December 18, 2014, 09:27:36 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 - caruser

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 02, 2013, 07:56:29 AM »
The point of ETTR is to allow more light to hit the sensor.

No, the point of ETTR is to avoid blown highlights while not losing detail in shadows. It might mean less light hitting the sensor, if average metering was going to blow important highlights.

In digital photography, exposing to the right (ETTR) is the technique of increasing the exposure of an image in order to collect the maximum amount of light and thus get the optimum performance out of the digital image sensor.

+1.  It's all about getting as much light as you can without clipping the highlights while reducing the shadows.  It's equivalent to an overexposure of around 1/3 EV.
You can't generalise ETTR in that way, whether and by how much it overexposes or underexposes depends on what the autoexposure does (since that's the frame of reference in this case) and on the concrete scene (the maximum difference between the "average" and maximum brightness).

A dark scene with one slightly brighter spot will need a few stops of overexposure; a normally lit scene with one very very bright object will need some underexposure.

So I'd say that Wikipedia is wrong; ETTR is a "technique" to ensure the best exposure without clipping the highlights. In some cases it increases the exposure, in others it decreases it. If ETTR were a simple overexposure or underexposure we wouldn't need a new term for it.

EOS Bodies / Re: An Update on the 75+mp Camera in the Wild
« on: August 02, 2013, 03:15:33 AM »
Klaus at Photozone and I have shown several times that  if one copy does not appear as it should we took another copy to test,  I tested 4 Canon 24-70 before I got one good example  and showed the test results  and so  did also Klaus  .
All brands have problems with the uniformity and quality, also Nikon
If I were reviewing a lens and I got a crap copy, I'd review the crap copy and give it a harsh negative review.  The fact of the matter is that a glowing of a review where three out of four copies are junk does not accurately reflect what a person is going to get when they buy one, statistically speaking.  If these manufacturers want to get good reviews, they should have better quality control.  This isn't rocket science.  They could trivially attach every lens to a test rig, measure it, and verify that it is within spec like pretty much every other professional hardware manufacturer does.  The fact that they obviously do not do this speaks volumes about their product quality, and I firmly believe that the reviews should reflect that lack of concern.
This could be taken a step further by purchasing multiple copies, like now, but posting the review for the WORST out of the bunch! Or start reviewing one copy, and then see what the worst one that a reader of your's got is!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why is metering not linked to AF spot?
« on: July 30, 2013, 06:20:07 AM »
It appears to be artificial product segmentation.

It seems to work in their favour, this feature was one of the reasons that made me get a 1DX over a 5DIII.

Of course some other people might have chosen a Nikon over a non-1-series Canon, we don't have the numbers.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Panasonic 60x superzoom
« on: July 19, 2013, 11:48:19 AM »
Come on, is this the level we are at?

"The [...] FZ70's lens has a 60x magnification factor, meaning you could probably read the date on a penny from across the room."

Anecdotally, I just don't see people using point & shoot cameras anymore. I see either smart phones or bridge/DSLR cameras.
And, it appears, many iPads and other tablets, seems like more than p/s cameras...

The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously.  In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry.  The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.
Battery life is a very real problem with modern smartphones, you get all the features, but not for very long!

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 14, 2013, 12:58:54 PM »
If the 100-400 is as good as Canon's recent new offerings, then it should be markedly better than the 70-200L II + 2x III.  Hopefully, it'll take extenders well and give us good IQ at 560mm, which is about as far as we can get with a mobile hand-holdable system.
Hopefully, it'll take them at all.  Lots of people are clamoring for a rotating zoom like the 70-300L.  What if that plus a compact design means the lens loses extender compatibility??  Why would they do that?  Consider...all along the 'barrier' was 400/420mm.  If you wanted longer and still wanted AF, you shelled out the big bucks for a 1-series body or a supertele.  So now that they've put f/8 AF in a 5-series, perhaps they'll take away a 'cheap' 560mm f/8 IS option with good IQ.  Not really trying to be the voice of doom, here, but we all know that Canon giveth and Canon taketh away (AFMA on the 60D, anyone?).
But presumably it would still work with 3rd-party extenders?

I'd get a 135L and while using that I'd think about the 35 IS or which other 35 or 50 to get, or perhaps the 28 IS and 40 pancake.
First, I'd be thankful -- lots of folks would love to have a 5D2 and $2K!!
That's a nice answer.

Now that I think of it, surprising that they don't use computer-generated renderings.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 1DX Junk camera??
« on: April 11, 2013, 08:54:59 AM »
I literally LOL'd at the end ;-)

Btw, the other day I was at this dance show, dim lighting, with my still rather new 1DX, and took over a thousand shots just to make sure some of them would be in focus, but nearly all of them were, it's a very very noticeable improvement over the 5D2!

Canon General / Re: Goodbye Cruel Canon
« on: March 31, 2013, 04:42:58 PM »
I'd start by getting a girlfriend.
That's the last thing any photographer needs!!!
Always-available model!  :)

  • Give ISO the same importance as time and aperture (e.g. put aperture on one wheel, iso on the other, and time in auto).
  • Sometimes I want to simply change a custom-mode from e.g. Tv to M or similar, which doesn't seem possible (please correct me if I'm wrong).
The first is possible now.  Av mode, and Custom Controls to switch the QCD to ISO (see p. 341).  With that, ISO is set during metering only.  With that setting in M mode, you set aperture/shutter when metering is inactive, and once you start metering you can adjust ISO.

You can't change the base mode of a C# setting. Canon could fix that for the 1D X, it seems to be a legacy of having a mode dial (the 1D X is the first to have C# settings and no mode dial).

Thanks for the hint regarding the ISO controls, that will be useful, and I'll read the manual again for other treasures that I might have missed. (All in all the customisability of the 1DX is really good compared to what I had before, and I'm glad to have made this upgrade.)

What would you like to see added to Canon's next firmware update for the 1D X?

I would like more than 6 choices in the My Menu. Even just 2 extra would be nice as I do find the My menu quite useful.
Yes, that with the menu would be nice, too. In general the possibilities with the 1DX are much better than what I was used to, but there is obviously still much room for improvement...

  • AFMA built-in at the press of a button, and yes different for different focus points etc.
  • That exposure compensation in M with auto-iso.
  • Give ISO the same importance as time and aperture (e.g. put aperture on one wheel, iso on the other, and time in auto).
  • Histogram when you zoom like even the cheap Nikons do when reviewing pictures.
  • Same thing for live view.
  • When I hook up the 1DX to a LAN via Ethernet and the LAN has a wireless part I want to use the 6D's remote control iPhone app.
  • Optionally automatically enable mirror-lookup when the 2-second self-timer is used.
  • Sometimes I want to simply change a custom-mode from e.g. Tv to M or similar, which doesn't seem possible (please correct me if I'm wrong).
  • Orientation-linked AF-point-selection is cool, but how about linking choice of custom mode to orientation? EC? Let me choose!
  • The AE-sensor has enough resolution for face-detect, so warn me if the phase-detect point is not exactly on the eye (or, even better, give me a drive-mode that while I keep the shutter pressed takes a picture every time a phase-detect point happens on an eye and focus is achieved).
  • Show me the effective transfer rate to the card(s) in MB/sec.
  • If there's an internal temperature sensor, tell me what it's measuring.
  • More possibilities to configure minimum shutter speeds or maximum apertures etc. and priority between ISO, aperture and shutter speed ("set the highest f-number where you can maintain 1/100 or 1/focal length, whichever is faster, with ISO not above 6400" or "with the preselected CoC, give me aperture for no less than 2cm of DoF and give equal priority to ISO and shutter speed to get correct exposure").

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9