February 28, 2015, 11:16:26 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 - Lee Jay

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 115
16
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]
« on: February 23, 2015, 03:45:06 PM »
The reality...a "cinema/video" oriented DSLR will provide more revenue/profit for Canon if they target the market segment/price point below their C100/300/500. 

I can see that making sense and seems to reflect what I have read on this forum from people that would actually use a cinema DSLR.

Sure...putting the 1DC's video functionality into the 5DIV makes complete sense to me.  That would allow you to do what they did with the 5DII - sell it to both the stills crowd and the video crowd, and therefore increase volume and therefore reduce amortized development costs.

However, Canon seems to be trying to go the other way - segmentation.  The idea being, apparently, to get people to buy multiple bodies for different purposes instead of buying one do-it-all body like they did with the 5DII.

I don't know if that will work or not, but it generally doesn't work with me.  I've skipped 10 years of Canon bodies because of slow feature and performance additions, and this segmentation approach is likely to cause me to skip another 10 years, if not more, once I finish the next year's upgrade cycle (targeting a 7DII and a 5DIV, or maybe just two 7DII's).

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 02:48:52 PM »
I think I speak for a few current 5D owners that if they reduced the mp then I would just stick with the 5D even if it improves DR by 1/2-1 stop. Resolution is important too. Recently been using mine a lot for wildlife and the ability to crop a little more would be most welcome. 26-28mo would be great

I've said this before, but....

I'd really like it if the 7DII were 24 or 32MP instead of 20MP.  However, I'm fine with my 5D classic's 12.8MP.

Why?

Well, I usually use full-frame when I can properly frame images, and properly framed images having 12.8MP are just fine with me, even for large prints.

I usually use the crop camera when I can't properly frame, due to focal length (or, to a lesser extent, magnification) limits.  In that case, I often end up cropping like crazy and that's where high pixel counts help.

I would have been interested in the 5DS for both applications (it has about the same pixel density as the 7DII) but for the ISO 6,400 limit.

Given that Canon isn't going to give us a high-ISO camera (I'd have been happy with the 5DS having the same ISO range as the 7DII + the 1 1/3 stops it has inherently just due to the larger sensor) and a high pixel count camera in one, I'll stay with shooting high ISO with full-frame, properly framed, and high pixel density with crop when I can't properly frame with a full-frame camera.  So, for full-frame, I'd be happy with 18MP, 20MP, 24MP or whatever, since I'm happy now with 12.8MP from a pure resolution perspective.

18
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]
« on: February 23, 2015, 02:39:14 PM »
YES! Just LOVE the idea of such a model split. Canon should bring a stills optimized 5D IV for the conservative, stills-only mirrorslapper crowd. And all those yelling for 4k in every DLSR should be asked to put their wallet where their mouth is and shell out a couple 100 or 1000 more for a "video-optimized" 4k video 5D C.

You think a 5DC would only cost $100 or $1,000?
I understand what he means $200 or $2000 more for the version that records 4K video.

Well, if I want an SLR that has 4k, with his approach, I'd need both a 5DIV and a 5DC.  That's not $100 or $1000 extra, that's a whole new body extra.

19
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]
« on: February 23, 2015, 01:27:11 PM »
YES! Just LOVE the idea of such a model split. Canon should bring a stills optimized 5D IV for the conservative, stills-only mirrorslapper crowd. And all those yelling for 4k in every DLSR should be asked to put their wallet where their mouth is and shell out a couple 100 or 1000 more for a "video-optimized" 4k video 5D C.

You think a 5DC would only cost $100 or $1,000?

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 01:15:03 PM »
Every time there is a megapixel advance some people claim "no one needs that many pixels etc. etc. etc."; they said this at 3 mp, 5mp, 10mp etc.  More pixels is always better if you don't have to give up anything (not sure yet what the 5ds will require us yield).

ISO 6,400 limit with expansion to ISO 12,800 (same as the pocketable S120 with 1/1.7" sensor, by the way).

21
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]
« on: February 23, 2015, 01:12:59 PM »
This makes no sense to me.

If the development costs of the 1DC were prohibitive, despite the fact that it's basically just a 1DX, how would doing the exact same thing with a 5D4/5DC make any difference as far as development cost goes?

The problem with the 1DC wasn't the development cost, it was the body cost.  Charging $5000+ to add a feature that's included in a $900 camera was insulting, and most people wouldn't pay it.  Can't blame them!

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 11:10:19 AM »
Having higher pixel densities just reduces ISO performance.

No it doesn't.

Yes it does.

Someday someone needs to explain to me why this myth persists after a decade of things going the other way despite similar basic sensor performance (QE).

Because when your small pixel drowns in a sea of noise a large pixel will still be getting a signal. It is simple physics.

Way to advance an argument: "I'm right, you're wrong". I think both could do with an added [citation needed].

How about a test?

Pixels that would give you a 208MP full-frame sensor on the left, a 13MP full-frame sensor on the right.  Same ISO, same f-stop, same shutter speed, same lighting, same focal length, both processed from raw using the same settings on the same converter.


23
Lenses / Re: understanding "fastness"
« on: February 23, 2015, 08:51:08 AM »
quite possible i now write total crap, but hey - thats what i think is right and if i am proofen wrong i learned something too :) so here i go ;)

its about the FOV - a 50 has a greater FOV so there is naturally more light coming through the lens (or better - to the front element).



if that's true then zooming from 70 to 200 should cause the exposure to be reduced, correct?  i'll try this out later.

Not correct unless the scene is non uniformly lit (which most are).

24
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 22, 2015, 07:40:18 PM »
5D IV possibility:

1Dx mirror assembly.
Fast processing (DIGIC 7, whatever) to support 4k/30 from a high resolution (i.e. 24+MP) sensor.
10-12fps.

1DX Mark II possibility:

Electronic global shutter.
Same fast processor * 2 supports 30fps at full res (20+MP).
On-sensor PDAF (dual pixel, whatever) to support focusing at that speed via dedicated separate processor (DIGIC 6/6+).
30fps only works in mirror-up mode which means only works in EVF mode.
In mirror-down mode, works conventionally at 15+fps.
2x the processing power means it supports 4k/60.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 22, 2015, 06:25:44 PM »
ok, so if you want an 18mpx 12fps ff camera then why not just get a 1dx now?
Two reasons - cost and I hate the 1D series bodies, and would never own one for that reason.
Cost? Fair enough...but have you ever owned and extensively used a 1-Series?
They're just plain fantastic. All the way from the EOS-1 film bodies from the 1990's.

-pw

No, and I'd never own one, for two reasons.  One, the grip is too large for my hands (I have small hands).  Two, I don't need a portrait grip and so don't want to carry one around.

26
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 22, 2015, 05:29:08 PM »
I don't want to buy two different bodies with different capabilities where I have to swap the lenses to use each bodys special features. I am very impressed by the 5Ds's but what body to choose? Prices are o.k. but I would easily pay 4000 €/$ if they had made a switchable low pass filter.

You okay with that switchable filter requiring you to partially disassemble the body?

https://support.red.com/entries/100226366-DSMC-Interchangeable-OLPF-System-FAQs#q10

"You will need to use a T6 Torx driver to install and remove a DSMC Interchangeable OLPF and an LED flashlight (or similar) to ensure no debris or contaminants are visible in the optical cavity before inserting an interchangeable OLPF.

NOTE: It is not required, but RED highly recommends performing an OLPF swap in a cleanroom environment."

I wrote switchable and it meant literally switchable by menu or a hw switch.

I know...and that isn't really possible the same way switching lenses isn't a menu switch.  Yeah, others have tried vibrating the sensor for AA filtering, but that approach hasn't yet proven to be both effective and without side effects.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 22, 2015, 04:57:15 PM »
Having higher pixel densities just reduces ISO performance.

No it doesn't.

Yes it does.

Someday someone needs to explain to me why this myth persists after a decade of things going the other way despite similar basic sensor performance (QE).

It's no myth, it's physics. Did you ever ask yourself why the ISO-Monster A7S has lesser Pixel (12MP) and the 5DS with 53MP looses ISO against the old Model (ISO6400)?

The A7S has a better sensor, not just larger pixels.

The 5DS has the same pixel size as the 7DII, which is limited to ISO 16,000 bases, 51,200 extended.  The fact that the 5DS is limited the way it is, despite the larger sensor (which gives it an inherent 1 1/3 stop advantage), proves that this is just another Canon artificial crippling exercise.

28
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 22, 2015, 04:55:11 PM »
However, we can not forget that the 40Mpixel sensor has 4 pixels covering the same area as each of the 10Mpixel pixels and that if you bin those 4 pixels together in post production you end up with very similar performance to the 10Mpixel sensor.

I think this this the main reason the myth persists.

You assume the area of both sensors are the same.

Of course - I'm not comparing full-frame to crop here.

Quote
This may be true in theory, but practically there are microlenses above the pixels/sensors. Please look at the schemes of such an structure. 4 small lenses have not the same area as one lense one the whole area of 4 small pixels. You didn't answer my question anyway. I guess, on purpose.

The microlenses are actually the great equalizer.  They take away a lot of the fill-factor difference cause by constant lithography size and variable pixel pitch.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 22, 2015, 04:08:09 PM »
However, we can not forget that the 40Mpixel sensor has 4 pixels covering the same area as each of the 10Mpixel pixels and that if you bin those 4 pixels together in post production you end up with very similar performance to the 10Mpixel sensor.

I think this this the main reason the myth persists.

30
Lenses / Re: understanding "fastness"
« on: February 22, 2015, 03:37:29 PM »
Several ways - vignetting, and transmission losses are the most obvious, but since you don't have the same focal length you don't have the same scene either, and that could make in-camera metering inconsistent between them.

Vignetting will likely be higher on the wide open 70-200 than that stopped down 50L.  Transmission losses will as well because the zoom has many more elements than the prime.

Look up the difference between T-stop and F-stop.

Lee Jay

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 115