March 05, 2015, 11:32:35 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 - rs

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 49
76
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: 4K, 5K, 6K and Up Video
« on: October 12, 2014, 04:57:37 PM »
These higher res displays look radically better!

Man that new Dell sounds amazing! Maybe I got the UP2414Q too soon!

I mean think about it, these displays are like getting INSTANT, FREE 8MP and 14MP 24" and 27" prints!
It looks so much better than regular HD monitors, that it is not even funny. My PA241W HD monitor looks so fuzzy now and pixellated it's got to go!

And some of the 4k video samples I've seen are pretty amazing. It's so much more like you are really there looking at something.
I fully agree - for stills, these displays with that DPI/PPI and size are getting to the point where there's no need for further improvement. It's just like a scaled up retina display. No longer are you tied to seeing pixelated images. Just everything appearing like a perfect print (if the viewing angles, colour gamut and all that are good enough).

However, I disagree about the need for 4k video (and beyond) with current frame rates. Video is usually shot with a 180' shutter - in other words 1/50th for PAL (25fps) or 1/60th for NTSC (30fps). Each frame of 4k footage is approx 8MP. How many images of moving scenes with a 1/50th shutter speed would resolve much more than 2MP? The background is typically not moving too much but out of focus, and the foreground will have motion blur. 4k (8MP) and 8k (32/33MP) are great - if the temporal resolution is there to match the spatial resolution. NHK have been playing about with 8k at 120fps (allowing for a natural looking 1/250th shutter), and that should be great.

Most 4k footage you see in showrooms uses a very clever trick - it all has minimal movement between frames - either a time-lapse with a fixed camera position, slow motion, or footage of a waterfall or some other scene which doesn't really move. In other words, with the slow frame rate they've cheated and found a way around the whole unnatural shutter speed while maximising resolution. However, watch any real life 4k footage and it'll fall apart. I remember when 1080p was a new thing - they were advertising it on standard def TV, and the footage always looked amazing. However, everything was always in slow motion to make the SD feed appear sharper.

For stills, these displays make perfect sense right now.

I can't agree, I've been looking at lots of 4k samples and they tend to look a lot better to me. Maybe for a 100% non-stop action movie it's less of a big detail, but for other stuff and certainly for nature videos, wow.
For any footage with minimal movement between frames, 4k at 25p/30p will yield benefits over 1080p at the same frame rate. But slow moving footage such as those samples used to sell 4k TV's is not the norm. Certainly parts of some nature documentaries could fit the bill, but not all. Almost all TV shows and films move much faster as the creators want the content to capture your attention, not the technology.

My point is merely that for the extra spatial resolution of 4k to be noticeable over 1080p for typical TV/movie footage (not slow motion/time lapses/tripod based static samples you see in TV showrooms, or, at a pinch, slow moving nature documentaries), the temporal resolution will have to increase too.

4k and beyond no doubt is the future for video. It has big benefits for big screens. But lets not have just one aspect of resolution increased with the other left in the dust. Lets keep some balance between spatial and temporal resolution.

77
EOS Bodies / Re: AA Filter: Still Relevant, Marketing Ploy, or Obsolete?
« on: October 12, 2014, 03:36:28 PM »
More MP negating the need for an AA filter is a paradox.

If you have a low MP sensor and a sharp lens, most users should be able to take a picture which shows pixelation. Any patterns in the image stand a chance of exciting moire/aliasing, so an optical low pass filter is very useful to avoid that - at the slight expense of ultimate resolution.

If you have a high MP sensor and a lens not capable of resolving as finely as the sensor, then under no circumstances will pixelation, moire or aliasing show up. So why not dispense with the AA filter?

However, there are some facts which have been overlooked in that second argument:

If it's impossible for the system to create that fine per pixel detail, why get rid of the AA filter? What possible resolution advantage can you gain by dispensing with it when there's a surplus of pixels anyway?

And what happens if that high MP body is paired with a sharper lens which can out resolve the sensor? Then we're back to square one. Pixelation can occur in certain circumstances, and then some users will find moire appear in their pictures - all because their lens/technique is able to make use of the extra resolution gifted to them by the camera manufacturer. Great, eh?

78
I doubt anyone owns one as they're only available for pre order at the moment.

There are some sample images out there: http://sigma-rumors.com/2014/10/wide-open-samples-sigma-150-600mm-sports/

79
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 01:17:32 AM »
Well the timer ran out... Nothing there... Whats with Canon guys ?
Just read like four posts up bud. Read before posting
For everyone who says the countdown timer is showing up wrong, is the time zone on your device set wrong? This page uses a client side script based on UTC - if your clock is correct but the time zone is wrong, UTC must be set incorrectly.

80
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 05, 2014, 01:12:32 PM »
You can read anything you like into this. I'm hoping this means they've got new sensor fabrication, resulting in a new lineup of sensors which make Exmors seem old hat. But it's probably promotional material for a PowerShot N2...

81
Does someone want to mention to the OP that switching from Canon with its free DPP software (which doesn't work with his computer, but appears to work fine for everyone else) to Nikon will mean paying for their DPP equivalent. Last time I looked, Capture NX 2 was $180 - $30 more than Lightroom!

82
It gets the site indexed in Google for those keywords. It'll drive traffic to the site, which usually means money for the site owner.

83
Quote from: dpreview
As the DSLR market falters, what is your strategy for mirrorless?

The mirrorless market is growing rapidly, thanks to products from manufacturers like Sony. We know that there is a certain body of demand for larger sensors in mirrorless products. Although we already have the 1 inch sensor in the 1 System, we don't want to deny the possibility of future large-sensor mirrorless cameras. So maybe if there is enough demand we may be able to provide another type of mirrorless camera with larger sensors. This is one of the solutions.
m43 is bigger than CX

84
I've not found any info about anyone seeing/reporting on this lens from Photokina. Was it not actually there, or is there somehow just so little interest in it?

It's already announced, see below :)

Photorumors.com

I know its been announced - I've already commented on it two or three times. It's just i've not heard about anyone actually seeing it at Photokina, let alone any more info or hands on time.

85
I've not found any info about anyone seeing/reporting on this lens from Photokina. Was it not actually there, or is there somehow just so little interest in it?

86
PowerShot / Re: New PowerShot Digital Compact Camera Under Development
« on: September 22, 2014, 07:40:43 AM »
Sounds like an RX10/FZ1000 rival

87
The Samsung does 420MP/Sec.

The Samsung is also saving 12-bit files during continuous shooting vs. the full 14-bits in single shot mode.

I'd like to know what other shortcuts Samsung are taking to achieve 15fps. Many mirrorless cameras suffer from no viewfinder and no continuous AF at their highest frame rate.

If they have somehow nailed it with a working viewfinder and continuous AF in continuous shooting, the next thing I'd like to know is how good is its execution? Is the viewfinder good enough to let you track what you're shooting as well as a DSLR, does the AF produce as many in focus shots as its DSLR competitors, and how deep is the buffer?

88
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which Canon L Lens for 7D Mark II?
« on: September 21, 2014, 04:47:37 AM »
I am about about to upgrade from my Canon T2i to the 7D Mark II.  I consider myself an enthusiast trying to make the move to pro.  I decided that with my 7D Mark II purchase I would buy my first Canon L lens.  The plan is to be an all purpose photographer doing weddings and other events. 

Which of the following lenses would you get?

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Standard Zoom Lens

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8L-Standard-Zoom/dp/B0076BNK30/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Thanks for your input.
or

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
Events require a lens with a focal range that starts much wider the 24mm on a crop body, so rule out the 24-70 and 7D2 combo straight away. And likewise, 70-200's work great for weddings and other events, but only on full frame. I personally would never dream of using my 70-200 on my crop body for an indoors event.

Before we all start saying "no, don't get a 7D2", what lenses do you currently have? Certainly the best setup for weddings would be a FF body (such as a 6D) and both the 24-70 II and 70-200 II, but that is more cash than you were talking about here. If you currently have some very good EF-S lenses, getting the 7D2 to use with your existing lenses could make sense. Otherwise, get a 6D as a second body, and buy the FF version of whichever focal length range is weakest with your T2i lens selection.

89
Lenses / Re: New 400mm DO II not suitable for converter?
« on: September 21, 2014, 04:02:14 AM »
Canon have provided pretty impressive MTF graphs with both TC's, so I'm putting money on it working with them.

90
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 05:56:09 PM »
This is my take on it: That brick wall in the background of the first scene has some pretty heavy moire on the 70D; the 7D mk II and 5D mk III seem to be much better on that front. In terms of sharpness, in this test the 5D3 is better than the other two. When it comes to noise, the 7D2 appears to be between the other two, possibly closer to the 5D3.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 49