Messages

1

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: November 24, 2012, 06:30:39 PM »

jukka,

Not sure if you saw my previous post, but do you know the answer to this question:

Since AFMA for a particular body/lens combo changes as a function of subject distance, it's not possible to have an AFMA value for all subject distances. Is this any different for a lens that appears to require 0 AFMA? I.e. will it also have 0 AFMA for all subject distances?

hmm My Finnish English do not understand what you're asking, can you simplify the question and I try to answer

2

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: November 24, 2012, 06:26:24 PM »

despite gold or silver rings the sigma 35/1,4 will be a new player on the market, if we are lucky the sigma lens will do a better job than the Canon 35/1,4 lens and to the half (60%) price

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 24, 2012, 06:11:18 PM »

well if the best is 1dmk 4 then  you can count out what the numbers will be with a 24x36 sensor regarding FWC and read out noise.

Today canon is behind   the best players in the market regarding FWC and read out noise=DR

4

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: November 23, 2012, 09:23:53 PM »

Its only for that the AF shall make a new measurement and  go from close distance up to the test target= 50x focal length= 50mm lens  and distance to target  =2,5 m,  100mm = 5m  and so on. (same for micro adjustments) Canon   own technicians  does it  also  between measurements and calibration of lenses AF.
The minor variations is variations in the absolute focal plane and F-2,8 sharpness depth
If you have a 1,2 lens the difference can be huge

5

EOS Bodies / Re: canon 1d mark iii 21.1 mp or the 5d mark ii

« on: November 23, 2012, 09:04:13 PM »

Im  beta  testing different  profiles for another company, and there are different CFA and tonal response , you can come close but there are differentcies, as for example Nikons CFA , 1dsmk3 CFA and old 5d CFA compared to  the latest Canon with thinner CFA
And passport does not generate the best profiles.

6

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 08:38:10 PM »

They can not price the sensors lower than for example Sony if they will have the same tech.
Even today the sensors department with the old tech have a high internal price  for a  24x36mm sensor.
And Canon does not make the  whole assembly in-house,  it means that the sensor waffers are  packed dust free and transported to a collaborative partner from one clean room to another, which is time consuming and   expensive.

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Too much dynamic range?

« on: November 23, 2012, 07:26:37 PM »

You need not look at any photos, with 14 stops DR you have more  exposure options and with for example d800 you have no banding  and  pattern noise in lower levels. You can use one raw file and develop the raw file  after highlight and  one after shadows and mix them together, With a Canon you must take two or more exposure and have the Camera on a tripod and no moving objects, or you can also develope one raw file after the high lights and lift the  areas  in shadows  and a  contrasty motive with out pattern noise or banding.

8

EOS Bodies / Re: canon 1d mark iii 21.1 mp or the 5d mark ii

« on: November 23, 2012, 07:12:14 PM »

Its differs a lot of things between the 1Ds3 and 5Dmk2 MK3. The color filters are tad sharper in 1dsmk3, and the red channel is more like  the old 5Dmk1
The biggest difference you see in the yellow-green color, with tons resolution takes on a whole different character. Then WB is because of the filters  balance is  a little differently, R + B is a little weaker in the 5dmk3  - probably planned so that it will "tolerate" more  weirder WB temperatures (as 2800K) and do the camera more sensitive to higher iso.

Parempi näppylä on nenä kuin yksi perse

9

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 07:00:14 PM »

I get usable 12,800 Color and 25,600 B&W's out of my MK3. How much more ISO performance could one really need?!

I'd like to be able to bump exposure of an ISO 100 image just a little bit during RAW conversion without all the shadows taking on lots of fixed pattern noise.

pattern noise and banding, you must cope with that as long Canon are not dealing with theirs read out problems.
Nikon D4, D3s etc can handle it and it with out any banding ,and  it  is a Nikon / Renesas solution and  close to 1dx.5dmk3 etc  with the read out structure and not a Sony solution as in D800, d7000  1dx  d600 with column wise  ADC at the sensor edge
We are some people who think Canon is sloppy regarding  the read out signal  and they can introduce a better solution to even out banding.

10

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 01:45:58 PM »

I get usable 12,800 Color and 25,600 B&W's out of my MK3. How much more ISO performance could one really need?!

That kind of performance in a APS-C sensor would be groundbreaking.

Because every new month/year, is a month/year closer to new Canon sensor technology. And they have been lagging behind Sony sensors for quite some years now. So maybe they are almost ready to strike back...

no sign of new sensor line, and it is impossible to make  a APS area  who are 2,3-2,5 times better than a 24x36mm sensor area  with todays  silicon solution, back light solution has not the same inpact as it have on a small 1,4 micron cell

11

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 01:32:33 PM »

I get usable 12,800 Color and 25,600 B&W's out of my MK3. How much more ISO performance could one really need?!

That kind of performance in a APS-C sensor would be groundbreaking.

Yep, 2,3 times better, not possible with todays Canons or others   tech

12

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 01:25:25 PM »

I'm also looking forward to the 6D (and will probably buy it). I'm just scared that the next APS-C sensors from Canon will be so good that they are better than the 6D sensor when it comes down to DR and low ISO noise.

Why, in 8 years canon has stick to the same sensor solution in APS and 24x36mm and refined it  , why do you think Canon has a new APS tech going on?
IF they have, why not already in the 1DX? Canon's most expensive camera? Canon's flagship.

13

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 11:27:38 AM »

1. Canon needs to invest 1 billion to get a sensor line similar to Sony, this investment would be seen in Canon's corporate report and as an investment, public paper
2. Canon need to invest in Nikons steppers
3. Canon need to invest in a new lens from Carl Zeiss in order to expose a larger surface and with higher accuracy then they can now.

Need to?  Why?  Are they behind in market share?  Failing to make a profit?  What's the corporate incentive that drives this 'need'?

the question was:
Speculation: That's because they'll introduce Canon's new sensor technology. Probably 180nm instead of 500nm (on a side note, I'd love to know more specifics about what that means).



the answers was : Canon can not with their current technology.  make  small circuit solutions that other manufacturers can do  for larger sensors. Canon  can do it for compact cameras small sensor but to make a 24x36 solutions  it will  costs a huge investment , and  if  it should be cost efficient ,ie without a stitch up or scanning solutions

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF

« on: November 23, 2012, 10:09:20 AM »

1. Canon needs to invest 1 billion to get a sensor line similar to Sony, this investment would be seen in Canon's corporate report and as an investment, public paper
2. Canon need to invest in Nikons steppers
3. Canon need to invest in a new lens from Carl Zeiss in order to expose a larger surface and with higher accuracy then they can now.

4. Scan or stitch smaller sensors together is not profitable=expensive
5.The only ones who use Canon sensors is Canon, and Canon sensor department internal debits 24x36 sensors at a high price/cost .
5. If you have read the other tread, you have already got the answers.

15

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Too much dynamic range?

« on: November 22, 2012, 07:04:00 AM »

True, but the geek inside me still enjoys these theoretical discussions.

From my point of view, as long as your ADC has significantly more gradations than the DR of the camera (e.g. "16 bits" for "13 stops at pixel level"), this is a non-issue: you have an ADC that has enough gradations to actually capture the read-out noise of your image, so that is your limiting factor.

Say you have a sensor with full well capacity of 20.000e-, and read-out noise of 2e-. Your DR is 20*log10(10000)=80dB, or 13.33 stops. I guess the D800 sensor is pretty similar to that.
Tie that up with 16-bit ADC, and you have absolutely no "lack of gradation" issues whatsoever: you have to count electrons, the most you'll find are 20K, and you have 65K gradations at your disposal. Even with a 14-bit ADC, you wouldn't have terrible issues: 20Ke- to count (max), 16K gradations to use; the 2e- read-out noise is still your bigger problem.

   D800   2.7e read noise      FWC   44972   = 14.0 stop