September 19, 2014, 04:08:14 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 - rh81photo

Pages: [1]
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced
« on: February 21, 2013, 03:46:23 PM »
Update: this does sound off-topic, but I wrote it to respond to the conflict that was beginning about the "color palates" of Nikon vs. Canon, a conflict that is fundamentally flawed.

The "color palate" of cameras, lenses, and LCDs which I hear about so often is a figment of photographer's imaginations. The only thing a lens has to do with color is separating between color contrasts (low chromatic aberration). The only thing a camera has to do with color is its AWB. The only thing an LCD has to do with color is its calibration (and color spectrum coverage); miscalibration might result in the color being displayed improperly during playback but has zero to do with the actual image, as someone correctly noted by distinguishing between the LCD and the monitor (although the monitor might also be calibrated improperly).
.
.
.
Abbreviated
.
.
.

For example, there was a photo of a bee and sunflower on here. The white balance on that was not quite right. I have done extensive sunflower photography jobs and know quite a bit about it. The bee was OK, but not the background and colors. (I shouldn't judge this though. On the original user's monitor they may have been perfect, but on my precisely calibrated screen they were considerably off.)

P.S. The way to assess "perfect" white balance as I alluded to, is simply to hold a print from your photo next to the original subject. If the colors are not the same, then the white balance is off.

sorry but this is way off topic and in many regards not entirely correct. nikon and canon use different color filters in their RGB-colorfilter array. Thus they cover slightly different colorspaces. This is not just AWB settings that somehow are a bit off. It is about measuring all visible colors with just three representations where Nikon and Canon have diffrent views on how this is done. I bet with some work both systems can get close in regards to color, but it would surprise me if they just slightly capture colors just so that you cant match each others outputs. a strong indicator is that the colormatrices for both systems are VERY different from each other.

On topic: Im truly amazed by this D7100, especially for that price! With the D600 I already was close to switching brands. Fiddling with it at Photokina left me with mixed feelings, changeing the settings was astoundingly counterintuitive. The D7100 is taking the Flak at nikonrumors for having a small buffer(6 pics) and being not completeley magnesium alloy body and other to me minor complaints. I'm eager to see what Canon comes up with in their 70D and 7DmkII.
Of course they can choose to not react and keep selling their "conservative" cameras e.g. a 70D with again 9AF-points or the old 18MP sensor. But this nikon offering makes me again rethink what actually keeps me in the Canon system.
Some, but few!, L-lenses is one thing,  handling of the Cameras another and finally: alot of people around me with Canon Glass that can be borrowed if needed. The last two points are very weakly rated by myself.

exciting times for photographic gearheads ;)

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cinema EOS C50 [CR1]
« on: February 13, 2013, 02:54:37 PM »
"For me, a dunce of a filmmaker. $6500 is too much money to spend just to show my family bad films on Vimeo. I’d really like a video camera that costs about half that with an EF mount. I could be in the minority on that one, but I much prefer to shoot video with a video camera as opposed to a DSLR."

It would be great to see an upgrade path for 5D Mark III users.

Serious video pros and amateurs alike need a $3000 camera, for the same reason serious photographers don't want to spend $6500 on a DSLR body. Cost is only not an issue for the bloated film industry. The consumer market is much larger and very sensitive to price.

I actually like the DSLR form factor for video, over a video camera - it has a few advantages. Yes a EF mount large sensor camcorder that sits above the top end consumer camcorder would be nice to handle, but you'd lose some abilities...

- Ability to do stills and video on one assignment without carrying 2 kits
- Swap between stills / video very quickly, almost simultaneously
- Stealth ability, with a DSLR you can blend in like a tourist. With a video camera people are more suspicious
- Small size... If you look at Sony's closest equivalent to a 'C50', the VG30 is a NEX in a huge ugly box

Canon should take the EOS M as a base, put that in a video optimised mirrorless form factor, add plenty of video features and a good focus assist, fix moire and have it priced just above the 5D Mark III. Job done.

I really like your ideas. together with you blogpost that would be a niche worth exploiting to my taste. but my guess is that Canon is not thinking that way.

I thought about how they could further strip the C100 down to justify a significant pricedrop without cannibalizing C100 sales. The 8bit 420 AVCHD is quite a limitation already and getting rid of 720 50p/60p (the C100 REALLY doesn't have that?? thats so hard to believe!) leaves almost nothing to cut down. basically they are approaching the video quality of a 500D/550D/600D/650D....and that at a pricepoint of 6500$ !!!

The only thing that they could leave out would be the EF-mount and go for a fixed lens. Something like a 24-105 f4 or the likes. They have this for their Pro Camcorders...to my taste, nobody wants this, but with a fixed lens they COULD differentiate between the rumored C50 and the C100.

to be clear: if they do that, to my taste they deserve to not sell a single unit of these C50's! On the other hand, it would be one of these conservative moves that Canon seems to like so much these days.

Tough!

What I would hope for: An even smaller and lighter version of the C100 with an EOS M mount but basically the same feature set. not going to happen,I know,  unless they don't use the S35 sensor but instead the 'good old' 18mp APS-C with dual digic5+ readout like in the 1DX. I'm thinking of a GH3 like formfactor.

Oh well, one can dream, right?  ;)

3
Hey guys,
I'm in the same boat. I think my 40D is a nice camera and I only could wish for minor improvements. What I would want is: better AF(more points, higher point sensitivity), 7fps, AFMA, cleaner low ISO with nice DR, High ISO usable to 6400, a usable autoISO implementation. I don't need 18mp, I would have been happy with 16ish....(my wishes sound alot like a 50D)

The 6D comes close in certain respects. If the 6D would cost 1500EUR it would be priced in a way that I would think about buying it. It would be expensive still then because it doesn't fulfill all my wishes. Great IQ but seemingly not usable for sports (Volleyball)

The 5DmkIII is much closer to what I would want but it's much more expensive and thus out of range.

The 7D is a bargain at the moment but would be an Investment into a camera that is (although better than the 40D in many many respects) already 'old'. nothing wrong with the cam, just an odd investment...

I will wait until the 70D gets revealed...if it's underwhelming then I will wait what the 7DmkII brings...oh gosh I plan to wait so much :(
at a certain point it would be better to buy a used 50D and be happy....

cheers
:)

i feel your pain.

having the exact same thoughts in regards to waiting for a new model and is it worth it...7D tight now is a bargain for sure....costs less than my 40D was when I first got it....but the "old" factor is a big turnoff for me, although it's hard to say if that's a reasonable concern or not.

yep. I have shot with a 7D from a friend briefly...nice handling, I really like it. but what spooks me is the low iso banding that makes it less nice for low ISO shooting. and the high ISO improvements are there...they are just not that much of an improvement to justify buying the 7D. thank god there will be a nice MagicLantern version for the 7D available...I haven't done video yet, but the option to do it with ML would be nice, so thanks A1ex and ML team for that!
The thing is: Canons recent record of new Cameras is a little awkward. My fear is that the 70D and 7DmkII will also just NOT be what I want (I think thats very likely) and thus I will then be contemplating whether to buy a much more expensive camera...well...that is seemingly their marketing strategy though....ugh :-\

I will read the other thread later that day...thanks for the link!

cheers

4
Hey guys,
I'm in the same boat. I think my 40D is a nice camera and I only could wish for minor improvements. What I would want is: better AF(more points, higher point sensitivity), 7fps, AFMA, cleaner low ISO with nice DR, High ISO usable to 6400, a usable autoISO implementation. I don't need 18mp, I would have been happy with 16ish....(my wishes sound alot like a 50D)

The 6D comes close in certain respects. If the 6D would cost 1500EUR it would be priced in a way that I would think about buying it. It would be expensive still then because it doesn't fulfill all my wishes. Great IQ but seemingly not usable for sports (Volleyball)

The 5DmkIII is much closer to what I would want but it's much more expensive and thus out of range.

The 7D is a bargain at the moment but would be an Investment into a camera that is (although better than the 40D in many many respects) already 'old'. nothing wrong with the cam, just an odd investment...

I will wait until the 70D gets revealed...if it's underwhelming then I will wait what the 7DmkII brings...oh gosh I plan to wait so much :(
at a certain point it would be better to buy a used 50D and be happy....

cheers
:)

5
Lenses / Re: Post your wishlist for to-be-released lenses
« on: November 08, 2012, 06:32:06 PM »
hmm, wishlist, yes!

70-200 f2.8 L USM II
This version should have:
-less weight (however achieved, it just shouldn't feel cheap)
-less purple/green LoCA fringing at f2.8
-a tad more contrast and sharpness wide open
-even faster AF (feedback loop would be nice)
-a hood with the click like the IS II version has
-weather sealing
-focus limiter with more steps (1.5m-inf, 3m-inf, 4.5m-inf)
-AF stop button(s)
-white-white instead of muddy-grey-white paint OR a black painted version of it...

the old version (17years old) is a really nice lens, but the above mentioned points could be improved. except for the optical formula it wouldn't require much R&D. It would become a little less versatile lens compared to the IS II version due to the lacking IS, but I hope the pricing would reflect this. the IS II version shows that stellar performance wide open is possible...why not have the same thing without IS? I think this is not asking for too much ;) and I would pay a premium over the old version. for that I paid 1100EUR and never regretted the purchase. a lens with the above mentioned improvements is probably 1500€ to 1600€ worth to me, maybe 1700€ if it is featherlight.
also if someone invents a 70-180 f2.2 L USM lens at the same weight...oh well, now I'm dreaming... ::)

6
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses to be Announced Shortly.....
« on: November 04, 2012, 05:38:03 PM »
Hmmm... let me guess.... 50mm f1.4 IS and 24-70mm f4 IS ??

Sounds plausible. a new standard fullframe prime and a stadard-zoom. would fit the 6D niceley. My guess: both reasonable quality (in Line with 24mmIS, 28mmIS, 40mm STM) and pricing at something like 600$-700$ for the prime and 950$ for the Zoom. without the "L" ofc.

I doubt that it's a f1.4 aperture with IS for the prime, but apart from that...let's see :)

7
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 04:44:55 PM »

So, theories we'ved spitballed about this are:

1) Canon is fully '70-200'-ing their 24-70 lenses into a lineup of (eventually) four offerings.
2) This is tailored for video -- STM, parfocal, etc.
3) It will be very small / very light in comparison to prior 24-70 lenses.
4) This is a 'value L' in the vein of 17-40, 70-200 F/4 non-IS.  Cheap L glass for everyone.

I'll offer a fifth -- perhaps these new 24-70s are just a leap above in resolution for the impending high MP body?  One would think the new 24-70 F/2.8 performance would speak to this, but I've seen:

  • One stellar review (from Roger Cicala)
  • One 'I got one good copy and one bad copy' from The Digital Picture
  • One so-so review (from Photozone) on the resolution front.
 
So I'm not certain about this theory.

But golly gee, the speculation is awfully fun.  Nothing like a CR3 to bring the band back together.   ;D

I suspect a combination of 2, 3 and 4: tailored for video in a light and small package, possibly the first L Lens with STM focus(oh gosh!) and an IS supporting the video fraction (you lot know what I mean, not the tight grip Tamron VC but something smoother for handheld video).
I don't suspect superior resolution...that would take away sales from the relativeley new and good 24-105L and the video guys need only so much resolution. It then should at least have good contrast though :-\
My guess for the pricepoint would be 900 to 950 bucks msrp with kit-prices below that at lets say 800..or even less if the IQ is just on the 'almost L' level...but then again Canon hasn't released cheap optics recently anyway. ugh, I don't know. they completeley scramble their lineup with this. at least its a constant aperture lens and not a 3.5-4.5 like in the nikon world.

CR3 definateley brings the band together  ;)

8
they had one on photokina this year. it was connected to 5Dc. it produced some nice testshots for me. the zoom-by-wire is not fast though, it has a lot of glass to move inside that barrel! and the AF speed was also only okay-ish. definiteley not zippy. but again, we know why  8)
I guess it could be very nice for video work. any demo videos out there of it? 500mm f2.8 should get you a nice subject/background separation not seen on video before...

douglaurent, you should put these monsters on top of HeLaBa in Frankfurt and take cityshots at dusk/night...i think that would instantly deliver awesome pictures! greetings to nearby-frankfurt from frankfurt!!! :)

9
first alpha out!
http://www.magiclantern.fm/whats-new/104-releases/140-first-7d-alpha-released
not everything is working, the dual-digics have some fancy synchronizing going on...very interesting read...great stuff they're doing there!

these guys need support...they are just awesome!

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Upgrade from 40D to 5d mkii
« on: October 03, 2012, 04:13:44 PM »
Is the 5d mkii focusing better or worse than the 40d for birds in flight?  I understand that the center point is more accurate, but is it faster than the 40d?  I only shoot birds about 25% of the time, I use for BIF a canon ef 400mm L f5.6 and for stationary birds an old Heinz Kilfitt 400mm f4.0 manual focus lens as well.  The other 75% of the time I know the 5d mkii would fit me perfectly. 

 I am happy with my focusing on the 40d with the smaller aperture (f8.0-f11.0) required for birding.  As long as it is at par I will be happy. 

I understand that the 1dx 1dmkiv and 5d mkiii are better cameras.  I have just installed a new furnace new air conditioning and have completed a basement reno(aka I have no cash flow),  I am finding the cheap price of the 5d mkii very tempting, And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?

I'm almost in the same boat as skinkfoot. Only difference is that I'm not a BIF shooter but I shoot volleyball. so far I'm mostly happy with my 40D 70-200 2.8L usm combo. has anyone of you experience with a 5DmkII and volleyball? of course a 7D would make more sense for that type of sports shooting. I'm aware of that. But did anyone >try< a 5DmkII for such a high paced sport? what was your experience with it (AF speed, accuracy, tracking...)?
Thanks in advance and sorry for partly highjacking this thread, I hope thats okay...I >think< my question is really close to what the OP asked.
Cheers! ;)


11
I'm using ACDSee Pro 3 at the moment. Serves me well as an Organizer/Raw-developer, but for any more than that I use Photoshop. Basically I'm missing some features on ACDSee Pro 3 (CA-correction, better sharpening tools, better denoiser)...maybe an upgrade to ACDSee Pro 6 will do the trick, will download the trial soon and see. everybody is suggesting that Lightroom is sooo much better, but everytime I used it somehow it didn't feel fluid in what I wanted to do. But its VERY possible that this is just me being lazy to adapt to LR.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 22, 2012, 06:43:38 PM »
really? THIS camera gets 5fps and the 6D doesn't? at 16bit per pixel that means 3.7GBit/s transfer speed into ram...the 1DX at 18MP with 14bit per pixel at 14fps calculates to 3.5GBits/s

that means its gonna cost more than the 5DmkIII...much closer to the 1DX I think. 4500-5500 bucks I guess.
4D as a name sounds plausible regarding recent 4D-name-spottings in app-screenshots.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« on: September 21, 2012, 06:33:34 PM »
You're currently shooting with a T1i and you're torn between the IQ of a FF Canon vs Nikon body? Poor DR? You sound like an engineer, not a photographer.

If you think Canon has better glass, then that's a much better basis for you to make your decision. But seriously buddy, stop reading the body specs and just go out and shoot photos. There's no IQ or DR category in photo competitions.
yeah a lot of people forget that, the main thing in how to do great photography is you! not the camera!

Although the camera is not the most important aspect in photography, you still want the best camera for your budget. Depending how much you're invested in canon lenses and how much you can sell it for, upgrading to a Nikon FF instead of a Canon FF might give you better value.

+1

I love when people posting in a gear-oriented forum and having themselves several thousands grands of gear pieces come out saying "Nah, it's not about the gear, it's about skill". It's hypocrite to no end. Especially because I often read that this is a Canon enthusiasts forum, so apparently I have to assume that skill comes in kit with Canon gear only.

I would kindly invite those people to act on their principles, sell all their expensive gear and buy a 1100D kit and a fifty nifty. Then you can come and show us "pixel-peepers" and "spec-readers" (who care about value for money of the products we buy) that our worries have nothing to do with IQ and how miserable photographers we are.

+1

this also cracks me up. but there's even more to it. certain types of photography are simply horribly ineffective with the wrong gear. try to learn how to shoot sports without the right equipment...takes really long and the learning curve is quite flat for a looong time.

yes yes, people learnt it before, even in analogue times and without the glass we have today, but it took them a professional career to do so.
today even I (non professional hobbyist) can shoot sports with a lens(70-200L f2.8 USM) that is fast enough to focus and a camera(40D) that has a good enough AF to lock focus and a decent framerate(~6.3fps). so YES it IS the gear that enables me to learn and succeed at photographing certain themes at a decent quality.

and SINCE I am a hobbyist I cannot justify any price for a camera, so naturally I look for value/price ratio. and at the moment the offerings from canon have a not-so-nice v/p-ratio. I have to express this, and reading the forums makes me feel that i'm not totally off with my view of the situation.

I am really torn apart here, because I see the arguments staying in the canon system. but the offerings for the bodies available from canon are either too pricey(5DmkIII) or do not offer enough features to even call it an upgrade (6D). I have about 2000EUR to spend for a camera, but see no point in spending it for something that doesn't fit my needs. BUT the D600 is only an entry into a world-of-lenses-to-be-bought, so a body alone purchase is also a no go.
I probably will go for a 7D now and have some spare cash. thats nice for me. but a week ago even a 7D was unattractive because ML wasn't possible, now that looks different :D exciting times!

just my 2cents
cheer up everyone, we have a nice job/hobby  ;)

14
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: How canon charges 6000$ for firmware upgrade
« on: September 21, 2012, 05:11:58 PM »

It may in fact involve doing _less_ rather than more in the pipeline. If they use the native resolution of the sensor for their 4K (which they do, it's simply cropped to native res) you won't have to do a downsampling step. The rest of your processing can be the same pipeline as stills as long as the processors can handle the throughput without power or heat problems. The codec at the end will have more data to process, but the codecs can handle that and are industry standards. In both cases, the 1DC proves that the stock 1DX hardware is capable of the feat.

If that is the case, then the 1DX is exactly a _crippled_ version of the 1DC: resolution-destroying code is inserted into the firmware of the 1DX that is left out of the 1DC. This might not be terribly hard to hack; I can think of two approaches off hand instantly.

this got me thinking. some thoughts to that: the resolution destruction does significantly reduce the amount of data that the pipeline(s) has to deal with. that may be the reason why they use 4k 8bit on the 1Dc. also: if the 1DX shoots jpeg the framerate can be higher. so maybe one of the downstream pipelines is not capable of processing more and somewhere upstream (the DIGICs maybe?) the downsizing(resolution, bit-depth) and/or jpeg encoding takes place...
another thing: the 1DX has roughly the same resolution as the 7D, right? what if the dual digic4s could already do some of the stuff the dual DIGIC5+'s can? I'm not asking for 4k here, but what if 2.5k would be possible...argh! I'm off into dreamland here... :D

Pages: [1]