September 22, 2014, 04:42:33 AM

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 - dilbert

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 197
1
The Samsung is also saving 12-bit files during continuous shooting vs. the full 14-bits in single shot mode.
Quote
Looks like the Canon 7D2 is just over half the speed of the Samsung NX1, which is an improvement on the 420MP/sec vs 200MP/sec where the Canon camera is under half the speed of the Samsung NX1.
Not quite, you have to take into account the actual file-sizes.

File sizes are just what's output to the storage card. That's the final output stage of the pipeline.

Internally, the camera needs to process the entire output of the sensor, so the Samsung needs to digest 5Gb/s  (or 420MP/sec) of data even if it writes out less.

2
Nikon D810 uncompressed RAW, 12-bit: 55.9 MB
Nikon D810 uncompressed RAW, 14-bit: 73.2 MB

That's a file size increase of ~30% going from 12- to 14-bit. 

I wonder why.  Mathematically, I'd expect it to be only about a 17% increase.  I wonder if they're doing something lame like using 16 bits instead of 14 to save on CPU bit shift overhead....  :)

Edit: 55.9 / 12 * 16 = 74.53 MB, so when you factor in the fact that part of it is a JPEG preview, EXIF data, etc. that doesn't expand, I'd say it's pretty likely that they're really writing it out as 16-bit data.

Hmmm, I would have expected both the 12bit and 14bit files to be arranged such that each pixel is 16bits.

Maybe 12 is easier to fit into bytes (2:3 ratio of pixels to bytes) than 14bit and thus the 12bit format is packed and the 14bit one not (instead expanded to 16bit)?

Seems strange to me ... I'm not convinced that the sizes are right.

3
But given that Canon's 1DX doesn't have more than 12 stops of DR and that stops of DR are bits then it even seems pointless for Canon to have 14bits of raw, don't you agree?
It's quite a lot of colour-information in those 2 bits, not just DR.

Would you like to demonstrate how the bottom 2 bits add "a lot of color-information"?

4
Assuming that analogy is not too complex for you, are you suggesting that there's no difference in file size or data content between a 12-bit and a 14-bit RAW file?
Given that file size is generally proportional to megapixels, I don't see how that helps.

So you are suggesting that there's no difference in file size between a 12-bit and a 14-bit RAW file. 

I haven't seen Samsung specs, but Nikon allows a choice between 12- and 14-bit, and the lower bit depth allows a deeper buffer in terms of number of shots.

Nikon D810 uncompressed RAW, 12-bit: 55.9 MB
Nikon D810 uncompressed RAW, 14-bit: 73.2 MB

That's a file size increase of ~30% going from 12- to 14-bit. 

You really should stop trying to argue technical details, you succeed only in making yourself appear inept.

So what you're saying is that by dropping from 14bit to 12bit, the Samsung NX1 will fit more images on the memory card!

Sweet!

5
Lenses / Re: Do you keep all your boxes?
« on: September 21, 2014, 01:47:45 PM »
If a seller doesn't have the box, it increases the chance that the part is stolen.

That is such bulls**t.

6
Strange because when people calculate MP/sec, it is generally fps * MP/f and the bit depth never comes into it.

You could calculate CM/w (cartons of milk per week), but if you want to compare milk consumption between households, you need to know the volume of the carton.  Assuming that analogy is not too complex for you, are you suggesting that there's no difference in file size or data content between a 12-bit and a 14-bit RAW file?

But given that Canon's 1DX doesn't have more than 12 stops of DR and that stops of DR are bits then it even seems pointless for Canon to have 14bits of raw, don't you agree?

Given that file size is generally proportional to megapixels, I don't see how that helps.

The file formats used remain the same. At a guess it is likely that Samsung does something similar to what happens with conversion to MP3 and sacrifices two bits to make the compression faster. If it was more complex than that then they'd have to have two separate ADC paths which is also more expensive. If they were chopping bits off the bottom then it would not much different to the effectiveness of Canon's files for the 5D3 where the bottom 2 or 3 bits are useless due to noise.

That said, JPEG files are all 8 bits so file sizes on the Samsung would be proportionally bigger.

With respect to raw, see above.

I'm just using published web specs. Feel free to come up with your own calculations based on whatever other numbers you imagine to be relevant.

7
...
Maybe,  but depending on usage for many professionals micro 4/3 or aps-c is insufficient or at the least undesirable (unless your shots are frequently reach limited).  Again, it will be a very tough sell for professionals.
...

Professionals are not the largest purchasers of cameras.

8
...
I completely understand that.  But you are by far the minority.

Everyone gets older, even you will.

Quote
If Canon did make a 5DIV mirrorless equivalent, I am quite sure it would still use EF lenses because there is little point on fullframe otherwise

Wrong. With a smaller body, the distance from the lens to the sensor is wrong. That's why metabones, etc, adapters are all so thick and is why new lenses are being created.

Quote
You have very well describe the problems mirrorless faces:
1) Consumers sick of lugging around "fat ass DSLR bodies and lenses" are not going to be all that enthused to carry a smaller mirroless body but still have to lug around the same "fat ass" lenses nor are they interested in being stuck with a fixed 35mm prime as their only compact option.
...

You're forgetting that m4/3s is also mirrorless and both the cameras and lenses are much smaller and lighter. Image quality compromise? Not significant.

9
Portrait / Can we identify this man?
« on: September 21, 2014, 12:08:50 PM »
From the "photos of photographers" thread, the attached photo popped up.

This man is committing a crime against the blonde in front of him.

Does anyone know if this man has been identified?

If not, does anyone know when it was taken?
Which car show it was taken at?


11
...
The bottom line is that mirrorless will remain a niche at least in the USA.  Professionals want the best quality and best ergonomics, while consumers want the best deal and best practicality.  Mirrorless fits neither of those formulas, thus it is doomed to third tier niche status that may retain a devoted fanbase but will never make it beyond that.  The very best scenario for mirrorless advocates is a hybrid camera (as an optional EVF mode to augment a traditional OVF viewfinder), but based on the anemic mirrorless sales it appears that will not be a necessary investment for any of the big players.

Let me put the situation to you differently.

If tomorrow Canon came out with a 5DIV and a EOS-MX, where both were full frame and using the same senor but the MX was mirrorless (with corresponding weight savings, etc), I'd buy the MX in a heart beat and never even consider the 5DIV. I'd also never buy another EF lens that was for non-mirrorless cameras.

The size and weight differences are not inconsequential and if I think to the future then at some point I'm going to say "I'm sick of lugging around fat ass DSLR bodies and lenses when I can use something smaller and lighter."  If I buy another DSLR it will either be the last or next to last DSLR that I ever buy.

Now maybe that's further into your future than you care to think about but not for me. In 30 or 40 years, what do you want to have hanging around YOUR neck?

12
I am a photographer and not a videographer. After viewing the Chuck Westhall video I was not really inspired to want to upgrade my 7D. We seem to have waited a long time for the 7D2 and I was expecting more 'must have' features.

I'm honestly baffled by comments like this - what else could anyone possibly (reasonably) want from the 7D Mk II?

It's a uniquely capable camera, far and away the most feature-heavy APS-C body out there, bringing umpteen novel features to the APS-C market, and improvements to the 7D.

Quite simple. A better sensor with significantly less read-noise. Visibly less noise and banding in Hi-ISO. Visibly more DR at all ISOs, including 100. :-)

On the other hand, I do not care at all for 10 fps, don't need more than 5-6 fps. But I still want a fully sealed mg-alloy shell camera with a top-notch AF. Essentially I want a FF-sensored 5D IV as a mirrorless camera sized like Sony A7R, with Canon user interface and a sensor at least as good as the 36 MP Sony sensor ... at a price like the Sony A7R. :-)

+1

13
Or do you wish to become one of your own DRones and insist that the extra bit-depth and thus DR is all of a sudden important?

Do you not understand that he's deliberately channelling you here?

If the situation was reversed, no question that you'd use it as another stick to beat Canon with, because then it would suddenly be really "important"...

Like how on the 1DX, if you want to shoot at 14fps (rather than 12fps) then you can only write 8-bit JPEG files?

Canon has already beat me to it :)

I'm kind of curious how many people enable the "14fps mode". Then again I imagine that all of the sports shooters that have no time for dealing with CR2 files do enable it.

14
It has nothing to do with being late to the market, both Betamax and V2000 refused to release pornography on their systems. V2000 had perfect slow motion and freeze frames and play backwards, it would have been the biggest hit because porn is the reason why there was such a huge thing made out of the perfect freeze frame on VHS.

Same reason why the Laserdisc (another Philips invention / shared with Sony product) was also a failure and why the internet is such a massive succes: porn.

Give people what they want or they will walk away, sooner or later.

How right you are!

The Internet is for Porn!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-TA57L0kuc

Enjoy!

15
The Samsung does 420MP/Sec.

The Samsung is also saving 12-bit files during continuous shooting vs. the full 14-bits in single shot mode.

So what?

You keep telling us that DR (and by extension 12bits vs 14bits) isn't important except to a small number of people so therefore this difference that you've highlighted is also relatively unimportant. Or do you wish to become one of your own DRones and insist that the extra bit-depth and thus DR is all of a sudden important?

Context, dilbert...context.  As usual, it eludes you.  If one is going to compare data throughput rates by multiplying MP x fps as Bob was doing, the underlying assumption is that the bit depth is the same.  In this case, that assumption is not true.

Strange because when people calculate MP/sec, it is generally fps * MP/f and the bit depth never comes into it.

Kudos to Samsung for deciding that when you're doing continuous shooting that you don't really need the extra bit depth - just like you keep saying, Samsung decided that the extra DR from the extra bits isn't important. Are you sure that you don't work for Samsung?

Or are you trying to say that we should calculate in bits/second to be fair?

Samsung NX1: 5Gb/sec
Canon 7D2: 2.8Gb/sec

Looks like the Canon 7D2 is just over half the speed of the Samsung NX1, which is an improvement on the 420MP/sec vs 200MP/sec where the Canon camera is under half the speed of the Samsung NX1.

Does that make you happier?

Oh, you like to hold up the 1DX, lets see how that does: 252MP/sec and 3.5Gb/sec. Still slower than the Samsung NX1.

Feel better now?

Oh wait, the 252MP/sec & 3.5GB/sec are in JPEG only mode (which is 8bit output).

So if we were to focus on keeping all 14 bits (as you've pointed out is essential as throwing away 2 bits out of 14 is just not on) then the 1DX is 216MP/sec and 3Gb/sec.

Theoretically (using the above numbers), the Samsung NX-1 could shoot at the same frame rate as the 1DX (12fps) and keep 14bits.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 197