September 22, 2014, 10:22:34 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 ... 495 496 [497] 498 499 ... 954
Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K
« on: January 01, 2013, 10:21:06 AM »
How did this thread go from 500 vs. 600 to cropped sensor vs. FF?  He already have a 1DX and is not asking about 7D vs. 1DX plus 1.4X.

Because fundamentally, that's a question only the OP can answer for himself.  What else is there to say?   :P

Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K
« on: January 01, 2013, 09:04:39 AM »
I did a 'quick-and-dirty' test (static scene, not my ISO 12233-type chart) soon after getting the 600 II, comparing the 7D vs. 1D X + 1.4x.  The 1D X + TC was a little better at ISO 100 and a lot better at ISO 3200.

The original test was with the 100L, no extender. The point was to simply compare the crop sensor vs. cropping the FF image to match FoV.

I so so so so frequently have to boost exposure in pp by 1/2 stop if I've decided to shoot auto iso in "m".

As I said, you can correct it with an AE microadjustment, which basically sets the zero point for the camera's meter where you want it.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1D X firmware poblem?
« on: December 31, 2012, 11:26:59 PM »
I recall something about needing to disable silent shooting in live view with TS-E lenses, but I thought the new ones (17 and 24 II) were exempt, so that's probably not it...

Even though restoring defaults fixes it, it could certainly be a firmware bug. For example, the AFMA bug that was fixed with firmware 1.0.6 was triggered by enabling the orientation-linked AF point setting.  If you can reproduce the behavior based on a single setting, that will help Canon (and the rest of us, eventually).  If not, you might still contact Canon and offer to email your settings file to them for testing.

FWIW, the autoexposure on my 1D X is also spot on.

If the 1D X autoexposure is consistently off, you can use AE Microadjustment (up to 1 stop in 1/8-stop increments). 

What is far more important, are whether or not they continue (or begin perhaps ?) to innovate...

Begin to innovate?  Show me someone else's 600mm f/4 lens that I can handhold.  Show me someone else with even one, let alone five, high-precision AF points with the greater accuracy of an f/2.8 baseline.  Show me 12 fps with a FF sensor/mirror.  Who else has an integrated radio-controlled flash system?  Maybe these innovations are irrelevant to you, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

Lenses / Re: Worth it to upgrade Extender 1.4 II to a Mk III?
« on: December 31, 2012, 05:09:38 PM »
For a 70-200/2.8L IS II, I would not bother to upgrade the TC(s) to a MkIII.  If you have a MkII supertele lens, the upgrade is definitely worth it. 

Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K
« on: December 31, 2012, 04:37:48 PM »
So, when you do get round to doing your testing, make sure you compare both with a 1.4TC and crop the 1Dx, you might be surprised. :)

Probably not.  The reason I haven't been terribly motivated to set up the test is that I've done the test between the 7D and cropped 5DII (about 18 months ago, now), so I know the only difference is MP not IQ, and the 1D X is better than the 5DII for sensor IQ.  I assume the test with the 600 + 1.4x on both bodies would show the same, or an advantage to the 1D X at higher ISO. That test is less relevant now that the 1D X supports f/8 AF - not much difference in pixel-level magnification comparing 2x on FF to 1.4x on 1.6x crop.  I disagree with natureshots that the 7D + 1.4x will optically outperform the 1D X + 2x.  That might be true with a lesser lens, but the MkII supertele lenses just don't take that big an IQ hit from a TC, even a 2x (and keep in mind that the 600 II + 1.4xIII beats the 800/5.6 for IQ).  As for AF, while the 7D's 19-points are very good, the center point of the 1D X is better.  But the real kicker is that most times I've been out shooting with the 600 II, my ISO has ranged from 1600 to 6400. The bottom of that range is ok on the 7D, but the top end just doesn't cut it on the 7D. 

For those reasons, I'm pretty sure the 7D gives me no advantage over the 1D X, other than a few more MP (and not really all that many more, comparing the 1.4x on the 7D to the 2X on the 1D X.

The question I suppose I'm really asking myself is, do I want to keep the 7D as a backup body?  Or should I take what I can get for it, now, and put that money toward a 24-70 II?

So, between 20 and 30 yards, the 7D will work and the FF won't resolve. ... So your test shots depend on what you are photographing and how far away it is.

Would you expect that to be true at, say, ISO 6400?

Whenever a new theory is proposed, the author has to prove that it's true. Saying "prove it's not" generally speaking is never enough to hold something for true.

Sorry, but formally speaking, it's not possible to prove a theory, only to disprove one. In the absence of disproof, the theory stands. But at least now I know who to thank for not having been mauled.  :P

Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K
« on: December 31, 2012, 12:35:27 PM »
After seeing the results I got without one I knew there was no point in me testing with one, I even had a 1.4 and a 2x TC to hand at the time, though I no longer have the 7D so can't repeat the tests, but, for me, the results without a TC were conclusive enough to realise a 7D wouldn't serve me a useful purpose.

Still not exactly the point - the question was actually a comparison between the APS-C (1.6x) with the 1.4x TC (so, 2.24x total) vs. the FF with the 2x TC, in other words, is the better IQ of the FF sensor sufficient to overcome the greater decrement in the optics with the 2x vs. the 1.4x TC.  It's relevant because in the case of an f/4 lens, the 1.4x TC allows normal AF on the 7D (all points) whereas the 2x TC on the 1D X allows only a central cross-type point and 4 surrounding single-line points. 

Software & Accessories / Re: AFMA advice sought
« on: December 31, 2012, 12:26:53 PM »
rpt, what about halogen? I use 50W halogen bulbs in my reading lamps as it puts out a bright, white light (unlike flourescent or LED).

Halogen is fine - that's just a tungsten bulb filled with a little bit of halogen gas added to the inert gas mixture inside the bulb.

On the 60D, long exposure noise reduction can be OFF, AUTO, or ON. When set to AUTO it never seems to happen. When I set it to ON it works as expected....Camera set to manual, ISO400, lens cap on, 15 second exposure..... and the shutter stays open for 15 seconds, followed by 15 seconds wait, then the image appears. Change it to bulb mode, hold the shutter down for 60 seconds, then the camera waits for 60 seconds, and the image appears.

And best of all, both pictures are BLACK!

Same on the 7D.  And on the 1D X.  After checking more carefully, long exposure NR on the 1D X is behaving as normal - wne set to Enable, a 30 s exposure is followed by a 30 s dark frame.

Sorry for the earlier confusion.

I'll be waiting anxiously.

How are you determining that the dark frame is done?  After the exposure and a few seconds into the dark frame, the read LCD comes back on (showing the quick control menu).  Last night, that's when I stopped the timer - I was holding the camera, and my hand was covering the red light.   :-[  But, the red light is still on and the 'shots remaining' display flashes until the dark frame is done, and the review image is displayed.  To confirm, on both my 7D and my 1D X, with long exposure NR enabled (not Auto), the dark frame is the same duration as the exposure setting.

So...I recommend checking again, timing from the shutter/mirror click until the red light goes out and the review image shows up - that should be the same length of time as the exposure was set.  If not, I'd call Canon.

Ford Focus is top selling car globally

I do not drive Ford and  If this were an argument for the best car I've missed something significant

Neither do I.  The vehicle I'm buying in early 2013 needs space for three carseats, and I prefer 4-wheel drive for the New England winters, so a Ford Focus isn't the best car for me.  Do you have the same needs as me?  If not, the best car for you will likely be different than for me.  So, who's 'best' is really the best?  I trust you're intelligent enough to see the problem - 'best' is subjective.  No one has yet proposed any objective measure of 'best' camera.  Do you have one? 

Regardless of what you or I think is the best car or camera, a majority of car buyers in the world think the Ford Focus is the best for them, and a majority of dSLR buyers think Canon is the best for them. That's an objective, measurable fact.  Obviously, everyone will determine 'best' for themselves, personally. But absent a bona fide definition of 'best' based on features/performance and applicable to everyone's needs, the aggregated buying decisions of the masses seem to be the only objective measure available. 

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikons and Canon's equivalent
« on: December 31, 2012, 10:32:43 AM »
On an unrelated note, is it possible to shoot sports with a 5D2? How much harder is it compared to using a 7D?

Of course it's possible.  People shot sports before autofocus. The tracking in the 5DII is ok for subjects crossing the FoV and moving at a pretty constant speed.  With subjects heading toward or away from the camera, the tracking does a poor job, even keeping up with my toddler was too much for the 5DII's servo mode.  Still, if you know where the subject is heading, you can prefocus there and get the shot.  The 7D does a much better job of tracking, sideways, toward/away, varying speed, etc. - not perfect, but much better (the 1-series is even better, of course). 

...means that I will have less free time to shoot. This also means that I do not really have a pressing want for a new camera.

Interesting.  I sort of feel the opposite - I also have limited free time, so I want the best gear possible, to make the most of the time that I have.  ;)

Pages: 1 ... 495 496 [497] 498 499 ... 954