February 28, 2015, 12:54:56 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 - marcel

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Canon Pro-1 Question
« on: February 26, 2015, 01:01:43 PM »
I have a pixma pro 9500 mk l since 2007. Never worked well in Mac or Win until canon published a new version of the plugin in 2012. Now is fantastic! The printer must always be used with the Easy Photo Print Pro plugin in Phtoshop or Canon software: Printer Manages Colors in Photoshop. The problem is that if Photoshop Manages Color plugins are duplicated.This was my problem. Or i save a Tiff from Photoshop and when i open it in Digital Photo Professional i can select the paper profile in the plugin. With new cartridges can print 250 sheets of fine art A3 + . Now i have also an HP Z3200 44".
I work for artists and art gallery in Milano, Italy.

2
Portrait / Re: We, The Photographers......Self Portaits..a Who's Who on CR
« on: February 16, 2015, 06:29:30 AM »
Self portrait in Milano.

3
Lenses / Re: Advice on Canon PRIMES
« on: February 10, 2015, 02:11:28 PM »
If spending little money is not a problem for you, the ef 50 1.8 is a fantastic lens. I have the mk l first version. With ef 35 f 2.0, are my favorites.
Nor should we forget the ef 28 1.8!

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: February 01, 2015, 03:01:02 PM »
For me personally, the question is:

Will the rumored (http://www.techtoyreviews.com/canon-5ds-image-leaked-price-tag-3800/) 3800$ (5DS) or the 4300$ (5DsR) be worth the price, Canon will want to have for it?

Or wait for an 5DIV, an goldenegglayingwoolmilksaw??? But how much will this be????

Those prices are way too high. If true, Canon killed the success of this camera right out the door. It can't be more than the D810. If anything it needs to be less, as most people looking for higher MP and higher DR have already moved to Nikon. I doubt many people are going to pay more for something with just more MP. 36MP is already taxing out many lenses and is a huge amount of detail!

I can't even think of a single professional landscape photographer who hasn't moved on to an A7R or D800/810 by now, who shoots with 35mm format gear.

Why then does the 5D3 continue to sell so well and be used by WAY more professional photographers than any Sony? Canon will sell a boatload of these AND the 5D4 will sell even more. Sony has not the same level of AF capability, the ergonomics, or especially the competitive and unique glass Canon has. Nor does it have so nearly a loyal following. One of the biggest reasons for this is three simple letters. CPS. Canon Professional Services.  Sony can barely spell customer service. Neither can most other companies. Even Nikon's pales in comparison to Canon.  This is a critical measure for real pros who demand high levels of and super fast service.  Try getting a major repair done on a $2500 lens with Sony with a door to door turnaround time of 3 days. Canon does it.


To be precise they will have to repair within 48 hours and give you a replacement.

5
Lenses / Re: The Canon EF 50mm f/1.0L
« on: January 20, 2015, 02:44:54 PM »
I tried it in a photography fair in Milan in 2005 for the second time.
Then had a eos 300d.
I did some tests at maximum aperture. See by yourself!
Amazing !!!!
The first time was in a meeting in 1989 with the CPS in Barcelona, an engineer told me that he had been designed especially thinking at basketball games. Thus the photographer could use the ambient light without the flash, and the angle of the lens capture all the action of a player making a basket.
Then I decided it was more versatile the 28 80 EF  EF 2.8-4L and the 80 200 2.8L zooms. Almost at the same price ...

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The structure of a CR2 file
« on: November 17, 2014, 09:34:01 AM »
I disagree. I have never seen that much difference between two files without substantial differences in the various settings, sure you can make anything look as bad as that (in any program), but not without trying unless you have an issue.



There is always a first time.

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The structure of a CR2 file
« on: November 17, 2014, 05:05:59 AM »
Since I have a large format printer I've realized that raw processed with ACR are very noisy while the same raw processed with DPP can be enlarged without  problem.
I use DPP to make a TIFF, and then i open it in Ps.
The attached example is  from a test from a 90 x 135 cm print size left ACR right DPP.
The printer is an HP Z3200 camera EOS 5D
I decided to buy the printer when the lab said "12 mpx is not enough, you have to buy another camera".

I print big all the time, you are doing something wrong for there to be that kind of difference between the two.

In my experience DPP can be very slightly better than ACR on some files, but the difference is so small I practically never bother using it. For there to be such a noticeable difference, not just in the noise but in the contrast and detail as well, means there is something wrong.

I think the problem is that certain things happen to certain parameters of certain cameras. The criterion can not be applied to everything in ACR. It is logical because Canon do not want to release the official specification of the format, must be understood until about Adobe and others have gotten interpret or guess what is a CR2 without the collaboration of Canon.
The contrast and detail feeling in the tests is given by the grain noise generated by ACR.
I also have Raw Photo Processor 64 and Raw Therapee ( more complete than ACR ), but DPP is always better!

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The structure of a CR2 file
« on: November 16, 2014, 07:34:01 PM »
This is what I thought before having the printer in my house.

Indeed, I don't doubt you've spend some though on this - but the apparent immense difference from your screenshots is worthy of a troll posting :-p. I hope we'll get more input into this, I never used dpp and can only tell about the acr side. It's not like Canon has some secret anti-noise weapon hidden in their cameras or post software.

Edit: Imho you should open a new thread in the postprocessing section about it, few people will this off-topic issue in a "cr2 structure" thread.

if I were a troll would write in the Adobe forum. :)

I think  is not off-topic.  From the page linked in the first post:
"Why writing a document to explain the CR2 format and why not just asking to Canon ? Canon do not want to release the official specification of the format for "Intellectual Property" reasons."

People think adobe can not go wrong, it is taken for granted. It is much easier to accuse me to be a troll.


9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The structure of a CR2 file
« on: November 16, 2014, 03:34:47 PM »
Since I have a large format printer I've realized that raw processed with ACR are very noisy while the same raw processed with DPP can be enlarged without  problem.

You're definitely doing something wrong there. ACR has very good denoising, as far as I remember it has even improved in the latest version(s). Denoising and sharpening parameters cant take some trial&error tweaking, and you might to have the denoise brush for some areas. And DxO's PRIME might be better for high iso. But having said that, I'm sure dpp cannot be that superior.

I decided to buy the printer when the lab said "12 mpx is not enough, you have to buy another camera".

As far as large print go - yes, I guess for 90x135cm (~a1+) 12mp is bordering on too low resolution, but it really depends on how much detail your scene has and from how far away you view it. Lucky me I never go beyond a3, so my 18mp is enough even after some amount of cropping.

This is what I thought before having the printer in my house.


10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The structure of a CR2 file
« on: November 16, 2014, 03:13:05 PM »
Since I have a large format printer I've realized that raw processed with ACR are very noisy while the same raw processed with DPP can be enlarged without  problem.
I use DPP to make a TIFF, and then i open it in Ps.
The attached example is  from a test from a 90 x 135 cm print size left ACR right DPP.
The printer is an HP Z3200 camera EOS 5D
I decided to buy the printer when the lab said "12 mpx is not enough, you have to buy another camera".


11
He use the cameras in APS-C. If he use the A7S in crop mode for stills the result is a 8 mpx camera. Like a Canon Eos 350.

12
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 06, 2014, 02:30:42 PM »
With google translate:

"At 80 years after the birth of the brand, Canon raises and introduces a new payoff to accompany their market challenges, "come and see." The principle is very clear: the world of smartphones has created a huge user base, with a few taps on a touchscreen, snap and share photos trillion every year; hesitate to consider a risk this dynamic would be counterproductive, so Canon has embraced the opportunity and want to aim precisely this type of users to convert them into customers than one type of photography more advanced and qualitative".

I do not understand. If you do not understand the translation, I do not understand the original text in italian, what they want to do?
reminds me  Nikon with its "true photography"......

13
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 06, 2014, 02:10:42 PM »
is a new ad campaign, as is explained in this article in italian:

http://www.webnews.it/2014/09/18/canon-come-and-see/


14
The best solution is a Sony A7.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Ye Olde Film Photography
« on: June 17, 2014, 02:46:02 PM »
"The one I'm aware of is that as film was an expensive medium, that offered limited shots, the photographers took their time composing a shot, thinking through all aspects before pulling the trigger."

For the limited shots you can always use only a 256 MB cf card on a Eos 1 DX, with the possibility to shoot only 4 frames you need to think and rethink before pulling the trigger! I have a 4 MB cf card, only one photo! This must be the top of the thinking think. I think.....






Pages: [1] 2 3