September 02, 2014, 08:24:46 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 - 3kramd5

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: Today at 07:25:46 PM »
Getting really good landscapes is actually a lot of work. You have to nail the day and time...

Indeed. I suspect that if you do eventually pick up a D8xx or canon reduces shadow noise to roughly equivalent levels, you'll find it merely marginally better since you are an afternoon landscape guy. I know I did.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 01, 2014, 12:25:14 AM »
Being a guy with a pure Canon kit that probably tops $25,000 in total personal cost...that's very frustrating. Now, instead of just being able to pick up a new Canon body with ergonomics and functionality I already know how to use without even thinking about it, I have to expand my kit. That involves even more cost, a new set of lenses that largely duplicate what I have, learning a whole new camera system, etc. I like simplicity...one brand, one set of lenses, one type of button placement and menu system. It just sucks. :P

The alternative though is there being no difference between the brands, ergo no competition. If you could grab a Canon 5Dxyz that equals a Nikon Dzxy, why would there be a Canon and a Nikon?

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 31, 2014, 11:30:52 PM »
When the 70D came out the Canon world was shocked with DPAF. That was July 2013.... DSLR launches since then - zero.

Something is coming..... and not "more of the same"....

If all the 7D2 is, is a 70D with slightly better specs, the same sensor, and a better autofocus system, it would have been out by now. Something is coming that required changing the underlying technology....

I think DPAF was the tip of the iceberg and we are in for a surprise.

But didn't you hear? It's the year of the lens. Er... about that :P

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII dual cards
« on: August 31, 2014, 08:05:35 PM »
...
3) But the 1Dx has two slots, and that's a selling point, so I'll make one of the 5D slots slow
...
Actually this IS a viable reason.

I can accept it's a viable reason in itself if I also accept that Canon marketing is deluded enough to think that weighs into an otherwise 1Dx buyer's decision.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 31, 2014, 08:00:06 PM »
Would someone explain to me what is wrong with pointing out the weaknesses of your brand and hoping that future models improve on those weaknesses?

Not a damned thing.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 31, 2014, 12:16:31 AM »
Maybe someone with more technical knowledge can chime in, but my understanding is that the effects of read noise diminish as ISOs go up.

Read noise is not ISO dependent, but it's not the only source of noise.

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII dual cards
« on: August 31, 2014, 12:11:37 AM »
The only logical reason to use mixed SD instead of dual CF on the 5D was to begin the inevitable transition of their high-end DSLR line away from the CF standard to the more commonly available SD standard

Forgive me, but how is that the only logical reason? That's just one potential reason, about which I question the logic. Were it a UHS compatible slot I could maybe see it, but the notion people are going to go out and buy a bunch of high speed SD cards to stick in a camera that can't write at high speeds is illogical on its face. Slow SD doesn't precipitate a transition to fast SD.

In any case, I hope you're wrong; I don't want to move to SD. I hope they go to XQD.

Personally, I always assumed the second slot being SD was a packaging thing, i.e. fitting two CF within the footprint of the 5D grip wasn't viable.

so they crippled the SD slot because they presumably couldn't cripple the CF card slot for some reason.

Oh come on. You honestly think Canon said:
1) I want people to buy into SD
2) So I'll add an SD slot to the 5D
3) But the 1Dx has two slots, and that's a selling point, so I'll make one of the 5D slots slow
4) Since I want people to buy into SD, I'll make the other slot slow, but wait, I can't figure out how! Never mind, I'll deliberately hinder the the slot I want people to get used to using.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 29, 2014, 04:47:44 PM »
My point is that this assumption that Canon lenses are superior is uninformed at best and delusional logo fandom at worst.

Erm, where there are obviously a number of lens qualities (many of them subjective), but considering only resolution, Canon on average is better than Nikkor (which is how the 22MP 5D3 on average outresolves the 36MP D800, per DXO testing, not fandom. BRB, gonna go shoot hummingbirds with my tamron).

Damn, needs more shadow detail

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 29, 2014, 03:46:35 PM »
My point is that this assumption that Canon lenses are superior is uninformed at best and delusional logo fandom at worst.

Erm, where there are obviously a number of lens qualities (many of them subjective), but considering only resolution, Canon on average is better than Nikkor (which is how the 22MP 5D3 on average outresolves the 36MP D800, per DXO testing, not fandom. BRB, gonna go shoot hummingbirds with my tamron).

10
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why the delay for the Tamron 150-600?
« on: August 29, 2014, 10:03:08 AM »
Tamron's options are to either find a way to produce more (and that could be VERY expensive)

And would likely be a bad move in the long run when demand dips. I think they'll ride this while it lasts. Price point probably won't change. It probably SHOULD cost a little more, but they're making an attack at the super tele market. It may be what... 75% as good as Canon glass? 65%? 80%? For less than 10% of the cost...

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:44:50 AM »
D800 -> D810

The 5dm3 is looking really old.

Although they're in the same general price range, one could argue that the D800/E and 5D3 weren't really competitors. 5D3 is a jack-of-all-trades camera. D800/E are more specialized. D810 and 5D3 on the other hand are competitors, in so far as the D810 is more of a jack-of-all-trades.

But let's assume that, because of the price point, the D800/E and 5D3 were competitors. They both came out in March of 2012; so they're the same generation. Chronologically, canon is one generation behind. However, in that market, I don't believe their goal is to churn out new bodies with high frequency (as opposed to the entry level market where they do). Rather, their goal in the pro/prosumer market is to release bodies which remain viable as long as they're designed to.

12
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why the delay for the Tamron 150-600?
« on: August 29, 2014, 12:13:26 AM »
They could also be tightening things like quality control, too. Such as making it really stretch closer to 600mm.

I ordered mine in early February and received it in late May. Going by exif data, if accurate, mine reports 600 at the long end.

That's what the lens reports to the camera. If one compares the angle of view at full zoom to that of the canon 600mm, the tamron is a little bit wider, hence the supposition that the focal length is less than 600. It's equally possible that the canon is more than 600mm. And it doesn't really matter.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 28, 2014, 05:21:21 PM »

Yes, I did.  You just didn't like it because it was shot on a tripod.

I don't understand what you think you are demonstrating here. Neither is with a FF camera, neither is handheld, and neither is with AF.

The 20D pixels are the same size as those in the 5DII.  Both were handheld, both were with AF.

Lee Jay,

This is my last comment to you unless you can actually supply the images you said you could.


You have now said the same images were shot both on a tripod, and handheld, you have no credibility.

I presume he's referencing the images from reply 765 as shot from a tripod and those from reply 769 as being handheld.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: MISSING Camera body feature
« on: August 28, 2014, 03:13:07 PM »
It seems reasonable that algorithms intended to predict motion may not be optimal for static subjects.

That's absolutely true. Camera pointing at a fixed targed, it will continually adjust, even if slightly. If it's a scene where AF was difficult in the first place like a small low contrast subject against a confusing fore/background (a bird inside a shrub, for example), it will sometimes jump way behind target, even though nothing related to the subject has moved. In my experience, anyway.

So like many, I have de-coupled the half shutter press from AF, and instead use the AF-ON button to Auto Focus.

Boom - no more hesitation when the trigger is pulled waiting for the lens to re-focus.

What's missing though is a second AF-ON button / Dedicated SERVO mode.

How many of you toggle between "Single Shot" and "Servo" ?

Is it just me, or it would it be sooooooo nice to have them both at your fingertip?

Switching between C1/2/3 isn't a good alternative, esp with a locked dial.
5d3 and 1 DX can program the dof button to do this

Just note that, at least on the 5D, it doesn't switch it permanently, only as long as the button remains depressed.

I generally have my camera in "M" + one shot. DOF preview switches to servo in case I need it unexpectedly, otherwise I do use the C modes for Av + servo, with various apertures and EC's dialed in.


15
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 28, 2014, 12:28:29 PM »
with two more stops of shadow-lifting ability, with a sensor that has read noise in the deep shadows that has a nice random appearance without any banding of any kind, I could probably get away with my GND filters, some hefty shadow lifting, and one single shot...instead of bracketing 5, 7, 9 shots and having to deal with some frustrating HDR mergers.

If you're looking for two more stops in the shadows, why are you bracketing 5, 7, 9 shots? Just bracket 2, one for the highlights and one two stops brighter. That would significantly mitigate the frustration of merging (fewer options for ghosting to occur, less labor, etc). You're still left dealing with the GND gradient, but that's true in both of your scenarios.

Have you ever tried to HDR merge just two or three frames when you have harsh highlight transitions? You end up with posterization and harsh transitions. The number of shots brackets isn't for more DR, it's to get a better blend around either the sun or very bright backlit clouds.

Nope, I've never done any HDR (hence the question). Thanks.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26