December 18, 2014, 05:45:48 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] 5 6 ... 89
46
Now, noise is additive...so, anything additional, dark current and dark current noise, read noise, are added to the shot noise.

You're off the rails.  Independent noise sources add in quadrature, not arithmetically.

47
EOS Bodies / Re: Focus problems with the Canon 7DII?
« on: December 07, 2014, 05:55:27 PM »
Honestly, this looks like an intentional failure to me but I tend to be a bit cynical at times. I'd say that lens is focused several feet in front of the model.

edit ..... When a camera has trouble tracking focus on an object coming towards the lens it typically back-focuses, it doesn't jump to a point three feet in front of a moving subject.

I had that happen on one combo - 5D + 35/1.4L.  The lens focused accurately on my other bodies and all my other lenses focused accurately on the 5D.  It wasn't close.  In the shot below, the focus point is right on his face.  The error here is about 6 depths of field, and that was typical and consistent.

I sent both body and lens in for calibration (both were in warranty) and haven't had a problem since, and none of my other lenses have either.  Weird, huh?


48
Nice image...
Would be impossible with my 7D.

You could do it with MagicLantern's DualISO feature.

I think you could do it with a G7X.

49
And the point is?

I could do this with a single shot from any Canon camera I own - it's not remotely a "high" dynamic range shot as DRones mean the phase - "something a Canon is (supposedly) incapable of doing..."

I agree.  And the final shot needs more contrast anyway.

50
Quote
Quote
Rather than blaming the manufacturer for bad results... they know the abilities of the equipment and find ways to achieve their desired results.

An idea which DRones seem utterly unable to cope with...

Give me one good reason why you want to jump through hoops finding ways and workarounds to achieve the desired results when there is other equipment that makes the process much easier.

Yet I bet you paid 1000s of $$$ for the latest and greatest Canon shooter... if you practice what you preach, why don't you find ways to achieve your desired results with a 40D, which you can get practically for free?

I still use my 20D and 5D.  I've learned to push them to their limits and get everything out of them they are capable of providing.  My biggest limitations are autofocus on exceptionally difficult targets and high ISO performance despite having the fastest lenses available.  So, I'm going to get a 7D2 to fix the first problem and an as yet to be determined full frame to fix the second one.

I've never had a low ISO DR problem with my existing equipment.

51
Here's a realistic high-DR shot I took on vacation last week.  The difference here is that it was taken at ISO 1600 and there were moving subjects in the picture (my kids, at the bottom).  This was taken in a cave near San Antonio.  In LR shadows are pushed +100 and exposure is pushed +1.  Highlights are -50.  So, this is a lot of scene compression and it's still got a ton of overall scene contrast.  In the original, my kids aren't even visible.

Oh, this was shot with the original 5D.

52
That image lacks overall scene contrast, and looks fake and nasty as a result.  It has that "HDR look" that is to be avoided at all costs.

53
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 07:49:08 PM »
For me, the most exciting aspects of the EVF are that they should be able to make them obnoxiously large (OM-1 size or even larger) and that I can imagine the potential to make "mirror" blackout almost imperceptible.  I've been excited about the possibility of the gigantic VF ever since my first EVF in an ancient Canon S3 IS.

If a gigantic VF is what you want, buy a Hoodman Hoodloupe 3 and put in on your SLR's LCD.  If you think a magnified 1/2" EVF is big, try a magnified 3".

54
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 07:09:08 PM »
With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS.  Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

I have the 18x50 IS binoculars and they exceeded my expectations too :)

I've tried all of them (literally).  I have the 18x50s and 15x50s at work.  The 10x42s just blow them all away, and my second favorite are the 12x36IIs.

55
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 02:31:11 PM »
I agree here...I don't think it is possible for an EVF to perform well enough that you couldn't differentiate it from an OVF. Too many things that would push physics too far.

It's no surprise we tend to be in agreement about the awesomeness of a *real* optics vf - after all, we're Canon shooters :->.

So let me change my game-changer "cannot tell an evf from an ovf" to "an evf so good it'll even make the most die-hard old-school photogs switch".

EVFs would have to have an advantage, which they don't except for video and manual focusing.

The film/digital analogy doesn't work - digital DOES have advantages over film, namely much higher QE and the ability to change ISO on the fly.

56
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 11:40:00 AM »
What would be "game-changing" for me is something like:
* in-vf focus peaking and a evf you cannot tell from ovf
* raw and/or 4k video sub $2k
* open firmware that enables 3rd party addons
One of those is impossible and the other two are features I wouldn't even consider in my purchase decision.
You think an open firmware is impossible?
No, I think an EVF you cannot tell from an OVF is impossible.

Considering the history of technology and what has been deemed impossible, this is a rather courageous statement :-)

No, it's fundamental physics.  An EVF requires dual integration (one for the sensor, one for your eyes).  An OVF does not.

57
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 11:28:37 AM »
What would be "game-changing" for me is something like:
* in-vf focus peaking and a evf you cannot tell from ovf
* raw and/or 4k video sub $2k
* open firmware that enables 3rd party addons
One of those is impossible and the other two are features I wouldn't even consider in my purchase decision.

You think an open firmware is impossible?

No, I think an EVF you cannot tell from an OVF is impossible.

58
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 10:46:10 AM »
* 7D II is a game-changer, proof .. a professional weather sealed sports camera with a professional frame rate and professional auto focus system can be put into a compact body costing under $2k which is 50-75% less than previous cameras with similar functionality.
no. It costs 100% of the preceding 7D, which has already proven that point and was "borderline game-changing", when it came out in 2009. 
Basically something labeled Mk. II or III by Canon rarely is a game-changer. Exception so far: 5D II for video. ;-)

Well, "compact body" or not aside, +1 for not accepting every marketing talk. The 7d2 is a fine camera at a still reasonable price (for Canon), and mk1 vs mk2 will result in more keepers due to improved metering and af. It will also have nicer video than previous crop cameras, but still below the 5d3 which also has ML.

But "game-changer" implies you can do something that you couldn't befroe at all - and I don't see it, tbh. Unless you shoot astro, looking over this thread the 7d2 seems to have some "more than a bit" iq improvement for this specific application.

What would be "game-changing" for me is something like:
* in-vf focus peaking and a evf you cannot tell from ovf
* raw and/or 4k video sub $2k
* open firmware that enables 3rd party addons

One of those is impossible and the other two are features I wouldn't even consider in my purchase decision.

The 7D didn't have professional AF even for its time.  Remember the 45 point system with dedicated AF processor?

59
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 06, 2014, 09:45:37 AM »
.

To me ... a "game cahnging product is "proff of some concept, that was considered hard, if not imposcosting achieve.

Canon game cahngers in my book:
* 1D ... proof of concept, of a "fully viable professional grade digital camera, offering more than what 135 film ever could.
* Digital Rebel/300D - proof of concept, that digital DSLRs can be offered at "reasonable cost" (sub USD 1000), within reach of consumers/enthusiasts.
* 5D was a game changer - proof, that FF sensored  DSLRs can be built "at reasonable cost" and first time they really came into reach of enthusiasts and semi-pros.
* 5D II was a game-changer, proof .. HD video can be done with a DSLR; put "shallow field of depth" capability into hands of video entghusiasts, low budget film makers

* 7D II is a game-changer, proof .. a professional weather sealed sports camera with a professional frame rate and professional auto focus system can be put into a compact body costing under $2k which is 50-75% less than previous cameras with similar functionality.

The A7s and r?  They're just over grown compacts with large sensors.  They should cost under $1k and be sold in the checkout line at Walmart.



60
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 05, 2014, 11:52:00 PM »
With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS.  Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 89