December 18, 2014, 04:58:27 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 - LetTheRightLensIn

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 271
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 09:22:46 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.

Taking current type Canon tech going to more MP tends to very, very slowly lower SNR and very, very slowly increase DR. The gains in DR going from 23MP to 50MP won't be a whole lot and SNR loss won't be a whole lot. In more extremes like 8MP vs 250MP it can matter more.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 09:01:35 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.

no, almost everything you wrote there is incorrect

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 08:47:45 PM »
Admin - have you excluded the possibility that this is a 23-25 mp DPAF sensor?  I believe we were previously led to believe that Canon was launching a high MP APSC sensor (which later turned out to be a 40 million photosite 70D which takes 20 megapixel pictures).  Just checking to see if that's the same thing here.  If it's a 5D model, the line Canon is known for video, I could absolutely see this being the case.

No, it will be "pure" (no DPAF) high res sensor body. Possibly build around Sony sensor (not sure).
From technical point of view it would be better to put that sensor into mirrorless body, but I don't think they are going to do it.
Could you explain why the sensor would be better in a MILC, rather than a dSLR (from a technical point of view)?

1. No mirror = no vibrations = better use of high res.
2. CDAF for more precise autofocus

High res body surely won't be an action camera, so mirrorless would be just right ;)

just go to liveview mode

(and the mirroless a7r has more vibration than 5D3 does in liveview silent mode 2)

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 08:44:04 PM »

A Canon sensor with the same technology 7D Mark II, but "stretched" up to 50 megapixel, would get much better score when DXO down convert to 8 megapixel, and the theoretical DR would overcome any camera that Canon has released to date.

nope, that's not how DR from Canon sensors scales, it's about the same at any scale

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 08:42:14 PM »
More megapixels is only part of the problem.

Better megapixels is the more significant problem that Canon faces.

If it simple scales up any of its current APS-C sensors to full frame then it won't address the megapixel quality problem.

Yeah if it is just the 7D2 sensor x1.6x1.6 and 4fps and same old same old video, forget it for me.

It would have great reach, but so does the 7D2 for a lot less and with tons better fps and way less wasted space around the edges for wildlife. It wouldn't compete, in my mind, with D810/A7R for landscape since I'd rather 36MP and lots of DR than 50MP and same old same old. So it would be a high reach, high detail but sluggish sloth with old school low ISO DR. That might do it for a few, but for sure not me.

I'd sooner get a 7D2 even. (but would get a bunch of Sony stuff to add to my 5D3 (unless swapped that for a 7D2) or maybe just go Nikon out and out with a7sII added on or something)

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 17, 2014, 08:36:45 PM »
I hope it's not just the 7D2 sensor in full frame. 20MP*1.6*1.6
Personally that would do nothing for me. No improved low ISO DR. The reach is the same as the 7D2 and the 7D2 would surely cost less and deliver far more fps. At 50MP it might not hit the critical 6fps of the 5D3. So it wouldn't improve DR, would have reach but no speed, all it would do it proved tons of MP, which is nice. But I'd rather have more fps and DR than just a ton of MP.

If it does 50MP at 6fps, has Exmor DR, then wow though.
And if it has good video too,10bits and real true not mushed up waxy 4k then wow .

One would hope it will have crop modes instead of the IMO largely useless sRAW,mRAW which aren't even really true RAW so then you could have 20MP APS-C and hopefully at least that could be drive at 6fp and for all those distant bird shots do you really want to have to deal with and store 30MP of useless borders when a crop mode could save you all of that mess?

Software & Accessories / Re: i folded and bought CC :(
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:09:22 PM »
(And just a nit: Windows is also an OS. What I think you meant to write is "I have now switched my desktop to Mac OS. As a user of long standing of both systems, I've always been amused that a company as market-savvy as Apple has never come up with a better name for their operating system than "OS.")

An even bigger nit is the whole "PC" standing for IBM PC clone and then standing for anything running MS-DOS or Windows. Atari 8bit is a PC. Amiga is a PC. IBM PC is a PC. MAC is a PC. Pretty everything that is not a giant mainframe, supercomputer or specialized workstation or gaming only box is a PC.

Lenses / Re: buying advice: 24-70 2.8 v1 or v2
« on: December 16, 2014, 01:58:25 PM »
Hi, I am on the fence about which to get for an admittedly silly reason: filter size. The majority of all my lenses and filters are 77mm. The issue with the filter size is two fold: 1) I hate to buy filters over again in 82mm 2) when traveling bringing filters in another size is an annoyance.

So the question is for those that have owned both lenses, is the v2 thaat much better (IQ and AF) than the v1? Thanks in advance for your help.

OTOH, swapping filters from lens to lens is a major annoyance and quite slow. So each time you say swap from 16-35 f/4 IS to 24-70 II and back you have to waste a lot longer time which gets to be a drag.

Monetarily it's very nasty, but it's way, way more convenient in my opinion to drag a few extra filters along than to constantly swap filters back and forth every lens change.

And the 24-70 II is so much better! It even has better AF (at least paired with a recent body like the 5D3 or 1DX that can make use of ultra-precision AF motor breaking slippage data). Apparently the Mark I is prone to internal stud breakage which makes it go soft at one end too. The Mark II appears to be better built internally.

Software & Accessories / Re: i folded and bought CC :(
« on: December 16, 2014, 01:55:29 PM »
and at least Adobe has offered their package at a reasonable price (finally !).

not if you do video work too

Once upon a time you used to be able to even do something like upgrade InDesign once every three gens and Premiere Pro package (including PS) once every three gens and then add in a stand alone PS upgrade along the way if needed. Or forget the InDesign and just upgrade PP every once in a while and PS extra as needed.

And with the rental model, you can pay them for years, thousands of dollars and then if you quit you have nothing, nada, to show for all that money spent. You don't get to keep anything even if you did it for years and spent thousands.

Software & Accessories / Re: i folded and bought CC :(
« on: December 16, 2014, 01:50:09 PM »
after trying the LR app on my new iphone 6+ its just soo awesome i folded and bought Adobe CC for the $9.99/month deal since LR 6 is bound to be along soon too...

yep i'm a turncoat :(

boo!  >:( :'(

EOS Bodies / Re: Sony Sensors Coming to Canon DSLRs? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2014, 01:36:05 PM »
If Canon did this, DXO would implode from having no one left to pick on.

- A

They might have to start testing cameras rather than sensors.

Why? They are not a general review site, but focus on imaging and sensors.

Software & Accessories / Re: An Easy Magic Lantern How-To from CNET
« on: December 14, 2014, 04:57:37 PM »
I mean just look at the games they played with AutoISO. Utterly trivial code.
Trivial, yes, but it is a feature.

Auto-ISO is still stupid or semi-broken on Canon:
  • Flash locked to 400
  • No way to set min. aperture in Tv
  • Crippled values for min. shutter in Av
  • No EC in M except for 1dx (dunno about new 7d2)

AFAIK it has EC in M on the 1DX and 7D2 as well as no crippled min shutter value. But it only took them 15 years!  ::) And again, if those who don't code, only knew how utterly, utterly, utterly trivial the basic coding for AutoISO is. I mean the 5D3 crippled min shutter in Av is just absurd. There is zero technical reason for it and, if anything, it added an extra 15 seconds of coding to implement (and probably wasted 8 hours in product management and marketing meetings).

Software & Accessories / Re: An Easy Magic Lantern How-To from CNET
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:10:40 PM »
Some of the video features in ML is so basic that I won't believe it would add very much to the price.

Canon properly don't put peaking and zebras in a dslr body, so it won't hurt the CXX line.

I doubt it is even that.  The more I study Canon, the more I conclude that the problem is structural, rather than deliberate.  Judging from what I see on the outside, I suspect that each hardware product team has a group of software engineers that work on that product, probably in isolation.  Each product line probably has a separate code base that doesn't share much except the basic OS.

The result is that their software engineering folks only have sufficient resources to handle bring-up and basic maintenance engineering, without being able to actually evolve their software in interesting ways.  Features are designed minimally, in the most basic way possible, because that's all they have time to do.  And so on.

I'd love to see Canon build a camera software research group here in the Silicon Valley.  I'd apply for a job there in a heartbeat, and I'm sure hundreds of other people would as well—I know most of my coworkers over the years have had strong opinions about cameras and camera UI.  Canon's silicon engineering team has a presence in San Jose already, so they could probably share those facilities.

That team could work on building a modern, shared platform for all of their cameras, using a plug-in architecture that would allow the hardware bring-up teams to do their thing somewhat independently of updates to the OS and UI as a whole.  If designed correctly, such a model could even allow folks to update the hardware-specific bits for bug fixes separately from the UI software.  That way, the pro folks wouldn't whine about UI changes after an upgrade, but folks who want new functionality could still get it.

Food for thought, just in case anybody from Canon actually reads this thread.

I think you are wrong. I think it's clearly deliberate decisions. You can even see where they have even coded some more advanced things and then locked out the written code or removed it and if you listen in detail to all the things their guys say at trade shows and so on....

I mean just look at the games they played with AutoISO. Utterly trivial code. It's 1/100000000000000000000000th the complexity and time of tons of stuff in the firmware but they took FIFTEEN YEARS to dribble it out (and even now only for 7D2 and 1DX in reasonably complete form). And yet the basic code for it is so simple that you teach a newbie programmer (one who had never programmed before) how to code the basics of it (maybe not the modal synching into the knobs and dials, but the main code) in their first week and it would like one page of code.

Software & Accessories / Re: An Easy Magic Lantern How-To from CNET
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:05:55 PM »
We are fortunate that ML development has been free and donation based to date.  If canon were to include certain features, the cost of the camera would likely be higher than most people could afford.  It would be nice to have some of these built in but the development and regression testing costs would make it cost prohibitive.

Utterly absurd (at least for everything other than the RAW video hack).

Software & Accessories / Re: An Easy Magic Lantern How-To from CNET
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:04:51 PM »
I am surprised that Canon hasn't taken these features to heart and started including them in current and future camera firmware.  It seems to reason that officially supporting many of the options would be a nice boost to a features comparison between cameras.

Canon marketing declared all those features 'ultra high-end' and doesn't deem the regular Canon DLSR user worthy of such 'beyond advanced' features like focusing peaking, zoomed focus boxes, zoomed video modes, zebra (or even true 1080p while we are at it). That is why. Canon has been taken over by marketing MBA droid types.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 271