September 30, 2014, 08:32:00 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 - Helevitia

Pages: [1] 2
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 23, 2014, 01:33:28 PM »
I'm feeling frustrated with my choices.  I bought a 7D in April of 2012 as a stop gap until a 7D2 was announced(thinking it was right around the corner) or a newer, cheaper FF camera.  As we all know, the 7D2 was never announced back then and we got the 6D, which has amazing image quality, but lacks in weather sealing and fast AF.

Fast forward, we are now starting to see images from the 7D2, which is barely better than the 70D.  Fine, I can live with that.  I get it now, I need to go FF if I want the image quality I'm looking for.  However, the 5DIII, although amazing, has no USB 3 and is way too expensive!  Which is a real bummer. 

The 7D2 has everything I could ever want, but image quality.
The 6D has the best image quality, but no weather sealing and slow AF
The 5D3 covers everything but USB 3, but is now 2.5 years old and way too expensive. 

So, looking at my choices, I basically want the 5D4 for less than $2k  :P

I bought both the 70-200 L and the 24-70 L lenses in anticipation of upgrading to better image quality.  It took me 3 years to be able to buy both.

Thinking out loud, the 5D3 would be fine if it wasn't $3200 retail!  I could live with USB 2.  I know it goes for as little at $2550 on they ebay auctions now and then, but even at $2550 it is incredibly expensive.

In my humble opinion, the 7D2 should have had much better image quality.  If it was closer to the 5D3, I would have pre-ordered it.  I know, there are a lot of people that will say the true RAW images haven't been looked at in detail and high ISO this and low ISO that, but what we already know with the images we have, speak for themselves, again IMHO.

I haven't looked into too much detail from other manufacturers, simply because I've always liked Canon, but I feel I'm waning a bit. 

What other choices do I have, if any?  I've always felt cameras were overpriced anyway for the high end cameras.  They must be making a killing.  Canon seems to be a bit behind and that's another frustrating part.  I'm just an amateur photographer(always for fun) that wants a great camera without having to take a small loan out to get one.

Maybe I need to reset my expectations?




2
EOS Bodies / Re: Chuck Westfall Talks Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 18, 2014, 04:12:21 PM »
Elsewhere, someone worked on a 7DII raw file and found rather clean shadows:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?s=5bc5bcfaeb7070a83fe961da98b20dfe&p=17162418&postcount=810

This is way out of my expertise, and all though it looked good from a shaddow point of view, I would have liked to see a few more examples. The steel railings (which in the original is quite dark) are somewhat smudgy in the shaddowenhanced picture. I am not sure if that is the way the steelrailing looks inherently, but could also resemble some sort of banding, could it not?

I gotta be honest, those railings don't look smudgy at all to me. What I see are weathered railings with different patches of discoloration due to sun/wind/rain. It's pretty common in moist/humid environments. And if that's the case, and that's the detail we're seeing, this sensor is sick!

I'm a nobody that has a 7D for fun amateur stuff, but I'll share my thoughts anyway :)

1. I agree.  The rails aren't smudgy at all.  I pulled the pic into LR.  The rails clearly have bird poop, discoloration, weather worn metal, water spots, sun reflection, etc...

2.  Canon knows they need to have much less noise on the 7D2 compared to the 7D.  Personally, I was never happy with any image over ISO400 on the 7D because it was too noisy.  I'm hoping for usable images at 1600 or 3200 ISO and I think that is good for this APS-C camera. 

I suspect it will be somewhere around 75% as good as a 5D3/6D and about 25-50% better than the 70D.  If that's the case, I'll buy one.  I would love to have the 5D3, but I don't take enough pictures to justify the price. 

Anyhoo, let's go back to examining tiny pixels :D

3
EOS Bodies / Re: It's Christmas Eve !!
« on: December 18, 2012, 10:48:00 AM »
Just curious, why did you buy from B&H when there are all these people selling it for $400-$600 cheaper than them?

Probably because B&H is much more trustworthy than the eBay retailers.

4
What initially pushed me to upgrade from a P&S to a DSLR, was the focus speed and the amount of time it took to turn on my camera and take a picture.  I felt I was missing out on pictures because of those two issues alone.  What pushed me to upgrade to a 7D from my Rebel was picture quality and support of higher end glass to have crispy pictures :)  ISO noise isn't very noticeable with the Rebel because the MP was small and the pictures were rarely used for real pictures.  Once I started blowing them up, I started to notice the limitations of lower MP and image quality for printed pictures. 

And last, once I got the 70-200 II, there is no going back image quality wise.  Don't buy this lens because you'll never be satisfied with anything less.

But hey, your reasons for upgrading could be completely different, just thought I'd share mine.

5
I am also worried about missing out on the advantage of having a cropped sensor. 

I signed up an account just to comment on this.  There is *no* advantage to a crop sensor.  How would you feel if you had FF camera, but the camera cropped the picture before it saved it to the card?  You would feel cheated!  Same deal, only it's a physical limitation.

Source:  I am a senior optical engineer.

Yes there is an advantage: the resolution of a sensor depends on the size of a pixel, the smallest image that can be resolved into two separated points is one where the distance is circa 2 pixels. The pixel on the 6D is 6.54 micron, that on the 7D is 4.3 micron. So, with the same lens on each body and iso noise not being limiting, the 7D can resolve a separation of 8.6 microns as opposed to the 13.08 microns on the 6D. So, the 7D has 48.8% more reach than the 6D, which is a huge advantage for bird photography and is why the 7D is so popular for nature photographers. I am waiting for the 7D II.

The resolution of a camera system and the subsiquent images depends on a hell of a lot more than pixel density. Stop reading badly written forum posts and test this stuff, it really is very easy.

I posted this a while ago but it is very relevant here, and I didn't explain the test situation very well last time. The attached photo contains three images, the one on the left is from a FF camera, the smaller red rectangle inside that is the full 7D image. Both images were shot from the same place with the same lens using manual focus and 10x Live View, a cable release, remote flash, IS off, very heavy tripod, with a 300mm f2.8 IS @f5.6. This is a typical focal length limited situation and I set this up to see the actual resolution advantage I would get were I to get a 7D, in doing so I have absolutely maximised the advantage of the crop camera, we never shoot in these kinds of ideal conditions other than a studio still life.

In real life testing, when using AF and its associated inaccuracies,  even the small resolution advantage the 7D has in these examples isn't realisable.

So, where is that 7D 48.8% reach advantage?

OK, so I've looked at your pictures and read some more online about FF vs. crop sensors.  Wouldn't it be better to say we are losing picture real estate instead of magnifying the image 1.6x?  If we are, in fact, not actually getting closer to the subject, then why does everyone say it like that?  Why not say the opposite? 

And one other question about this:  If I take a picture with a crop sensor at let's say, 12 ft, I then take the exact same picture with a FF sensor, at around 8ft, I'm going to get the exact same image size.  Now let's assume for a second I cannot move closer to the subject to "equal" the crop sensor size.  Do I miss out on anything? 

Also, what about the resolution within the crop sensor?  If both the crop and FF sensor have the same megapixel, does that mean I have more detail in the picture on the crop sensor vs. the FF sensor or is it really just that it's exactly that, it's cropped out the extra real estate so it's the exact same?  Whew!  Hope I made sense?

6
Thanks again for all the feedback.  This thread grew much bigger than I had anticipated.  After mulling over everything in this thread(again), I 'm pretty sure I'll just focus on buying a new lens and see what the 7DMK2 has to offer or see if canon comes out with something in between the 6D and 5DIII.  I really need to go play with a 6D in a store with my lens and see what I think.  Maybe after the holidays.

Another thought is, I wait for another $2500 5DIII deal to pop up, buy that and sell my 7D for a grand.  Technically I'm only paying $1500, right? right! :D

7
Black & White / Re: Abandoned House
« on: December 11, 2012, 02:49:23 PM »
I had a quite play about with it in PS

I probably have 10 different versions of this picture :)  Thanks for posting your version.  I have a few similar versions as well.  It's definitely a fun picture to tweak on.

I also have a few split toned versions I like.  A slight red in the shadows with a slight brown in the highlights and touch more clarity.

8
Black & White / Re: Abandoned House
« on: December 11, 2012, 02:48:20 PM »
Cool.  i think the power lines add to it.  Make them show a little more if you can.

Thanks :)  You really think the powerlines add to it?  I don't think they are terrible, but others have complained.

9
Black & White / Abandoned House
« on: December 10, 2012, 11:57:44 PM »
I took this picture a few weeks ago.  I am using a 7D with a 70-200 II @ 70mm.  1/125, F/9, ISO 125

Here's a link to the color version: http://www.flickr.com/photos/s3r3n1ty/8156729456/#

BTW, I know the power lines take away from the photo, but there isn't much I can do about that.  The spot where I took the pic is the only spot I can get it from without trespassing. How about the rest of the image?  You like?

10
Thanks neuroanatomist, I appreciate all of your responses :)

11
Hey everyone :)  A lot of info.  I really appreciate it!

After going through everyone's posts, here are my thoughts:

1. bokehliciousness is my new favorite word :D

2. Some say they don't see a noise problem in my pictures.  That's because I shot at ISO 100(which still has noise on a 7D) and it is heavily processed in LR.  These are ideal pictures scenarios.  Bright light, low ISO, etc...Once it gets a bit darker, the noise is much more apparent. 

3. Thinking of moving objects(my daughter), I set my camera to AI SERVO, turned off IS and snapped away.  How would the focus on the 6D compare to this type of situation?  I would hope it would be better?  BTW, this was manually pressing the shutter button, not using burst.

4. I have thought of waiting for the 7DM2.  I hope it's not too far off, but in all honesty, if they pin it below the 6D, I can't see how the noise will improve much.

5. Is using LR to clean up noise an acceptable practice?  Does anybody really care if they like the picture?  Most people that look at my photos(all but one really) don't even notice things like bad shadows, noise, sharpness, etc..

6. As for the "advantage" of a crop sensor.  Don't take my words too seriously :)  I just meant that I get 1.6x vs. FF.  Call that a pro, con, whatever.  If I take a picture at 200mm with a 7D vs. FF, am I really getting a "closer" picture? 

7.  Again, the sharpness in my images are also improved in LR.  And again, I ask, is it acceptable practice to use PP for things like this? 

8.  Without LR, I wouldn't be able to get the images I want.  Sad but true.  LR has allowed me to achieve the pictures I want.

9.  I noticed someone mention the 6D will easily beat out the 7D in low light.  Thinking about that, I like to take pictures without flash whenever I can.  I like the natural lighting better.  I think the 6D is much better for this scenario.

10.  Someone mentioned the noise when taking bird photos.  I agree 100%, the noise is really noticeable.  If you look at bird pics on 500px, flikr, etc... they are so clean, I often wonder if I'm missing something.  I hate to say it, but I'm pretty anal about noise. 

I think I'm gonna hold off a bit longer.  Possibly buy the 24-70 II instead and see what happens in 2013 :)  As usual, I love this site and I appreciate everyone's feedback!  Of course, tomorrow I might change my mind and want to buy the 5D3 :D  I'm sure you all know how that goes  :P

I think I might take my 70-200 into a store, put it one both the 7D and 6D, take some pics and then take them home and compare.

12
Back in May I upgraded from a Rebel XTi to a 7D with the anticipation that a new FF camera was going to come out sooner than later.  I would sell my 7D and upgrade to whatever was nice and new. Sure enough, the 6D was announced.  As a lot of people, I wasn't too thrilled with the initial specs of the 6D, but I am slowly starting to like what I'm reading.

I love the 7D.  I think it's an amazing camera with one exception.  I think it has too much noise.  For that reason alone, I really want to upgrade.  That being said, I'm not so sure I'll be happier with a FF camera.  I mean, the build quality of the 7D seems really good to me and people are saying the 6D is closer to a 60D.  Am I reading too much into this from a build quality perspective?  I don't really need the fast fps, but it sure is fun to have.  I am also worried about missing out on the advantage of having a cropped sensor.  My walk around lens is the 70-200mm II.  I love this lens.  The pictures are extremely sharp and it has great clarity.  Will this lens be even better on the 6D?

I know the images will look cleaner, sharper and nicer on the 6D.  I mostly shoot landscape and people, but not really portraits.  I do occasionally record video.  Obviously I don't need a 5D3.  I'm not a professional and I don't pay attention to every single feature of my camera.  I'm still learning a lot and still getting used to shooting in manual+RAW.  And I know a lot of people in here will laugh at me for this, but I use LR as a crutch to make my pictures look better while I get better at picture taking :)  But hey, that's the truth.

I guess the bottom line is, I want really good image quality.  I want it to look sharp, clear, and as little noise as possible.  Here's are two pics I took with my 7D and 70-200mm II.  Any critique is welcomed.  Thanks!

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D or Canon 5D mark iii + which lenses?
« on: December 06, 2012, 03:13:36 PM »
Probably because your question is too vague?  Have you narrowed down your choice between two cameras?  How much money do you want to spend?  What is most important to you when shooting?  Fast moving, sports, landscape, people?  You said Santa Cruz, so I'm thinking landscape, beaches and people?  Also, 2 years ago, I considered my 28-135mm my walk around lens, now I consider my 70-200mm my new walk around lens, Though if I had the extra money, I would pick up the 24-70 II.  I mostly shoot landscapes and people.  I am considering upgrading to the 6D from a 7D mostly for higher ISO usage.  BTW, I don't have the technical knowledge that most of the people have on this site, but I know what feels right :)  7D is a really nice camera minus the unusable photos past ISO 800.  I'm almost wondering if it's worth the upgrade to the 6D.  I know I'll miss the 1.6x zoom of the crop sensor.

14
Thanks for the results.  I'm considering upgrading from a 7D.  How does the 7D compare in these tests?  Does anybody know?  I'm sure there have been similar tests done between 7D and 5D2/3?

15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs 5Diii today...
« on: December 05, 2012, 02:24:31 PM »
I think if you HAVE to buy today, it should be the 5D3 for the simple fact that not enough is known about the 6D yet.  If you could wait a month, you will have a better idea.  Can you wait a month?

Do you need 1/8000 and 1/250 for flash?  Though you did say you were keeping your 7D.

From what you use the camera for, it sounds like the 5D3 might be the better option anyway.  If you can afford it and think you'll make your money back fairly quickly, than it seems you'll be happier with the 5D3 in the long run.  The only downside would be the possible new scenarios with WIFI, which is starting to sound more and more like a feature that professionals will use and want.  I think somebody else pointed out that you could add this?  Not sure though.

One other thing I thought of, it sounds like you already have your lenses.  Do you need another one?

I'm an amateur, so it's an easy decision for me, 6D :)

EDIT: Something else I noticed.  The 6D is rated for 100K shots, 5D3 is rated at 150K shots. 

Pages: [1] 2