October 31, 2014, 07:35:04 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 - spturtle

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
EOS Bodies / Re: What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?
« on: March 06, 2014, 05:32:56 AM »
Everyone is now buying Leica cameras but they're not a member of CIPA so those sales are not counted.  :P

2
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 05, 2014, 05:26:48 PM »
There is a very specific reason why the 1D X, which has the best weathersealing of any Canon DSLR, does not use a main rotatable dial and opts for buttons instead. The wear on a seal with a rotatable dial is greater than wear on a seal with depressable buttons.

FYI the thing you're talking about is called a mode dial. The dial on top close to the shutter button is called the main dial and that one is not missing on the 1D X.

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D M3 - Mirror slap during live view?
« on: March 02, 2014, 02:12:32 PM »
Even Image Stabilization kicking in can cause such a problem (on longer lenses?), but I suppose you already have it turned off (or not even available on that particular lens), or already tried to fist half-press the shutter button for a few seconds.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 26, 2014, 10:00:14 AM »
So do you believe Canon is willing to cannibilize their cinema line with xD bodies RIGHT NOW?

Two of the 3 mirrorless cinema cameras only do 1080p video, while with the recent release of the 1200D all EOS DSLRs can also record 1080p video.This partial overlap of features has existed from the start, I don't see why extending it to 2160p video recording would suddenly be a problem. You invented the "RIGHT NOW" yourself, the earliest xD release we can expect is in 6 months - end of march is more likely to be the release of a 750D and/or a 100D successor.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 26, 2014, 09:28:18 AM »
What it all comes down to is storage. Compact flash and SD are not fast enough unless you compress the video stream to the point where you negate the advantages of higher resolution or you stick to slow frame rates....

So you're saying the EOS 1D C is a total failure? At least I thought it records 4k video on Compact Flash cards at an average data rate of 65MB/s - a card with at least a 100MB/s write speed is needed according to the manual.

Quote
Capturing 4K video is not a problem... the sensors are up to it and the computing power is up to it..

Maybe the sensors from other manufacturers are up to it but from Canon only the 1D X sensor (as used in the 1D C) and of course the 8MP sensors used in the mirrorless cinema cameras. We don't really know what Canon's other 35mm and APS-C sensors are capable of in this respect. And video compression is usually done with special hardware the implementation of which in Digic 5 and Digic 6 most likely doesn't support H.265 yet. The 1D C is an exception: it probably uses the still picture JPEG compression engines to build the Motion JPEG 4096x2160/25p video stream.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 21, 2014, 09:14:59 PM »
There isn't enough bandwidth to support 4k streaming such that it looks significantly better than 2k. I am an avid fan of NetFlix, for example, and their Super HD is good, but not great. But when you get right down to it, even 2k (1080p) is only rightly done off of a BluRay disc. You get the full uncompressed audio and exceptionally crisp, sharp picture. You don't get anything even remotely resembling that with streaming, even some of the higher quality streaming thats showing up online now.

Netflix claims their UHD streams are 15.6Mbps HEVC/H.265 while the 1080p streams max out at 5.8Mbps AVC/H.264. Sure bluray video will likely look better in 2015 but those streams probably don't look so bad, depending on whether h.265 delivers on its promise of doubling the compression ratio at the same quality level as h.264. Anyway you don't get to decide for other people what is valid "4k" or UHD video and what isn't.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 21, 2014, 12:32:17 PM »
4k BluRay playback

You forgot to take off your bluray fanboy hat. Everyone else understands UHD video support in current devices (2014) is about network streaming but for you that is somehow not good enough - did you post your comment on bluray disc to this forum?

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 20, 2014, 07:56:13 PM »
7DII - This is the only place I could feasibly see it happening. Wondering how much that would raise the starting price point. Also, how would it be packaged so as to not cannibalize the cinema lines? Max 24 FPS for 4k? Dual pixel live view included/excluded?

It doesn't have to raise the starting price point much if some mobile phones (costing about $650) can already record 4k video. But the sensor needs to support it while there are already other challenges for this hypothetical sensor like less noise and possibly a higher dynamic range ::). A high still picture frame rate on the other hand may actually allow 4k video.  Say the 7D2 gets a 22Mpixel sensor and takes pictures at 10fps, that would be a pixel rate of 220Mpixel/s, while UHD video needs ~8Mpixel @ 30fps which translates to a 249Mpixel/s data rate. I have no idea if these numbers are at all related, though.  ;D

The limitations of the 7D2 compared to the 1D C would be: no All-I compression, only 30min. in a single clip, more noise at higher ISO values. An advantage of a 7D2 would be that its APS-C sensor is approximately the same width as "Super 35" which is used in the other cinema cameras, so the FOV is the same.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 20, 2014, 08:52:47 AM »
There has been something of a chicken and the egg problem with CFast (availability of cards vs things to put them in) but the D800 has really broken the ground on that one so the future should be much better for everyone. Now if the D800 had never of happened then we might be mired into an awful place where SD and related cards were the only way forward for quite some time for performance reasons. That would have been a big problem for the industry in general.

I thought the D800 has compact flash and SD card slots, not CFast (Nikon uses the competing XQD in the D4).

BTW if we are talking about 4k video data rates, something called H.265/HEVC exists which should double the compression ratio. This may hold up introduction of 4k video recording features if display devices and editing software don't support it yet.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 19, 2014, 11:12:14 AM »
Put Digic 6 in there, and they're good to go with the T6i/750D.

Digic 6 adds e.g. 1080/60p video recording which the current Canon CMOS sensors apparently do not support, even the G1 X II still has Digic 5. The 700D is really a rebadged 650D so I don't think it not having the latest 18MP sensor means a lot, maybe the "rebel" team was just busy with the 100D.

11
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 17, 2014, 06:20:17 PM »
You are mistaken. The eos-m mount can physically not handle an ff image circle. Sony was smarzer and made their e-mount just barely large enough to also handle ff. Canon was stupid, as so often. Aps-c only.

Can you explain why this is not possible? The flange distance is 18mm for both Sony E-mount and EF-M mount and they have approximately the same diameter.

It was discussed here and elsewhere many times over. Just scroll down on the dpreview article:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-m

While the ef-m mount has a huge 58mm outrr diamezer it has a freakin narrow throat. So small, that neither canon is ashamed to provide the specs. It must be a couple mm less than the sony e-mount which has a clearance of 46.1mm. Ef-m is definitely not ff-capable.

I suppose you're right but no, I cannot find any definitive numbers to back up your statement. Has nobody with an EOS M actually measured the inner mount diameter (taking into account the bayonet wings) and posted the results? This hardware is available, there is no need for Canon to post specs. You claim the difference between the outer and inner diameter is 12mm or more, so 6mm at the edge. For the EF mount I get 6.5mm from a quick measurement. That would translate to a 13mm smaller inner diameter (45mm) so about 1mm smaller than the Sony E mount.

12
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 17, 2014, 04:31:33 PM »
You are mistaken. The eos-m mount can physically not handle an ff image circle. Sony was smarzer and made their e-mount just barely large enough to also handle ff. Canon was stupid, as so often. Aps-c only.

Can you explain why this is not possible? The flange distance is 18mm for both Sony E-mount and EF-M mount and they have approximately the same diameter.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 13, 2014, 04:12:45 PM »
4k video is not a revolutionary new feature but just a small improvement of the existing video feature of phones, tablets, and still picture and video cameras. Most of the necessary hardware can also be used to provide 120fps 1080p video recording. I don't see what the big problem is, the only possible bottleneck is the sensor. Even memory cards are not really a problem it seems. The current data rate for the 7D is "330MB per minute" or 5.5MB/s. Simply counting a quadrupled data rate for 4k video gives us 22MB/s. That's not really a huge problem for current memory cards AFAIK.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 13, 2014, 09:22:55 AM »
is this a photography or harvard business school forum?   ;D

These people are just showing their dynamic range.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the next xD cameras do 4k?
« on: February 12, 2014, 07:09:49 PM »
One further thing, in their promotion slide set for the GH4, Panasonic have a slide comparing their camera to a number of other manufacturers still cameras. The Canon product they compare to is called the "7D successor", and in it they list the specs for the 7D Mark II. The specs are pretty specific, which means the new 7D is going to be with us in the near future. Unfortunately that just relates to stills, and the video comparison was made using the 5D Mark III. My guess is that the reason they didn't use the new 7D for the video comparison is because it probably comes with fairly formidable video capability, so they would not want to emphasize that.

Pretty specific? LOL they list many 7D features, e.g. 19 AF points which the 70D already got making it unlikely the 7D2 won't get more.  It also clumsily lists the 7D (and D7100) burst speed as if these DSLRs do not support AF tracking during bursts. Maximum burst size is taken from 7D without the 2.0 firmware. Finally, the 7D has a flash sync terminal, why wouldn't a 7D2 get one? So no it's not really specific at all but certainly interesting they felt it necessary to cook up this fake spec list.

Pages: [1] 2 3