February 28, 2015, 12:57:07 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.

Topics - bigblue1ca

Pages: [1]
EOS Bodies / Canon: 22 megapixels is enough for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: March 06, 2012, 05:00:01 AM »

jmeyer | News | 05/03/2012 09:30am

Twenty two million pixels is the ideal number for theCanon EOS 5D Mark III, Canon has said in response to questions why it doesn’t closer match the 36-million-pixel sensor of the Nikon D800.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark III has only one megapixel more than its predecessor, the 5D Mark II, which has led some to question whether the new Canon camera is enough of an upgrade.

Speaking to our sister website TechRadar, Canon UK’s David Parry said he believes that 22 megapixels is enough, adding education needs to be done to convince consumers of that.

“I think there’s difficulty with having higher megapixel counts. What we tried to do is create a camera that’s good for all types of photography,” he told TechRadar.

“We feel that this is an ideal number for this type of camera, if you’re a journalist or sports photographer, you need to get the images off the camera quickly, and they need to be as sharp as they can be.

“It’s OK [higher megapixel counts] for studio photographers, but that’s not who we envisage using this camera,” he added.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark III is currently the highest resolution DSLR available in the EOS range, which is outgunned by the Nikon D800, which is the world’s highest resolution full-frame DSLR.

To see more of Parry’s comments, read the full interview on TechRadar.

Posted on Monday, March 5th, 2012 at 9:30 am

Site Information / Record number of members online
« on: February 22, 2012, 07:10:10 PM »
1021 - Today (Feb 22, 2012) at 16:20:23

Not surprising given the popularity of the 5DIII and today's CR3 status for it.

Software & Accessories / LR RAW WB TEMP EQUIVALENT FOR JPG
« on: February 06, 2012, 08:16:48 PM »
I've googled around with no luck, so I thought I'd throw this out to the forum.

In LR when processing the WB of Raw files, the WB Temp is displayed in degrees Kelvin.  If you are adjusting the WB of JPEG files the WB Temp is displayed as a numerical value -100/+100. 

Does anyone know if there is a way, either in the form of a chart, a calculation, or otherwise to take a degrees Kelvin temp value from a raw image and convert it to a numerical temp value for jpeg images. 

I have two series of pictures, one in raw and the other in jpg (long story), that were shot under the exact same indoor arena lighting.  I have a WB temp from the RAW image I would like to apply to my jpgs, to adjust them just a little to match. 

Obviously, the other option is just to compare them side by side until they match and take that value.  But not being one to try the easy way first  ::), is there a way to convert 3900 K, +6 Tint from a Raw image and find out what the jpg WB temp equivalent is?

Pages: [1]