March 05, 2015, 07:29:44 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 - Marsu42

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 396
I just searched the website for Lightroom 6 and came across the quote above.  Unfortunately the link takes you to LR5.

Of course, there is no "Lightroom 6" so it'll simply show the result for "Lightroom" rather than an ugly 404 not found page.

Plus Adobe *might* have it already in some meta-tags to prevent 3rd party sites grabbing the keyword for commercial purposes. That's why I grace CR with a lot of search hits by writing:

Lightroom 7


Lenses / Re: Tilt Shift 90mm Sharpness
« on: Today at 11:42:01 AM »
Is the issue still decentering, or is it the position of the camera?

Sorry if I've mis-understood you, decentering is really when one edge/side is different than the other(s). If you want to really test your lens, there's no way 'round printing and shooting a test chart.

At f16 should the whole image be in focus from front to back?

Hahaaha, no way, calculate to see the average depth of field (for a standard print/view size):

Forgive my inexperience, but when I say that the edges are soft I wonder if this is simply a Depth of Field issue, because the top portion of the image is out of focus?

Sure, that's why you do focus stacking, you cannot get infinite dof es. at close distance no matter how small the aperture. Or try f222 instead of just f22 :->

Lenses / Re: Tilt Shift 90mm Sharpness
« on: Today at 07:32:01 AM »
If I fill the frame with the shot and focus a third of the way up (perhaps focussing on a specific Jewel), without tilting or shifting I am noticing that the top edges of the image, are a little soft, at f16.

This lens should be as sharp as they come, and if one side of the lens differs from the other side (try shooting a test chart) this points to decentering.

Am I focussing on the right point?

Do yourself a favor and use Magic Lantern - with focus peaking, you see exactly what is in focus and what isn't. And use focus stacking instead of diffraction at f22, will ya :-) ?

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos 6d metering timer
« on: Today at 06:48:24 AM »
I just assumed (never smart, I know  :-[ ) that my 6d would do what my 1d m3 would....

In that case, it is indeed smart to cut back on assumptions 1d->6d or you might be in for a few other disappointments :-p

EOS Bodies / Re: 6D MKII
« on: Today at 02:14:30 AM »
But the fact that Canon are not being forced as you put it earlier suggests that the difference in feature sets when everything is taken into account is not that great.

Personally, I find that the main reason that *any* recent dslr is an incredible tool and sufficient for most things you can come up with - alas, except tracking. But one or more features don't matter that much except on paper.

I do think Canon is more conservative because they want to remain a choice for as many professionals / prosumers as possible.

Agreed - which in turn can make it a bit awkward for anyone below that level. It's not I wouldn't recommend Canon to entry-level shooters, esp. because of Magic Lantern, but purchasing at 6d price and below imho warrants a good comparison with Nikon/Sony.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Poor video quality or normal?
« on: March 03, 2015, 04:33:57 PM »
Marsu, you are the expert on this. Does the M use full sensor readout?  I know the 5D MK III does.  I thought the "M" used line skipping.

No, actually I have very little idea about video - the question mark above about where the downscaling occurs was for real. When in doubt the actual video wizards are to be found over in the ML forum.

I just follow the video thing simply Magic Lantern does it and *if* I'd go into video it'd certainly not be 8bit on a camera that doesn't even do proper downsampling (i.e. everything except 5d3 or 7d2, the latter doesn't run ML).

Of course ML's raw video doesn't do any downsampling at all but simply crops a part of the 1:1 sensor res - that's the big usability hassle apart from a lot of time-consuming postprocessing with the mlv stream.

Damn, all I'm getting is birds on horses, not the other way 'round :->

To be honest, digital photography market is flooded with work on same or much better level than that of the Lik, not to mention his lies and pretty cheap cheesy stories behind every capture, that further cheapens real value of his work. Are marketing skills and trickery worth the premium? Well at the moment in Las Vegas and other high excitements producing places apparently it is!

Without commenting on this particular photog, shouldn't we be happy that it's possible *_at_all_* to be successful in the age of digital photography? And at least he seems to have retained a sense of humor about it ...

While he can't deny artnet's figures and his non-existent resale market, Lik does have an excuse. "It's like a Mercedes-Benz," he said. "You drive it off the lot, it loses half its value.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Poor video quality or normal?
« on: March 03, 2015, 03:14:24 PM »
I have an EOS M and I like it very much for photos but as I tried the video mode I was a bit disappointed.

If you want better iq and like experimenting a bit, use Magic Lantern and raw video which grabs the full sensor quality (14bit, full dynamic range) unlike Canon's 8bit legacy video codec.

About 1/9 of the photosites are used to capture the image, so you get a much poorer quality when you look at one frame.

Afaik all photosites are used for image capture, but then the resolution is immediately reduced in the image pipeline? This would be the reason why a camera that uses "pixel binning" like the 5d3 has much better video quality than for example the 6d that has to apply an awkward downscaling algorithm.

As we move to 4K videos, the individual frames will be about 8mb and a single frame will look much better.

Amen to that!

EOS Bodies / Re: 6D MKII
« on: March 03, 2015, 02:06:50 PM »
What you are describing is sensible business practice.  This will exist in Nikon too.  The fact that Canon has not been "forced by Sonikon" demonstrates that similar processes are in operation in all three companies.  This should not be any kind of surprise to anyone.

Still, there might be different business practices in the respective companies. Sony is know to stuff every gadget they can come up with into their products ignoring compatibility (external or internal), while Nikon seems to be out to have the best "on paper" specs and value. This might be simply due to market share and Canon being the dominant force, but maybe there are different enterprise cultures that result in Canon being rather conservative.

EOS Bodies / Re: 6D MKII
« on: March 03, 2015, 02:32:59 AM »
If Canon was smart and wanted to sell a ton of cameras, they would just have to sell a full frame Rebel 6ts for $1500.

Sure Canon is interested in having a good part of the market, but what they're more interested in is profit. And rumor is that a ff sensor is rather expensive to produce, and even if you cut everything else - basically like on the 6d - you're still well above crop territory.

That and internal cannibalization will occupy their marketing minds, i.e. better sell a $1000 70d with $500 profit than a €1500 6ts for €300 profit and omit the danger of people "downgrading" from a real ff camera like the 5d. I'm sure there are other arguments in disfavor of a "ff Rebel" and Canon will only do so if they're forced by Sonikon.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5Ds or possible alternatives?
« on: March 02, 2015, 03:17:09 PM »
Alternatives: Canon 5Ds (5DsR), Sony A7R (or mark II if it comes out), and Nikon 810.

Well, I can say that a friend of mine who broke his 5d2 due to the non-existent weather sealing just purchased a used d800 on my advice. I begin to regret this because....

... now I'm getting daily enthusiastic mails from him, wishing his Canon would have been broken earlier to force him to switch. Admittedly he's a landscape and high-dynamic range guy, but for that application the 36mp 14+ ev Nikon sensor blows Canon out of the water. I don't think the studio "crop upscaled" 5ds is a competition here.

DR: Expose correctly, capture in RAW/CR2. It is extremely rare that this does not do the job. If not, it's HDR time

*Snigger* oh my it's Canon enthusiast time, but really, try that on moving cloud with light beams shining through them and people walking about the scenery. Or anything that moves in high contrast like leaves or grass, actually.

Don't misunderstand me please, I'm happy you're happy with Canon and totally love my Canon gear, but as far as landscape as dr is concerned you cannot just compensate with bracketing even if you accept the usability hassle.

How do you know? Got any solid evidence the cross types of the 7D II is better than nikon non cross types when shooting anything other than bar codes?

Take it from me, after shooting with a non-cross single af point film camera for a decade and now being burdened with the 6d's af system I feel safe to say that the difference is *huge* unless you have the time and patience to select a pattern that happens to match the non-cross point you have selected :-\

But what would you be shooting when the light levels are at -3EV?

This isn't that dark if you use a slow lens or a tc and end up at f8 (if the d7200 can do af at f8, I didn't check). With the latest IS systems, you can still handhold these indoor shots.

Very Meh compared to the 7D2 but a relative competition to the 70D.

Sure, but I don't think it's meant to be a 7d2 killer. Nikon is probably quite content to leave the premium and niche market to Canon while grabbing the mass market with better value, i.e. more features for the same price or the same performance for less €€€.

I'm sure there'll be pages over pages on Nikon service, oil leaks and whatnot - but imho even Canon fanbois might have to ack that Nikon is damn competitive with these crop cameras ... esp. as the 70d doesn't even run Magic Lantern too extend features and boost dynamic range.

After all, we Canon shooters should be happy for a strong competition, or the 70d would still have 9 af points and the 7d2 would have a €3000 price tag :-)

Lenses / Re: APS-C 60mm or 100mm macro lens?
« on: March 02, 2015, 02:00:20 PM »
by hooking your little finger onto the stick.

I'd love to the a picture of *that* :->

I may try the string technique too - string attaches to the 1/4" tripod hole in the bottom of the camera, stand on string, pull upward.

This one is rather ingenious as the equipment needs zero packing space. I wonder how many stops this axes off the shutter on average vs controlled breathing alone?

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming March 9
« on: March 01, 2015, 08:08:59 AM »
In theory, it's quite possible to merge several raw files into another raw file, Magic Lantern does it for their dual_iso feature.
That's not how dual-iso works. Dual iso changes the iso line-by-line when reading out the sensor so it's a single exposure. You do need a post processing tool (cr2hdr) to extrapolate the values to smooth the transitions. Otherwise you end up with a picture that looks interlaced due to difference in exposure between the lines. People are using dual-iso because it's a single exposure and not a post bracketing merge or several photos. I use it for handheld 1:1 macro pictures to avoid blown highlights when using a flash and 1/400s shutter speed.

Right, I faintly remember someone else mentioning ML and dual_iso on CR before now and again :-)

My point is that dual_iso outputs a raw file, and not a demosaiced jpeg or whatever. It's true that dual_iso is based on interlacing rather than stacking exposures, but I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be possible to hdr-merge several raw files into another raw. It's not like the raw data is a black box as oss software raw converters exist. My guess it's that simply no one has found it worth the hassle - or there are problems I cannot think of right now.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 396