September 02, 2014, 04:11:09 PM

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 - vscd

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR vs Mirrorless :: Evolution of cameras
« on: June 23, 2014, 12:09:10 PM »
Mirrorless is a trend, it has no (kicking) advantages in itself. On theory the bodies could be build smaller... practically the bodies of existing systems won't get small as the focal flange is the same. So, you need at least a new bayonett and lense-system which is causing you a lot of problems for existing accessoires.

So, as a photocompany you could invest in a new lens-system, let's say a mirrorless EF like the EF-M, but with fullframe lenses possible. The advantage is to get your lenses more closer to the sensor... yepp, nice idea, but what about refraction of light? You have to get the ray mostly straight to the sensor. Sony somewhat shows us that they failed on the A7/A7R.    Maybe shaped sensors will be a solution.

So, what are the drawbacks of mirrorless? You aren't able to use the camera if turned off in most cases... so you rely on live view which drains your battery and heats up the sensor. The formfactor of a smaller body is something which I like on holydays but hate while working serious. You may laugh, but a Fuji is to small for me...      you don't have back/frontfocus. On this point I'm in, but you have liveview on actual DSLRs, too.

Don't believe the hype. It's a nice idea for smaller Crop-Sensors with new bayonetts... but nothing for a serious fullframe-cam, except a fixed lense (like the Sony RX-1). Even the framerate is nothing to be concerned 'bout, anymore. For me, the work with an optical viewfinder is still the best choice, even good EVF have something like a "DriveByWire". You won't see this on the photo, but for me the future is a mirror/EVF Combination. I would like to see the data projected to the mirror if i need them.

The Fuji-Cams are nice indeed. Fuji prooved for ages that they're capable of doing the finest hardware around, but on the other hand... the fanboys are getting booring. Yepp, the 56mm 1.2 is a hell of a lense, but creating a standard-prime around that focal length with a APS-C lightcircle... is not really that hard. Even not with that pricetag given. Creating a 85mm 1.2 is somewhat harder. And stopped down to the equiv-DOF (@f1.8), the Canonlense should be competing.

The roadmap sounds plausible for me. Just expand the schedule to the future and a new 5DM4 is right in time. The 1DX should be fine for the moment.. I don't think that the new 1D will arive before the 5D.

I wouldn't mind to get down to 16 or 18 MPixel again, just with 2 Stops more dynamic. The new Sony A7S is the right direction in my opinion, if it wouldn't be Sony ;)

As I don't work with DPP, because the results are less accurate than with DXO, I don't care too much about the new Version 4. But if you want to test the programm just grab a serialnumber from the net (be creative with the google image search or read exifs) and try it out for yourself. It really blocks RAW_Files from other Cams like my 5D, but you can easily find a lot of 1DX-CR2's on the net to evaluate the new features. JPEGs (even from nonsupported cams) are useable, too.

I don't see too much new features for the masses, allthough I didn't used the programm excessive. The workflow is indeed better, but this is just the way a tool should work in 2014. Nothing special to see, I think.

Edit:   And they don't support a lot of my old lenses, again ;(

Hey Tamron or Zeiss, If you can read this...  1:2.9 is no Macro. Mkay?  8)

Ok, Sigma made the "Best" Superzoom of em all... but 9 MPixel Resolution @DXO? This lense isn't even able to serve a old Canon 60D or even a 50D? People who buy this kind of gear should head to the Sony RX1, they get a far better and smaller System @f2.8

No offence.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: April 03, 2014, 01:52:17 PM »
You can clearly see that the D800E has at least twice the real-world "resolution" (read that as spatial resolution or resolving power, not width and height image dimensions) as the SD1.

The only thing I clearly see, are the both corners you mentioned. Yepp, the line is smaller and more accurate, but that's the only sweet spots for the Nikon, the 98% percent of the (for me) important picture is in the center, where the D800E just compounds every wire with each other into a heap-meshup . Try to find the one diagonal wire in the lower center. It's not visible and it's not visible in the Pentax 645D (!) eighter. The Sigma shows it clearly... for me the results are by far better than the Nikon. Maybe we talk at cross-purposes, but if that's not resolution or sharpness or spatial whatever than may it be. Whatever it is, I like it. I want it. I want it THAT way. The only thing I could admit is that the lense of the nikon was limited, as not even the Zeiss OTUS is able to serve the Nikon to the fullest (29MP was counted @DXO). I think you don't want to see, what I see  (or vice versa) ::)     But let me say, those Sigma FoveOn Pictures are available with my Pocket DP3M, too. You just don't need the ultra-highpriced lenses, you can do this with the Kitzoom (17-55 2.8) of a SD1 or with a 50mm 2.8 @DP3M.

I rarely use my DP3M, I'm mostly a Canon 5D kind of guy (yes, the first one, on purpose)... and the other time I often use my Zenza Bronica ETRSi (645 mediumformat, analoque). But if I decide to go out with a tripod and shoot landscapes, nothing came close to the foveon. And I borrow sometimes a Nikon D800 (sadly without "E") from a friend of mine. They can't match the pictures and the tests were with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART. So this shouldn't be the weak point of the system.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 85mm f/1.2L III and Others
« on: April 03, 2014, 04:46:27 AM »
>I'm surprised how good LR is with LOCA/CA...

Of course, this is another fine tool for those tasks. I also use LR5 for some specific pictures, but I don't like the workflow. I hate to import every picture into a tool, just to see a JPG of my RAW.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: April 03, 2014, 04:39:14 AM »
I really like to interchange information with you on this objective way, but I think you're to bent to think on your decisions, you once made. I know what you're talking about and I mostly agree, but there is more than just theory... there is practice use. Even if we get out the AA-Filter of the formula, which we always did (because we choosed the D800E to compare) and we think of an optimal lense (which are rarely seen!) to serve a D800E... the result is something you have to explain after all. So I took the time, went to and got both RAW-Files, from the Nikon D800E ( and from the SD1M (

Your misunderstanding. Every bayer pixel may have only one color, but regardless of color, every pixel receives "light". This is why the spatial resolution of a bayer sensor is so high, and why a D800 is capable of resolving so much detail. If you convert a bayer sensor's data to monochrome, you effectively have just the full detail luminance.

I take you literally, ok? I converted the NikonFile with CaptureOne7 to a stock b/w TIFF and the SigmaFile with SigmaPhotoPro5.5 to a b/w TIFF, too. So, here are the results (as png, to loose no pixelinformation):


Sigma SD1:

Sigma SD1, (normal) resized to fit the Nikonsize:

There are no tricks, no JPG Artefacts, no Color, no catch. You can repeat this by your own. Now, if you speak scientifically (as you apparently like), your theory has to get prooved. One counter evidence prooves a theory wrong, you know... this is my try. Explain the results as we speak from a 15MP against a 38MP. In my humble opinion the Sigma clearly outperforms the Nikon, and this is not just a pixelpeeping Testchart, this is my daily experience. I don't speak about the disadvantages (AF, HighISO, Accu...), they are all clear and bespoken.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 85mm f/1.2L III and Others
« on: April 02, 2014, 06:47:13 AM »
[...]this lens has really bad LOCA that's difficult to fix in post[...]

Did you try DXO Optics? I have no problem with LOCA/CA after developing it in this Raw-tool. Sometimes, if they're really harsh I also use RawTherapy for manually optimze some pictures... but normally all optical problems are gone after a stock conversion., this is no advert. But in the beginning I also thought the OOC-JPG is the final picture... but hell, there is so much more to get of your pictures. Especially with the 85LII.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Canon Cine Zoom Lens?
« on: April 02, 2014, 06:35:17 AM »
I'd be happy with a moderately-decent, powered 24-105 f/2.8 (FF equiv) cinema lens, made to match the C100. Get both for $5000 each, and that would be a great indie doc base kit at $10,000.

Is that really too much to ask?

Unfortunately, probably. The closest thing (26-120mm f2.8 equivalent) weighs 15lbs and costs $90,000.

Remember, "Super 35mm" is APS-C, only... it just sounds like fullframe. So this isn't even something close to compare.  8)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: April 02, 2014, 06:31:13 AM »

Yepp, you mixed some things. The first FoveOns were 5Mpixel on three Layers, which (could) be summed up to 15MPixel. The next generation was the Merrill, where about 15MPixel on 3 Layers can be counted to 45MPixel. The new Quatto Design ist again 3layered, but just the blue one get's 19MPixel, where the other 2 are just about 5 MPixel each. Now happy counting ;)

At the End, the results are crucial.

It may have 45 million photodiodes, but that is not the same as megapixels, and I really wish Sigma would stop being so misleading.

This is of course confusing, but it's not a lie, because... let's define a pixel. You refer to it as a Pixel is the Picture which comes out from the cam. The Pixels from the Sensor are something different... you could also count each layer as a single Pixel, because it has an own wired output and the information is capsulated within this *single* Lighttrap. Remember the Nikon D2X (or was it the D1x?), there the Pixels were halfsized, so what do you count? ;) It's some kind of definition. The Sigmapeople have the same "problem" as Intel had 10 years ago... recognizing that Megahertz has nothing to do with speed, but the people don't know this. So you have to catch them with Numbers they understand.

Furthermore, the D800 and 645D both have more information to start with. They are resolving details that are not even present in the SD1 image at all, despite it's sharpness

No, they DON'T, that's what the image should have told you. I could resize the Sigma-Picture 4 Times and have more resolution, but not more information.

A light sharpening filter can deal with the softness in a few seconds, and then the SD1 is at a real disadvantage.

Please try and proove me wrong, the RAW-Data is available for download  ;)

By the way, the Size of the photodiodes are of course really important, especially on lowlight, but the technology solves some of the problems. On the paper no one could beat my old 5D with ca. 8.2 Microns, but in reality your 1DX would run circles around it  8)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: April 01, 2014, 04:22:49 AM »
Have you seen the new DP2?  They claim up to 39 MP...

I have and I'm waiting for the reviews, I think I may get one if the results are good. 39 MP are realistic... of course you just have to get rid of the context "pixels" just by x/y Resolution. The Details of a FoveOn (@lowISO) are outstanding above a Nikon or even a Pentax 645D!

F.e. (picture from

This was the first sensor which really catched my attention after buying my 5D back then. Everything else is just "evolution" here and there, half a stop more Dynamic, more resolution, ISO25600. Hooray, you invented the holy grail. Nikon bla, Canon bla... everything no real leap. A 5D is still awesome and able to serve my needs. The sigma is again something worth time spending with.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: March 31, 2014, 04:40:07 AM »

Yepp, but one *large* advantage of a foveon is that you don't need a Zeiss Otus to get your 36MP Sensor served. "Normal" sharp lenses, even customer-ones, get 15MP Pixels without problems... so the whole, or at least most better L, Canon Lense Lineup would be able to outperform the D800E.

Of course the layers constrict the light... until someone invents something new and proves the old wrong.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: March 30, 2014, 06:13:55 PM »
ISO100 on FoveOn is great, now show us something at ISO3200 and compare that to a 5D.

Please read my text again ;) Of course you're right, but lacking ISO-Performance is even a problem of the very expensive (CCD-)Medium Format Sensor for >20k$. If you shoot in LowLight, the ISO-Performance is of course a problem of a Sensor where the Light has to dive into the specific Layers, but those are problems which I dare to get solved by canon. At least they could bring it to good ISO1600. The 5D has no real ISO3200, eighter, and I would not use it anyway.

Taking pictures with a FoveOn is really about shooting like a MediumFormat Cam. Use it in a studio (with a flash sync up to 1/2000 (!)) or with a tripod in LowLight.


PS By the way, if you want to shoot black/white then you *should really try* a DP3 with ISO3200. It's like real grain and looks damn good! Here 2 examples:



EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: March 30, 2014, 03:17:50 PM »
Maybe the answer of canon will be the "Canon FoveOn". If they would bring a better and faster Fullframe foveon like the Merrill of Sigma, the Resolution of maybe 24 MPix would be comparable to maybe 60MP of a bayer-sensor. So, they would beat the Nikon D800 easily, with the full power of the EOS-lenseprogram. The patents for this are filed since a few months... I REALLY WOULD LOVE IT.

If I go out, making pictures with my Sigma Merrill DP3, and forget about all those disadvantages in speed, flexibility or Autofocus I would say the foveon is head and shoulders above anything else. A Nikon D800 is nothing against this small jewel. But I have to admit, mostly my Canon 5D is way more used ;)

A small example from a "poor" Compact Sigma DP3M, imagine this with FullFrame:

Remember, no one said "Mediumformat" from Canon, just the quality and resolution of a medium Format ;)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12