Messages

121

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]

« on: January 29, 2012, 06:34:21 PM »

I have no understanding what so ever for those who wants better dynamics and ISO performance but not higher resolution when it's clearly better with the better dynamics, ISO performance AND higher resolution. You must be stupid if you want 2 of 3 improvements instead of all 3.

Donny you're out of your element!

Unless there is some tremendous new breakthrough that negates the laws of physics... you only get to pick two. 

If you want amazing DR and ISO performance then you have to sacrifice Resolution. 

If you want high ISO and Resolution then your DR is really going to suffer. 

If you want DR and Resolution then you're going to have to take a hit on ISO. 

Sure we would like all three, but until we can negate the laws of physics in regards to CMOS sensors, you only get to pick two priorities, or a compromising balance of all three, and that's exactly what the 1D X supposedly is, the sweet spot between all three.

I suggest you read up on how CMOS sensors actually work, there are actually physical limits to the photon collecting ability. But the gist is... the smaller the pixel, the less light it will take in, and consequently a lower ISO.

Sensor Technology - http://dpbestflow.org/camera/sensor 

Fundamentals of Image Sensor Technology - http://www.cse.wustl.edu/~jain/cse567-11/ftp/imgsens/index.html


See for yourself that higher resolution can cause diffraction that actually lessens the image quality...

122

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]

« on: January 29, 2012, 09:28:58 AM »

-  I also expect we won't see any more than a doubling of the ISO speed, probably up to 12,800, but much more usable and probably software limited just to keep it from eating into the 1D X sales. Hopefully we'll see a nice jump in the DR too. But expect the 1D X to trounce the 5DMK3 when it comes to low light and DR performance, even if Canon has to kneecap the upper ISO select-ability of the 5DMK3 to do so. I don't think Canon will let the selectable ISO be anywhere near the 51,200 of the 1D X, even if the noise levels for the two look identical up to 12,800... the 5DMK3 will just not have anything higher available.

I don't think so, Canon has never once intentionally crippled sensor performance.

You misunderstand me, I'm not talking about crippling sensor performance, I'm sure it will be phenomenal, it's just they will impose a limit to the selectable ISO. Who knows it may even remain exactly where it is for select-ability, just that the resulting images will all be much more useable.

And yes Canon has crippled performance of cameras by not including a robust firmware. See the following link. The 300D has the same sensor as the 10D, but the 300D was firmware limited to 1600 ISO and the 10D to 3200 ISO. A firmware hack was all that was needed to reclaim the 3200 ISO on the 300D, and other functions that had been left out.

 http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/digital_rebel_firmware_hack.html

123

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]

« on: January 28, 2012, 08:25:47 PM »

- I can see these specs being accurate if the 5DMK3 is released at $3500-$4000.

- They could pull off using the 61 point auto-focus, no reason not to... but the 100,000 pixel RGB metering will be absent, as will all the features that come with it, like the intelligent tracking and spot metering using the active AF points. So the 1D X will still be well ahead of the 5DMK3 when it comes to mission critical action shots, and evaluative metering.

-  I also expect we won't see any more than a doubling of the ISO speed, probably up to 12,800, but much more usable and probably software limited just to keep it from eating into the 1D X sales. Hopefully we'll see a nice jump in the DR too. But expect the 1D X to trounce the 5DMK3 when it comes to low light and DR performance, even if Canon has to kneecap the upper ISO select-ability of the 5DMK3 to do so. I don't think Canon will let the selectable ISO be anywhere near the 51,200 of the 1D X, even if the noise levels for the two look identical up to 12,800... the 5DMK3 will just not have anything higher available.

124

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Brief Specs? [CR1]

« on: January 27, 2012, 03:42:50 AM »

Why not - the cheap 7D has dual processors??

Exactly, and It wouldn't surprise me if the 5DMK2 is actually cheaper for Canon to build than the 7D. I know there are fewer sensors per wafer in production, but I seriously doubt they cost Canon more than a few dollars more per chip than the 7D's sensor, and by every other measure the 7D is a better built camera. So either it's a wash in cost to produce, or, more likely, the 7D actually costs Canon more per camera.

125

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Brief Specs? [CR1]

« on: January 26, 2012, 10:32:37 PM »

I have to say, I did not expect 7.5 FPS. I think I'll buy one... maybe two.

If you buy two you could get 15 fps, you just need to practice your framing by feel instead of by sight. And if they're $3K a piece you'll save $800 and get 1 fps over the 1D X.

126

Portrait / Re: Costumes and other

« on: January 26, 2012, 06:32:26 PM »

Canon T90, Vivitar Series 1 28-105mm f/2.8-3.8, Kodak MAX 400. The model refused to pose, insisted that I take the pictures while she danced, manual focus.

127

Portrait / Re: Black and White portraits

« on: January 26, 2012, 10:49:40 AM »

Old School B&W - Canon T90, Vivitar Series 1 28-105mm f/2.8-3.8, T-MAX P3200

128

Site Information / Re: a thank you letter to Canon Rumors

« on: January 18, 2012, 03:25:58 PM »

By the way, if you don't like SOPA, you really aren't going to like what it coming in the sales tax arena.  Within the next two years, there is a strong likelihood that so-called tax-free online shopping is coming to an end.

  Really, I have no problem with internet sales being taxed. I welcome it, it would make bookkeeping for the business so much simpler. To claim we are against SOPA because we want everything free is missing the point of the protest entirely. It's not about a support of piracy, it's about due process of law. We've already seen corporations abuse the process of take down notices for works they do not hold the rights to, expanding that to entire sites without going through the process of determining that (1) The people requesting the take down are actually the right holders, and (2) That the sites failed to take down said content when requested to do so. The way SOPA/PIPA is written, it's the equivalent of me having you thrown in prison because I wrote to the police that you "broke the law"... then telling you that if you want to get out of prison that you have to prove that you didn't break the law. You get no trial, no jury, you are guilty until you can prove your innocence. In the mean time we get to have all the payment networks block any financial transactions with you, or they could be in violation by aiding your "criminal" undertakings. 

  So yes, I do have a problem with corporations being able to take down entire websites with a simple "good faith" claim of infringement. If a site is infringing then let them send a take down notice for the offending material, if the site refuses to take down the material then let it be fought out in court. If the complaint is valid, then let a court order be issued to have the site taken down, and hey, guess what, we already have laws to do that, it's just that companies, and governments, don't want to have to bother with the legal process, they want the power to terminate sites on their word alone.

129

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L II [CR2]

« on: January 17, 2012, 10:37:08 AM »

mkII represent a designation for a new lens in its current "configuration" which includes IS.  So for the 24-70, if it does not have IS, it will be called 24-70 f2.8L II.  If it does have IS it will be called 24-70mm f2.8L IS.
Hope this helps...Jacques

I see, I was under the impression that if the II was after the IS on Canon lenses referred to the IS generation instead of the a combined IS/Lens generation. Probably from an article I read on a IS II lens where they mentioned it was a second generation IS system and I (erroneously) equated that the II after the IS was a reference to the 2nd generation IS system.


 Still confusing on Canons part from a end users perspective, in that if they were up to an IS IV lens and they then produced a lens that had never had IS before and marked it as just an IS, the average consumer will likely think it's an obsolete design - (IS) vs (IS IV), as canon doesn't exactly go out of their way to let you know the original release dates on their lenses.

(Hell, I've been Canon Only since 1985 and I had it wrong, chances are the average consumer will too.)

130

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L II [CR2]

« on: January 17, 2012, 12:13:45 AM »

<strong>Here we go again</strong> [...] the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS II.

Indeed   I'll just point out I think CR Guy is being funny with this, as we've already discussed the apparent wrongness of the "IS II" specification when the current lens is not IS so the IS II moniker would be erroneous.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the II designation has anything to do with whether a lens had IS previously, but what generation of IS technology Canon is using for the lens. You wouldn't call the DIGIC 5 processor a DIGIC 1 just because it's going in an all new camera body, the same holds true for for the IS, it's Canon's 2nd generation IS system... even if it's the first appearance in this particular lens.

131

EOS Bodies / Re: When will Canon 1D-X release?

« on: January 06, 2012, 05:53:17 AM »

At 2:30, he said "4799 available on Feb 16!!!"

£4799 refers to price in british pounds, not quantity available. Which would put the british price about $648 above the US price of $6800. I seem to recall reading that Canon is aiming at 10,000 units per month for the 1D x. 

 I imagine that Canon could have several thousand ready for an advance launch if they felt like pushing up the date to steal Nikon's thunder.

132

EOS Bodies / Re: 5d mkiii insanity

« on: December 25, 2011, 12:03:43 AM »

I finally couldn't take it any more so last week I took the plunge and purchased a 5dmkii with 24-105L...

Personally, as someone in the same boat, I just wanted to say thank you. Murphy's law should now come into effect...  Canon will therefore officially announce the 5DMk3 within a month.

133

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit About the 5D Mark III? [CR1]

« on: December 08, 2011, 03:49:57 AM »

The purpose of the 5D Mrk III is not:
-   to be a great professional landscape camera
Landscaper Shooters who keep saying this is so popular.. please be realistic.

You could not be more wrong !

Some of the best landscape photograpers here in the Netherlands use the Canon 5D Mark 2 and these people do shoots all over the world all year long at the most beautifull and sometimes difficult to reach places as I  learned in a seminar of one of them.

Being there at JUST the right time , catching the moment with magical light , the right season etc etc thats what counts in getting greater pictures in landscape.
They use big Gitzo tripods and Lee ND filters but seem to be very satisfied with 'just' a Canon camera.

  Just because some professionals use it as such, doesn't mean this was the purpose of the camera. In business, decisions are made, usually, to appeal to the largest possible market, and I guarantee you the wedding/portrait professional market dwarfs the professional landscape market, at a ratio probably greater than 500:1. That the 5DMk2's so-so AF keeps it from being the ultimate wedding/portrait camera, doesn't mean that landscape was it's intended target.

134

EOS Bodies / Re: How often do you go through a body? Why do you upgrade?

« on: November 17, 2011, 09:31:08 PM »

I take photographs for about 25 years now. Bodies during this time: T70, T90, 40D. That's it. Strange.

Best regards
Eisbaer

27 years here. Bodies T70 (1984-1987), T90 - 2 bodies (1987-2011), 7D (2011)... 1D X (As soon as it's released).

  The T90 still works like a champ. The 7D is nice, but will become a back up camera for the 1D X... until the 5DMk3 comes out.

Cheers,
Wrathwilde

135

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D X

« on: November 12, 2011, 06:15:15 AM »

What does the X stand for? Did they explain? - Ooops sorry re read

I wonder why they steered away from 5 as the 1 series was always named after the digic processor number... eg 1d3 - digic 3 -  1d4 digic 4

- I realise they crossed over the two models... but I thought the numbering system was quite effective

Maybe because the EOS 1D X has two Digic 5 processors, 5+5=X - Just Kidding, but it would still work.