January 29, 2015, 09:35:53 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 - pedro

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 54
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D or 5D3 for low light candids?
« on: February 13, 2013, 11:13:47 AM »
5DIII + 24-105/4L will deliver noticeably better low-light/high ISO IQ than 7D + 17-55/2.8.  For low light candids, I also agree that an f/2.8 or faster lens is the way to go. 

Personally, I prefer not to depend on IS in that situation - even if the camera is stable at 1/30 s (IS or tripod), subject motion is a problem, and especially in candids where subjects aren't 'holding still' for the camera (even in posed shots, I prefer at least 1/60 s).  On my 1D X, I use a minimum 1/125 s shutter for shooting people - and I let the ISO run up to 12800 with no worries.

+1 neuro. don't depend on IS either. anyway, your 1Dx surely must deliever excellent IQ beyond the 12800. I know for reasonable noisefree nighshots the 5D's limit is at about 5000 or 8000. There was a dude earlier this year who came up with a comparison to the 1Dx.
Two questions for neuro:
1) Did you take an ISO 204800 or 102400 photograph? I tried one at 102400, exposing well to the right (not a very dark room) and outcome was pretty well although it required quite some NR to make it look right.
102k no NR

Z96A0008aBWkNR ISO102400 no noisereduction by Peter Hauri, on Flickr
102k NR

Z96A0008aBWUsMaNR ISO102400 by Peter Hauri, on Flickr
2)What do you think can be expected from a 5DIV or 5DV (whatever they may call it) at hopefully about the same MP with an improved sensor design as the rumors are floating around? Will we see 51K or 102K IQ compared to what is now 25k IQ for the 5D series? Or let's say, will IQ at 102k improve at least half a stop or a as up to a whole stop in RAW until 2015 or 18? Thanks for your assessment on this according to your profound technical knowledge...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D or 5D3 for low light candids?
« on: February 13, 2013, 05:59:29 AM »
@wickidwombat: so you're talking about 3.5 stops in RAW from crop. That comes close. Coming from a 30D 1600 was highest I would dare to go in nightphotography (knowing there's some PP waiting). With the 5D3 now I go as high as 25.600 or 51200 without hesitation. Depending on your situation, even 51k without NR look quite usable  8)

Shooting my Cat at ISO 51k by Peter Hauri, on Flickr

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D or 5D3 for low light candids?
« on: February 13, 2013, 03:06:35 AM »
I have both bodies. I don't have an issue shooting my 7D at 12,800 for sports and such if I have to but I sure would not do that for a wedding. 7D @ 1600 is comfortable and 3200 if I have to. The 7D will yield great even higher ISO shots but I call the sensor light hungry. It needs correct exposure so it is not very forgiving.

The 5D3 on the other hand will do better at higher ISO's and is a little more forgiving. If I were to shoot a lot of low light I would get a FF sensor. It is just basic megapixels, sensor size and math.

Here is my 7D at 12,800. NR using PS/LR - they are both the same. I really can't tell you about AF acquisition as I don't suffer with either.



looks pretty well, man. I have the 5D3 and I am a happy camper in that.

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 11, 2013, 06:07:04 PM »
by jirista: "My 7D is a pretty great camera. It has a high frame rate, a good AF system that does a great job, but can bail out and get sketchy at any moment. With quality L-series glass it pounds out the sharp like you wouldn't believe. But...the 5D III, despite its SLOWER frame rate, still out-does it because of the better AF system. The larger pixels on the 5D III result in much better noise characteristics, allowing usable ISO to jump from around ISO 1600-2500 on the 7D to as high as 12800 on the 5D III, while concurrently making ISO 1600 WORLDS BETTER."

Coming from a 30D the 5D3 just blew me away. 12800 are a no-brainer. I'll even go as high as 25600 and sometimes 51200 (required in very dark rooms, exposing well to the right, final output color or b/w) I am playing with it since my cat-photograph looked pretty usable  8) even without NR...

Shooting my Cat at ISO 51k by Peter Hauri, on Flickr
here's a 25k lowlight shot

Z96A3292bNoNRBWcropDEFKLEIN by Peter Hauri, on Flickr

EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III
« on: February 10, 2013, 08:27:36 AM »
Actually it's quite easy. If you REALLY want the 5D3 and don't have the money for it, then just wait until you have the money for it or wait until the price drops. Over here in Belgium the price of the 5D3 is 2.859 EUR which is 3,820.62 USD. So even more expensive. I'm still deciding between a 6D (1.759 EUR / 2,350.64 USD) and a 5D3 (2.859 EUR / 3,820.62 USD).

+1 sound advice.

Lenses / Re: New Tokina AF 16-28 F/2.8 AT-X Pro SD FX - Focus Pocus
« on: February 10, 2013, 05:34:27 AM »
Had the lens from almost a year. Used it very often in a great range of situations (lightning, composition etc.) on two bodies (1DsMk2 and 5DMk3), apertures ranging from 2.8 till... I don't know (16?... 22?) with the AF point almost everywhere, used with MF also in enough situations (last time 30 minutes ago in a big photo report) and I did not see what you're experiencing.

Yes, on 5D3 it needed AFMA. Also, at f/2.8 even if the center is very good the margins are a little bit soft, but this is quite normal for this class (in fact, I found Tokina's sharpness best for it's class). The corners start to catch up immediately from f/3.2 - 4 and become very good at f/5.6. From there on, I don't know anymore...  :)

Just my2c & HTH

Your experience refers quite a bit to the photozone.de findings. After reading this it kept me from going for it. Even though 28 mm on the long end would come very close to my photography preferences in nightsky shooting. 28mm on the long end would yield at least 20 to 22 sec of exposure applying 600 rule (600:28 = exposure before startrails become evident).
Photozone reported, they got a few lemons while testing the copies and that made me hesitate a bit more.
Glad to hear that your experience is good so far. Here's the photozone link.
It is in english and I appreciate their review. Guess I'll go for the classic 16-35 range instead...As it offers the possibilty to mount an ND 10 filter for ultra long daytime exposures as well 8) Cheers, Pedro.

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 09, 2013, 11:49:28 AM »
@jirista: Thank you so much for taking your time to elaborate your explanation for me. Now I got a faint idea of what it is all about. I highly appreciate that! Has  there leaked any info (patents) that Canon are changing to the CP-ADC approach sometime soon? or let's say within the 5DIIIs or 6Ds body cycle? Could the rumored 5DX contain at least some first components towards this system? Looking forward to read about CP-ADC approaches related to future canon sensor designs....Cheers, Pedro

Reviews / Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« on: February 09, 2013, 06:21:49 AM »
@Carl, Dustin: Don't want to hijack that thread either.
But no, I don't have the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8. The risk of getting a "lemon" according to photozone kept from buying. Therefore I'll go for a 16-35 classic WA. Although, it doesn't get the best verdict quality/pricewise by photozone.


The Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II may not be the greatest lens around in absolute terms but it delivers regarding its primary purpose - a very good performance at its ultra-wide to wide settings (16-26mm) from about f/4 onwards. This isn't all that simple as we've seen during the test of the EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L. On the downside the lens is rather mediocre at 35mm although still perfectly fine at medium apertures. A major weakness is the amount of vignetting at f/2.8 especially at 16mm but to be fair this is a general problem in this lens class when using a full format DSLR. The Canon lens suffers also from a typical degree of barrel distortions at 16mm whereas it's only a minor problem from 20-35mm. Lateral CAs are very well controlled throughout the range. The bokeh (the quality of the out-of-focus blur) could be better but, again, few ultra-wides are really good here anyway. Flare wasn't a big issue during our field tests. The build quality of the lens is exceptional and the AF speed and accuracy is on a very high level. All-in-all a good offer although it will not knock your socks off.


BUT: you are able to mount a 10 ND filter to it and that is the icing on the cake for me. And yes, you'll get a 16-35 at a decent aperture, all in all as up to "five" lenses in one: 16, 20, 24, 28, 35. That's not bad, even at f/2.8  8) Online pice tag over here: US $ 1400.00

Whatever may happen to Canons body line up related to a rumored high MP 5DX, I could imagine to opt for a 6D II in case they screw the 5Ds towards 36+MP !

Reviews / Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« on: February 09, 2013, 03:42:46 AM »
CarlTN, Dustin: Here's a review of it at photozone.de (german site in english)

To make it short, here are their conclusions:


The Tokina AF 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SD FX is a high-performance ultra-wide zoom lens that gives the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II a run for the money - but it's not a lens without flaws. Its primary weakness is corner softness at f/2.8 but that's not unheard of in this class anyway. However, the center quality is great and the borders are generally sharp as well. The corners start to catch up at f/4 and they're very good from f/5.6 onward. Vignetting is, of course, visible at f/2.8, specifically at 16mm but the issue is better controlled than average. Lateral CAs, an old Tokina disease actually, are modest and not overly field-relevant when stopped down a little bit. Typical for such lens it shows some barrel distortions but they're, again, comparatively moderate even at the very wide end of the range. Technically the Tokina is superior to the current Canon EF zoom lenses in basically all the analysed image aspects!

Unfortunately there may be a hair spoiling the (optical) soup here - quality control. As mentioned we purchased three lens samples for testing, two in Nikon and one in Canon mount, and all three showed some centering issues. The initial Nikon variant was so poor that we had to cancel the testing procedure. We'd like to urge the manufacturers to take lens centering (alignment) more seriously - just a good or possibly even great base-design is simply not enough without proper manufacturing. We are pretty sure that consumers, especially in the mid-to-high end market, would be happily willing to pay a little more for better quality control. Especially ultra-wide and standard lenses show more outliers than desirable - not only among Tokinas but across the manufacturers (e.g. recently we tested 3 (three!) Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 in Nikon mount without success). We are probably seeing negative outliers in excess of 25%(!) in this segment which is, frankly, embarrassing and unacceptable!

That all said we'd like to end this review with some more positive aspects. The (outer) build quality of the Tokina is on a very high level. The lens body is only based on tightly assembled, high quality plastics rather than the "duraluminium" finish used in previous AT-X lenses. However, the quality is still up to pro standards with the exception of the missing weather sealing. Tokina has improved the AF quite a bit - it doesn't really operate "silently" as promised but it's both fast and accurate in phase-detection AF mode. Some users may not like the huge, bulb-like front element which prohibits the use of front filters. However, it seems as if only this design approach solves the performance issues that are usually associated with ultra-wide angle lenses. So setting aside potential sample variations the Tokina is definitely worth a deeper look!

Reviews / Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« on: February 09, 2013, 03:21:14 AM »
The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.

As far as the center focal point, I can't remember the last time I used the center focal point. The 5D3 with all the those cross types spread out is really sweet.

There's really only one thing I'm envious of on the 6D and that is built in wifi. I have to use and Eye-Fi card for that.
I've never really run into a situation where the 1/2 DR would have made a difference. Therefore the banding issues of the 5D3 aren't an issue either. During test I do know the banding is considerably better than the 5D2.

Good points, and I do think that the 5D3 is perhaps the best all around camera available.  I suspect that most 5D3 users are quite happy with their purchase.  I also think, however, that most 6D users will be happy with their purchase and will discover that they got far more camera than what most people have written the 6D off to be.

I purchased the 5D3 last August. Still paid the premium, but as it was a brick and mortar store I didn't mind to support them. Coming from a 30D it was worth even that. Definitely saving up for a 16-35 instead of waiting for the 14-24 fantomas ;-) Just tested the 5D3 one night this week with the 50 f/1.4 wide open @ ISO 20k out in a soft snow storm. AF (I am using center point only) was incredibely snappy and accurate. Although lights were blurred a bit due to aperture. In comparison to a 30D the high ISOs are all I ever dreamed of. And I dare to say at its price tag it is the most versatile all round cam for serious amateurs and pro's who do not go for the 1Dx.As a high ISO geek I would have liked it to have the same MP count as the 6D or even as low as the 1Dx. But Canon won't eat into their PJ flagship. Recently took a picture of my cat at ISO 51k in an almost dark room:
and here's another low light pic at ISO 25k
No NR applied.
The 6D might even slightly surpass these in IQ due to the lower MP count and a new sensor.  8)
Cheers, Pedro.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 1D X - Clean HDMI out
« on: February 08, 2013, 10:14:11 AM »
I agree with your logics as well, given the fact that the 1Dx not only is a workhorse for press togs, as videography is becoming the "new" medium to do one's job. So I hope for every journalist out there, to get updated with this, as the 1Dx is almost double the price of a 5D3. "Crippling down" things in this sense would be an unhappy move.

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 08, 2013, 09:32:17 AM »
@neuro, mikael: Thanks a lot. This helps for my better understanding!

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 08, 2013, 05:52:52 AM »
Jrista wrote;  However, the current approach to ADC taken by all manufacturers except Sony.

There are Panasonic with row wise ADC as Sony   , there are Aptina and Toshiba with ADC at the sensor chip with different solutions. Every 10 row in Aptina sensor as one  example
Sony has no over all patens regarding row wise ADC at the sensors edge.

And about Canons 120Mp sensor  do you mean that Canon has ADC at the sensor chip

I am not talking about "row-wise" in general. I am talking quite explicitly about Sony's CP-ADC w/ Digital CDS, which is an ADC for every single column that performs a refresh readout, negative read and register for each pixel, then full sensor read on top of the negative registration to produce a near-noiseless image. THAT is the genius behind Exmor, and why it performs better than every other sensor on the market.

Row-wise ADC is not the same, as it is just a form of bucketed parallel readout. It still has the potential (and frequently realizes that potential) to produce banding. Canon also has patents for bucketed parallel on-die ADC readout. According the the patents I've read recently, it is not row-wise but clock wise. Not really sure how that affects read noise or banding (I suspect a light hatching is probably the result), but it isn't much different than row-wise on-die ADC.

There is  ways around different patents, and the results shows that in the new Toshiba/Nikon sensor in 5200 with 65% QE and very good S/N figures and DR 13,3 stops

This is what David Hull wrote in another discussion we had  about patents     
The original IBM patent: US-5877715

The More recent Sony Patent: US-7864094 B2

The CDS is the "Correlated Double Sampler" the point of this is that when you clear the photo diode prior to recording a new image all of them reset to a slightly different reference voltage. This difference needs to be taken into account and subtracted off prior to recording the image so that this residual “noise” does not become part of the picture. For this reason, so two samples are taken with the first being subtracted from the second. Canon uses a little capacitor to do this (an analog approach). Sony does it by counting DOWN the SAR (successive Approximation Register) counter during the first sampling phase and then counting UP from this reference when the real image is recorded. Both of these methods serve to subtract out the residual "noise" in the photo site. Sony gets this essentially for free with their column SAR architecture. Canon has a column ADC patent as well; I don't have the number handy for that one.

and this is from Bob Newman

If you're interested this is Canon's patent for the CDS mechanism that they use. And here is Canon's column ADC.
The More recent Sony Patent: US-7864094 B2
That patent covers the use of the column ADC to 'bin' multiple pixels in the row, rather than the count down/count up CDS method.

ONE thing is for sure: Canon makes no column wise ADC sensors, the Sony only integrates the ADC. Canon still uses off chip, Analog Devices ADC's. That's why they can't get the performance that Sony, Toshiba does. One of the reasons that they can't is because their process geometry, on the old line, is just too coarse.

@Mike Risedal: Thank you for sharing! I am not a tech and non-anglo as well. But do I understand correctly, that Sony sensors apply kind of a black frame ( as we do it in long exposures at night) to get rid of all the noise before ever a new photograph is taken? Well, this allows much more noise free high ISOs then...So, when is it likely that Canon apply a similar system? My 5D3 seems to be a good investment until they are able to present a similar solution. 8)

What if Canon simply ditched the 5D3's sensor and put the 6D's sensor in it? I mean, same body, same AF system, everything, but made all 5D3s with the 6D's sensor from now on... Same sensor size, same company... Is it feasible, on the technical side?
I also believe that the 5D3 will have a much shorter product cycle than the previous 5D-cameras. A replacement (the 5DX?) will most likely come sooner than later.

A shorter product cycle seems intresting. Can't wait to see the improvements in high ISO IQ. But I am sorry to say that, I'd be a bit of dissapointed if the 5D's were about to turn out to be the D800 equivalents. My 5D3 is too much of great allround cam at its MP count. I bought it especially because of its high ISO qualities. But anyway, as long as they maintain that or even improve it, why not? Hope they keep to M and S-Raw modes. Cheers, Pedro

Lenses / Re: IS or no IS?
« on: February 08, 2013, 02:47:42 AM »
I guess, IS at this range is a plus for video or handheld photography. But I do some photography using my Canon 70-200 2.8 non IS and get nice results at very low speed, sometimes below 1/200. As the 5D3 allows me to crank up the ISOs quite a bit there is some space for experiments...

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 54