December 22, 2014, 08:50:10 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 ... 435 436 [437] 438 439 ... 1005
6541
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: May 21, 2013, 11:08:30 PM »
Have you considered the possibility that people shooting with a 1dx are just more adept (on average) at getting the most out of their gear?  A priori, I think this is the most likely explanation for what the OP observes.  A pro with a 1dx will take a better shot and post-process it better than a doofus with a 5d iii like me :) The reason you see more in the processed image is because there is more there to start with. I expect if you switched the cameras so that the pro had the 5d iii, you would find that the 5d iii magically started producing much better raw images (that could be pushed further).

Well, the OP has a 5DIII and a pair of 1D X bodies, and is therefore speaking from personal experience of shooting similar scenes (gymnasium sports with f/2.8 supertele primes, needing fast shutter speeds in the typically poor lighting of such venues) with both cameras personally.  He's processing his own RAW files from the two cameras, and the needs of the shots often demand careful work in post (if you've shot basketball, volleyball, etc., in a gym, you're familiar with the need for high ISO, the crappy color of the inadequate-for-photography lighting, etc.). He's commented in several threads on the difference in how far he can push files from the two cameras.

So in this case, I don't think your explanation is the likely one.

6542
I'm actually mostly ok with the new layout/design.  The Photostream now matches the iPhone app, which I am used to and works decently.  I find the Contacts > Recent Photos layout to be the most useful for keeping up with everyone's activity, and I pointed my bookmark to that view.

My beef is with keeping it ad free for myself and my viewers, keeping the stats functionality, ability to replace images, etc. - i.e. the Pro feature set.  I'm going to wait and see how (if) they address grandfathering of non-recurring Pro accounts (mine currently expires in September), and in the meantime, I'll be looking into 500px, SmugMug, and Zenfolio.  Leaning toward 500px ATM.

EDIT: digging more into 500px, I may just port over there regardless of what Yahoo does or does not do with Flickr Pro (besides saying that Pros don't exist anymore, which hints rather strongly at what they won't do for Flickr Pro users).

6543
Anyone figured out where the "Actions" tab is now on flickr (sure hope it's there there!) where one could choose "View Exif info"?

Click the '3-dots' icon at the bottom right. 

6544
Hmm what happened to viewing by collections??? It has to be by photostream or sets only now??? What if you made special sports collections and landscape collections and so on? Wide gamut collections? Now way to organize everything? It's just all photos dumped at once or by sets all dumped out at once?? No way to organize?

Collections are there...but the UI is the 'old' one with the new header.  Clearly, they haven't bothered to update that feature for the new look. 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_brain/collections/

Since Collections were only available for Pro users, and they've pretty much abandoned the Pro users, it would not surprise me if they don't ever get around to updating the feature for the current UI.

6545
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D accessories?
« on: May 21, 2013, 01:45:49 PM »
Neuro, thanks for your suggestions.  What is the largest lens you have mounted, when using your "pro holster"?  I assume it's not from spider.

Sorry for the confusion - I was referring to the Spider Pro holster (to distinguish it from their less robust 'black widow' setup).  I routinely hang a large white zoom from it (70-200/2.8L IS II, 28-300L or 100-400L) with the 1D X. 

I have no plans to try hanging the 600 II from it.  ;)

6546
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: May 21, 2013, 12:52:03 PM »
Failure of the amplifier to pull photons from the background noise.
Not even close to explaining your statement which was (and I'll add some emphasis)... "FAILURE of the amplifier to PULL photons from the background noise".  All you've done is tell us with your analogy that for low signal levels the SNR would be high.  Please enlighten us how even the best amplifier in the world, even a hypothetically perfect amplifier, will "PULL photons from the background noise".

But wait, he stated,

I  am quite done with this.

When an individual's metacognition is insufficiently developed to understand when s/he has moved on from a concept, others may question that individuals understanding of more complex issues.

6547
Lenses / Re: Recommended Lenses for 60D
« on: May 21, 2013, 09:22:01 AM »
Define necessary...   You can take nice portraits with the 100/2.8L, but you'll get better subject isolation with an f/1.8 lens which is 1.33-stops faster.  If you have good physical separation between subject and background, the 15-85 at f/5.6 would work ok, too. But when you don't have control over a busy background, a fast aperture is very useful.

6548
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: May 21, 2013, 08:45:34 AM »
No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

If that's the whole story, the 12 MP original 5D would have the most 'stretchable' RAW files. Does it?  The 20D would have the same latitude as the 5DII, since the pixel density is the same. Does it?

6549
Lenses / Re: Recommended Lenses for 60D
« on: May 21, 2013, 08:40:14 AM »
I have a 100mm  macro L  lens and it was great for both macro and portraiture,  so I would suggest that as a good all in one.

I'm actually selling my 100  because I have a 70-200 is mkii  and it seems redundant,  but I loved that lens, 100mm,  for over a year  and I would highly recommend it.   also,  from  what I  was  told,  it is  the best  macro lens on the market,  better than the 60  and 180.

I found 100mm on APS-C to be a bit long for portraits.

I'd not say the 100L is 'the best'. The 180L delivers more (apparent) background blur, and the longer working distance is a huge benefit for some macro subjects (e.g., bugs, reptiles). From an IQ standpoint, the 100 and 180 are similar. The IS is nice, but keep in mind that at macro distances the IS is less effective (2 stops instead of 4), and the aperture is effectively reduced (less light).

6550
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: May 21, 2013, 08:00:44 AM »
I'm sure someone knows, just no one on these forums.  ;)

6551
Lenses / Re: Recommended Lenses for 60D
« on: May 21, 2013, 07:59:20 AM »
The 15-85 is great for landscapes.  The EF-S lenses (15-85, 17-55) don't work on FF.  Personally, I recommend buying the lenses you need for the camera you have now, not a camera you might get at some unspecified future time.  The high-quality EF-S lenses that I listed, along with the 10-22 ultra wide, hold their value very well.  More importantly, outside of those lenses that I listed (and some 3rd party counterparts), There really is no high quality general purpose zoom lens (wide angle to short tele) for both APS-C and FF.

6552
Lenses / Re: Recommended Lenses for 60D
« on: May 21, 2013, 07:32:00 AM »
17-55, general purpose zoom good for indoors and portraits.

15-85, general purpose zoom good for outdoors, travel.

85/1.8, portraits.

100L, macro.

6553
Lenses / Re: Recommended Lenses for 60D
« on: May 21, 2013, 06:35:33 AM »
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS as general purpose zoom (or EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS), EF 85/1.8, and EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS.  Plus a 430EX II.

6554
EOS Bodies / Re: Buy 1DX now or wait for an upgrade?
« on: May 21, 2013, 06:12:07 AM »
If they do introduce a high MP body that is not a 1 series, then it will have to avoid stepping on the 5D3's toes.

<4 fps, and the 6D's AF system. Done.

6555
Yes, it is supposed to be as sharp. (Note that this compares Nikon vs. Canon versions, but results should be comparable because they're using the old D3s to evaluate the Nikon lens.)

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/792-sigma3514dgfx?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/510-canon_70200_2is28?start=1

At f/1.4 the Sigma ranges from 3K to 3.2K. And at f/2.0 the Sigma ranges from 3K to 3.7K. At f/2.8 the Sigma ranges from 3.2 to almost 3.9K (line widths per picture height).

At f/2.8 the Canon 70-200 ranges from 3.1K to 3.5K. The all around peak of the Sigma is 3,960 @f4.0 while for the Canon it is 3,721 at f/5.6 at 70mm.

Ummmm....no.  Ignore for the moment the fact that Klaus specifically states, "Please note that the tests results are not comparable across the different systems."  The Sigma 35/1.4 was not tested on 'the old D3s' (a 12 MP FX camera) but on the D3x, a 24 MP FX camera.  Those extra 3 MP directly translate to an increase in LW/PH compared to the 21 MP Canon 5DII, all else being equal. 

Compare the TDP ISO 12233 crops (where the Canon version of the Sigma lens was tested on the same camera as the Canon lens), is the Sigma as sharp?  Nope.

Pages: 1 ... 435 436 [437] 438 439 ... 1005