October 20, 2014, 02:15:05 PM

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 ... 433 434 [435] 436 437 ... 970
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 11, 2013, 08:54:36 AM »
No, not grasping at straws, just simply considering all of the lenses that are available for a camera. If you want to limit yourself to only those lenses that the camera vendor makes, fine, but don't impose those restrictions on others.

There are many fine lenses that are made for use on Canon/Nikon that are not made by Canon/Nikon.

The grasping at straws part was more about the fact that considering the Sigma 35/1.4 gets you barely a marginal improvement, as I said - throwing away 13 MP instead of 14 MP.

If I was going to have a grudge, it would be because of something it them taking 4 tries to Canon's lens repair service to fix the IS in a 70-300 IS USM (non-L).

"Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again." "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again." la la la

And with Nikon, that might be <wait 4 weeks> "Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again."<wait 4 weeks> "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again."<wait 4 weeks> la la la

No, the point of me saying this is because lots of people are arguing that "Canon cameras sell well, so obviously 18MP is enough" or "... so obviously the DR isn't important." In a sense they're right, but it appears that it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera - it is the bells and whistles.

In a sense?  No need for a qualifier there.  As I've stated before, people buy cameras not sensors.  Their reasons for choosing one camera over another are as varied as the people themselves.  Canon recognizes that people buy cameras, not naked sensors, and they design their cameras accordingly.  The fact that they continue to outsell Nikon across the lineup quite clearly indicates that they know what they're doing in terms of camera design (including the sensor). 

Saying 'it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera' is an unrealistic over-generalization.  The problem is that some people seem to suggest that simply because the sensor in a Nikon camera offers a couple of extra stops of DR, that means the IQ of the sensor in a Canon camera is unacceptably poor.  It's that sort of attitude that raises hackles around here, and for good reason - it's complete crap.  If you want to peddle that line of BS, try a Nikon forum...I'm sure you'd be welcomed with open arms. 

I sold my 24-70 2.8 L II, my 70-300 L an my 70-200 2.8 L IS II last week....to buy the magic 200 2.0 L.

That would be a little extreme, for me.  But the thought did occur to me that by selling my 35L, 24-105L and 28-300L, and 100-400L, I'd be better than half way to a 300/2.8L IS II.  :-X

Lenses / Re: $1000 budget, need lens recommendation for Canon t1i
« on: April 11, 2013, 08:33:20 AM »
I would guess that 25% of the time, the camera will be used indoors where there isn't great light and a flash won't be possible to use.  I'm worred that the 15-85 won't be any improvement over the kit lens in that type of shooting situation.

No, the 15-85mm will not help you there.  The 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 would be good...if a short tele is what you need in those situations.  Else, consider the 35/2.

Here's my suggestion:

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 $499 (better IQ than the Sigma 17-50 and cheaper, too).
Canon 50mm f/1.8 II $109
Canon Speedlite 430EX II $254
Manfrotto 294 tripod w/ QR ballhead $135

Leaves you $3 from your $1K budget.  :)

Macro / Re: Mp-e and 100mmL sharpness
« on: April 11, 2013, 07:29:30 AM »
I find the 100 L a lot more easier ... another interesting think which I was not aware of was how long the MP-E 65 lens barrel zooms out at 5x Macro ... I always thought it was tiny lens.
Did you know that the 100 L gets "shorter" as you focus closer?  Not on the outside, but on the inside. Although it's a 100 mm lens when focused at infinity, when focused at 1:1, it's actually approximately 68 mm in focal length.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon Refurb 400mm f/5.6L $910
« on: April 10, 2013, 10:45:18 PM »
Yes, I have both.  I much prefer to use the 100-400L at 400mm.

Same here.

Lenses / Re: Help: 24-105L making faint noises
« on: April 10, 2013, 10:43:34 PM »
I too had a similar query when I got the 100-400, that lens make a fairly loud and audible clunk when the IS is activated.

Try the 300/4L IS sometime - an even louder clunk you can hear and feel, and during operation the IS is sort of a low growl.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 10, 2013, 10:33:13 PM »
Can you elaborate, please? I mean, if you were to take a hypothetical 25.6 MP FF sensor and use scissors to trim it by a factor of 1.6 in each dimension, you'd end up with a 10 MP APS-C sensor. Using the same lens, there should be no difference how it resolves before and after trimming, right?

P-Mpix isn't a measure of resolution, although resolution is a contributing factor.  Resolution ≠ sharpness.  A true measure of spatial resolution involves a physical distance.  Usual units are line pairs / mm (LP/mm). For a spatially normalized measure in LP/mm, the higher density sensor will outresolve the lower density sensor. 

However, that's a per-unit basis - and that's not how we look at images.   MTF50, a commonly used measure of sharpness, is reported in line pairs / picture height (LP/PH).  In that case, the greater 'height' of a FF sensor means higher values.  You can see that on photozone.de - when you compare a lens on FF vs. APS-C, the MTF50 values will be higher for the 5DII tests than the 50D tests, despite the higher pixel density of the 50D.  This isn't just a numerical phenomenon - take a look at the TDP comparison of two 18 MP sensors, the 1D X vs. the 7D (same lens, the 200/2L IS at f/4).  The 1D X is producing a noticeably sharper image.

P-Mpix isn't exactly measuring sharpness, either.  It's basically a measure derived from subjective quality factor (SQF), which simply put is an MTF measurement that's adjusted to match human perception (the psychophysical basis is that humans percieve some spatial frequencies better than others, and viewing distance is relevant to perception of sharpness, too). 

That difference you see in TDP's ISO 12233 crops can be measured by SQF, and that's basically what P-Mpix is telling you.  For example, the Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II that delivers 22 P-Mpix on the 5DIII achieves only 14 P-Mpix on the 7D.  In fact, the 300mm f/4L IS at $1400 delivers better perceived sharpness on the 5DIII than the $7000 supertele lens on the 7D.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 10, 2013, 05:47:45 PM »
Aomething is not right with these numbers.

For example, Canon 40D's 10 MP sensor would be 25.6 MP, if enlarged to FF size (10 * 1.6 * 1.6). Similarly, 7D's-FF equivalent sensor would contain 46 MP.

Yet, 7D shows markedly better resolution than 40D in combination with the same lenses. In fact, with quite a few lenses, not only the very best ones.

So, if these systems benefit from increased pixel density from 25.6 to 46 MP FF sensor equivalent, how can the best lenses be the limiting factor at 21-22 MP? Or am I misunderstanding something?

Pixel density isn't the only factor - sensor size matters.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 10, 2013, 11:48:30 AM »
According to DxOMark, the best prime and best zoom from each are:

Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 22 P-Mpix
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G on D800 - 22 P-Mpix

You're wrong or rather you've quoted incomplete information. If you look here:

Then you will see that the Nikon D800 with the Sigma 35/1.4 bests the Nikon 85/1.4G with a P-MPix score of 23.

Grasping at straws, are we?  I was comparing Nikon vs. Canon lenses, and last time I checked, Nikon doesn't make the Sigma 35/1.4.

Ok, so with that excellent lens not made by Nikon, the D800 is only throwing away 13 MP instead of 14 MP.  Woot.

Here's what CPN Europe has to say:

There is also a new charger to go along with the new LP-E4N and this is the only charger than should be used with the new battery. If an LP-E4N is charged in an LC-E4 charger you will not fully charge the battery; instead it will only reach around 90% charge so your capacity is reduced and it will not meet new safety regulations. However, an LP-E4 can be charged in the new battery charger with no problems.

Software & Accessories / Re: Bag while I am a "tourist"
« on: April 10, 2013, 10:43:52 AM »
Let's put this in context:
Above and beyond the 'homes' for your more expensive things, how many bags do you own neuro ;)

Not that many.  Really.

Software & Accessories / Re: Bag while I am a "tourist"
« on: April 10, 2013, 10:09:12 AM »
(yes I will sell unused bags)

Lie to yourself all you want, just not to us.

You ain't sellin nutthin :P None of us do.  Once you're a member, always a member.

Not true.  I sold a Lowepro Primus AW bag that I was no longer using.  Of course, that might have had something to do with the fact that it was nearly impossible to get the 7D in/out of the quick-access side opening (the main flap was fine), even without the grip on the body...and now I can't remove the grip from my current body at all.   ;)

Lenses / Re: Which Lens ... 24-70 II or primes?
« on: April 10, 2013, 09:34:05 AM »
Another +1 on 24-70....Even Neuro stop using his 35L after buying 24-70

Well...it's only been a couple of weeks that I've had the 24-70 II, so the jury's still out.  The point about creative effects with thin DoF is a valid one.  Also, for nighttime walkaround, the 35L may be useful as with the wide angle, if the subject(s) are a few feet away the DoF isn't as much of an issue, and the extra 2 stops would come in handy.

Macro / Re: Mp-e and 100mmL sharpness
« on: April 10, 2013, 08:07:51 AM »
It's definitely an extremely fun lens.  Having the right tools makes using it much easier.  A stable tripod, a macro rail, and the MT-24EX are very useful...almost required.

...I still dont see any great "leap" from a say 550d to the 60d ?
Yeah, you're right.  The pentaprism vs. pentamirror VF, ~40% faster frame rate, much better AF (9 crosses with a dual cross vs. only one cross), one stop faster max shutter speed, bigger battery for more than double the number of shots on a charge, better build with some weather sealing, better ergonomics (top LCD, etc.), all that's irrelevant.

I understand there are many other important components to a body......I still dont see any great "leap"
Since you understand there are other important components to a body beside the sensor, and you still don't see a difference between the 550D and the 60D, what 'leap' are you expecting? It's one level up...you expect Ferrari power and handling if you get the Accord instead of the Civic?

Oh, I get it...you must one of those people who expects a 1-series body for $1000.  That Entitlement T-shirt must look even better than the DxOMark T-shirt!  ::)

Sorry, but I really don't see the point of your post. 

Pages: 1 ... 433 434 [435] 436 437 ... 970