONLY single factor to your "better shadow detail, sharper images, better colour rendition", is because of the AA filter or lack of one?

By the way, "colour rendition" in digital photography doesn't mean anything at all in RAW.

Nothing personal at all, I just don't understand your statement.  That's all.

No offence taken.

Can we agree the AA filter on current Canon sensors blurs the image on pixel level? Well that blur is perceptible when zoomed in at 100% when comparing the same shot, same lens different cameras (in my experiment a 6D vs A7R). This is not debatable. Shadow detail and DR (I called it colour rendition mistakenly) of the Sony sensor are clearly not the results of AA filter removal. Hope that clears it up.

My point was that I need resolution and sharpness on par with what the Sony A7r offers. If canon can deliver this in 2015, AA or no AA,  then that's what I'll be getting.

Thank you.

Brett

2
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 05:41:41 PM »
yes , and it is regarding  Canon sensor layout and read out, more Mp means also higher dynamic range due lower read out noise from the individual pixel, more Mp is a easy way to increase Canons dynamic range, but the analog signal path way can  never be as short as, for example in  the Exmor and it depends on the early AD conversion in Sony lay out

In other words, no.  There are many other factors you mention above.  Just increasing sensor resolution alone isn't going to absolutely increase DR. 

3
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 05:24:35 PM »
When does diffraction kick in on a 50mp 35mm sensor?! How would this be good for landscapes or studio shots where you stop down? Wouldn't scaling up a lower mp shot probably look the same?

There is exactly the same amount of diffraction in a print of a given size from a 12 MP camera and a 50 MP camera with the same size sensor. Higher photo site density does not create any diffraction problem whatsoever. Diffraction is an optical phenomenon, not a sensor phenomenon. The news is entirely good news.

At the same smaller apertures you might shoot on your current camera, you will get equal resolution from the higher MP body to the extent that it affected by things related to diffraction. At some larger apertures, depending on what lens you use, you might get a bit better resolution on the higher MP body.

In addition, there is that potential for smoother gradients, smaller "grain" and pixelation, etc.



There are many who do not understand what is diffraction is and that more sensor resolution is never a bad thing.
If Canon would increased the  resolution it will also lead to better dynamic range.

Increased resolution causes increased DR?   ???

4
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 05:18:16 PM »

Quote
And they're filled with jaggies, false detail, and false resolution.

I see it better shadow detail, sharper images, better colour rendition.

Quote
A 50MP with an AA filter will wipe the floor with a 36MP with no AA filter, and that's the right way to do it - more pixels with proper sampling rather than fewer pixels with lousy sampling.

Fantastic. Until then the sensor with jaggies and false detail wins.

So the ONLY reason, the ONLY single factor to your "better shadow detail, sharper images, better colour rendition", is because of the AA filter or lack of one?

By the way, "colour rendition" in digital photography doesn't mean anything at all in RAW.

Nothing personal at all, I just don't understand your statement.  That's all.   

5
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 03:14:11 PM »
There are many articles about the AA filter out there, so it's use is no mystery.  It is there to reduce moire, but it's drawbacks are less detail, sharpness and lower resolution.  That is why the newer high MP cameras have no filter.  Put the AA filter back on, and you lose the advantages of the higher MP count.  Pretty simple really.

I'm sorry, but NO.

6
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 25, 2014, 12:31:17 AM »
Received the lens from Canon today and..........................

The paperwork states the following:

Your product has been examined and it was found that the adjustment of the AF assembly was incorrect causing inaccurate focus.  Electrical adjustments were carried out on the AF assembly.  Product functions were confirmed.

???

7
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 20, 2014, 02:12:56 PM »
Agreed on f-stop, but my shutter speed was 1/3200 to 1/4000.

8
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:04:09 AM »
Thank you guys.

I called CPS and they want to see the lens only.  I mentioned maybe it's a camera/lens combo and he seemed to only want to see the lens.  So I'm sending that out today at noon and I am curious to see what they say. 

I will keep you posted.

9
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 19, 2014, 09:34:24 PM »
Yes thank you, combo of front and back focusing.

10
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 19, 2014, 08:20:48 PM »
I will let you know what happens!

Frustrated?  Yes.  It seems it front focuses but not that deep.  I went from f/3.2 to f/5 and it was much less noticeable.  My guess is the wide aperture and iTR metering of the 1Dx are both contributing because this is not a problem at night.

11
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 19, 2014, 06:16:04 PM »
I've not had this problem, I don't tend to shoot sports, but I often use the expanded AF selection. Would this help maybe? It might just help if the problem is to little contrast on the white. Maybe a polarizing filter would help.

Yeah I'm not sure.  Before when I was shooting sports I was using a 300 f/2.8L I IS and so therefore I was closer to the subject.  This is worse as the distance from me to subject increases as well so it could just be the 300 had more contrast to detect.  Either way, I missed a lot of shots and I'm at least going to have Canon check it out as I'm sending it in tomorrow. 

We'll see.  Thanks.

12
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 19, 2014, 05:09:19 PM »
And then it just got worse.

13
Lenses / Re: 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: October 19, 2014, 05:07:39 PM »
Quick example.  Here's another game that started at 1pm.  I had the AF point locked on her face; this is frame 3.  Notice the ref's face on the far right, so this front-focused.

14
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 18, 2014, 11:00:42 PM »
Just go shoot low-light sports with a 1Dx and a 7D.  You'll quickly, very quickly, be able to differentiate crop vs. FF.

15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 18, 2014, 10:58:50 PM »
Does it have a cowbell?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 174