October 01, 2014, 05:00:34 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 - Lee Jay

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 69
1
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 30, 2014, 05:53:56 PM »
USB devices are all backwards compatible.  You can plug a USB3 source into a USB2 port, no problem.

2
If you haven't downloaded the RAWs and taken a look at them, then I encourage you to.

I finally did, and your 5D3 has more red channel and fixed pattern noise than even my T2i pushed just about as hard.  Fiddling with 70D raws doesn't seem to look anything like that.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 11:49:35 PM »
Also stating that the next bodies will get "upgraded" to the AF sensor on the 7DMkII has got to be wrong, that thing has just one f2.8 sensitive point and the rest are f5.6. That would be a serious downgrade.

All the f/5.6 points are also sensitive at f/2.8.  It's a question of precision.  Have they made the all-new AF sensor with small enough pixels that even the f/5.6 sensitive points are just as precise at f/2.8 as the old f/2.8 points were at f/2.8, and the new f/2.8 points much more precise with f/1.4 lenses than the old f/2.8 points were?

The specs for the new sensor as for DOF precision don't seem to have been released yet.  Or, at least I haven't seen them.

I think this is the information you're looking for.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_7d_mark_ii?selectedName=Features&fileName=0901e02480cf26fa_feature3.html

But then they give the caveat "The number of available AF points, and whether single line or cross-type, varies depending on the lens."
I have no idea what they're talking about, unless some of the AF points are cross type at f5.6 and become single line at an aperture faster than f5.6, which really just sounds dumb.
Then there's the overly optimistic idea that some of the AF points surrounding the center still work at f8, but you'd think they would have said as much if that were the case, given how big a deal f8 autofocus is.

I guess this would be why some people are so eagerly awaiting the release of the manual.

The manual is out, and this didn't have the needed information.  Are the focus points accurate to 1 DOF, 1/3 of the DOF, 1/10th of the DOF, etc.?

4
Curious about the setting... Are the walls a vibrant or subdued green?

Low ISO shots the A7 shows a more neon green while on the next set the 5DIII shows more neon green and the A7 show the subdued hue...

on boths sets something between the two would be pleasing to my eye (what little eye I have for such things)...

The colours really are irrelevant, both cameras can be used with profiles to make the colours identical.

Not exactly, color is more relevant than most other things on a camera...

Sure, you can do what you want with the colors both on camera and post. But all things being equal I wanted to know which one was spitting out accurate colors... From the pics they are each inaccurate at different settings.

Yes exactly, colour is completely irrelevant with RAW digital capture, just like WB. So which profile was set?

There is no such thing as "accurate colors" from RAW files, nothing can be rendered without a camera profile/picture style (well it can but you don't want to see it, it is green and dark with no contrast and a gamma of 1.0) choose one better to your liking, it is as simple as that.

I get that. I am talking about what I shoot looking like what I see. You are talking about what you can do to it after you shoot it.

I want my colors to come out of the camera close to what I see (I understand that once we enter post its all a wash), Some cameras do a better job of this than others. That was the basis of my question... pure and simple. Back in the day it was more about what film you used.

And now it's about what raw converter and profile you select if you shoot in raw, or it's about what picture style and other in camera raw processing settings you choose in the camera if you shoot in JPEG.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 03:37:24 PM »
These might be nice, but as someone who actually owns a 5DIII, I don't find any of these to be compelling reasons to upgrade.

I'm a 5D (not II or III) owner and haven't upgraded, but these things might well encourage me to finally do so.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II: More High ISO Samples
« on: September 29, 2014, 01:42:47 PM »
It could well be that I'm doing NR wrong and if you have any suggestions, I would appreciate them.

Start with this:

Sharpening 40, Radius 1, Detail 25, Masking 40
Luminance NR 40, Detail 90, Contrast 0
Color NR 25, Detail 50, Smoothness 50

Messing around:  For more detail, try increasing the first two detail sliders (say, 30 and 100) and sharpening (say, 50-60).  For more NR, try increasing L-NR without decreasing detail first.

If I put luminance that high my shots look like they were taken with vaseline smeared over the lens.

Not if the detail slider is high enough (90-100).

7
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II: More High ISO Samples
« on: September 29, 2014, 01:40:08 PM »
NR before sharpening always.

You do realize that the order of application makes no difference to the final result, correct?  It may make a difference to what numbers you end up choosing and how you choose them, but the application order is hard coded into the Camera Raw code.

Hm, I have always liked the results better that way, and I have watched a few tutorials back in the day, and at Adobe they have said, always start with NR so you don't sharpen the noise, but remove it first. And that makes sense so I have always done that.

In Lightroom (or Camera Raw), it doesn't matter.  The final numbers are all that matter.

Try this.  Apply 100L-NR and then 100 sharpening and export an image.  Then reset and apply 100 sharpening and then 100L-NR and export again.  Now, compare the final images.  They will be identical.

Note that doing the same in Photoshop (not using the Camera Raw plugin) WILL depend on the order of application.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 01:09:22 PM »
And, for that matter, why would the 5DIII need to be replaced?

Dual pixel, new RGB+IR metering.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II: More High ISO Samples
« on: September 29, 2014, 12:53:33 PM »
NR before sharpening always.

You do realize that the order of application makes no difference to the final result, correct?  It may make a difference to what numbers you end up choosing and how you choose them, but the application order is hard coded into the Camera Raw code.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 11:23:17 AM »
Also stating that the next bodies will get "upgraded" to the AF sensor on the 7DMkII has got to be wrong, that thing has just one f2.8 sensitive point and the rest are f5.6. That would be a serious downgrade.

All the f/5.6 points are also sensitive at f/2.8.  It's a question of precision.  Have they made the all-new AF sensor with small enough pixels that even the f/5.6 sensitive points are just as precise at f/2.8 as the old f/2.8 points were at f/2.8, and the new f/2.8 points much more precise with f/1.4 lenses than the old f/2.8 points were?

The specs for the new sensor as for DOF precision don't seem to have been released yet.  Or, at least I haven't seen them.

11
HDR would certainly be better in the case of the +5 stop, regardless of which camera, but the A7r is still going to handle HDR better than the 5D III, and with fewer bracketed frames.

I doubt that.  I shot this something like 15 years ago with a Nikon Coolpix 950, and the top-right finished image used just two frames.


12
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 11:15:47 AM »
I hope they pull a big surprise. 7D2 will have no measurable effect on a 5D3, let alone a 5D4.  I don't understand why people keep trying to compare the two as competing bodies.  They are not, nor will ever be. Not in price and not in use.

I think Canon needs to make a statement before 2015. We have the sensors out there. Even if from Sony. I'd love to see a Sony sensor in a Canon system.  Talk about the best of everything!

Does Sony make a dual-pixel sensor?

13
A zoom lens 10-50mm would crazily good, if it were rectilinear. ::) :o It seems to me that the geometric distortion will continue uncorrected even in 50mm. Can be a lens for "special effects" only.

All projections have distortion.  Rectilinears keep straight lines straight but make round things oval.  Fisheyes keep round things round but make straight lines curved.

These are all full-frame fisheye shots that have not been "defished".




14
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 10:38:11 AM »
But when?

I'm mostly curious about the 5D replacement.  Spring or not?
Didn't we just get one?

Yes, March 2nd of 2012.

The 7DII is not a 5DIII replacement.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: No EOS-1D X Replacement in 2014 [CR2]
« on: September 29, 2014, 09:42:18 AM »
Not spring. Canon has to milk buyers with the 7D2 for a year or so. If they released 5D4 with 7D2's AF feature in spring (5 months after 7D2 got released (not introduced)), who would buy the 7D2, if the 5D4 offers same or even tweaked AF with slightly lower frame, but better IQ?

I would.  I would buy both.  As it stands, I'll probably buy a 7DII and a 6D, but if the 5DIV comes out sooner than later, I'd probably buy it over the 6D.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 69