September 20, 2014, 02:21:18 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 - dtaylor

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 49
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 11:52:15 PM »
I can't imagine Canon doesn't read to some degree forums like this  one especially.


UPDATE: I just came off the phone with Canon HQ in Tokyo, and they actually Do have A PERMANENT, FULLY STAFFED "SILLY INPUT" DEPARTMENT! I stand corrected...  ;D

A department flooded by DxO articles no doubt.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 11:17:00 PM »
I'm actually referring to real photographers I know out in the real world.

Anecdotal evidence...meh. Any hard sales stats?

The story is not the same on DPR forums, Fred Miranda, forums. There is a strong and growing presence of members on those forums who are, just like myself, wondering when Canon is going to do something about overall still photography image IQ.

Obsessive behavior fueled by Internet trolling and memes. It's not representative of more then a small sliver of the buying public who mostly think we're obsessive compulsive nerds to argue this stuff. (They're right.) It drove me nuts early on when the meme was Nikon sensors sucked and Canon were best (think 6-8 MP days when only Canon had FF), and it drives me nuts today with all the Exmor 5+ stop pushed shadow tests and 36 MP envy.

I would actually rank the 1DX, 5D3, and 6D a tiny bit better in high ISO then their Sony/Nikon counterparts. DR (actual, not DxO fantasy) is within a stop of Exmor across the board. Yeah, you can push Exmor shadows by an insane amount and not see any real noise, but your tonality is !@%# by that point and you should have bracketed / blended any way.

Scale and properly (lightly) sharpen a 22/24 MP FF image to 36 MP and you have a hard time finding any where that the 36 MP image is better. On a print? Do you have a loupe and an hour? (I say that having poured over 5D3, A7, and A7R RAWs recently trying to decide which A7 I want. It's no longer the A7R.)

Where Sony really has Canon beat right now is JPEG quality. The A7 JPEGs in the Imaging Resource Comparometer are stupid detailed and sharp. Makes the 5D3 look bad until you load up the RAWs in ACR. Already knew that but someone who has never shot/processed a 5D3 might not. Same thing with the 7D, fine detail is substantially better in ACR.

So given that Canon is right there on IQ, what are they supposed to do? I guess it would be nice if they eliminated the shadow noise completely and released a high rez FF. At least then the trolling would stop.

However, the 7D II is years past it's due date.

How so? It looks to me like Nikon abandoned the segment and nothing else matches it overall even today.

We are now WELL into the era of significantly improved DR.

Basically 12+ vs. 13+ stops. The DR meme is driven entirely by BS DxO tests that aren't even physically possible (i.e. claims of >14 stops from a 14-bit ADC).

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 07:56:58 PM »
That's not my line of thought. My line of thought is, adding a touch screen and all the firmware requires resources at Canon to perform. They have to implement it, test it, work the bugs out of it, etc. All that...when there are other things Canon could be investing those resources into.

Again, they've already developed this tech. Adding it to the 7D2 would have required minimal effort during development. (Assuming this particular rumor is even true and it's not in fact there.) Doing so would involve separate engineers from, say, sensor development.

There probably were test units in the wild with touch screens which were the source of the initial rumors. They probably did in fact develop it. If it didn't make it to production, it likely was due to reliability. Admittedly I'll take build over touch screen at this time. But by the mark III reliability issues should be solved so that all their cameras can have a touch UI *** which compliments the physical UI ***.

it is the farthest thing from the most "essential" feature that the 7D II could possibly get.

It is now annoying to use a camera that does not have touch. There are two cameras on my radar: a Sony A7 and the next Canon 7D. Neither has touch. This will not stop me personally from buying either, but it is annoying. will stop some people because touch UI is that important to the way they work. I can totally see why a cinematographer would demand a touch screen UI.

Personally, the deal breaker for me, is whether Canon does something fundamentally new with their sensor design or not.

Whatever they've done, there are too many rumors to assume it's a reheated version of the 70D sensor. I doubt multilayer is true, but I hope I'm wrong. Either they're using two layers for DR or three for RGB, and there's potential for great IQ gains either way.

same old freakin gimped out 19pt AF system that can't reliably maintain a SOLID lock on a target.

I swear the 7D is the most divisive camera body. Either you think the IQ is great or you hate it. Either you have no problems with AF servo or it never works. Did Canon have a QC issue I'm not aware of???

I can't remember the last time my 7D lost AF lock on a target with either of my "sports" lenses, 70-200 f/4L and 300 f/4L IS, or with the 85 f/1.8 at distance.

If I have any complaints with my 7D's AF it's AF accuracy, particularly in very low light, with fast (f/2 or faster) primes shot wide open at closer (portrait) distances. There's too much play in these situations. Spot AF helps a bit.

Canon has a problem. I know you do not believe that, but they do. It's a perceptual problem, and it could seriously affect their revenues and ability to fund the necessary R&D in the years to come.

They are #1 in DSLR sales. If they have a problem it certainly has not affected their revenues or R&D to date.

Such things have happened before, and often companies, even if they were on the top of the world, NEVER recover (Kodak?)

Kodak was hit by a fundamental shift in technology equivalent to the invention of PCs and their impact on the typewriter industry. False analogy is false.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 08:25:36 AM »
You guys are still totally missing the point. I'll keep it simple:


I mean, of ALL the things to get irate about...not having a touch UI is a deal killer???

It's not a deal killer for me, but fairly disappointing now that I've got serious time on a camera with a touch screen.

Where are all the people saying not having a 24mp APS-C sensor capable of 14 stops of DR is a deal killer? Oh, right, they are busy wasting their time complaining about the lack of a touch UI.

Another false dilemma?

I know you guys all have your dreams about how useful a touch UI could be for some things.

Dreams? Canon is shipping cameras with touch screens. Some of us have cameras with touch screens. We are actually using touch screens. They are freaking nice.

Like I said, I find myself touching my DSLR screen and thinking "doh! hope Canon adds that to the next version."

They can slap on a touch UI later. Hell, they could slap on a tough UI with a freakin firmware update.

Touch UI requires a physical touch screen. But it is something they could slap on with practically no additional development time. (Not two weeks before the announcement of course. But during development it would have been trivial.)

But...they apparently don't think touch screens are durable enough yet. Maybe they fail under cold or wet conditions, I don't know. I can see that being a valid reason for not putting one on the 7D mkII, but I am disappointed none the less.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 08:17:38 AM »
were talking about refined devices meant for a professional, or extreme hobbyist who might as well be a professional.

What makes you think we don't want touch screens?

It's why I brought up airplane cockpits in my prior post...people have talked about making airplane cockpits more modern for decades, however they are still built today primarily with individual dials and knobs and levers and switches and readouts (even the highly advanced Dreamliner).

Ever hear of the glass cockpit? The entire goal has been reduction of the number of dials and knobs and levers and switches and readouts. Granted there are still a lot of those, just like a pro level DSLR would still have twin dials and CFn buttons and a top LCD with buttons for changing settings, etc. But the touch screen has its place.

Because it isn't some run of the mill consumer device meant to be easy...but potentially inefficient...

False dilemma. Again I'll ask if you've ever used a Canon DSLR (or M) with a touch screen? Some things become more efficient. After using the M I find myself inadvertently touching the screens on my DSLRs because my mind clings to the faster/more intuitive method despite years of using Canon's physical UI.

Digging through menus is one thing...however, how often do you really do that?

Card formatting. Sensor cleaning. HTP on/off. MLU on/off. AEB. VF display changes. Wireless flash control. Some or all will be accessed for every shoot (except maybe surfing where I snap the mode dial to C3 and go). Not to mention image review.

Quite a lot actually.

Oh yeah...I would love to have a touch screen when in LiveView.

Touch might offer an alternative means, but I truly don't think it would be any faster or better.

I think at this point it's safe to say I've got my answer. Forget the question of whether or not touch screens are a pro or a con: the public has already spoken. The more interesting question is: why would you be so adamantly against something you've never tried? It's not based on any factual evaluation of or experience with touch screens in DSLRs. What could it possibly be based on? Your rhetoric is impressive in terms of emotional persuasion but seriously lacking in terms of reason and support.

THAT is my photography. THAT is what I do with a camera.

Are you afraid that Canon is going to someday give you a shutter button and a touch screen and nothing else???

Digging around through menu systems, or poking around through the quick access screen, are things I do when I'm NOT actually doing photography.

Some of us have more varied shoots and need to access more features while shooting.

I am just's NOT how a professional or an avid enthusiast uses a DSLR.

So you have a statistically valid survey of professional and enthusiast users and how they use their cameras? Great! Let's see it  ;D

Ask any serious or professional bird or wildlife photographer, sports photographer, probably most any action photographer, and they will likely tell you the same thing. Why would anyone want to pull the camera away from their face to fiddle with a UI when they are actually doing photography?

Why would they have to? Again, do you really believe that a touch screen on a pro level body would replace rather then compliment the physical controls?

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 02:13:36 AM »
That does not change the fact that a touchscreen really does nothing for your PHOTOGRAPHY.

Anything that helps me work faster, easier, or more confidently does something for my photography by letting me focus on what's important.

Canon's current menu system wouldn't be any faster with a touch screen...

Have you actually used a touch screen Canon?

They would have to fundamentally change how the menu system works to make it viable for touch...

That's funny because they have multiple models that already use touch with the existing menu system.

Lack of a touch screen is not a deal breaker, but after using it I'm disappointed to hear that it might not be on the 7D2.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 12:54:32 AM »
Comments like this make me think people don't know how to use a DSLR. DSLRs are devices that you need to instantly change settings on. You need to be able to dial in exposure on a dime when the light changes. Who in the world, ESPECIALLY pros, want to pull the camera away from their face so they can fiddle with a clunky touch screen?

The touch screen isn't for shutter/aperture. It's for the now hundreds of other settings we have. I can change several things on my M faster then on any DSLR I've handled, including focus point.

And if Canon tweaked the UI a bit it would be even faster.

For certain things I want physical controls. For the rest...touch screen. (Not that this would be a deal breaker.)

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 12:47:25 AM »
I've tried and tried to demonstrate to everyone, through theory, math, and even some visual examples (of which I clearly need to do more) that an APS-C sized sensor will NEVER perform as well as a FF sensor (all else being equal).

If you mean across the entire ISO envelope, you are correct. If you mean at ISOs where noise is a solved problem...then we've already seen this in multiple sensor comparisons.

I do not expect a 7D2 to have high ISO IQ like a 5D3.

The question in my mind is...why the hell hasn't Canon already employed the technology they HAVE PATENTS FOR, and have had patents for for a while, in the 5D III, 1D X, and 6D?

Chip yields.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 12:34:53 AM »
Dunno...the 1D X with dual DIGIC5+ gets 500MB/s data throughput in total. For Canon to jump from 500MB/s to 3.5GB/s in two years...seems far fetched to me.
So, if the camera isn't a measly 8mp APS-C sensor, then something else has to give. I could see Canon jumping from 500MB/s throughoput to ~1.5GB/s throughput. That seems more reasonable to me. In that case, I don't see DPAF being included, and the sensor megapixel count would probably be a little lower than 24mp.

Good points jrista.

If the sensor is RGB and takes full advantage of this in terms of IQ, then I think a lot of people would be fine even with 20 or 18 MP. That sounds backward from a marketing perspective, but this body will be marketed to people who know better then to just look at MP.

I'm guessing it's a Bayer sensor. But the rumors and the timing of the patent announcements do intrigue me.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 12:27:18 AM »
Multi layered sensor sounds tantalizing - perhaps a foveon style sensor but after thinking some time about it ... three layers of 20 MPix with a frame rate of 12 pictures per second or more, would need a Digic 9++ or similar.

Page 6 and no one seems to be talking about this until now???  :o

An RGB sensor wouldn't necessarily require a ton of processing power. I would think readout off the sensor would be the problem, but once you have the data you don't have to demosiac it. So bandwidth and file size is the issue, not CPU power per se.

I'm surprised to see this on the list of what CR "knows." I've read else where that the 7D2 will not have a multilayer sensor. Time will tell.

I will be pleasantly surprised and eager to see sample files if the 7D2 does indeed have a multilayer sensor. Sigma always struggled at high ISO but Bayer sensors actually throw away a significant fraction of light that an RGB layered sensor should, in theory, capture. If Canon managed to solve whatever problem plagued Foveon at high ISO we may be looking at a very interesting sensor indeed. Foveon always overstated the improvement gained with multiple layers. But a multilayer sensor can resolve more detail for a given number of sensel sites, does not need an AA filter, and can handle some colors that Bayer struggles with.

I've been itching to get a Sony A7 but...I think I'm going to wait to see what Canon is doing here and what they're going to charge for it.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 12:12:55 AM »
What makes you think Canon (officially) said, "EOS-1 build quality"?  Even if they did, 'EOS-1' is a generic statement, not a specific model designation.  If this turns out to be a $3999 EOS 1D Mark V, it'll have build quality equivalent to the 1D X.  If it's a 7D Mark II, it won't.

Canon's "equivalency" statements don't mean anything. They are purely for marketing and not worth discussing or arguing about. Since no one in this industry performs and publishes the results of standardized tests we really have no clue what manufacturer claims translate to in the real world.

If anyone with an engineering background has fully disassembled their 7D and 1DX they might have some input, but still wouldn't be able to tell you whether or not it matters without extensive stress testing.

Does "1N sealing" mean rain for 30, but "1DX sealing" means rain for 45m? Maybe it's 4 and 6 hours? Maybe it's a temperature difference? Only Canon's engineers know what, if any, real differences exist and under what conditions they become apparent.

Outside of a handful of water/shock resistant bodies intended for underwater use and therefore subject to standardized over pressure and drop tests, all we have are user reports. Based on those the 7D seems to be able to handle anything a sane photographer would throw at it, as well as punishment a not so sane photographer might throw at it:

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 12, 2014, 05:06:41 PM »
I wonder if anyone can tell me which of these came from which camera? Or brand? Or even format? All scaled so that on a 96ppi monitor it's like looking at sections from a 36" print.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 12, 2014, 04:58:16 PM »
You mentioned that I shall attribute the noisier image to 7D. How does that relate to my inability to size images?

Most people drop images in PS and zoom to 100% forgetting that higher MP images are magnified more at "100%".

Of course, it will be affected by my alleged inability to compare images, but then that is just your guess, isn't it?

You are correct that I am guessing as to why you believe the 7D is noisier when reproducible tests say otherwise.

I don't objectively test cameras or formats so all the parameters you mentioned are moot.

No, your opinion is by your own admission moot.

It simply amazes me how people will stubbornly cling to opinions even when they fully admit their opinions are not based in any way on anything objective, reproducible, or reasonable. No wonder Zack went on his rant. I'm behind him 100%.

Yes, I know it isn't the same ratio of enlargement. Who cares?

Now I have no need to guess.

So what are you trying to prove through your offensive statements,

Pointing out the truth is offensive? But it's not offensive at all when people appeal to hyperbole to prop up clearly false statements?

and uneducated "guesses"?

My guess was spot on as you just admitted.

Put less stock in theories and calculations, and rely on your eyes.

Silly statement considering I'm telling you to rely on your eyes with a proper comparison.

Human nature just amazes me sometimes...

jrista - thank you for posting your test.

I've found that most of the time a FF file cropped to APS-C yields about the same IQ as an actual APS-C in prints up to 20", given your typical "reach limited" subject matter (sports, birds, etc.).

However...the minute you have to crop even further into both files the sharpness and detail differences you observed in your test come into play. I've made 20" prints from 8-9 MP crops out of 7D files that remained sharp and fairly detailed. I could not crop into a 5D2 or 5D3 file for the same magnification and make a satisfactory print.

Of course if you can fill the frame then the 5D3 sensor is better. But if you need the reach in decent light...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 09, 2014, 06:08:36 AM »
Yeah it's perplexing. The 50D may be as noisy as the 7D, but it lacks the waxy AA filter that just smears details on the 7D.

LOL! Google "Comparometer." Pick the 50D and 7D. Click the ISO 100 test scene with the fabric and the bottles, etc. Pay careful attention to which one looks "waxy."

In fairness this is about the JPEG engines. The 7D has the better JPEG engine, and both cameras are capable of higher IQ in ACR. But it's the 50D that was "waxy" in JPEG. The AA filter isn't an issue with either body.

It's the combination of inconsistent focus (burst mode in AI Servo and/or AF single point even on static subjects),

If you experienced poor AF you should have returned the body for repair work/calibration.

drab colors

It's digital. You decide the colors.

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 49