January 29, 2015, 11:58:03 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 - LetTheRightLensIn

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 278
1
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 06:22:39 PM »
If, IF Sony had a 50mp sensor, why haven't they put it in any of their own cameras yet?

I find it incredibly unlikely that Canon would use an outside firm to design such an important sensor for such an important camera.

The problem is Canon is using and old fab and it's too old to make Exmor or any of the many recent new patents from Canon for improving sensor IQ in major ways, I mean they can make the sensor sensor in terms of just the photo collection piece, but they can't put any good, modern, circuitry inside of the sensor, the pieces they need to make are too small. A new fab cost $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ so maybe they just gave up and figured better to partner with Sony who already has capable fabs.

Quote
But people that buy those high end Canon cameras are going to want Canon tech.

They are gonna want worse tech in the high end gear? Just to get a Canon name on all of the tech?


2
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 05:35:28 PM »
what so many people seem to forget is that Sony sensors work better at low ISO and canon sensors work best at high ISO. Nobody is best across the board. I think it would be a step backwards for the industry to just pick one.


Look at the DR difference between Sony and Canon at High ISO (rather modest, I mean what, like barely 1/4 stop worse than the 6D? and actually like at least a 1/4 stop of more better than 5D3) and at Low ISO (huge):
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D750-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___975_836_795

Look at the SNR (Sony actually ahead at High ISO, if anything, although it's basically all within the margin of error and nobody will notice any differences on this plot even if the data is exact anyway):
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D750-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___975_836_795

So....

The downsampling in the DxO testing methodology may have something to do with that.  Roger Clarke has for years, if I understand it correctly, stated that Canon sensors are the best for low-light, astro-photography and he recently called the 7D2 sensor a game changer for astro and it had something do with an advancement in dark current at high-iso (I'll go find his post later if I have time, I don't recall the details and I could be wrong).  Regardless of the details, it's perfectly plausible that whatever advancement Canon has made with the 7D2, dual-pixel AF, and possibly other tech that we don't know about has given them enough to do a cross-licensing deal with Sony.  If they had just wanted to use Sony sensors without something to trade it may have been too expensive or they may have had to give up control of other sensor design.  Bottom line is that if this rumour is true it very likely is only happening now because Canon finally has something that Sony also wants.

Well astro performance is something a bit different, it might be that Canon is best for that, but otherwise it seems to be kind of a wash at high ISO at this point (and even with Sony ahead if you look to their high ISO-tuned Exmor used in the A7S).

3
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 04:24:18 PM »
This is more likely to be someone's fantasy sensor, now churning around the rumour mills.

My thoughts exactly.

Sony has high resolution/DR and Canon has dual-pixel AF.
If we marry those two, we end up with high resolution/DR and dual-pixel AF - in the same package.

What an obvious, wonderful solution ... that is pure fantasy, I'm afraid.

There are many reasons why Canon will not switch to Sony sensors and
is unlikely to cooperate with Sony on sensor manufacturing at this time.

The rumored 50MP resolution is also fantasy, IMO.

My bet is that Canon's high-resolution camera will feature a 40mp/high-DR Canon sensor.
Let's see who will get it more right  8).

My wish is a 36+MP high DR sensor, with nice 4k and non-crippled video usability basics and non-waxy quality and that can deliver at least 6fps in some form or another (even if just in an APS-C cropped mode).  :D

My guess is a low DR, 40-50MP sensor with crippled body specs (4fps and no true cropped modes at all, never mind with more speed) and crippled 1080P.  ;D

Unless Canon becomes the old Canon again, in which case maybe it will be my wish.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 04:21:40 PM »
what so many people seem to forget is that Sony sensors work better at low ISO and canon sensors work best at high ISO. Nobody is best across the board. I think it would be a step backwards for the industry to just pick one.


Look at the DR difference between Sony and Canon at High ISO (rather modest, I mean what, like barely 1/4 stop worse than the 6D? and actually like at least a 1/4 stop of more better than 5D3) and at Low ISO (huge):
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D750-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___975_836_795

Look at the SNR (Sony actually ahead at High ISO, if anything, although it's basically all within the margin of error and nobody will notice any differences on this plot even if the data is exact anyway):
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D750-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___975_836_795

So....

5
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 02:51:24 PM »


If this comes to fruition I think jaws will hit the floor in short order.  A Sony sensor with Canon AF is insane.

yes
 ;D

6
EOS Bodies / Re: A Sony & Canon Sensor Partnership Mentioned Again [CR1]
« on: January 28, 2015, 02:48:40 PM »
At CR1 it might very well be just wishful thinking, but if this is real.... damn.  :)

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 27, 2015, 08:58:09 PM »

This makes perfect sense if the criteria you seek in a camera is exactly the criteria DxO measures and you assign exactly the same relative weight to that criteria that DxO does.

???
Or simply just look at the various data points you care about, take various things into consideration and take from it what you need.


Quote
That you have found a testing lab that measures exactly what you consider to be the most important factors is great for you. Many others don't feel that way. Rather, many feel that the criteria DxO uses to select what measurements it takes do not reflect their needs, desires or even experience.

all he said is that he wanted to use their scores to compare a few sensor metrics

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 26, 2015, 07:48:37 PM »
11-24mm f/4 would probably not have a bulge like a 14-24mm f/2.8 Nikon.

The leaked images of what is thought to be the lens shows it has a bulb lens on the front.  at 11mm I can't see how it could have a flat frontal lens.

Yeah I can't imagine they hit 11mm without a bulge unless it take worse picks than literally using a coke bottle.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 26, 2015, 07:36:54 PM »
Well, we finally find out whether Canon either can or cares to match Exmor and whether to live with a mish-mash of older Canon bodies plus new adapted Sony or go Nikon for some....

Hopefully it's not just the 7D2 sensor made FF size.

And whether Canon is smart enough and willing to change enough to give it a decent fps in a full-reach cropped mode (like Nikon) or will cripple it to static shots only....

And perhaps whether they punt or charge forward for video again or not....

10
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 04:14:41 PM »
Definitely on the gimmick list is in-camera hdr as this is done better in real post with dedicated software.
By that logic, in-camera JPG conversion is also a 'gimmick'.  ;)

No, because you cannot "easily substitute" the reduction in card space and jpeg makes sense if you need sooc pictures asap.

Is selecting sRAW from the menu really all that difficult?   In-camera HDR then makes sense if you need SOOC HDR pictures ASAP.   ;)

although sRAW doesn't help the buffer too much, but jpg does so it's not quite a replacement, plus sRAW has a lot less detail than a full res JPG (even as waxy as the Canon jpg engine is)

11
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 04:11:59 PM »
In thinking about it, if I had $5K to spend I would do so on an high end lens like the Zeiss Otus 85mm rather than upgrading my 5DIII.  My reasoning is that such a lens makes every one of my cameras instantly better. There is no doubt of this. That even includes my IDs II (that I use for time lapse sequences and landscape) and my 650D.  It makes my videos better too.  If I were to buy a 5DIV or  or whatever they call it in the future or a IDx when the price drops, then that lens would make those cameras better too.  Cameras will come and go on a fairly short 3-4 year life cycle because Canon and other manufacturers have to make a profit.  But a high quality lens has a much, much longer life cycle.

Personally I'd suggest putting money first to a great ultra hi-res monitor, UHD at a min or better 5k for 16MP. Great color and uniformity with instant, 'free', 8-16MP 'prints' is pretty nice. Honestly, how many of the thousands of images people take ever get printed? It's too time consuming and costly and people don't have space to store 20,000 large prints.

But so often you see 15k in lenses, 8k in bodies and $150 for display. I'm not sure that really makes sense.

12
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f4 IS vs. 24-105 IS
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:59:02 AM »
24-70 f/4 IS is better

I tried the 24-105L a few different times and never got one more than a week. They just seemed very pricey (this was before the current $600-650 price range) for the IQ and they performed worse than any other L I'd ever tried.

I paid particular attention to near 24mm performance, stopped down, on FF and it just was ugly as the edges and it would be prone to put too much CA on branches against tough sky conditions, etc.

The 24-70 f/4 IS was another story entirely. It actually delivered a nice edge to edge 24mm on FF for critical landscape work. It was also better at the edges at 70mm for landscapes.

Plus it's smaller.

It's not quite as impressive as the 24-70 II (although the best 24-70 f/4 IS I tried actually has better 70mm landscape edges than all 24-70 II I tried), but for finely detailed, edge to edge, FF landscape work I'd say it's quite a good deal better than the 24-105.

Oh and the 24-70 f/4 IS does have a lot less distortion at 24mm (the least of any 24-something type zoom) and it fights longitudinal CA pretty well, getting close to the 24-70 II (this is the type that makes purple in front and green behind the focal plane, not side to side lateral).

My second 24-70 f/4 IS had crisper mid-frame to edges than the first so copy variation can hit you with this lens, it seems to vary in mid-frame to edge sharpness. The 24-70 II tends to vary by which way the focal plane is tilted and little bit as to whether f/2.8 is merely very, very good or beyond, beyond belief good.

For how I used them and per money etc. the 24-105L was also disappointing but the 24-70 f/4 IS was pretty good.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:36:43 AM »
You obviously dont speak for the majority. The current 36MP Sony sensor also in the Nikon D800 is 14ev and in cinematography / video 14ev is still not enough. Plenty of situations in landscape where more DR would be useful particularly in strong sun situations with deep shade.

I have more than 300,000 images under management in Lightroom.  I went looking for high-DR situations shot at base ISO.  I was not able to find a single image where my Canon sensors didn't have sufficient DR AND 1-2 more stops would have made the difference.  I found one situation shot at base ISO where 15-20 more stops would have done it, but not 1-2, and that was the only situation I found where I couldn't get enough DR at base ISO.

On the other hand, I have thousands of high-ISO shots where DR was severely constrained.

I looked through shots from a single trip and found a lot scenarios where 2-3 would help. All it takes is something as simple as shooting into a dappled forest!

14
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:35:43 AM »
Quote from: Marsu42
As for poor dynamic range: For the a lot of people in the targeted audience (landscape and studio) ~11.5ev is fine, you only need higher dr if you cannot bracket and/or shoot movement. Otherwise higher dr is nice to have, but not essential - or there wouldn't be any Canon shooters left even now.

You obviously dont speak for the majority. The current 36MP Sony sensor also in the Nikon D800 is 14ev and in cinematography / video 14ev is still not enough. Plenty of situations in landscape where more DR would be useful particularly in strong sun situations with deep shade.

Nope.  He speaks or the MAJORITY.  Hence why Canon leads the market.
[/quote]

Marketing leading and best tech or providing most exactly what people want are very often not so tightly correlated as you imply, not at all. And in this case there are tons of side variables that completely toss the correlation.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:30:39 AM »
I just talked to a landscape photog having to switch from his broken 5d2 to something else. He's now buying a d800 because for him, only the resolution counts - he was happy enough with the dr of mf film cameras. If Canon would offer 50mp for a comparable price, he'd been sold.


most of the landscape guys who added a Sony+adapter or moved to Nikon that I've talked to counted the DR much more important than the MP count increase (although some certainly appreciated the MP count increase too)


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 278