December 20, 2014, 08:50:52 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.


Topics - K-amps

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31
Canon General / Canon Inc. DSLR Mkt Share in 2011
« on: January 31, 2012, 11:32:50 AM »

BNC released their annual electronics company rankings: Not sure how they get their data, but the criteria seems to be market share:  Looks like Canon is doing great in DSLR and Lens categories trouncing Nikon again. What I got a kick out of was in Lenses, Tamron beat out Nikon for second place.  ;D


On the negative side: If the Canon bosses feel they are doing so great... they wont be pushed to announce the 5Diii   :-\



32
Canon General / Sensor Saturation/ DR
« on: January 23, 2012, 02:25:37 PM »
 I like the idea of the equipment getting smarter, in this case, can it avoid burning up highlights or unduly darkening shadows due to the limited DR of the sensor. While advanced in lithography are the current roadblock, there needs to be a rethink of the way Sensor data is recorded and handled.

Could they develop local dimming on the sensor (or local illuminating):

So lets say you are shooting a scenery of the sea with horizon in the middle. If you expose for water, Sky is over exposed and if you expose for sky, the sea is underexposed etc. (Yes there are Grads but I don't want to carry them everywhere).

What if the sensor can locally dim the sky to bring it down to levels that do not distort (burn out). This will definitely need a faster data processor, but similar things have been done in the Audio with Dynamic range compression/ expansion. The concept is the same. Get the signal past the limitations of the equipment and then later if need be, restored to it's original glory if the right displays are available (with High DR).

So there are 2 concepts to think about:

1) Reduction of DR to fit the sensor's capabilities (sort of what HDR does but without taking multiple exposures)
2) Restoration of DR under right conditions (so that the exposure is not permanently captured in reduced DR but can be rendered however which way).

In some ways this is similar to the inability of LCD displays to show absolute blacks, so manufacturers came up with local dimming schemes. In the good old days of Audio cassettes, the issue of limited Dynamic range also existed and there came along dbx...

Once the information is captured in this compressed format, PP can be used to render it anywhich way the user desires.  Current technology renders each photosite anyway, they would just need a pre-layer to determine exposure levels before bayer demosaicing etc. It will take a lot redesigning, including perhaps a new RAW like format to handle this variable DR and decoders to process it..

This could be revolutionary if implemented correctly.

33
Lenses / Is my 70-200 2.8 mk.II back focussing?
« on: January 15, 2012, 07:33:29 PM »
I took some shots at a party last night. Most of them were a bit out of focus which I don't mind in portraits of regular folks  :)... I learnt that the hard way!

But I was curious, if the lens is back focussing.

Exposure is manual, no flash, AF is spot center (5D classic) aimed at the eyes. @f2.8 . NO sharpening done, though some NR was applied in LR4.

The eyes are not as sharp, however some of the hair (a smidge behind her eye plane) are more in focus. See below her mouth on the right side that lock of hair seems to be more in focus.

What do you guys think?  this 70-200 f2.8 mk.II is only a few weeks old and not fully broken in.

There's no MA on the 5Dc.

34
Software & Accessories / Canon SDK +iOS/Android
« on: January 09, 2012, 01:21:47 PM »
Does anyone know if there are plans (rumors  ;) ) of Canon announcing an SDK or plug in for people who would like to take their iOS /Android Tablets into the field for previewing their shots, or even using it for Time Lapse/ focus bracketing and similar "extended" functions? These functions can be performed by a laptop, but these can be heavy & unwieldy on a long trek.

If there is any site where I'd hope to get the info, it has to be CR !

35
EOS Bodies / 7D successor Poll
« on: January 05, 2012, 11:13:05 AM »
Given the past Polls on the 7D, I was wondering if an APS-H offering was made to match the crop-pull of the 7D (i.e. same pixel width) would it appeal to current 7D owners? Would they upgrade to it? Would current 5D owners want the extra reach offered by the APS-H? Would current 1D owners get the same reach they are missing with the 1Dx?

Edit: In option 1: We assume better feature set for Firmware; better noise/ ISO performance compared to 7Dc
Edit 2: Added 2 more flavors based on some requests: Poll re-set: You can re-do your votes.

36
Lenses / Anyone try a Vivitar 2x extender
« on: December 27, 2011, 10:49:00 AM »


I know... you get what you pay for... but at $109, this is worth looking into: I was wondering if anyone has any experiences with these:  http://www.ebay.com/itm/2X-Extender-Canon-EOS-EF-II-Lenses-/130621881929?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item1e69abbe49


37
EOS Bodies / Upgrading from 5d... 1ds2 or 5d2
« on: December 20, 2011, 11:40:27 AM »

I have been wondering what to upgrade next from my 5D. I am looking for the following:

1) Better ISO performance Primarily
2) 7 AEB in Burst is a nice to have

I don't care about big jumps in MP or Video.  The used prices of the 5d2 and the 1Ds2 are not far off. Which one should I consider and why? Thanks!!

38
Lenses / 70-200f2.8 mk.II vs 70-300L sharpness test
« on: December 03, 2011, 05:07:54 PM »
Did some tests as a result of a discussion on another thread. Comparing the sharpness of the 2 great lenses with the following test conditions: Subject shot = a Ruler placed 45 degrees on the wall and focused on the 12" mark.

Attached are 3 shots; 2 of the 70-200mk.ii (I have 2 copies, the old one is a refurb unit and the new one is a new unit bought from adorama) and the last 1 of the 70-300L

1) ISO = 100
2) F5.6 (favors the 70-200 slightly since it is natively larger aperture)
3) 5D mounted on tripod
4) camera jpeg used: zero PP done except 100% crop .
5) Spot AF at the 12" Mark. Did not MF since I seldom use MF with these 2 lenses; Spot AF relevant for my use.
6) Used various focal lengths but the attachments are for all 3 at 200mm
7) Ruler was vertically placed with top = higher numbers on scale. After cropped I turned the crops 90 degrees clockwise for better viewing.

Conclusion:

1) The 2 copies of the 70-200mk.II are very similar in sharpness and focal length
2) The 70-300L set at 200mm shows a smaller frame compared to the 70-200's not sure which one is accurate the 200's or the 300.
3) The 300 seems slightly sharper than both (though it is a toss) and has a greater DoF at f5.6 than the 200's.

Hope this helps people who are considering both:


39
Lenses / Owners of 70-200f2.8L IS mk.II & 70-300 L IS
« on: November 22, 2011, 01:20:13 PM »
Guys:

I have owned and enjoyed the 70-300L these past months. It is light and has great IQ. All along I was on the lookout for a cheap 70-200f2.8 IS mk.II, and while I could goto ebay/CL, I figured if I could get one refurbished from Canon Direct (i.e. like new but serviced by Canon, I would go for it)... I waited for months but none showed up in stock till last Friday, I visited the site again and said to myself... if they have one in stock, I will push the button.

Well one did and it was delivered today!! ;D  I was very excited and went home over lunch to open the box up.

Apart from a tiny paint chip (less than 1mmx1mm) it is MINT. It does not come with the white box, but otherwise with all accessories. I think it is a great deal at $1999 especially when Canon has gone over it (something not all Production units can claim since random lots are inspected on the line):... or so I console myself. :-\

I only had time to fit it on to my 5D and take some test shots and view them on the Camera LCD.

It is too early to say if the images are good or not, but what I did notice is that for the 5-10 minutes that I held it.... my left arm which supports the lens... started to quiver with the weight after this little session. This never happens with the 70-300L.

Originally; my intention was to sell the 70-300L when I got the 70-200mk.ii +x2.0mk.III, but now... I am wondering if I will enjoy holding this heavy lens for long periods.

Would like to know if you guys have trouble keeping up with this solid lens and did you get used to it.

Thanks,
K

40
EOS Bodies / World's priciest Photograph... bland
« on: November 10, 2011, 04:35:27 PM »
Why did anyone pay $4.3m for this...? it's nice... but whats so great about it.

Experts... please make me see the light.

http://gizmodo.com/5858107/worlds-priciest-picture-is-as-bland-as-it-is-expensive



41
Canon General / Filters: Cokin P Series "Equivalent" quandary
« on: November 01, 2011, 04:46:51 PM »
As some of you know, I am fairly new to the hobby... so much so that I have never used Filters before (did most of my stuff in PP). As I begin to broaden my creating wings a bit... I bought a cheap Filter kit off ebay: this one: http://www.ebay.com/itm/200641087439?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

to go on my 24-105mm. I think it is great for the price... seems to work ok but there is something weird... at anything below 30mm or thereoff, I get black bars on the sides (severe vignetting); which I think are the edges of the filter holder showing up in the image.

Seems weird that I got graduated filters for outdoor/scenery shots and I cannot use this wide? Is this a defect or was the P series not designed for FF cameras like the 5D?

42
Lenses / New lens... err body?
« on: October 24, 2011, 04:48:15 PM »
This might sound weird to some of you but I wanted to run this by you guys.

I want longer reach... but am thinking of buying a new body to do this.

I currently own a 70-300mm L lens on a 5d Classic body, I would like to take some bird shots, but upgrading to the 100-400mm wont give me much more reach. However if I get a 7D body for the same price of a 100-400mm, I get 480mm effective range due to crop on my current 70-300mm... and maybe more.

I can illuminate more pixels (photosites?) on the 7D's 18 mp sensor thereby giving me an additional increase in resolution of (18mp/12.7mp*100 =) 41.7%... thereby increasing this advantage to 480 * 41.7 = 680mm equivalent resolving power.

Is this making sense or am I way off?

 

43
EOS Bodies / Ball pitching speed / Shutter speed accuracy experiment
« on: September 21, 2011, 02:27:53 PM »
I am trying to estimate the velocity of a pitcher (the radar gun I have does not seem to be not accurate) using a framed capture at 1/60th of a second.

I set a 1d2 at 1/60th sec capture then measured the trail of the ball and (how much it moved in 1/60th of a second); did some on screen measurements; ran some calculations; to get at an expected speed of 90.12mph.

I think this is very close to what I thought his speed would be, so I was confident in the modelling.

This was a cricket pitch, but lets use baseball analogy if it helps.

We have another pitcher that we think might be a bit faster or at least the same than Pitcher #1.

This time I set a 5Dclassic (that I had on me at the time) with the similar (though not same) framing and 1/60th frame capture. I figured as long as I can get a ratio of the ball trail vs the diameter of the ball, I’d end up with a constant that could be uses to compare the two captures and calculate the speeds. We also have a third pitcher who we feel is a bit slower than #1 and #2 that I framed the second time as well.

To summarize:

Pitcher #1 = 1d2 1/60 sec
Pitcher #2 = 5D 1/60 sec
Pitcher #3 = 5D 1/60 sec

For that batters (batsmen) who have faced these 3 guys feel Pitcher 1 & 2 and neck and neck at around 90mph, while pitcher 3, is about 7-8%  slower.

Results:

Pitcher 1 = 90mph (1d2)
Pitcher 2 = 77mph (5d)
Pitcher 3 = 67mph (5d)

While the speed differential between pitcher 2 & 3 is absolute since the test and the conditions are identical (even the trail in the photo bears out a 14% difference between them) what I cannot believe is that Pitcher 2, is only 77mph (though he seems very close or faster than pitcher 1).

I may not be able to assemble these guys together for a retake with the same equipment so here is my question:

When the 1d2 takes a picture at 1/60th of a second, how accurate is that? Same for the 5D.

Based on this, it seems to me that there is a 15% difference between the 2 bodies. Should I trust one or the other? Are shutter speeds that accurate?

44
Macro / Canon 100mm USM MACRO (not L / IS)
« on: September 18, 2011, 05:18:56 PM »
Guys the non-L 100mm Macro is a great value. It is very sharp and half the price of the L version, and the L is not twice as good than this guy. Please post your 100mm Pics here:

45
Lenses / 17-40L bad copy?
« on: September 07, 2011, 09:01:35 AM »
Just got a new 17-40L from a local shop (along with the 70-200mmL IS). The focus on the 17-40L seems off... it is worse than what I remember on my 18-55 kit lens. I know not scientific enough... but having tested the 70-200mm on my 1D2, it seems sharp enough as I would expect any L lens to be, and I am not comparing the 17-40L to the 70-200, but it really does not seem sharp enough.

Does anyone know of QA issues with the 17-40L?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4