October 24, 2014, 11:02:39 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 - J.R.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 101
16
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why haven't you left canon?
« on: September 29, 2014, 10:22:57 AM »
I have considered the dark-side with the Nikon D810 and a Nikkor 14-24 lens for landscape shooting. The only thing that's stopped me from getting this combination is my existing TS-E 24mm with a TS-E 17mm to be added this Christmas.

So basically it's a compromise like it always is in life. Either I can use the TS-E or I can take advantage of the DR of the Nikon. I opted for the former because the TS-E is too good to give up. I take bracketed shots with my 6D for landscapes and process them with luminosity masks in photoshop.

PS: The more I've thought about it, I've realized that more often than not, the DR range in landscapes is way too wide to be covered by the D810 in any case. So it basically boils down to ... only 2 stops more??? Meh ...

I don't mind switching systems, but the incremental benefit is likely to be negligible.

17
Just to see how far I could push things, here a couple more versions, not particularly "realistic", but still a good demonstration of what's possible and how the raw data reacts. No interpretation of the data needed here...5D III totally falls apart. A7r...noisy...but manageable.
Interestingly, I don't really see any significant difference between them, even in the +5 ones (calling the 5D3 one "falling apart" is totally ridiculous, it's a perfectly usable picture). Admittedly my eyes are old and I'm looking at the pictures with a relatively lowly monitor, but that's what I'd mostly do anyway. I guess it means the DR difference isn't a good reason to go for Sony, *for me* - your mileage may vary.

I arrived at the same conclusion but for different reasons. To me both shots are unusable

18
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why haven't you left canon?
« on: September 29, 2014, 03:54:54 AM »
+100

Because photo are more than gear, and just chasing the "perfect gear" could only distract you from actually shooting good photos.

This! And on another thread on this forum, people have suggested that the dark side unlocks "creative potential" because you don't have to worry about taking a good exposure - everything can be recovered in photoshop ... Sheesh

19
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II AF Guidebook Available for Download
« on: September 26, 2014, 10:31:16 AM »
Looking good. Can't wait to get my hands on one

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 02:58:32 AM »
I feel too much is being read into this interview ... after just releasing a 7DII, what was Maeda supposed to say? That the sensor in the camera sucks or is worse off than the SoNykon cameras?

Of course this is marketing BS and there is no way Canon would be delusional to not know that there is a difference in the sensor performance. Canon usually comes up with what the majority of its customers want while ignoring the requirements of a niche group.

Who know how many people are buying cameras basing their decisions on the DR of the sensor ... I'm sure the members of this forum do not know and I'm also sure that Canon knows!

21
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
« on: September 23, 2014, 10:33:38 PM »
I love this lens

22
Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 23, 2014, 09:25:31 AM »
You're missing the point.

There was nothing in my post that indicated that I missed the point.  I was actually supporting your position, just from a system agnostic position.  :D

The fanboys, as I mentioned in my post, are those people who believe that a system they like must be not only the best system but the best system for other people.  Again, I was agreeing with you.

The best camera system is the one that works best for the individual.

Agreed.

BTW, I've not found too many fanboys here (which is the beauty of this site). There is general consensus that while Canon could get better at certain aspects (especially at you-know-what) of their cameras, most users don't find these issues limiting their photography. Trouble arises when people advocating another brand doesn't merely have an opinion, he has to beat everyone over the head with it.

The way some people argue on these forums, you would have to believe that Canon gear is trash and everyone needs a D810 and the 12-24 for getting a half decent picture of a doorknob that you need to push by 5 stops to get right ... Ugh ... and I mean Ughhh  :P

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 23, 2014, 09:10:06 AM »
All equipment has limits, if you push it past those limits then it will fail.
This is true of other bodies and sensors as well.
No matter which body or manufacture you are using you should always take the DR in to account, none have enough range.
The best claim you could make here is that you do not have to discard as many shots with the other camera due to your poor craftsmanship.

But you give a bad example, it is bad because you pushed the lens and body beyond its limits. It was the combination of the body and lens not just the sensor.

A good example is a comparison of two identical shots taken with the same exact lens in the exact same situation.
Posts an example like this and we have something to discuss other than your skill level with a shot that you failed.

This is all too true.

On an aside, why would some continue to shoot with Canon gear if they hate it so much, if not hate it, find it too limiting. If they have switched to Nikon, you've obviously moved on, why complain about it on a Canon site?

24
Aberrations are caused by the lens. If a lens is producing (let's say) 3 pixel wide aberration on 20mp FF sensor, then the same lens will produce 5 pixels wide aberration on 20mp APS-C sensor just because those pixels are 1.6x smaller and denser. Simple math here.

Thanks

25
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: What's more important, gps or wifi?
« on: September 23, 2014, 07:34:11 AM »

I do see a lot of younger people who eschew wearing a watch.  That would drive me nuts.  I even sleep with my watch on my wrist. It is probably a generational thing.

So camera manufacturers worry about cell phones taking the place of cameras.  I wonder if watch manufacturers are experiencing the same thing?

Younger is a relative term. I've worn a watch since childhood only to stop wearing it about 4 years back. I've been checking time on the cellphone ever since. Times change  :)

Nevertheless, cellphones have eaten up a large chunk of the P&S sales. To the generation that is "younger" to me, it's all about pushing the output on the internet. Even if the images look like they have suffered radiation damage are posted on FB and other social networking sites. A P&S doesn't make sense for a large part of the crowd.

26
I hope I'm not high jacking this thread ... It's gone way too scientific for me to comprehend fully despite trawling tHrough the posts.

Would it be a reasonable conclusion to draw that at low ISO (100-400), the difference between the APS-C and the FF is negligible, thereby meaning that the reach benefit could be satisfactorily obtained at the low ISOs?

There is always a difference. It may only be negligible for those who don't care.

Thanks. What differences would be obvious and what would be the ones you would look for? Again, I'm talking only of low ISO.

Sharpness, contrast, aberrations.

Hmm ... so basically sharpness and contrast are the obvious ones and the aberrations would be the one you would look for. Thanks for this.

To my mind sharpness has been relative, depending more on the available light and the focusing. Why the FF should be sharper is something I've not really understood.

BTW, wouldn't the aberrations be caused by the lens instead of the camera body?

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 23, 2014, 07:17:43 AM »
Canon is looking to shut up the "Canon isn't innovating" brigade  ;D

The last line takes the cake though -

Quote
And so on the products that you intend to produce a new fun as an interchangeable lens system, please keep looking forward to it.

Now, I know that it is a translation but I couldn't resist.

28
I hope I'm not high jacking this thread ... It's gone way too scientific for me to comprehend fully despite trawling tHrough the posts.

Would it be a reasonable conclusion to draw that at low ISO (100-400), the difference between the APS-C and the FF is negligible, thereby meaning that the reach benefit could be satisfactorily obtained at the low ISOs?

There is always a difference. It may only be negligible for those who don't care.

Thanks. What differences would be obvious and what would be the ones you would look for? Again, I'm talking only of low ISO.

29
Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 23, 2014, 06:48:20 AM »
Good to hear a sane voice. I'm tired of people telling me how bad my gear is. 

30
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D2 and EF 24 - 105 F4 L IS USM
« on: September 22, 2014, 12:03:10 PM »
Why not get the 17-55? Used, if possible. This lens retains substantial value and is excellent for shooting on the APS-C.

The 24-105 on an APS-C is an oddball focal length and it is f/4 as well. The one stop ISO penalty is pretty heavy - I'm thinking of the difference between ISO 3200 and 1600 and then between 1600 and 800.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 101