March 05, 2015, 02:09:43 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 ... 176
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 24, 2015, 08:37:38 AM »
This is the way I see it.  And of course Lee Jay and PBD can add/correct me if needed.

To increase high ISO performance to me is to increase DR at high ISO/light-limited situations.  I need to increase FWC or max signal per pixel or QE, however you look at it.  You need to lower read noise.  HOW you do those two things I'm not really commenting about but if you can do that you can increase S/N at high ISO.  You already have less read noise with smaller pixels so why can't you increase the size or efficiency of the photodiode in the pixel?  I've been in discussions about smaller parts in and around the pixel to make way for larger photodiodes, for instance.  I can also see where the FWC could be more important than read noise and overcome the higher read noise by adding more signal because signal is additive whereas noise is added SQRT.  So in that case, larger pixels might still win.  This of course is all at equal sensor size and equal technology.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 06:56:57 PM »
I agree with Lee Jay.

I think sensor size is a heck of a lot more important than pixel size in determining ISO performance.  You can always increase the QE and smaller pixels already have less read noise.  Noise = SQRT #photons.  If I can collect and use more photons with smaller pixels (admittedly tech improvements need made) then why not?

4
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 10, 2015, 03:08:16 PM »
I remember when they claimed that the 1Ds Mark IV was all but confirmed and annoncements would be coming soon...

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless vs. DSLR
« on: February 03, 2015, 05:14:17 PM »
Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait!  DSLR's and cars both have mirrors!!!

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless vs. DSLR
« on: February 03, 2015, 05:13:05 PM »
Tinky,

I couldn't agree more.  I too am sick and tired of the stupid car analogies.  Never in any other profession or hobby have I had to endure more car analogies. 

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 05:42:43 PM »
Quote from: Marsu42
As for poor dynamic range: For the a lot of people in the targeted audience (landscape and studio) ~11.5ev is fine, you only need higher dr if you cannot bracket and/or shoot movement. Otherwise higher dr is nice to have, but not essential - or there wouldn't be any Canon shooters left even now.

You obviously dont speak for the majority. The current 36MP Sony sensor also in the Nikon D800 is 14ev and in cinematography / video 14ev is still not enough. Plenty of situations in landscape where more DR would be useful particularly in strong sun situations with deep shade.
[/quote]

Nope.  He speaks or the MAJORITY.  Hence why Canon leads the market. 

8
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 04:24:53 PM »
What do you mean by "really good DR"?  At ISO 6400 the 1Dx has 1.4 stops MORE DR than the D810, as an example.  Do you mean low ISO?  I guess I've never found myself DR limited with low ISO's where light is sufficient but rather, find myself DR limited in low light, exactly where Canon excels. 

9
Sports / Re: Motion Blur (on purpose) in Sports Photos
« on: January 24, 2015, 05:36:58 PM »
Sorry, I don't save a lot of my photos.  I had some from 2013 still on my D drive:

10
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2015, 08:59:38 PM »
Just having a little fun, that's all.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2015, 08:15:48 PM »
<Outside of Sports, fast moving wildlife, candid shots, and anything moving auto focus is over rated.>

So basically, sports, weddings, wildlife, candid shots.  OTHER THAN THAT, AF is over-rated.

LOL.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2015, 08:13:35 PM »

If you are expecting auto focus with Canon Lens on a Sony you are missing the point.  Many lens perform about as good as the EOS M.  And we all know what people say about that.  I still prefer using old converted manual lens on my Nex6 over Canon EF lens.

With any system, be it Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, or whatever... the native lenses will AF faster  than any third party or adapted lenses.
That is the point apparently you half get it.  But for most of my general photography I have found I do not need auto focus at all if I have focus aids. 

My Nex6 and native E mount 50mm it will go to big rectangle auto focus in indoor light.  So it is also a Manual focus only moment.  I have found that is not really a problem giving peeking and other focus aides.  I also found it does not really do f stops faster than 2.8 very well.   In that regard the EOS M is more accurate when it eventual gets to auto focus.  In the two years I have owned the Nex6 most pictures taken with it were using FD Lenses and an old M42 lens.  I only bought the Metabones adapter to fill in the holes in the Lens lineup until native lenses were available.

For a year the only reason to use my 60D was ML.  Sense I bought my 6D I have been very happy with it.  The 6D is a very good low light camera.  If a high MP 5Ds is released for around the MSRP of the 5dIII it will be a very hard decision.  I will still want a Sony A7 something to put the old lens to use because I enjoy that.  But it will not have to be high MP if Canon releases a reasonably priced high MP camera.  I can only imagine what a 50 mp camera can do for wildlife photography. 

Not all of the Sony native E mount lens I am interested in even have auto focus.  Zeiss Loxia 2/35 anybody.

Who cares?  You're in the minority.  MOST people use AF all the time. 

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Difference in image from APS-C to FF
« on: January 10, 2015, 06:20:31 PM »
I get that, I was more or less thinking in terms of absolute area of the lens diameter and not the focal length.  Because in theory in Bizzaro World I could create a 16mm lens with a gigantic diameter or a super long and narrow 600mm lens.  I didn't do the math on any of it so the 600 might very well always beat the 16mm...

...Ooo time for more Guiness Extra Stout...

Yea, it does get complicated. Here's a link to a guy who can explain it much better than me:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/exposure/

In a nutshell light density is not the same as total light in volume terms. Exposure is dictated by light density, not volume. A greater volume of light will lead to less noise.

When you magnify you lose light density. This is why the given aperture of a longer lens is larger in diameter than a shorter one, to give the same exposure. So when I said a longer focal length lens passes more light, in practice it does, unless you want a 600 mil lens that starts at f64.

This is why those who use long focal length lenses on their aps cameras are generally more content with the sensor size than those who use very short focal length lenses.

Of course this becomes more relevant in lower levels of light density - darker.

'Landscape' FF focal length lenses are still quite short, and so suffer from small diameter. This is why I find it amusing when I hear people referring to the likes of a D810 or A7r as the 'ultimate landscape camera'. It is also going to be the problem with cramming more pixels into a FF size sensor, and the reason why a lower mp count DMF sensor will run rings round a very high FF.

Thanks to you and Neuro, I got it now.  That's actually a really, really good point and one often overlooked.

14
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Difference in image from APS-C to FF
« on: January 10, 2015, 06:19:41 PM »
Ps.  After that, if you like dark beers try a Sam Smith's Imperial Stout.  In the bottle, which has gold foil over the top, it looks a bit darker than a Guinness ES.  But after you remove the foil, you see that unlike the brown Guinness bottle, the Sam Smith's is clear glass.

Cool.  I love dark beers and it has always been a small hobby of mine to seek and find obscure ones.  Thank you.  My wife is about ready to kill me right now because I've been watching the New England game with my "6 pack."  Sam Smith's Imperial Stout, I will have to try that.  Where do you get the Foreign Stout?

Thanks.

15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Wait for 5D4 or go for 5D3/6D right now ?
« on: January 10, 2015, 06:15:19 PM »
Almost identical problem what I'm thinking at the other thread.

I haven't found answer to my question yet.

Possible alternative options for you:

Buy used 7D (especially if you have plenty -S lenses) and sell it when 5D4 comes out. You'll "lose" <$200, and meantime you'll get plenty more camera than 400D for your trip.

Buy used 5D3, and sell it when 5D4 comes out. You'll lose maybe ~$500, give or take.

Buying a 5D3 is the most logical.  Just get the 5D3 now and be done with it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 176