September 21, 2014, 06:20:36 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 - K-amps

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 102
16
Reviews / Re: DxO reviews Sony A7s: king of low light photography?
« on: June 24, 2014, 03:25:04 AM »
Guys, Why is there such emotion, calling names, ad homenim instead of talking objectively....  we are all intelligent adults here. If some people are ok with Canon falling behind one step at a time at things it used to excel at in the past, then congrats to the competitors, my take is, competition is good, some of it will trickle into Canon products, then we are all happy. We just need to be a little Patient, I think the new Canon sensor tech will please "most of" us....

The problem I have with innovators like Sony is they change formats too often and whoever has a collection of lens is left with a less than ideal situation of mount mismatches and workarounds. This is where Sony is failing to convert new users, even if they are speed of innovation is impressive.

I think almost everyone (save very few true trolls) are Canonites, why do we bicker like a dysfunctional family so much.... Chill.... don't hate.... understand the human aspect of why someone is saying something and don't start a war that will consume your day with negativity.

Stay positive and discuss ideas only please, not people,

I come to this forum because I learn from the generous experts here who share their knowledge and ask for nothing in return, I mean, what a bargain....

Lets please be polite and respectful to all fellow Canonites and leave out the sarcasm behind.  We are all skilled at debating ideas without the need to resort to personal attacks.

17
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: June 15, 2014, 05:09:33 AM »
One taken recently: Handheld. With a slight breeze. Here is where the 100L shines with it's IS even though the 180mm I had might have been a tad sharper.... but it took too much real estate in my Camera bag.

19
Lenses / Re: Tamron 90 macro or Canon 100 for portraits?
« on: June 09, 2014, 11:03:22 AM »
I liked the 85/1.8 and the sister 100/2.0 both very similar, sold them and got the 100L, I don't miss them. I had similar requirements as you. If you want macro just go with the 100L which is very sharp. If you prefer the look of the F2 over having a dedicated macro, then get the 135 F2 with tubes.... choice is ultimately only yours.


20
Very Sharp!   :)

I like it.

21
Macro / Re: The same flower.
« on: June 09, 2014, 02:49:14 AM »
Second.

First is sterile, distracting, clinical, the yellow is too bright...

22
Not my favorite technique as I don't have the tools (proper focus rails), software (I use PS, Helicon and others made me crazy), or patience, but here's one of my more successful attempts that was necessary - it's a Maypop flower - really odd to me, but apparently an extremely common flower/weed 180mm macro @f/8, 1/800s, ISO 800:


Amazing pop!

23
Macro / Re: Flower macros
« on: June 09, 2014, 02:43:19 AM »

24
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: June 08, 2014, 12:13:28 PM »

25
I'd like to be wrong.... but I fear Canon might disappoint many who desire f/8 AF, Foveon type or other radical sensor design, or 4k video  all tech that could match the wow factor that the 5d2 and 7dc had when they came out... They seem to have been quite conservative since then. There have been many incremental improvements (like the 5d3/1dx over their predecessors, Dual Pixel AF) ; but Canon enthusiasts are waiting for a "wow" factor announcement.

26
As mentioned over and over, all the information you need in order to install is readily available on the ML forums and the idea that you should understand a bit of how it works before using it is not a bad one. :) Really, spend a few days reading through some of the active parts of the forum and you should find most of the info that you need.
For me, the few aspects that DO have some degree of complexity are often the aspects that are under development as well as new modules, not included in the standard package and with those, your best bet is the forum as well as any written guide has the danger of being outdated fairly fast.
That said, the 1.2.3 port works great for me and ML hasn't left my 5D3 since I bought it :)

Thanks Eyeland:

Does installing the 1.2.3 port render any permanent effects (flags) of ML usage if I ever need warranty services?

27
Canon General / Re: Buying refurbished from Canon
« on: June 02, 2014, 08:11:16 AM »
Good service and good price.

However.

You pay sales tax whereas with BH you don't. (whether you do later on when filing taxes is a separate issue).

I got 2 lenses from them. One was steller (70-200 f.28mII) in sharpness. The other (24-70 F2.8mII) was ok, but not steller.....

eventually I sold both and got new ones.

For whatever it is worth.

28
Canon General / Re: 9 Sins of a Newbie Photographer
« on: June 02, 2014, 08:08:50 AM »
Looks like  someone describing themselves...

29

Has any manufacturer implemented a dual scan or dual pixel single scan of a read whereby one scan reads the scene (as an example) +6 stops over and the second scan reads 6 stops under, then these scans are merged to output a file that is +12 stops more in DR than the one file.

If the dual scan will cause a blur for fast objects... perhaps have a dual pixel read out where each partner pixel offsets the recording of the image by +/- 6 stops, and either yield 2 raw files for manual processing, or do an in camera processing to compress the file into visible DR for output purposes...


30
Being in my late teens in the 80's and witnessing how the DAC's in the CD players would go from  16 to 18 to 20 to 24 etc. every 2-3 years, then the sampling frequency even faster than that....

Apologies for the stupid question in advance:

What's the huge deal with this 14bit wall in Digital Photography? Why can't they make an 16 bit processor and give us 16 stops of DR.... ?



Beyond a certain point, it makes no sense - for example, measurements and analysis by various folks on the web put the capacity of the 5D Mark II's sensor at about 59,000 electrons (ISO 100). That's fewer than the maximum number of different positions achievable with 16 bits. If you can't record 16 bits worth of different electron values, why would you use 20?

Thanks. Again I am no expert, but perhaps they would use 16 or 20 bits for similar logic that the CD player manufacturers used, i.e. larger bit depth converters are more linear in certain bit depths... i.e. offset the data stream from the sensor by 2 bits and then encode/decode. If for nothing else, it might be less noisy maybe. I don't know... just thinking out aloud. I would feel visual acuity is more sensitive than auditory... so why doesn't this have the (marketing) traction that audio component manufacturers had. In the end it was a Sony idea of using direct stream as opposed to a ladder process that satisfied the most die hard audiophiles...

How does 59k electrons convert to 14 bit and what influences the # of electrons. Do EXMOR's do more than 59k electrons?


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 102