September 19, 2014, 12:16:21 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 950
1
Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: Today at 08:28:11 AM »
I did see a lot of pictures, taken on the same moment from the same scene, but if we mix them, we can't tell from who the picture was (5d3, D800, D810), unless.... we dive into the pixels, and then I agree, but that's not the way we look at a photo?

Some people can't see the forest for the trees.  A few people can't even see the trees because they prefer to look at pixels instead of pictures. 

2
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D and 7D II Combo or 5D III?
« on: Today at 06:41:53 AM »
Neuro, did you see Tony Northrup's video on the 7Dii?

He had some "math" up about the 5Diii vs 7Dii for wild life use. Says that cropping the 5Diii down to match the framing of the 7Dii, will result in a 14MP image.

Now aside from getting into a discussion about whether resolution is important for final IQ, do you call bullshit on his "math" or do you see it as relevant?

Watching his D810 (vs. 5DIII) Nikon infomercial was enough Tony Northrup for me.

Cropping a 5DIII image to the Canon APS-C FoV yields an 8.6 MP image (22 / 1.62).  If the 5DIII had a 36 MP sensor, that crop would give ~14 MP (Nikon's 1.5x crop factor yields a 16 MP image).  Alternatively, he may have simply divided the FF MP by 1.6 to get ~14 MP, which is a level of technical competence I'd expect from a turnip.

3
To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates.  Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body. 


There was the 200/2 IS issue ith the 5d3, among other teles.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5044.0

Was the fix for that issue a lens firmware update?  The Canon service advisory mentions only 'repair'.

I'm not sure, since image quality was not an issues, I never sent mine in.

I had assumed not, since Canon has a page where they list firmware updates; the 300-600 MkII update is listed there, even though you need to send your lens in for that.

4
To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates.  Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body. 


There was the 200/2 IS issue ith the 5d3, among other teles.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5044.0

Was the fix for that issue a lens firmware update?  The Canon service advisory mentions only 'repair'. 

5
So here's a question, how can one determine if an affected model has already had the new firmware installed?  This would be more relevant for those that have picked up the MKII used.

Serial number, or mount the lens to a post-2012 camera and go the firmware menu, which will show versions for both the body and the attached lens.

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7Dii + 400 f/5.6 + Canon 1.4TC =?
« on: September 18, 2014, 09:07:50 PM »
I compared the 100-400 -/+ 1.4xII on my 7D, IQ wasn't significantly different from cropping.  But...the 400/5.6 takes a TC better, and the 7DII will AF.

As for what to expect, the AF with the TC will be 50% slower.  Also, I'd expect a some hunting with a busy background, e.g. bird in a thicket, based on my experience with the 1D X with the 2xIII behind the 600/4L IS II.

I'd encourage you to get it.  :)

7
Lighting / Re: Basic help: How does Flash exposure compensation works
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:53:21 PM »
The idea is that E-TTL flash metering tries to 'correctly' expose the subject (determined by the pre-flash), while your camera's meter (in evaluative metering) is trying to correctly expose for the ambient/background.   

8
Lenses / Re: What do you use your wide angle lens for?
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:48:33 PM »
I recently sold my 16-35/2.8L II, since for my general shooting 24mm is wide enough.  Where I need the UWA is mainly architecture, I considered the 16-35/4L IS for increased sharpness over the f/2.8, but decided on the TS-E 17mm (I already have the TS-E 24 II). 

If you need to use a UWA for groups of people, distortion can be a problem.  I'd recommend looking into DxO's software which corrects for volume anamorphosis.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D and 7D II Combo or 5D III?
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:50:25 PM »
I had the 7D and the 5DII, it was a great combo.  I replaced them both with the 1D X, and have no regrets.  If the 1D X had been out of my budget, I'm sure I'd have been happy with the 5DIII.   It's an excellent all-around camera. 

The combo of 7DII and 6D can work well, if you're either prepared to always carry both or accept compromise if you take only the body best suited to what you plan to shoot, and a different opportunity arises. 

10
Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:15:45 PM »
Double your resolution from 20mp to 40mp, you could downsample the 40mp image to the 20mp sizes, and have considerably better data that looks sharper, crisper, clearer without any additional sharpening.

What happens when you downsample both to 2 MP for web display, or make an 8x10" print?  Do you stand by your earlier claim that a 36 MP image would yield a "naturally crisper, sharper" result than an 18-24 MP image? 


At some point in the future, you guys are going to be the new generation of "film forever" guys.

No, we're just honest about the relevance and impact of the comparatively minor technological differences of which you're apparently so enamored.

11
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: It's all gone a bit dry...
« on: September 18, 2014, 04:58:05 PM »
And in certain parts of the world, practices like this is illegal. For instance, in Norway you must be able to document that the "before price" was an actual going price prior to the campaign.

Interesting.  The 'going price' on Canon lenses is lower than MSRP, but during Canon rebates they enforce MAP, meaning the price goes up then is rebated (and sometimes the price after rebate is higher than the going rate before the rebate!).

12
Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:33:27 PM »
"Large difference in detail" #1

http://s11.postimg.org/kyh7iwp8j/5d3_d810_1.jpg

"Large difference in detail" #2

http://s16.postimg.org/i7ha1whwl/5d3_d810_2.jpg

"Large difference in detail" #2

http://s24.postimg.org/swj8ybket/5d3_d810_3.jpg

All images: left 5D mark III, right Nikon D810, DPReview studio scene RAW files at ISO 100 / NR0 converted using ACR standard settings. 5D3 file was resized to match (Bicubic Sharper) and then had light sharpening applied. I encourage everyone to download test files such as these and try them for yourself.

I don't really see significant differences.  Since 36 MP >> 22 MP, I must conclude that your test is flawed. 

 :P :P  Phhhtththhhththththt   :P :P

</sardonic trolling>

14
Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 18, 2014, 01:05:03 PM »
The D800 resolves quite a lot more detail than the 5D III. That either translates into the ability to enlarge more with the same level of detail as smaller enlargements with the 5D III, or it translates into naturally crisper, sharper images when downsampling for smaller prints or online publication.

Are you saying that the 'naturally crisper, sharper images' from the 36 MP D8x0 can be readily and easily distinguished from images taken with a 24, 22, 20, or 18 MP FF sensor when downsampled for small prints or web-sized images? 

Northrup said the 5DIII was ok for Facebook, but you're saying the D810 would be better for Facebook?

15
It's not always best to argue on principles.  Sometimes you have to argue on reality.  Yes, you do have to pay for an accessory, however, that accessory is very cheap (no offense if you have a low paying job).  To many of us, especially those of us who are successful and run businesses, time is money.  I don't get to go shooting whenever I want.  I have opportunities, and they come and go.  I'd rather spend a bit of money, and keep the lens at home, than send it in to get an update and wait a week or several weeks.

Furthermore, each time you ship something, you take a risk of it being misplaced, stolen, lost, or damaged.  While you may get compensated for such an occurrence, it's just another added headache.  Another added reason why being able to plop your lens onto a dock and update the firmware in a couple of minutes, even if it does cost ~$50, is so convenient.

As one who runs a successful business, which MkII super telephoto lens(es) do you own?  (No offense if your business isn't successful enough for you to afford one.)  Were they affected, and if so what was the turnaround time for Canon to update the firmware? 

As I stated, my 600/4L IS II came with the updated firmware; I ordered the lens soon after its release, before the original advisory, but I received it after the advisory was issued.  Given the timing, I expect there weren't too many affected lenses, especially the 500/600 II since they lagged and initial availability was limited.

To date, Canon has issued only 5 lens firmware updates.  Four of them are covered by this advisory, the other I referred to above, which was available for download and application via camera body. 

Many people choose Sigma lenses as a more economical option, particularly since the supertele lenses and many other high-end OEM lenses are so expensive.  Since 3rd parties have to reverse engineer Canon's communication/AF/etc. protocols, changes implemented by Canon can (and have in the past on many occasions) affect compatibility with 3rd party lenses.  It's good that Sigma offers the dock, to allow users to correct those problems.  Of course, users with Sigma lenses that fail to maintain compatibility with a new Canon body or firmware update can look forward to weeks or possibly months for Sigma to release a fix that can be applied via that inexpensive dock, but I'm sure you've considered the effect that might have on productivity.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 950