March 07, 2014, 09:14:58 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 - J.R.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 93
286
##### EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 08, 2013, 02:49:16 AM »
A FF camera has a larger area, BUT...
[...]
Has shallower depth of field (NOT always a good thing, ESPECIALLY with long lenses)

This is a misconception. FF does not have shallower DOF. It only has the option for less DOF when needed.

Sure it has shallower depth of field 50mm at f4 on a 7D is roughly equivalent to 30mm f2.5 on a 5D. Same framing, shallower depth of field. When shooting birds in flight, I need usually f8 on a 7D to get the bird at least mostly in focus. On full frame? That's f13. To maintain shutter speed, that means ever rising ISO's.

Yes. The Hi ISO advantage disappears.

And that is just plain BS you are talking. Assuming that you are taking a photograph of a bird with a 400mm lens 50 feet away. Let's see how the DOF works out at f/8 with the 5D3 and the 7D -

7D: Total DOF is 1.41 feet
5D3: Total DOF is 2.23 feet

I think that there are circles of confusion here! It seems pretty obvious that if you have the same lens it gives the same size image on crop and FF sensors, and if the two images are viewed at the same size on a screen or print they will have exactly the same depth of field. If they are not enlarged, but the FF is viewed at a smaller size, it will only appear to have a greater depth of field.

The arithmetic from the DOF calculator proves that the images have the same depth of field when viewed at the same size. The depth of field is calculated from the size of the circle of confusion. For the 5DIII it is 0.03 mm, for the 1.6x crop 7D it is 0.019. And 0.03/0.019 = 1.6. So, when you enlarge the FF image 1.6x to get the same size image as the crop, you exactly compensate for the difference in circles of confusion.

Similarly, look at the ratios of total DOF of the 5D3 to 7D. It equals 2.23/1.41 = 1.6. The image from FF has to be enlarged 1.6x to give the same size print as the crop, and in doing so you multiply the out of focus regions 1.6x and so reduce the depth of field 1.6x.

If talking in terms of equivalence, yes.

287
##### EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 08, 2013, 02:42:09 AM »
And that is just plain BS you are talking. Assuming that you are taking a photograph of a bird with a 400mm lens 50 feet away. Let's see how the DOF works out at f/8 with the 5D3 and the 7D -

7D: Total DOF is 1.41 feet
5D3: Total DOF is 2.23 feet

Yes (as someone else probably already mentioned), you should count in crop factor of x1.6 and compare "Focal length (mm): 400 mm" on cropped 7D with "Focal length (mm): ~ 640 mm" on FF 5Ds.

After that you will see that to get "equivalent" DOF, you need to stop 5D down to f/13...

AprilForever wasn't talking about equivalence so I guess you missed the point. In fact, while doing the IQ comparisons, it is almost always assumed that you need to crop the FF image to make it equivalent to the APS-C image ... If that is mandatory, why buy a FF in the first place?

288
##### EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 08, 2013, 12:52:51 AM »
A FF camera has a larger area, BUT...
[...]
Has shallower depth of field (NOT always a good thing, ESPECIALLY with long lenses)

This is a misconception. FF does not have shallower DOF. It only has the option for less DOF when needed.

Sure it has shallower depth of field 50mm at f4 on a 7D is roughly equivalent to 30mm f2.5 on a 5D. Same framing, shallower depth of field. When shooting birds in flight, I need usually f8 on a 7D to get the bird at least mostly in focus. On full frame? That's f13. To maintain shutter speed, that means ever rising ISO's.

Yes. The Hi ISO advantage disappears.

And that is just plain BS you are talking. Assuming that you are taking a photograph of a bird with a 400mm lens 50 feet away. Let's see how the DOF works out at f/8 with the 5D3 and the 7D -

7D: Total DOF is 1.41 feet
5D3: Total DOF is 2.23 feet

289
##### EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D af tracking: experiences & usage cases
« on: November 07, 2013, 11:17:36 PM »
One think u can do for sure is to get rid of canon system and get nikon. One thing is sure for me. Nikon AF, despite faulty D800 units is way better in almost every aspect. I know what is 5D3 in specification list (61 points, many x type points etc.) but try it with one of the outer x type focus points or with center AF under bulbs or fluorescent light-BF or FF. Outer points with mojority of lens just do not wrok (FF)  I have one 5d3 and test two other, different 5d3s-same thing. Reviews and other tests don't shot that. U still has one point in reality. I spent a lot time on testing, trust me or not. Tested different bodies with different lenses, spoke with other users. The new AF system is ok if u use it with center AF, under daylight, with lens adjusted to specific distance, and if the lens are 2.8, if u change one of those factors-it will just not hit the target. That's not the AF system I thought I had paid for. I know how it sounds but it is true, regardless all reviews. Same thing about 6D. AFMA and other service adjustments are useless when u change environment a bit. Check any 5d3 or 6d, LV vs phase detect, then do same test with other camera producer.

Interesting...

I don't why I got MUCH-MUCH more keepers in AI servo with 5D III than 5D II. Must the photographer

"keepers rate"...ok...i am not talking about servo. I am talking about AF precision on all AF points, not about servo at long distance with more DOF and probably stopped lenses. Take 16-35 and check outer points with tripod and well lit target at close distance. Take 135L, adjust it for daylight and than go under different light (fluorescent or bulb). With 70-200 L  at daylight, at 40 meters,  at f3,5 shooting speeding cyclist-I had also a "higher keeper rate than with 5d2" but that's not a revolutionary AF.Old canons users did one funny thing-compare everything to 5d2 as a reference and even now, with 5d3-recompose. I am not a brand lover, I switch system 2 years ago (5d2, then 5d3) but I just regret due to AF. I used to use all AF points before, in D300 and it worked precisely for studio works, even when points were not x-type. Let me say I am kind of experienced user so it's not about skills etc. Just want to share it. No offence, I know you love canon, I tried for two years:) thinking that maybe I had a bad copies. No, i did not. It is only my subjective opinion.

Do shift to Nikon by all means. Most good photographers who do this for a living change systems as and when it suits them. Andy Rouse changed to Canon basically for the autofocus performance of the 1DX. Art Morris on the other hand, shoots Canon through and through - I'm sure he knows what he is doing.

So much for your "subjective opinion" - a highly biased and trollish opinion if anything.

290
##### EOS Bodies / Re: 70-200 f2.8 IS II noise
« on: November 07, 2013, 11:28:22 AM »
What do you mean by strange noise? With various lenses it can be a clunky sound (100-400), a squishy sound (24-105) or an audible growl (300 f/4).

Are you sure that it didn't make any sound earlier? I used my 70-200 II for over a month before I realised it was making a sound when the IS was engaging / disengaging.that said, I can hear it only when I am in the confines of a very silent room though where it is fairly audible.

I've also noticed that the more I look out it, the more audible it gets.

291
##### Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony A7R on DXO - Highest full frame IQ ever
« on: November 07, 2013, 11:17:02 AM »
"Nothing wrong with trying to make a big push to wake Canon up so we don't have to wait another decade to get such expanded possibilities ..." I don't see a big push to "wake" Canon up.  Instead I see people complaining about something that they could easily address by changing brands.  They claim DR is so important that they would choose a Sony sensor over a Canon sensor  "any day", and yet they keep using Canon.  So that "any day" apparently hasn't come yet.  I'm sure Canon is quite "awake", but they have to deal with diverse priorities and their own timetable for development.

why shouldn't we want them to up the time table? how the heck does it do anything positive for you for them to keep milking away the old sensor line? so why defending their sacred honor to the ends of the earth? they sure don't do that for you, they try to get away with absolutely the least they can for the most money they can.

You're showing two misconceptions here.  The first misconception is that bashing Canon on a rumors forum somehow pushes the company to "wake up" or "up the time table" for new products.  It doesn't.  Their investment in sensor research, development and production is huge and isn't going to be moved even slightly by anonymous complaints on a rumor site.

The second misconception is that "they try to get away with absolutely the least they can for the most money they can."  Well, Canon has a huge product line to disprove that notion.  It simply wouldn't exist in anything near its current form if they were trying to get away with absolutely the least for the most money.  They offer such a diverse line of products, some with 2nd or 3rd generation refinements, and some of them unmatched by any other manufacturer.  Their products (like the 1DX, 5D3, 600EX-RT and new wide angle primes) have shown outstanding responsiveness to the needs of many photographers, fulfilling many wishlists for improvements over predecessor models.  These creations don't just happen at the flick of a switch, but rather require very substantial investment, planning, effort, testing and risk.  A company trying to "get away with absolutely the least they can for the most money they can" would have no where near the acceptance in the professional market that Canon does, nor would it be preferred by some of the best and most demanding people in photography.

And this raises a question.  If you really feel that Canon tries "to get away with absolutely the least they can for the most money they can", why in the world would you stick with Canon???  I mean if they do that, and provide deficient sensors, *when* do you decide to switch?  How productive is it to just keep bashing Canon on a rumors forum?  When do you decide that some other company is more properly aligned with your interests?

Sure they do, did you not hear the speech one of their reps gave at a show some years back? See how they played games with something as critical as MFA and removed it from the 60D so they could offer it as a 'new' feature again in the 70D (one of their reps got caught admitted they removed it so the future 70D could have a extra selling point), look at how they dribble out something as trivial to implement as AutoISO over a decade and did you see some of the user surveys they sent out where they were all but stating they were trying to figure out how locked in by lenses people felt and how much they could get away with dribbling out slowly.

Because even if a company is acting a bit too far IMO like that now doesn't mean they have to continue doing so or that they don't make good lneses and have a friendly UI.

You're looking for faults in everything they do, and finding it in the lack of ONE feature on a low-end model, the comments of some rep years ago, the wording of some user surveys, etc.  It seems that everywhere you look, you perceive some ill motivation toward customers.  With this eagerness to find faults, I predict that you'll never, ever be satisfied.  And despite all of these perceived faults, with which you paint a picture of a rather bad company, you still can't get motivated to switch brands!?

Almost every company does stupid stuff at various points of time. Look at Nikon who have screwed the buyers as well as dealers when they replaced the D600 with the D610.

I guess it may be time for someone to chime in with the "Canon screwed the FD lens users by changing to EF mount" rant ...

292
##### Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Lee 4x4 Big Stopper filter in stock
« on: November 07, 2013, 05:36:23 AM »
The thing is now...I'm almost afraid to use it...who wants to wait that long for a replacement if it breaks???

That's why I have got two

293
##### Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Lee 4x4 Big Stopper filter in stock
« on: November 07, 2013, 05:35:12 AM »
If you don't want to wait, the following eBay seller that I ordered from has been selling Lee Big Stopper for quite a while.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lee-Big-Stopper-4-x4-10-Stop-Neutral-Density-ND-Glass-Filter-Brand-New-/161104691260?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item258296803c#ht_289wt_1187

Yup, but the price is high compared to B&H. \$140 vs. \$230 (and upwards).

294
##### Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Lee 4x4 Big Stopper filter in stock
« on: November 07, 2013, 05:34:06 AM »

It is usually in stock for not more than a few hours at best - you need to be lightning quick to order it from B&H

295
##### EOS Bodies / Re: Huge Issue with 1DX AF micro adjustments
« on: November 07, 2013, 05:32:20 AM »
I trust you had sufficient light when you did the AFMA. AFMA can vary depending on the available light and the distance to the target.

Have you tried focusing using Live-View? Is the image sharp when focused with Live-View?

I'd recommend checking AFMA for all your lenses. If the AFMA gives very high values for all your lenses (as compared to the 5D3) then it is likely that your 1DX needs to be calibrated for which you will need to send the camera to Canon.

296
##### Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Appeal of Nikon Df
« on: November 07, 2013, 01:44:12 AM »
Option 4 - looks don't matter because with my eye on the viewfinder, I couldn't care less what my camera looks like. Unlocking and turning one of 7 dials for every change I want to make ... I think I'll pass - not interested.

297
##### Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Lee 4x4 Big Stopper filter in stock
« on: November 06, 2013, 11:58:02 AM »
Congratulations and good luck using it.

Cheers ... J.R.

298
##### Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f/5.6 focussing issues
« on: November 06, 2013, 11:04:22 AM »
Thanks Neuro.

Just to add to my earlier post, the PDAF works like this

299
##### Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f/5.6 focussing issues
« on: November 06, 2013, 10:55:10 AM »
Hey Alan & BeenThere

I shoot AI Servo, Spot Metering, Continuous Shooting, either at f/5.6 in AV mode or in manual with variable shutter speed depending on available light.

Stationary subjects lock in a cinch but when I point the camera skyward, the auto focus struggles. First time in a year I experience this.

Two samples of stationary birds
Try evaluative metering.

And what benefit would that give? I'm not too sure that PDAF has anything to do with metering.
Focus is based on the contrast in the picture. When you use spot metering, you limit the contrast and lose or limit the focus. You'll see this when photographing birds against the sky especially when the sky and the bird are close in color.

Do you have any source for this? AFAIK, the metering sensor and the AF sensor do not communicate with each other for PDAF.

300
##### Canon General / Re: "Pure photographic experience"
« on: November 06, 2013, 10:27:58 AM »
I guess "pure photography" might be something like William Henry Fox Talbot's idea of the "Pencil of Nature" – images drawn by nature with the photographer being just a servant to the sun. But I suspect that's not what we are talking about here.

If its retro we're after, lets go for some real innovation.

A button/switch on every camera that engages the sensor. If you forget to turn it on, you can shoot pictures the whole day, but not one will be recorded. And, while we're at it, let's make sure that the button "slips" once and awhile and even though you think you hit it, it won't record any pictures. That way we can resurrect the "pure" film experience of forgetting to check the rewind knob to verify that there is film in the camera and that the take up spool has actually engaged the film.

How about separating the ISO display from the actual ISO on the sensor, so that you have to select both. That way, you can recreate the "pure" experience of putting ASA 100 film in the camera and forgetting to change the meter dial from Tri X.

Or maybe, there can be a random feature where all the images on the card appear as though someone inadvertently opened the back of the camera without rewinding the film.

While were at it, let's extend the experience to Lightroom. Maybe every once and awhile when you upload your images, several of them will have chemical-like blotches on them or be undeveloped in the center, so you can recreate the "pure" experience of film sticking together on the developing reels.

Maybe have shots taken at ISO 100 have the same noise as ISO 100,000 to simulate the experience of someone developing the film using Dektol.

Better yet, sometimes the entire upload can be blank, simulating the experience of accidentally pouring in the fixer first.

I'll think I'll stick with today's photography instead of some retro "pure" experience.

ROFL!

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 93