February 28, 2015, 07:32:56 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 - heptagon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14
1
EOS Bodies / Re: After a 50MP camera what is the next breakthrough?
« on: February 12, 2015, 04:02:01 AM »
So, better iso performance, better DR, not that much frame rate because it'll kill the 7D2

The 7D2 is in another market segment at a lower price. Canon would be happy if the expensive 5D4 kills the cheap 7D2.

The problem would be the 1DX or 1DX2. Their sales might suffer if the 5D4 is too good in the same categories.

2
Don't bother with ETTR. Simply make 2, 3 or 5 exposures and blend them manually in PP. Thus, you have each shot properly exposed for each subject (hill, sky, etc...)

Do you use RAW or JPEG for this?

3
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 07, 2015, 08:58:02 AM »

All it shows is that Canon chose to announce the camera as it is. As to why only Canon managers can tell, it could be what you say, or it could just as well be that they are not able to produce higher DR, it could be that Sony refuse to produce sensors to them to protect own sales, or maybe it could be that some manager in Canon has in house sensors as his personal pride.

Nor does it show that this is the best strategy for Canon, sometimes it is just best to produce the best product possible instead of trying to milk as much money as possible from as little as possible because that can backfire.

The optics are where Canon shines, and that is probably main reason why Canon still may have the largest market share. For us users, it would be better if Canon got out of the sensor business altogether.  We just want the best product for our needs, and do not care who makes most money.

My bet is on money, corporate politics and pride.

Using Sony sensors may prove a hassle on the engineering side. Maybe it is not very easy to "just" integrate a Sony sensor into a Canon body and make that work reliably. After all it would be a top line product. So making it work may present an heavy investment and several years of engineering in order to make it work as expected.

Then Sony will charge for the sensors. But how much? That's up to negotioation. If Canon has to buy Sony sensors at all costs it will have to pay a high price. If Canon on the other hand has their own "good enough" sensor line they can negotiate the price and wait until an agreement is reached. Sony can wait, too.

Having a sensor factory costs about the same if it runs at 0% capacity or 75% capacity. Maybe Canon is currently producing more sensors than they can sell. Thus reducing the number of Canon sensors sold directly cuts into their profit. It'd be better to sell a few cameras less.

Other than dynamic range the sensors that Canon makes are not bad. They are mostly on par or sometimes better than Sony sensors. Do you want to tell your engineers that all their hard work gets thrown out of the window? Maybe Canon is "just" negotiating about some patents with Sony or somebody else so they can use technology which enables a higher DR with technology Canon already has developed but cannot use.

The situation may be that Canon had the best sensor and took pride in that. Then they didn't want to hear that they got overtaken by a competitor. Still, there's technology like DPAF which is unique to Canon sensors and who cares about DR, anyhow! Then they heard the signals but it takes time to change course and Canon sensors get better (very little) every generation. Now they may actually be in negotioations with Sony but one or both of the companies play the waiting game. The problem doesn't hurt sales (yet), so the problem doesn't exist (yet).

After all, a 50MP sensor is a great step in the right direction, and I'll be curious how it compares to the 6D or the 6DII if that gets released. When the time comes to upgrade from the 6D I currently have, I'll look for the package that Nikon can deliver and decide wether it's worth changing systems - or - to invest in a landscaping camera with a landscaping lens from Nikon with a Sony sensor. But that time has not come yet.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5Ds & EOS 5Ds R Image & Video Samples
« on: February 06, 2015, 06:39:12 AM »
Some od us - like me dislike the new 5Ds.
But honestly, the 5Ds will be well sold. Be sure, the IQ maybe not better than existing bodies, but equal to them. So millions of buyers like the IQ of Canon and they will buy this high-MP body.

I wonder, why the AF area is so small. My sonĀ“s brand new 7DII has nearly double the AF-Area. (added picture from Canon.de)

The 7DII is a crop camera. If you put the same AF sensor inside full and crop cameras, it will have a greater coverage of the sensor in the crop.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5Ds & EOS 5Ds R Image & Video Samples
« on: February 06, 2015, 05:28:43 AM »
These sensors will require a set of new standards on the models'skin quality and the skills of the make-up artists.
They will be a direct hit on the medium-format digital market. Pretty impressive and way beyond my scope.

What aperture do medium format photographers use? One can simply trade aperture, focal length and ISO for sensor size.

The following settings result in exactly the same image when the sensor has the same number of pixels (assuming a perfect sensor and a perfect lens, same exposure time):

crop sensor, 85mm f/1.2 ISO 100
=
full frame sensor, 136mm f/1.92 ISO 256
=
medium format sensor, 209mm f/2.95 ISO 606

Now if things are not perfect, smaller sensors have less read noise, therefore ISO 100 on your crop camera will look better than ISO 600 on a medium format camera - but - with medium format you will likely shoot at ISO 100 and therefore collect more light than is currently possible with a crop sensor (until they make one with ISO 16). Currently a win for larger sensors.

Pixel sharpness can be made better on larger pixel sizes - a win for larger sensors.

Lenses can be mades sharper if they are longer and have a narrower aperture. The 85mm f/1.2 is not very sharp but the 200mm f/2.8 is very sharp in comparison at the respective apertures. - BUT - you need heavy and expensive glass to make good lenses for large sensors. This means small sensor: cheap and light glass, heavy sensor: enormously heavy and expensive glass but better image quality.

Also a large sensor could be shot with a big f/1.2 lens and give a blur that is not obtainable with small sensors. - A big win for larger sensors in some areas.


Now with the new Canon sensor and the good Canon lenses you can actually make use of those 50 MPix. If you need to stop the aperture down to avoid too much blur in the out of focus regions your image is actually going to be on par with a medium format camera. The advantage is much lower weight and price than medium format.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5Ds & EOS 5Ds R Image & Video Samples
« on: February 06, 2015, 02:36:24 AM »
The 5DS R samples are shot at aperture F/11 to hide the moire. They should have been shot with f/4 or f/5.6 to achieve maximum image sharpness in the center.


7
Magiclangern provides a button to "expose to the right". Adjust exposure in postprocessing to fit your needs. Problem solved, case closed.

And how, exactly, do you do that? Because if you are using the 'Blacks', 'Shadows', 'Exposure', 'Highlights', or 'Whites' sliders you are not getting the tonality of the scene.

If you use tone curves on each colour channel seperately, if you are using the camera calibration panel etc then yu might be getting close.

You seem to be missing the point that 'simple' adjustments to an overexposed file do not get you back to the same tonality as a 'correctly' exposed file.

The RAW data is linear. If you expose to the right, you just collect more photons. In software you have to reduce (or increase) the exposure by the same amount that you adjusted while taking the picture. Then you have the same raw data without blown highlights (when decreasing exposure taking the picture) or with less noise (when increasing exposure when taking the picture).

You do not need to change the channels separately. You do not need to change the tonality curve.

The required correction is only one single value. E. g. +2EV while taking the picture and then -2EV to reverse that effect in software.

That is the theory and software which does that is fine but there are many things that can go wrong. One big difference is the tonality curve of the camera (software) which is applied to convert linear RAW data to JPEG values. You cannot work with those JPEGs, you need linear RAW. But even then the RAW is preprocessed by software and that might do some things like change the color of dark/bright parts. E.g. reduce the color of dark parts to avoid color noise.

You can simply test your software. Switch to manual mode and take a photo of some dark objects before a dominant white wall and expose like the camera would do (make the white wall grey). Then expose to the right and remember how many EV you increased the exposure. E.g. 1/100s camera exposure vs 1/25s ETTR exposure = +2EV. Then use the RAW files and convert them with your software and apply -2EV exposure to the second picture. Now they should have EXACTLY the same color properties but the ETTR picture should have less noise. If not, your software is not up to that specific task.

Using the camera JPEGs here will lead to totally wrong colors, banding etc. due to all the "optimizations" applied to the RAW data in order to get good looking JPEGs.


At the end of the day the goal is to take a picture and to expose for that specific subject and the sensor noise may actually be low enough that you are satisfied with the exposure suggested by the spot metering of the camera. In that case you can directly use the camera JPEGs and be fine. Heavy postprocessing is only for low volume activities or people with too much time.

8
Magiclangern provides a button to "expose to the right". Adjust exposure in postprocessing to fit your needs. Problem solved, case closed.

9
What do common people want what only a large DSLR can give them but a smartphone can not?

AF/resolution/color/dynamic range isn't that much of an issue for smartphone cameras. I think it's mostly low light sensitivity and blur/Bokeh.

Most photos are made throughout a sunny day and many times blur isn't even desired. Why would we want to sell them big chunky DSLRs?

Not because they need them but because they want them inspite not needing them. That makes for an unstable market. People buy a DSLR, realize it's not for them and that's it. A tiny percentage may be converted and buy the more expensive stuff. This time mostly because the can afford it and make better photos than with their smartphone but the majority of these people do not need these photos and therefore do not need new equipment if money becomes tight. Even some journalists start switching to smartphones because it's good enough for the photos they need to take. That's the point. Non-DSLR-solutions are good enough for most people but have many different advantages like size/price/flexibility.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 31, 2014, 11:22:30 AM »
It was some rumors about Canon wanting to move 6D upmarket, if that is the case, then it does make sense to give the 5D4 52mpx, if the 6D then becomes the "real" 5D4, under the cover of the name 6D2. Hopefully it stays below 36 mpx as well.

This actually makes a lot of sense. Providing the 5D4 with the 6D sensor and keeping the rest of the 5D3 wouldn't sound as good an upgrade than providing the 6D2 with the 5D3 focusing system. - The result is the same but now the 5D4 leaves an open space where a new high-resolution sensor could find place.

Or they may as well call it the 2D, 3D, 4D, 8D, 1DXs, 5Ds... whatever.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 31, 2014, 11:16:55 AM »
Looks like I'm the only one who's looking forward to a high MP 5DM4.  Add in GPS and the 7DM2's focus and I'm sold.  Canon needs to respond to the competition. So many Canon users have defected to Sony and Fujitsu because Canon is no longer meeting their needs.

People complain loudkly in forums and yet Canon sales remain good.

They are not. According to Canon financial statements their DSLR sales have been into a double digit fall in both 12/13 and 13/14... So I'd say - and I'm pretty sure the board room talk is - "Canon DSLR sales are dismal and we need to act now before its too late".

Sales are falling across the board. The most reasonable way to improve figures is to cut research and up on marketing. Those who buy cameras don't even know what we are reasoning about here in the forums.

12
Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 24, 2014, 03:32:47 AM »
Looking at the noise comparison above ISO3200, the 7DII clearly is a little bit better than the 70D. - I suppose this is about as good as we get with Bayer pattern silicon sensors. It is not possible to make large gains.

Reduce read noise? At high ISO, the Canon sensors are already close to the limit.
Improve Quantum efficiency of the subpixel? Yes, but not with current silicon.
Use multicolor subpixels? This hasn't worked out well, so far, with silicon.

In that light, even the tiny gains, that Canon could achieve, are great.

Current sensors throw away a lot of light. Color filters block out a lot of light from the other colors. Green is the most important channel but only half the pixels detect green. That would be almost one stop improvement if every pixel was green.

I would expect 1-2 stops improvement when the sensor manufacturers move on to utilize new materials to build Layered sensors with multiple colors (possibly more than RGB) and 90% quantum efficiency throughout the spectral range.

13
Lenses / Re: Preorder: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 13, 2014, 12:14:40 PM »
Well, it seems to be a really really nice lens. But I won't preorder. I will wait for the first batch to get out so that the quality control fixes the early bugs. Then I'll wait some more because the price might come down a little bit. Then I'll wait even longer because I don't _really_ need this lens. Then I'd consider which camera to use with this lens. It should presumably be a crop camera. That camera would be the 7DII. Buying one without the other is pretty pointless in my case. This bumps up the price considerably. So I'll wait even more until the "fun" account bursts with money unless it gets drained by some other toy. But then, finally, I'll buy it and it will be nice.

14
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 05:44:50 PM »
I'd be interested to see a comparison when these are out.

100-400L II at 400mm and f/5.6 upresed 50% compared to Tamron 150-600 at 600mm and f/6.3.
100-400L II + 1.4x TC III at 560mm and f/8 compared to Tamron 150-600 at 600mm and f/8.

My prediction as that both would be a near tie, except the Canon will have less CA and faster focusing on the first test.

my prediction is that the first comparison would put the tamron far ahead for total detail, 200mm is an insane amount to make up for, the tamron would have to pale even compared to a coke bottle for that to be true

now in the second case maybe it would be about a tie???? who knows or even better?

Results are mixed, see for yourself:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=113&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=10&API=2&LensComp=929&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2

The Tamron loses a lot of quality from 500mm to 600mm.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7Dii vs Nikon D750 Dynamic Range Test
« on: November 02, 2014, 12:48:30 PM »
Thanks for your post. A comparison with the 70D would be nice everything points towards that they have the same sensor.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14