February 01, 2015, 04:29:21 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 - torger

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Colou
« on: January 30, 2015, 09:31:26 AM »
Can't wait to see sample images and sensitivity comparisons...

Actually NO! The trend with MF is to optimize the ISO availability ;-)

A plea to the more knowledgeable people here:
Could you please enlighten me why Canon is going for colour that actually eye perception is UNABLE to differentiate? Or I misunderstood it?

You can read this about the Phase One IQ250

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/the_phase_one_iq250_cmos_fully_realized.shtml

quoting the section on the CFA:

"As one example, the selection of a CFA, the color pattern put in front of the sensor, is a choice between quality of color, and ISO performance. If the CFA allows each pixel to see a broader spectrum of color (e.g. for the green pixels to see a bit further into yellow) a camera’s ISO range can be modestly increased. The resulting loss in color quality is subtle – subtle variations in color are missed and a handful of specific colors become difficult to photograph. In a market where a ISO 25,600 camera has a leg up on a ISO12,800 camera, the engineers are under enormous pressure to pick the modestly increased ISO over subtle color quality."

The trend of going to more ISO in MF is because CMOS has become available just recently. The olde CCD tech was just not capable. Still The IQ250 is capped at ISO6400.

Stay at MF-oriented forums for a while. Color is a big thing there. What's real and what's imagined differences is harder to understand, but even microscopic differences are important to that kind of users. So if you want to get good credibility in those circles this kind of optimization, regardless of how subtle it is, is valuable.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: More About the EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R
« on: January 30, 2015, 09:18:49 AM »
Not once have I read someone complain about colour accuracy when shooting birds or sport.

No, it's a medium format thing, on medium format forums these kind of very subtle and subjective color issues are discussed at length.

I can guarantee that it's a very small difference in the CFA, and it does not limit high ISO that much. Capping it at ISO6400 is probably more about differntiating their own products than that the sensor is really limited. It could be that the real fact is that they aim this camera to be a studio/landscape/architecture camera and people that care about utmost image quality and color and then you don't use high ISO much, and that fact has been transformed to this type of rumor.

Pentax 645z is a MF camera that is said to have CFA optimised for color accuracy and it also happens to have ISO 204800

3
EOS Bodies / Re: More About the EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R
« on: January 30, 2015, 09:00:46 AM »
That's really interesting. A claimed advantage of medium format digital cameras have been that they have color-optimized CFAs rather than high ISO, it would be awesome if this sensor has taken the same type of optimization.

I think a 50 megapixel camera for sure should be optimized at high resolution use cases, rather than trying to be a hand-held low light action camera.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: January 30, 2015, 08:54:17 AM »
On the topic "which version to get" that is with or without AA filter, it will depend if you care about pixel peep crispness or real image quality. AA filter is a good idea, sure it will reduce crispness but also take away most false colors and aliasing, and moire. Diffraction won't kill aliasing fully until you're up at f/16, so yes AA filter is the way to go.

But what will happen of course is that people will prefer pixel peep crispness over aliasing, jaggies, moire (because most don't really know about these issues or choose to ignore them) and buy the 5DsR and the next high res camera will only exist without AA filter, that was the case with the D800 and I think the same will happen here.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 30, 2015, 06:09:28 AM »
It's supposed to be a medium format killer, don't you think? In that case ISO6400 is plenty. Still seems as an unlikely upper limit coming from Canon, but maybe they want to sell the lower megapixel cameras for high ISO work.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 29, 2015, 09:37:04 AM »
One thing is sure, a high megapixel Canon body with the same DR as previous Canon models would be a massive disappointment. To make the consumers happy it must be competitive with Sony in this regard.

If the only way they can achieve this is to use a Sony sensor, then it's the right way to go.

If it falls a little short on high ISO performance compared to their other models it's just a plus, it differentiates the products, it's not good to have one that is best at all aspects. Today a high resolution camera must perform excellently at base ISO with huge DR, that's what people expect.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?
« on: September 26, 2014, 07:53:45 AM »
I'm interested in a high MP Canon, but I would be disappointed if they are not competitive with the Sony sensors concerning base ISO dynamic range. I'm less interested in high ISO performance as I would not intend to use a high MP camera as an all-around camera, but rather use it as I use my medium format camera today, ie carefully set up shots from a tripod shot with base ISO.

As I shoot landscape, and I expect many will with a high MP Canon as landscape photography is huge among amateurs, base ISO dynamic range is of interest.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: A New EOS Pro Body With 46mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 18, 2014, 09:50:54 AM »
D800, D810 and A7r have been proven popular. Crossover into medium format space. $9k is still cheap compared to medium format. A high MP body is a good idea, but if Canon cannot compete in dynamic range at base ISO I think it's better to wait until they can.

Canon has so far prioritized video and other advanced sensor features ahead of absolute image quality at base ISO. It's probably the right thing to do for the bulk of photography, but to succeed with a high MP body I think they need to rethink and really do everything they can do get the best possible image quality out of the sensor at base ISO, possibly sacrificing some other features.

9
(don't get a mirrorless, you'll regret it (even if it's from Canon, should they ever decide to produce such ****, which I hope they never do)

Unfortunately(?) the DSLR concept is as dead as CRTs (you know those big fat TVs and computer screens) was in the early 2000s, but they don't know it yet. DSLRs will hang on for as long EVFs and on-sensor focusing is not as good for the photojournalists and action photographers, but then they will disappear in favor of mirrorless.

It will be interesting to see who will be leading this unavoidable shift in technology. Currently it seems like Sony has the lead.

10
I think this is the adapter: http://www.metabones.com/sony/buy-eos-nex-adapter

Focusing performance etc won't be great of course, but I would be using this camera for landscape and still life (for hand-held action and high ISO Canon is very competitive indeed already), ie manual focus via live-view off a tripod.

Say if it's 1 year until Canon releases it's first big megapixel, and it still lacks in DR (I think it will), and then 2 more years before they become competitive at that point. Having an A7R meanwhile at the same time as say a 5D mark III and use Canon glass via adapter seems like a quite good idea. Sure an extra body on the side only for landscape/still life is an expensive solution, but looking the pile of L glass the main cost is there, not in the bodies, and you would get some residual value off the Sony when selling it second hand when you can get a Canon of corresponding functionality.

Saying that this camera is slow and and focusing performance sucks is missing the point. What we should be excited about is that high resolution high DR sensor and the ability to use our excellent Canon glass with it. If you don't desire this resolution or DR then you don't need to look at it.

11
1DX a Mazda chassis ... I'm glad if it works for you!

 :)

It depends on genre. Canon has always been great for journalism, action, wildlife, ie the high ISO lower res department. This new A7R is not at all that competitive in these genres by the way, too slow.

For still life and landscape you can sure call the 1DX a mazda chassis when you compare with the current competition. Today I shoot most of my landscape with a digital medium format system, but is also interested in a smaller lighter system in some conditions. I don't like to drop down to 18 megapixel and a base ISO dynamic range worse than a medium format digital back from 2004 when doing so though.

12
I could potentially buy it with a metabones adapter just to use it with my Canon lenses for landscape photography, and then sell the body when/if Canon comes up with something at the same level of performance. The big investment is in lenses.

I think Canon big megapixel is still quite far away, and I doubt that the first camera will be as good in the dynamic range department as Sony.

Canon have some really great lenses though just waiting to be used with a great sensor. With Canon's own bodies it's like using a Ferrari engine (lens) on a Mazda chassis (camera)...

13
For us landscape photographers the wait for a high megapixel body with state-of-the-art dynamic range to be used with lenses like the TS-E 24 II has been tough. But now it's possible at last, with a Sony!

14
Lenses / Re: Should I get a clear filter for my lens?
« on: August 16, 2013, 04:37:35 AM »
...polarizers for each of your lenses.

Coupled to a 5dIII or the like, you won´t even need to remove them in low light situations if you do not want to.

Sure...because who needs that extra ~1.75 stops of light when there's not enough to begin with...   ::)

Those with very good low light capability cameras, >1.75 stops better than the previous generation  ;=)

You could use Kenko Zeto Ex polarizer wihch loses a bit less light than the typical polarizer. But is easier to break too. I would not recommend to use polarizers. I have a clear filter on my 70-200, but all other lenses are naked. On my medium format system I go bare. The reason I have it on my 70-200 is that I tend to use that in "rough" conditions, rainy, splashing etc and I rather frequently wipe the clear filter than the front element. I prefer clear filter rather than UV as I don't want any change to the image whatsoever, it's only there as a splash-cover for the front element. I don't have it for general impact protection, my impact protection is called insurance :-).

I once used polarizers quite often for my landscape photography, but nowadays I use them very rarely. My photographic style generally don't gain from them.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: A Big Megapixel Discussion
« on: June 13, 2013, 10:24:56 AM »
Big megapixel is a "medium format killer", just as D800 currently is. It's targeting a specific genre, high resolution photography.  It's not a journalist camera like the flagships. Sure, for typical 35mm photography high resolution is just a waste of disk space. But a high resolution 35mm is there to stretch into medium format territory, just as medium format digital stretched into large format film (think 4x5 and 8x10 view camera) territory. In other words expand what you can do with a 35mm system. A pro Canon shooter could have a 1DX for fast handheld action work, and a big megapixel camera for studio/still life/architecture/landscape.

Probably the high resolution genre is smaller, but every landscape hobbyist will want it (those are many!), and some of the pro shooters that use medium format today will drop the costly MF system and use only 35mm for convenience. I think Canon need this type of camera in their lineup in the long-term to provide a cameras for all genres users nowadays expect 35mm to be good at.

In the medium format forums the only camera that is considered as real competition with MF is the D800, and indeed several has ditched MF in favour of the more user-friendly, all-around and cheaper D800. In the same forums Canon is still used as an example to show off how "bad" 35mm is compared to MF, as it still has poor dynamic range and color rendition at base ISO compared to MF, while the D800 actually is competitive and even better in some aspects.

Not a single recent sensor out from Canon is even remotely close Sony Exmor sensors in terms of base ISO performance. I'm still waiting to see that Canon actually can produce a sensor which has the properties high resolution photographers desire - ie great dynamic range and great color fidelity at base ISO. High ISO performance (which Canon indeed is good at!) is not irrelevant, but much less important than in traditional 35mm photography.

I shoot medium format digital myself for my landscape photography hobby, and use my Canon system for everything hand-held. I follow the developments closely, a good high resolution camera could be a game changer for users like me. But it must deliver competitive image quality per pixel, not just resolution.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16