October 22, 2014, 08:32:06 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 - torger

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15]
211
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III / 6D from India
« on: January 25, 2011, 09:38:56 AM »
touchscreen??? on a pro level dslr? no no no!

Phase One has touchscreen on their new IQ1xx medium format camera backs, and the backs are supposed to work in rough conditions. Not sure how well the touchscreen works though.

just because Phase One does it doesn't mean it's a good idea.  I shoot plenty of places that I'd really rather not take my gloves off.  touchscreens don't work through gloves (unless you get one of those with the metal contacts, but those are rarely insulative gloves).  bad idea.

Yeah, it just means that pro-level equipment already does it. The phase one backs can be operated both using the touch screen *and* using four large buttons. The glove-operated mode would be using the buttons. The touch screen is faster to work with when you want to zoom in a specific area of a picture for example, but you can do the same using the buttons (if I understood the description correctly, haven't tried them myself so I'm not 100% sure how the ui works).

I agree that a touchscreen-only interface is a bad idea (even if it would work with gloves, fingers get too thick with gloves on), but think that a combined version could be nice. Overall, I think the live view and histogram etc can be much improved. For tripod-mounted landscape / architecture shoots I use live view almost 100%, and needing to scroll around with buttons and zoom in to verify focus does feel a bit awkward. It seems like the latest medium format backs have come a bit farther in this respect.

212
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III / 6D from India
« on: January 25, 2011, 08:02:33 AM »
touchscreen??? on a pro level dslr? no no no!

Phase One has touchscreen on their new IQ1xx medium format camera backs, and the backs are supposed to work in rough conditions. Not sure how well the touchscreen works though.

213
EOS Bodies / Re: A Little 1Ds Mark IV Info
« on: January 19, 2011, 01:20:58 PM »
What do people have against viewfinders? What real benefits are there to a EVIL?

Drawbacks - the sound from the mirror, the vibration from the mirror (when shooting on tripod, but then there's mirror up and live view of course). Moving parts also wears down faster. The mechanical shutter is also a problem in the same way as the mirror, but less so.

Viewfinders need also to be very large (and heavy) to get as good view of the scene as you get from a fairly cheap LCD. Live view is already today commonly used for manual focusing when shooting on a tripod.

However, as far as I know the mirrorless technology has not come far enough to be able to replace high end DSLRs, auto focus performance being the main aspect. Its also quite nice ergonomics to hold the camera to your face when it is large and heavy (which high end always will be due to the required optics), easier to hold still, and also more discrete in dark places. So on high end cameras, there will probably be some electronic viewfinder (looking at an internal LCD via a viewfinder) in addition to the rear screen even if the mirror is removed.

I think mirrorless will first be introduced in lower end cameras not intended for professional use.

214
EOS Bodies / Re: Different camera numbers internationally - why?
« on: January 17, 2011, 04:51:00 AM »
Probably several reasons, one could be to make it more difficult for customers to compare between markets, so you can have different prices. And even if you compare the products have a local feel to it (and guarantee) so it is more likely that you will buy the local version although it might be more expensive.

In short, it is useful to segment the market if you want to maximize profit.

215
EOS Bodies / Re: Buy now a 5D MK II or wait...?
« on: January 17, 2011, 03:33:10 AM »
It depends :-). If you are a bit of a technical nerd and want the-latest-and-greatest it is not so fun to buy a full frame camera now, since all of them are showing some age compared to the newest APS-C models. However, if you care more about making pictures buying a 5D now makes sense. And we don't really know when the next 5D comes out, and what price tag it will have. I would not be surprised if it slips into 2012...

Anyway, the big thing is the format, the shallower depth of field etc, the next model won't radically change how you make pictures. If you feel you need the format now, just buy.

And your 7D is a very nice complement to 5D.

I'm myself in about the same situation, however I'll wait to the next model, but that's since I need to save up money anyway, so I almost hope that it won't come until 2012...

216
Lenses / Re: Delivery of the Canon 1.4X III HAS STARTED
« on: January 13, 2011, 09:33:42 AM »
I've always wondered but not found any good comparisons if it is generally better image quality to use 7D body with 1,6 crop instead of 5Dm2 + 1.4x teleconverter. The teleconverter is of course more practical, portable and cheaper than a teleconverter, but say you already have a 7D for action and 5Dm2 for landscapes/portraits, does it then make sense buy a teleconverter for the 5D, or is one better off concerning image quality bringing the 7D and switch bodies to get the extra reach?

217
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* More 5D Mark III / 1D Mark V & Lenses [CR2]
« on: January 13, 2011, 03:14:34 AM »
As for kit lens, I would imagine a redesign of the 24-105L somewhere down the road. Since the original one was released as the kit for 5D in 2005, it's about time - especially with the recent 24-120 from Nikon). IMHO, the 24-105L is wwwaaaayyyy more versatile than the 24-70L and a more sound candidate for the kit lens.

Of course, the more zoom range you have the more "versatile" it is. I consider F/4 to be a problem though, I'd rather have F/2.8 and less zoom. The other point is optical quality. The current 24-70/2.8 is better than the 24-105, and I guess the shorter zoom range makes it easier to make good quality. If you tend to do shoots that gain from good optical quality (like tripod-mounted landscape shoots), then the quality part adds versatility.

As the megapixel count go up, it also becomes more important with high optical quality.

218
EOS Bodies / Re: More 5D Mark III / 1D Mark V & Lenses [CR2]
« on: January 13, 2011, 01:42:06 AM »
Ahh, but the built-in flash on the 7d is ALSO a wireless controller, and that's a cool and useful feature that I'd love to have on a 5dIII

JSP

Yes I use the 7D bulti-in as a wireless controller a lot, have never used it as a direct flash (so far :-) ). However, I've understood that built in flash is a bit of a compromise concerning weatherproofing, so on a more high end camera I rather do without.

219
EOS Bodies / Re: The Canon High End [CR2]
« on: December 17, 2010, 06:27:01 AM »
Would the 5D3 be to high end to add a swivel screen to?

Swivel screens don't work well if you want the camera to be rugged and weather-proof. So it is not likely that swivel screens will be used on any high end camera meant for professional outdoor use.

220
Canon General / Re: Camera Body Breakdown [CR1]
« on: December 10, 2010, 04:32:48 AM »
Canon is receiving quite a lot of bashing for not having the same low light performance as Nikon, and not so much appreciation for having higher resolution.

If you're a landscape photographer or studio photographer it seems to me that low ISO performance is key, and then resolution is an important factor. Some use medium format just for the resolution.

For my personal photo style, I'd rather go for higher resolution at low ISO and slightly worse high ISO performance. Needing large DOF and therefore often working around f/8 - f/11 which makes resolution generally diffraction limited I'd still could use as much as ~50 megapixels on a full frame sensor before additional pixels does not give significant value.

The exceptionally low noise at ISO100 in the sensor of Nikon's new D7000 shows that low noise (at low ISO) is indeed possible with small pixels.

However, if you need to shoot in non-ideal lighting conditions with short shutter speeds, then good high ISO performance is necessary of course. I don't really think that these conflicting goals can be combined into a single camera body today. Either you optimize for high res at low ISO, or low noise at high ISO. It's unfortunate that 35mm camera bodies are not modular as larger formats, then you could have two digital backs, one for high res and one for high ISO (and you could actually upgrade a body instead of having to buy yet a new magnesium alloy body).

Anyway, for me personally, I'm not particularly worried about the rumors of 5Dmk3 having as much as 32 megapixels, rather the opposite, it seems quite attractive to me. Closing in on medium format.

I also think the view on resolution will change in the coming years. Current resolution guidelines is based on more or less obsolete film and print standards. DOF calculators use acceptable resolution as 30 microns - meaning 1 megapixel. Saying that is a sharp image is like saying 8 bit audio is clear. In some circumstances yes it is true. However, not too many years from now we'll probably have monitors with 9000x6000 pixels rather than 1920x1200.

221
EOS Bodies / Re: Design Your Own Canon Body
« on: November 16, 2010, 06:24:54 AM »
It shall be interesting to see what the sensors will be like in the coming future. Many seems to like the pixel count reduced to increase S/N ratio, much like Nikon's philosophy. However, ideal pixel size is not really easy to state. Large pixels are indeed less noisy on high ISO, but you cannot trust as much on averaging as you can with higher resolution either. I personally believe that high resolution is a valuable feature, ideally I'd like optics and airy disc be the limiting factor on resolution, not image sensor -- assuming there's not too much compromising with noise and dynamic range. With postprocessing algorithms like lens correction, perspective correction, sharpening etc it's great to have a capture at or beyond optics limits so postprocessing is possible without reducing actual resolution.

I'd like to see new techniques with having multiple simultaneous readouts. If electronic shutters could be made better one could get several shutter times at once, great expanding dynamic range, like bracketing but in one shot. With multiple amplifiers one could read out at low ISO and high ISO simultaneously, and mix them to get lower shadow noise in low ISO images (where read noise tends to be higher than corresponding high ISO readout darkened to the same light level as the low ISO readout). With these techniques combined the RAW files would get extremely large though. DSLRs are quite large though, so I think the size should be used to pack in high performance electronics, large memory buffers etc.

Oversized ram buffer, and option to write to two CF cards simultaneously would be great, to maintain full RAW speed for many seconds. Design the camera so that you are not tempted to use JPEG to get more performance - RAW should be fast enough to be possible to use in all situations. Actually, I think it would be cool with a RAW-only camera too, or at least be able to turn off all JPEG-related features and settings to clean up the user interface.

And yes, radio flash controller should be standard by now. IR/flash triggering feels really really low tech.

It also like to see some new ideas on how to make photo inspection better, something more/smarter than histograms. I'm not sure what, but it feels a bit limited currently, at least for I as an amateur, still it happens that mistakes are not discovered until I look at the photos on a computer screen.

Oh, better remote triggering too. It should be standard to be able to modify ISO, aperture, shutter speed from the remote, in these days of HDR...

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15]