September 30, 2014, 06:35:42 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 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 69
241
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:54:08 PM »
So, why the heck should I keep waiting, when a D810 is right there, it already has everything I need, and is for sale on the market today?

Because you might only have to wait two weeks or so to see what Canon has been up to lately.  At least that might give a clue as to future directions.

242
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:37:17 PM »
I actually commend them for having the courage to do this. It would have been very easy to offer a 24 mp sensor and just expect people to sacrifice higher ISOs with their APS-C camera and force customers to move to full frame for low light sensitivity. But, it seems very possible now that the 7DII will have decent performance at moderately high ISOs (of course it won't match a full frame).

For the billionth time, more pixels does NOT mean poorer performance at higher ISO.

In fact, the opposite is usually true.

243
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 11:58:53 AM »
Just noticed some things (this is about high ISO):

70D is about 1/6th of a stop better than the 7D.
6D is about 1/2 stop better than the 70D per unit of sensor area.
(separately), the 6D is about 2/3 of a stop better than the 7D per unit of sensor area (consistent).

This means, it's possible just using the same level of performance as the 6D to do about 2/3 of a stop better at high ISO than the 7D.  If they could do a little better (this 6D isn't brand new), maybe we could expect between 2/3 of a stop and 1 stop better performance at high ISO (in raw) from the 7D replacement.

That would be quite good, in my opinion, if they could achieve it.

244
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 11:36:02 AM »
Very disappointing specs after so long a wait. IMO, minor evolutionary improvements.

That is how Canon operates. Look at their product development over the last 11 years and you'll see the same minor increments from one model to the next. If you're looking for revolutionary development then you've bought into the wrong camera system/brand.

Or, you can do what I have done - skip a bunch of generations.

I'm looking to buy the 7D replacement.  Do you think I'll see an evolutionary or revolutionary improvement compared to the camera I'm replacing, the 20D?

245
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 09:33:31 PM »
It's amusing that a 2-3 stop difference means nothing and yet when Canon does better for SNR and it's like 1/3 stop better than it's all wow Canon rules!!!!!

A 2-3 stop difference in base ISO DR actually does mean less to me than a 1/3 stop difference in high ISO performance.  This is because I virtually never run into base ISO DR problems (even with the 18MP 1.6-crop sensor), but I'm always struggling against high ISO limits.

246
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 09:30:51 PM »
The key point is: this camera was promised to be revolutionary, the biggest evolution since the start of DSLR.

wait.. where was this promise by canon? I missed this.

We (the fanatical users) promised it in their name.

247
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 08:04:37 PM »
I just think it's embarrassing how Canon's top of the line crop cameras are so far behind technologically to Sony's.

Can you please list the features that make a camera like the Sony A5100 so technologically superior to a top of the line Canon crop camera.  Feel free to discuss advantages in areas like native lens selection, AF speed, frame rate, focus tracking of moving subjects, integration with a radio-controlled off-camera flash system, etc. 

If you mean sensor and not camera, please say so.  As I've said repeatedly, people don't buy bare silicon sensors to take pictures, they buy cameras.

Let me compare the 70D to the A6000.

I know I specifically mentioned the A5100 when talking about the sensor, but I was speaking generally of Sony's crop cameras compared to Canon's in terms of overall camera capability so I'll use the a6000 as my example.

The a6000 is much cheaper at $800 (actually $648 now on Amazon).
The a6000 is full metal compared to 70D being plastic.
The a6000 shoots up to 11fps compared to the 7fps on the 70D
The a6000 has a 179 focus points compared to 19 on the 70D
The a6000 shoots 60p video at full hd (note: also with better quality)
The a6000 has 100% viewfinder coverage compared to 98% on the 70D

On top of that, it has a superior sensor with more dynamic range, color sensitivity, and tonal range.

Don't forget, the a6000 has a lousy viewfinder, lousy tracking autofocus, absolutely horrid ergonomics, tragic battery life, and a poor supporting system.

248
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 05:36:39 PM »
Exactly. The joy and art of photography is in trying to make a machine conform to an individual's vision.

That machine's job is to make ME the limitation, not it.

249
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 05:15:40 PM »
New Battery – LP-E6N

I haven't kept up with the battery changes.  Are the current varients interchangeable and just have different capacities or are they genuinely different?  Is Canon just trying to keep people buying their batteries and away from third parties?

I have, and intend to continue to have, both full frame (5D) and crop bodies but will absolutely demand that they use the same batteries and chargers like my current two do.

250
Technical Support / Re: Another my Stupid question = Sensor Sizes
« on: August 24, 2014, 01:15:16 AM »
Pixel size is irrelevant. SNR, and therefor dynamic range (assuming you have no other source of noise than what is inherent to the image signal itself) and noise are ultimately relative to total sensor area. That's it.

If that is so, what is stopping Canon from making a 46 MP FF camera with the same sensor tech as, say 7D?
I am not really an expert on this, but I think every pipeline (pixel-->signal processor) must add its own bit of noise. So noise from 4 1x1micron pixels > noise from 1 2x2 micron pixel.
It also has a bearing on processor power, but that's another topic.
Maybe an expert can chime in on this?

You already got the correct answer.

251
Technical Support / Re: Another my Stupid question = Sensor Sizes
« on: August 23, 2014, 10:58:17 PM »
One difficulty with this whole discussion it that one wants to say "Keeping everything else the same, here's what happens when you change the pixel size...". But it's actually impossible to keep everything else the same. Same optics, same lens , same shooting location, same framing, same viewing size, etc.

Same focal length, same shutter speed, same f-stop, same ISO, same lighting, same shooting position, shot in raw, same raw processor, pixel area different by a factor of 16 (small pixels on the left).


252
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 23, 2014, 04:43:35 PM »
Are there really that many indie movie makers that are shooting in 4K nowadays or is this just all baloney?

4K is the future-proof format. That's why it's important even now, when 4K TVs are still not the norm.
+1

Ever shoot a picture and crop it? Same thing.... only with movies...

It also allows post processing image stabilization.

Stabilization is what I'm after with 4K.  Oh, I do it t with full HD but if the output is full HD, the up sampling does noticeably soften the image.

253
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 04:41:56 PM »
Size size size.  It makes your rig so small you don't mind leaving the bag behind and just slinging your camera around your neck all day. 

I leave my 70-200/2.8 "around my neck" all day, no problem.  It's all about placement (shoulder, not neck), and strap (Optech, not Canon).

254
EOS Bodies / Re: Update on the EOS 7D Mark II Spec List
« on: August 23, 2014, 11:02:30 AM »
Funny , all this fuss about a consumer camera . Dreamers discuss specs on plastic consumer cameras like the 7d, Real photographers just buy the pro body , ie. the Canon 1dx . Nuff said

What a dumb thing to say.

The 7D and the 1D series have about the same ratio of plastic to metal (it's pretty high, actually).

I know lots of pros who will not use the 1D series because of the idiotic built-in grip.

The 7D will crush the 1Dx when it comes to focal length or magnification limited situations.

255
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 10:59:15 AM »
The beauty of the 400 prime over the zoom is size/weight and image quality, as well as it would be cheaper.

A new 100-400L would very likely improve over the old one in size, weight, and image quality, and improve for Canon in cost.   ;D

As in 'improve' you mean 'more' I think? I also think a new 100-400 will be bigger and heavier especially if it's twist zoom.

All the newer teles have gotten lighter.  I expect the same.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 69