October 24, 2014, 03:09:44 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 972
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 06:20:35 PM »
I don't agree with this "amount of light" argument. Consider a full frame sensor and an APS-C size sensor with pixels the same size as a full frame taking photos with the same lens at the same f-stop and the same distance from the subject. The signal to noise ratio for each pixel in the APS-C sensor will be the same as the S:N ratio as the corresponding pixels in an APS-C sized area of the ff.

True, but the 2.56x greater area of the FF sensor will gather more total light.  Comparing noise at the pixel level isn't the same as comparing noise at the image level.

You lost me on the image level noise, Neuro. It seems that an APS-C sized crop of the FF image and the APS-C image in this case would be identical. The number of photons hitting each pixel is the same and assuming the downstream operations are identical, what's the difference?

As PBD noted, you left out the 'crop the FF to APS-C FoV' bit out...

The highlighted part is where I tried to cover the 'crop the FF to APS-C FoV' bit

In that case, my mistake!  Thanks for clarifying...

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ISO 160 vs. 100
« on: October 23, 2014, 04:52:02 PM »
While I have a bit of difficulty of understanding all of the kind answers here (technological ineptitude), I am to understand (Neuro) that on my 1Dx Iso 100 is the optimal setting?! And I guess that the charts used here are based on empirical evidence, hence it would be impossible to say beforehand what the correct value for the 7DII would be, except than low?

On the 1D X there's really not much difference at any ISO from 100 - 400.  No way to know for sure about the 7DII, but I'd guess it'll be more like the 5DIII/7D.

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ISO 160 vs. 100
« on: October 23, 2014, 03:02:50 PM »
I'm pretty sure the native base ISO is 100 (or slightly less, according to DxO) for the 1D X.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5Diii viewfinder info missing
« on: October 23, 2014, 02:36:48 PM »
I'd contact the repair center (again).  :'(

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ISO 160 vs. 100
« on: October 23, 2014, 02:15:17 PM »
Any thoughts/insights?

You have a 1D X, so I wouldn't worry about it.  The 1D X uses a different analog amplifier setup, note the 'jagged' plot of noise vs. ISO for the 7D and 5DIII (with troughs at 160 multiples), vs. the 'smooth' (and overall lower) plot for the 1D X.

Very interesting. Is this because the 1D X applies the gain at an analogue stage for each ISO, instead (I presume) of for multiples of ISO 100 only, followed by digital push/pull on other sensors? If so that is surprising, as I would have thought such behavior is a product of the sensor architecture shared by all 500 nm process DSLR sensors.

Others know more about this than me, but I believe the signal amplifiers are off-die (also accounting for 'amp glow'), and the 1D X has separate analog amplifiers for the 'tweener' ISOs whereas other Canon bodies do only full-stop analog amplification with digital push/pull for the 'tweener' settings.

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How Strong is a Sony Lens Mount
« on: October 23, 2014, 02:00:37 PM »
What I care about is that my lens not disconnect from my camera body at the wrong time.  This happened to me with my 5D3 and 500mm f/4 with 1.4x III extender.  I connected the lens to my Black Rapid with my hand wrapped around the foot of the lens in order to stabilize it while walking.  Nevertheless, my 5D3 disconnected with the lens and fell on the concrete (my RRS L-bracket took the hit).  Somehow my 5D3 loosened and rotated off the lens while I was walking along.  I have no clue how it happened.  Anyone who thinks Canon is not prone to mount-related issues is mistaken.

Your hand or some part of your clothing or the strap depressed the lens release button.  That's a 'mount-related issue' only in the wetware sense (i.e. you).  I speak from experience, in my case it was the belt loop of my jeans when carrying the 5DII with 70-200 II after mounting the 2xII.  The TC altered the balance of the rig and I didn't change the position of the 1" clamp connecting the BR strap to the lens foot.  FWIW, my camera was fine although when I checked AFMA I found the values for all lenses had shifted ~10 units negative.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5Diii viewfinder info missing
« on: October 23, 2014, 01:54:12 PM »
You're referring to the green characters showing exposure info, etc.?  There's no setting for those, AFAIK they're standard LED displays (vs. the AF points which are on the transmissive LCD).  If they're dark, I'd suspect the repair facility botched something.  What were they supposed to be doing?

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ISO 160 vs. 100
« on: October 23, 2014, 11:46:46 AM »
Any thoughts/insights?

You have a 1D X, so I wouldn't worry about it.  The 1D X uses a different analog amplifier setup, note the 'jagged' plot of noise vs. ISO for the 7D and 5DIII (with troughs at 160 multiples), vs. the 'smooth' (and overall lower) plot for the 1D X.

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 11:40:25 AM »
I don't agree with this "amount of light" argument. Consider a full frame sensor and an APS-C size sensor with pixels the same size as a full frame taking photos with the same lens at the same f-stop and the same distance from the subject. The signal to noise ratio for each pixel in the APS-C sensor will be the same as the S:N ratio as the corresponding pixels in an APS-C sized area of the ff.

True, but the 2.56x greater area of the FF sensor will gather more total light.  Comparing noise at the pixel level isn't the same as comparing noise at the image level.

You lost me on the image level noise, Neuro. It seems that an APS-C sized crop of the FF image and the APS-C image in this case would be identical. The number of photons hitting each pixel is the same and assuming the downstream operations are identical, what's the difference?

As PBD noted, you left out the 'crop the FF to APS-C FoV' bit out...

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 09:59:56 AM »
I don't agree with this "amount of light" argument. Consider a full frame sensor and an APS-C size sensor with pixels the same size as a full frame taking photos with the same lens at the same f-stop and the same distance from the subject. The signal to noise ratio for each pixel in the APS-C sensor will be the same as the S:N ratio as the corresponding pixels in an APS-C sized area of the ff.

True, but the 2.56x greater area of the FF sensor will gather more total light.  Comparing noise at the pixel level isn't the same as comparing noise at the image level.

11
If Canon made a 500/5.6 it would likely cost >$4K.  A 600/5.6 is a like 300/2.8 with a longer barrel, and would likely cost ~$7.5K (and that's about the same as a 300/2.8 + 2x, so why bother?). 

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 08:25:30 AM »
Crop vs. Full frame.

As a 6d owner - my first full frame- im very unimpressed at its low iso quality. There is no 3d-ish POP that i have seen in so many 5d2/5d3 images over the years - image quality that i could easily see was not reproducible on my crop cameras.

To these ultra pixel peeping eyes, the 6d is only slightly better at dynamic range than my t2i.  High Iso handling is generally FANTASTIC, which is why i figure the low iso takes an image quality hit. Low light photography is a whole other ball game compared to my crop bodies.

So while i enjoy my 6d, its nowhere close to the full frame experience i thought it would be. Still dreaming of a 5d3 and non-ancient AF.  :(

Really? From what I've seen, 5D2-3 and 6D images side by side look almost identical :).

If one has seen and admired a '3D-ish POP' in 5DII/III images taken by others over the years, but doesn't see that quality in one's own 6D images, I suppose "it's the camera" is one possible explanation.  It's certainly a more palatable one than the far more likely and rational reason for the discrepancy. 

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D Mk II Availability Question
« on: October 23, 2014, 07:42:19 AM »
Depends on if the vendors get an allotment that exceeds their preorder queue, how quickly they fulfill them, and if they offer Saturday delivery.

Bottom line, I wouldn't count on it.  Buying locally is a better bet.

Best have a pre-charged LP-E6 to use, also.

14
Maybe thought to be too big (89mm front element) for most consumers, too slow for people who really need/want the length?   Note that 3rd party lenses are f/6.3 which Canon wouldn't do, so the Tamron 150-600 has a ~94mm front element. 

Perhaps the new 600mm zooms from Tamron/Sigma and f/8 AF pushing down the product lines (for TC combos) will make Canon rethink...

15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 06:37:31 AM »
Personally, if I were going to Alaska or Yellowstone, I'd take the best gear I could afford.

...unless I'm shooting at dusk or dawn...

Personally, I would not go to a spectacular location to shoot wildlife and plan to bring gear I knew was not well suited for use at the great times of day for shooting wildlife. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 972