March 01, 2015, 04:21:36 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 - rs

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 49
EOS Bodies / Re: Could the 5Ds (R) be using the 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor?
« on: February 09, 2015, 07:45:56 AM »
Traditionally Canon has been conservative, I would not expect them to have this sensor in the 5ds
What do you think? When?

Can't say.... not soon. First they need to fix the DR many people are asking for... it is a threat to Canon if people defect, they would be interested in fixing this, but it seems they are not able to hence this stop gap 5Ds model...

I would expect new sensor tech in the 5d4 or 1dxii... towards Q4 to address the DR.

It looks like the DR could be improved on the 5Ds after all. Here's a quote from Northlight Images:

Quote from: Northlight Images
8th An interesting comment (thanks), coming via testing a pre-release 5Dsr with a test version of DPP4. Low ISO DR is put at 1.5-2 stops better than the 1D X, but high ISO performance (6400) falls marginally behind the 7Dmk2.
The sensor is similar to the 7D2 technology, but has apparently been tuned to maximise low ISO performance.

Plus I've found that the jpegs (ok, not the best starting point) posted by Canon Japan when loaded into LR have a lot of latitude in terms of shadow recovery/exposure boosting before granular/natural looking noise starts to show up.

Regarding the 5 layer sensor, nothing was said about this being a non bayer, foveon style sensor.

Lenses / Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 08, 2015, 12:44:25 PM »
T/S? Fazier?

EOS Bodies / Re: The Dawn of a New Digital Resolution
« on: February 05, 2015, 03:06:25 PM »
I assume you mean the biggest square that will fit with current mirror assembly design.  Certainly there's no limit on the size of a sensor in-place.

I mean the biggest square that will fit the image circle of EF lenses (assuming that it touches opposite corners of a 36mmX24mm frame exactly; in reality it's likely somewhat larger).

Ah, I see your misunderstanding, it needs to be the other way around: the smallest square that covers the entire image circle.

Ah, yes, that would be a huge (the aformentioned 43-1/4mm). Mirrorless and possibly electronic shutter would certainly be the name of the game.

To me this is one of the two big payoffs for a mature FF mirrorless body.

There would naturally be the question of affordability. 43mm is longer than the short side of big-boy medium format digital (PhaseOne IQx80). I could see the premium being significantly more than that of APS-C -> FF.

Fun to think about, though.
No. The largest possible square supported by the 43.27mm image circle common across the EF lens system is just under 30.6mm x 30.6mm. Anything bigger than that would result in corner shading.

Then let's consider some other issues:
  • Some EF lenses have a rectangular baffle, such as the 70-200, optimised for a 3:2 image format. This would allow for a theoretical maximum 24x24mm square sensor

  • Many lenses have petal shaped hoods, optimised for a 3:2 image format. This again means a 24x24mm sensor
  • If using the DSLR format, the 44mm flange distance would be pushed over the limit to allow for a 36mm image height mirror - due to its 45' angle, it would have to be a minimum of 50.9mm from top to bottom - simply no room to allow it to fold out of the way. This again brings it down to around 24x24mm.

Lenses / Re: A New Nifty Fifty Coming [CR1]
« on: February 04, 2015, 08:36:02 AM »
However, for me a fast prime is about good bokeh - and a smaller filter thread indicates that they didn't put much importance into this.
Entrance pupil size dictates the quantity of bokeh, not quality. The focal length and aperture define the exact dimensions of the entrance pupil (50/1.8 = 27.77mm), and set a lower limit for the filter size.

Neither of these factors influence the quality of bokeh.

EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: aa, or not to aa (5ds vs. 5dsr) ?
« on: February 02, 2015, 04:21:50 AM »
Here's an example of false colors in an irregular landscape subject, the magenta and cyan pixels are not there in reality

Riiiiiight... I guess you really have to look for this, other than moiré on the infamous cloth everybody knows from tv. Probably for many people, a softer lens (esp. on high-res 50mp) will indeed work as an aa filter substitute, giving enough blur to hide this issue. But if the Canon 5ds-r performs as your samples, it'd be a reason for me not to get it.
This is a very divisive subject.

If a system comprising of a 5Ds R, lens, and user/conditions all combine to produce images sharp enough to reveal the extra 'detail' that would be missing with an AA equipped sensor, moire can be a very real issue. This will only bother people who are irked by the difference between real detail and false detail. And if it's next to impossible or even impossible to excite moire with this system due to ultimate sharpness being unobtainable for one reason or another, what possible advantage does removing the AA filter give anyone?

EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: February 01, 2015, 01:42:44 PM »
sorry, may have overlooked it: but what does the "ITR AF" on the rumored spec list stand for?

- AF 61 points (41 points cross type). EV-2 support.

Intelligent Tracking and Recognition Auto Focus

EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: February 01, 2015, 12:02:53 PM »
Can someone please explain the advantage of no low pass filter? Thanks!

Gives you more false detail, jaggies, moire, and color artifacts, but makes people feel good who can't tell the difference between false detail and actual detail.

And probable more expensiv as the 5D with low pass filter :)
Lee Jay, i admite "false details", relating to no low pass filter, is new for me. Can you explain?

Let's say you have 6 fence pickets in the distance.  Let's say they're far enough away and close enough together that you don't have enough pixels to resolve them.  With an AA filter, you'll just get a mostly smooth area.  Without, you might get 4 fence pickets.  4, not 6.  None of them are real, they're aliasing artifacts.

At the risk of seeming very dim on a popular thread...

Is true that all the AA filter is doing is smoothing things out a bit?

On that basis, if someone goes with no AA filter, and gets moire/etc., they can just smooth it out in PP?
No. The moire is baked into the image, and no amount of softening or downsampling can entirely remove it. Here's an example of what you'd be left with (although its not a fence):

EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: February 01, 2015, 11:56:39 AM »
No A Canon user for 25+ Years, just a very Pizzed off one that this company will not listen to its customers.
I have stuck with them against all my senses, but the choice is no longer an option, I have yo either move to working equipment or retire for press work.
Canon are unable to make what nikon can offer and have been unable to do so for a number of years.
Shooting static well lit objects is easy on any camera, but once the light goes and they start moving you have to accept the Nikon users are going to spank your gear and spank it hard.
My rant is I can no longer wait for them to get their bloody act together and the Rumours of yet even more spreading out of working features over other models has angered me no end.

This time Next Month after at least 25+ years, I will be switching, I held on, foolishly hoping and hoping they would get the act together then out comes the 1dx which to be honest is not even as good as the mkiv on working ISO j-peg output.
To hear they are getting sony technology but are going to drip feed and divide it slowly is the last straw.
If that Makes me a Nikon forum troll, so be it.

Yours one fed up Canon waiting tog.
This is a new one for me. Current Canon gear holds an advantage over current Nikon gear in low light situations - Canon sensors have better DR at high ISO, and less noise. This is before we include the f1.2 lenses in the current range.

The main complaints people have about Canon vs Nikon in the current range is resolution and low ISO performance - and it looks like this particular camera is aimed at addressing those issues.

If all you want is better high ISO performance than Nikon, look no further than the current full frame Canon bodies.

Lenses / Re: Image comparison for fisheye lens options?
« on: February 01, 2015, 02:53:00 AM »
The Images created by the Canon scream 'fisheye', while the Samyang looks much more natural. I could imagine getting away with the effect for much longer before sickness sets in with the Samyang.

Unfortunately the two lenses don't have similar test shots for an easy comparison, but here are lenstip reviews of both:

EOS-M / Re: EOS M3 24 MP Sensor?
« on: January 30, 2015, 01:05:34 AM »
The typical crop factor for other manufacturers APS-C cameras is 1.5x. No-one else uses 1.6x, so that suggests it can't be an off-the-shelf Sony 24 MP APS-C sensor.

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 27, 2015, 05:41:28 AM »
I'm not going to buy a new DSLR from Canon (or Sony!) - regardless of how good the sample images are - until it's been tested and evaluated by DxO.

Sony make DSLR's?

EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 24, 2015, 11:01:33 AM »
Explanation please? What is a low pass filter in this context? What is it for and if it's necessary, why build a camera without one? Is it the same as an anti-aliasing filter (another term I don't understand...)
Yes, they are one and the same thing.


EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: January 22, 2015, 08:39:33 AM »
Look at all of the tests that websites such as dpreview do. Do they judge a camera's IQ by how well it focuses? Or do they judge it by how well a camera correctly captures and reproduces test patterns, colour charts, etc?

IQ is a property of the camera...

Yes, IQ is a property of the camera and lens.

Those tests to which you refer are judging the sensor, which is one of multiple components that contribute to the image quality of a camera.

IQ is a property of the sensor.

Of course you can keep your view but every camera reviewer out there on the Internet disagrees with you.

Yes, you're 100% correct. Lenses have zero influence on IQ, AF has zero influence on IQ and all the other features of a camera such as metering, shutter lag and FPS don't cobtribute anything towards creating a better image. And, the only differentiator between the IQ of any film cameras was which film they were loaded with.  ::)

Lenses / Re: TS-E Depth of Field newbie question
« on: January 13, 2015, 01:12:39 AM »
Unfortunately not.

For starters you'd be using a lens with no zoom, a slow aperture and no AF - not exactly a good recipe for sports. Then, throw in all the other manual settings such as the tilt and the rotation of the elements, and you end up with a locked into one position on a tripod solution.

It is a misconception that a TS lens increases DoF. It does not. Like any lens, it has a plane of focus, and the depth of what is acceptably in focus is controlled by the aperture (and subject distance). How it differs is you can angle this plane of focus so it is no longer parallel to the sensor. This means that for two dimensional objects such as a peice of paper, even at an angle, with lots of patience, tweaking, experience, and magnified live view, you could potentially get all of it to lie perfectly within the plane of focus. Move the camera a touch, and you'd need to readjust it all to get it back. And to make matters worse, if that was a three dimensional object, everything above or below the piece of paper would be out of focus.

If you really want an approximation of everything in focus in a three dimensional action scene, try either using very small apertures with very high ISO's, or do the equivalent of such by using a small sensor camera like an iPhone.

EOS Bodies / Re: A New xxD DSLR Coming From Canon [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2015, 05:05:24 PM »
Quick, check out the leaked page before Canon UK notice and take it offline again ;)
Leaked page? If it was posted 12 years ago, then yes  ::)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 49