July 29, 2014, 06:48:26 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 - Meh

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 47
556
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 08:11:19 PM »
Quote
Very few replies here for an 'historic' Canon announcement!
Well, 16,000 bucks is a little bit out of my budghet...
Wait and see what the other camera costs.....

I'm more interested in the label on that second camera and am still hoping for a 5D3...

5D3 is not getting announced, this is a video only event. The 5D3 is a photography camera... not a camera entended for Hollywood.

You're probably right that it won't be a "5D3" but there could be a video optimized pro-level DSLR form factor camera announced.

Not that there is any rule that says Canon can't announce anything they want and could certainly add "one more thing" if they wanted to.

557
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:56:50 PM »
We're running a way a bit here.  Couldn't the DSLR picture just be of the 1D X with a purple 'C' badge on it, to show that you can use the new cinema EF lenses on a regular EOS stills camera?
I was thinking the same thing a bit ago.  Also, is there any significance to the RED color, indicating that this camera aspires to compete with RED equipment? Or is it just an additional notification of a professional body/lens combo?

Or the RED color could be because Canon's corporate color is RED.

558
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:55:09 PM »
The three primes are 24 f/1.5, 50 f/1.3, and 85 f/1.3.  It is interesting how the 50 and 85 are slower than the standard L series EF lenses, especially for such an expensive camera. They better be good.

No they are T/1.5 and T/1.3.  T Stops and F Stops are different.  I cant remember the exact difference, but I know that T stops let in more light, but T/1.3 is superior to f/1.2 for sure.
Oh dang. Well I feel stupid now.


Don't feel stupid, I would think they were the same too (and did at one point).

T-stop takes into account the transmission loss of the optical glass.  It is the equivalent of an f-stop for a lens that had zero transmission loss.

559
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:49:17 PM »
There it is on engaget... much clearer shot of the second camera and certainly looks like a DSLR with "C" badge in the upper left of the body.

Yup, it's gonna be the "but wait, there's more."  Not everyone is going to ditch their 5D2 for a $16k camera, it's too much to ask.  They're going to release something that they want to sell the S___ out of.  I'm willing to bet the primes will be around $3k or more/each

Next big question though... will it be a lower resolution sensor (i.e. less than 21MP) with the justification it's optimized for video?

560
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:46:48 PM »
There it is on engaget... much clearer shot of the second camera and certainly looks like a DSLR with "C" badge in the upper left of the body.

561
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:20:06 PM »
Anyone else notice that the camera on the left in the group shot of all the new stuff is not the same as the C300 and it's NOT a 5D?  And has the same little light on it as the C300...Another cam on the way?

That'll be the 5D3... they'll announce it at the end as "oh, and just one more thing...".... woohoo bornshooter was right!!!

My thought exactly.  It looks like a standard DSLR; and they are going to say hey by the way we have the 5d-C have fun with that Nikon.

Or maybe it's a 1Dx.

I thought that as well and looked real hard at the "red light" to see if it was just a reflection but it really does look like the "C" on the C 300.

562
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:06:21 PM »
Anyone else notice that the camera on the left in the group shot of all the new stuff is not the same as the C300 and it's NOT a 5D?  And has the same little light on it as the C300...Another cam on the way?

That'll be the 5D3... they'll announce it at the end as "oh, and just one more thing...".... woohoo bornshooter was right!!!

563
Lenses / Re: Buying a 5d mark ii what should my first L lens should I buy?
« on: November 03, 2011, 03:36:46 PM »
Without knowing what you plan to shoot with it, it's hard to make a recommendation, but the 24-105/4L kit is a great deal.

If you look at the SUBJECT line the question is answered

I read bvukich's comment to mean what type of photography/subjects the poster plans to shoot, not which body as indicated in the SUBJECT line.

564
EOS Bodies / Re: Max CF Card size that can be used in the 5D2?
« on: November 03, 2011, 12:32:43 PM »
This morning, that additional discount seems to be gone - cart price is the same as browsing price.  Fortunately, I got my pair of 32 GB 90 MB/s cards last night.  :D

Yep, on Tuesday evening when the sale started the browsing price for the Extreme Pro 32Gb was shown as $99.99 and no additional discount in the cart.  I also ordered two of them along with some other goodies... the shipping fees to Canada are not much more for many items compared to one so on that basis I can justify to myself adding more items to my cart :)

565
EOS Bodies / Re: Max CF Card size that can be used in the 5D2?
« on: November 03, 2011, 12:26:16 PM »
Many good points and all correct relative to specific circumstances.  If price doesn't matter, it's good to have the faster cards for those situations when it will make a difference.   Shooting at high fps is primarily dependent on the speed and size of the buffer.   However, on my 7D, I get an extra 3-5 frames before the buffer fills using 400x cards compared to 200x cards.  The reason is that in the time that has passed before the buffer is filled more images have been emptied from the buffer onto the CF card.   And once full and I stop shooting, the buffer does empty much faster. 

Using 600x cards is not as big a difference compared to 400x cards.... it's only 1 maybe 2 extra frames before the buffer fills compared to 400x cards.  In fact, there may not even be any difference and when I think it's an extra frame the file sizes were a little smaller in that sequence.

Biggest difference is in read speed copying files off the card to the computer.  400x cards are twice as fast as 200x cards.  600x cards are not faster than 400x if using a USB2.0 reader because USB2.0 is limited to 60Mb/s (480bits/s).

Nothing scientific about any of the above as I didn't try to do any controlled tests.

566
EOS Bodies / Re: Does a Digital camera need SLR?
« on: November 02, 2011, 11:17:21 PM »
10 FPS cameras like the 1D series predict where the subject will be for the next frame and focus there, and do not AF each frame at 10FPS. 

Sorry had to delete and edit the reply I just made if anyone started reading that:  Yes, in "one shot" mode the AF locks and then the camera will fire away without refocusing between frames.

You're referring to predictive AF and that is what my comments are relative to.  With predictive AF, the camera will fire away at whatever the frame rate is and will take an AF reading between every frame and adjust focus between frames.   And you're right, it also measures the speed of the subject and predicts where the subject will be in about 60 milliseconds (or whatever the shutter lag for the camera is) in the future when the exposure will be taken and focus there rather than focus where the subject is at that moment.  Between each frame AF measurements are made, a focus position is predicted, and the focus element is moved to that position.  It's essentially the same process whether in one-shot or predictive mode the difference being whether it focuses where the subject is now or where it will be 60 ms later.  And in predictive AF mode, if it can do that between frames then it is doing it in less than 0.1s (for a 10fps camera).

Mirrorless cameras do something similar.  The new Nikon may improve on this with much faster focusing.  The previous mirrorless cameras are hampered by a lack of computing power, but the new Nikon seems to have plenty of it.  Sony also has upped the stakes with their latest mirrorless cameras, but there are still lots of problems to solve before they get to professional levels, and the viewfinder is one of the biggest.

Depends which mirrorless cameras you are referring to.  My comments were referring to the differences between contrast AF and phase-detect AF.  The new Nikons V1 and J1 (if that's what you're referring to) claim to have a hybrid AF that uses contrast and phase-detect and I'm not sure how they implemented it.  The Fuji camera I mentioned has phase-detect built into the image sensor but it is slower (0.158s) and masks off some photosites so technically that affects the image and has some other issues I believe.

The Sony SLT (if that's what you're referring to) are not true mirrorless... they just use a translucent prism in place of the mirror that doesn't flip.  It stays in place and splits the light up so that 70% goes to the image sensor and 30% to the EVF and AF sensors.  The downside to this system is of course that you lose 30% of the light (about a half stop) from the image and also that the image may be slightly degraded (not much though) because the light used for the image must pass through that translucent mirror.  In a flipping mirror camera, when the mirror flips up 100% of the light is used for the image and does not pass through an additional optical elements.

Feel free to correct anything I'm not getting quite right.

567
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 02, 2011, 04:09:57 PM »

I'm no neuro but I can take a shot to rephrase it into less technical terms....  we'll see if I have this right!
........ 

Perfect response Meh .... really dumbed down for me!   ;)

You get a gold star!

Thanks!

568
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 02, 2011, 04:09:15 PM »
But in a real-world application, DoF is shallower with FF (because you have to move further from the subject to compensate for the narrower angle of view with a crop sensor).

I like the way you phrased "real-world application"...  unless something is preventing the photographer from moving, he/she will move forward or back to compose the shot and to get the desired framing one would naturally (without thinking about the technical aspects) move a little further away with a crop sensor camera according to what is seen in the viewfinder.  And because we don't walk around with DoF calculators we might tend to choose the same aperture setting and when we look at the images we do in fact observe that the FF gave more background blur.

569
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs 7Dii (FF vs APS-C)
« on: November 02, 2011, 03:16:16 PM »
@Meh - Exactly, it's the iris diaphragm that matters. Practically, since you have to actually do simple math (eek!) to determine that from the focal length and f/number, it's more practical to use those values to determine DoF.

LL's experiment with the gremlin is approximately correct. In fact, at the distances involved it's actually not the best approximation. I don't agree that the degree of unsharpness is identical - but it's close, good enough for approximation. I've tried an equivalent experiment, as a post hoc test, with my AFMA testing. Since I use 25x the focal length for all lenses, and the LensAlign fills the same proportion of the frame (i.e. distance and focal length are equal and opposite).  With an actual distance scale on the ruler, it's apparent that f/2.8 at 16mm (16-35/2.8L II) and at 200mm f/2.8 (70-200mm f/2.8L IS II), the measured DoF is the same, when distance and focal length are reciprocal.

Actually, the reduction of DoF to dependence only on magnification holds at macro distances (and for microscopy, although we usually call it axial resolution not DoF, and use numerical apertures vs. f/numbers).

Neuro: Please dumb this down for me... (you have done this many times  :) ) : Bokeh notwithstanding.... do i get more or less OOF blur (Quantity) is APC-S or with FF. Give me some numbers in feet etc if you can... cause "framing and similar terms are relative  :-\

I'm no neuro but I can take a shot to rephrase it into less technical terms....  we'll see if I have this right!

If you use the same lens, set to the same aperture, and place the camera the same distance from the subject, you will get more OOF blur with an APS-C sensor compared to a FF sensor.

If you use the same lens, set to the same aperture, and place the APS-C camera 1.6X further away from the subject than the FF camera (to get the same framing) you will get more OOF blur with the FF camera.

If you use the same lens, set to the same aperture, and place the APS-C camera 1.26X further away from the subject than the FF camera you will get the same OOF blur. (1.26 is the square root of the ratio of CoC of FF and APS-C)

If you use different lenses (two different focal lengths) on the same camera but set to the same aperture, and place the camera at the same distance from the subject, the shorter focal length will give less OOF blur.

If you use different lenses (two different focal lengths) on the same camera but set to the same aperture, and place each camera at 25X (or any multiple) of the focal length, both lenses will give the same OOF blur.  (This is the gremlin example on LL that keeps the subject the same size)


570
Canada / Re: Futureshop VIP sale Thursday, Aug 11th.
« on: November 02, 2011, 11:38:59 AM »
Best Buy now owns Future Shop. Curiously, they now often build stores side by side with BB targeting Joe Consumer and FS targeting the technophiles. I've spent a small fortune at FS since the late '80s and have never seen bait and switch. If they advertise a product that may not be in stock they always tag the ad with "limited quantites per store". But the only time this seems to be used is Boxing Day.

Agreed.  I've never had a problem with FutureShop.  Even the much maligned extended warranty program treated me well a number of years ago on a laptop that died.  It took a little over a week but they got working (claimed to have replaced components but who knows and it's still working and running XP fine despite being 7 years old (I use it as a backup/test machine).  I don't buy the extended warranty on laptops anymore... they're more reliable than they used to be and the replacement cost is low enough to just buy a new one in the unlikely event something goes wrong.

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 47