August 30, 2014, 06:23:08 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 - Apop

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
16
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 06, 2013, 04:52:29 AM »
What I wanted to show is, that the DXOmark score is nonsense. Their measurements are nice, but even they lack information to conclude which camera makes the best pictures. Sure, there are some things that can be derived from the DXO numbers, but others not. One is for example noise; you can have the same amount of noise for two cameras, but to the human eye they look different, because of the patterns and the colors they appear in.

I also found the test interessting, because it even worked for myself, since I forgot most positions of the cameras, and also did a blind test (and I judged the pictures differently then when I knew from what camera they were).

My conclusion.
-The DXOmark score difference between the 70D and the D7100 is definitly not justified.
-The Fujifilm x-pro1 makes some nice pictures.
-The Sony a99 is a bit dissapionting, the D7100 and the 70D produce pictures that are about on the same level.
-FF is better, but not but the difference is not as big as I thought (the 70D was often rated higher than the D600 at JPEG).

I really tried to make a fair test; I took samples from colorcards to show noise performance at low ISO, I took parts with high contrast and some with details. So I think the comparison is quite fair. If it is meaningful to you, I don't know, this is up to you.



It's a nice thing you showed, but does DP review even use the same lenses for the cameras?( for example all sigma 35 1.4?, same apertures?, don't think so).
(One  thing i noticed they have trouble framing every camera in exactly the same way , and there are also quite some focus differences , making it a bit hard to compare.)

But in general I guess it's safe to say they are  close.(70d/d7100).

I think to say that DXO is complete nonsense isn't fair.

17
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: IQ comparison; or how meaningful is DXO
« on: September 06, 2013, 02:40:43 AM »
DXO measures the sensor characteristics.  Those are hard facts. 

No, they are the results of DxO's testing process and interpretations. There's quite a bit of disagreement as to whether or not DxO's tests are accurate and/or meaningful.

I do not think there is much disagreement that their sensor tests, methods, and results are accurate and meaningful (at least for some uses).  The disagreements are to 1) whether the reported scores (scores, as opposed to test results) are fair, useful, meaningful or what-have-you 2) whether the differences matter for a given user and 3) the fact the DxO only measures sensor performance, not camera performance (and does not claim to do anything different).
That is why it is said: "Statistics is the prostitute of mathematics". ??? And also: "Statistics is a form of lying, using numbers". :-X What is the use of a collection of correct data, if the end result will be totally subjective score, and mysterious criteria? :-\

This is left to the intelligence of the reader. The "end result" has nothing to do with statistics, it is some kind of cumulative score for readers who are too busy to try to understand the data. The data is there for everybody who cares; the score is not data and every intelligent user would ignore it.

yes ,but
The scores/numbers should at least represent the data ?
Regardless of ones intelligence , some people are not interested or don't have the time to interpret the data themselves. I think DXO should deserve credit for conducting all these tests, if you agree or disagree with their scores/data shouldn't matter. They are putting in a lot of time and effort and if you do disagree , set up an experiment and try to disprove them rather than bashing them because your camera doesn't score the highest:P( this is just a general opinion of me, not aimed at you at all pi)

Still I think the score is derived from data and should not necessarily be ignored, since the score should represent (some of) the data.

For example; does anyone know where the image quality of a sensor is based on @ dxo?
95 vs 82 image quality, sensor 1 has around 20% better image quality.
To be honest I never value that score, because I have no clue where it is based on
(Resolution? DR? Noise? , no clue).

In that aspect I agree that scores should be ignored , they might have made up some formula with several variables and come up with such a score. again I have no clue how they get the number.

On the other hand , thins like
2.853 ISO     or    2.340 ISO     don't have to be ignored, If it's shot RAW and was a good test ( so repeated by others with the same result), that is enough information for me.



 

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70d vs d7100 Buffer
« on: September 05, 2013, 02:22:10 AM »

The Nikon is processing 20% more data (24 MP vs. 20 MP), and presumably writing out 20% more data.  That's part of the difference.  The rest of the difference is likely in the size of the buffer.

yes fair , but the nikon d7000 also had a very poor buffer compared to the 60d

70d: 16 raw files ( shoots 22 with fast card before slowdown) (7fps)
d7100 6 raw files (slows down after 5-6, 5fps in 14 bit raw)
60d 16 raw files (5.3 fps)
d7000 10 raw  (6fps)

I know the d7000-d7100 is from 16 to 24 mpixel,
but the canon went from 18 to 20 and retained the amount of shots that could be taken
I have always been annoyed by a small buffer since it should be fairly cheap to put more buffer memory in a camera.

When you shoot raw+jpg these numbers off course get worse.
I had it happen a few years ago with a river crossing of lions , where I used a d7000 and shot raw to one card, jpg as backup to the other, with a fairly slow card (45mb/s).
After only a few shots it went down to around 1fps .

Since then I have stopped backing up jpg to the second card slot and looked for a camera with slightly better buffer. I can understand to some people buffer doesn't matter at all , but I think it is also often overlooked when people are out to buy their first DSLR ( with the intention to shoot wildlife sports)

19
EOS Bodies / Canon 70d vs d7100 Buffer
« on: September 04, 2013, 05:43:25 PM »
Hey all, I just found a video on the 70d's buffer
With 95mb/sec it supposedly does 22 shots before slow down, which I think is pretty nice !
I am quite happy to see that they didn't limit the buffer ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuEtZb3ZNLA
( see 3 minute 58 to see the fast card)

A video on the Nikon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9R83frC6-w

In 3 seconds you get approximately 50% more shots (21)70d vs (14ish) d7100


I do wonder why there seems to be such a big difference between these cameras, which supposed to compete with each other.
Normally canon gets accused for protecting the next camera in the line, Now it seems nikon is protecting the yet to be released d400?.

Hope either one presents the d400/7dII soon, the good buffer on the 70d makes me wonder if the 7dII could have 30-35+ raw buffer!



20
Site Information / Re: Banning ankorwatt
« on: September 04, 2013, 02:07:15 AM »
Well I didn't read any of his foul language or heavy insults.

I am not sure if this is good thing or not, I think i said earlier the best thing to do is just ignore those kind of people , they won't get their fun if no one responds...

The forum ''community'' should be able to take of such a problem themselves by simply ignoring , there wouldn't be any need for admins to ban him.

If ankorwatt has a cellphone , or dynamic IP adres he will be back within a few hours anyway.
It is quite hard to ban people ( especially since ankorwatt is a self-claimed genious)

I would vote on some how to avoid-and-ignore troll(s) lessons!




21
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 03, 2013, 04:44:11 PM »
no explain Jrista , and keep it short, i have some problem to read your posts, 5% information and the rest a lot of words
so please explain
do you mean that this forum could not be better with all people like Pi and  Hulls knowledge as two example ?
I know David from dpreview since years back
That neuro has not been understanding or misunderstood
or what?
sorry but  you two are used that people are not question you.
what good  does that lead to?
a little self-criticism would be good, especially if you're wrong


 Neuro and Jrista strike me as the people who like to share their knowledge, but also read others opinions which might influence their beliefs/point on certain topics.

I like the way they constructively explain things, in a ''slightly'' less aggressive way than yourself.
It seems like you feel the need to attack anyone that disagrees with your pov, how can that ever lead to a serious discussion?

The reason that people won't question them as much as you, Is that they actually explain things or support it with facts/research. The way they approach people (and ignorance) is also working for them ;).

I asked a rather stupid question about exposure/exposure compensation, instead of getting flamed at that I am a dumb idiot that doesn't understand how a camera works and that the one accusing me of being so has been doing it for 30 years and has great knowledge, they just fed my ignorance with information ...(actual useful information).

That you don't like a lot of words seems to support my feeling you have a rather short fuse.
And the 5% you do read is most likely what you had filtered out and interpreted as an insult.

This forum would be better if there weren't as many flaming people around like yourself,
If anyone is to get a ban ( I doubt it), it's more likely you than Neuro .
( that can be based on the fact alone that the admins eyes disagrees with dxo mark results, so i don't expect him to be in your corner ;) lol)



22
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 03, 2013, 12:18:58 PM »
M mode, 1/100 s, f/8, ISO 400, change HTP from disabled to enabled, what happens to the number of photons?  Nothing. No difference.  Av mode, f/5.6, ISO 200, change HTP from disabled to enabled, what happens to the number of photons?  Nothing. No difference.

This is basic physics, assuming of course the situation external to the camera is controlled. Anyone who does not understand this can easily learn it. Admitting one is wrong is another story evidently.

Again, assuming controlled lighting from outside the camera, the number of photons hitting the sensor can only be changed by exposure settings - the f-stop and the amount of time the shutter is open. No artificial computer driven setting in the camera's software can magically create photons or destroy them. That is contrary to the laws of physics.

Hi, How does changing the Exposure increase or decrease the amount of photons hitting the sensor?
It does make sense(brighter/darker image), but i'm just wondering what actually happens.

According to theoretical physics photons flow, and so aperture physically restricts the amount that can pass, and shutter speed restricts the amount in time.

But from what I understand, it is theoretical physics, the emphasis being on theoretical.

Oke, i Must have misunderstood :p, I thought he meant 3 things ( not 2)

I misinterpreted it for exposure compensation , the part of aperture and shutter speed was clear.

But i still wonder what exposure compensation actually does, is it an electronic signal boost?

Exposure Compensation is usually only available in modes that are not fully manual. Av, Tv, even M with Auto ISO, you often have EC. Simply put, EC changes one of the "automatic" variables to achieve your chosen "exposure".

In Av or Tv, EC usually adjusts the factor not controlled by your dial. If you EC in Av, that will usually change shutter speed, unless shutter cannot be changed...in which case, if ISO is auto, EC will change ISO. Same goes for Tv, except that EC will change aperture when it can. Exposure Compensation is not something mystical or magical, or having to do with electronics. It is simply changes one of the settings you are already intimately familiar with.

Thanks a lot for the explanation(!) and useful information.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 03, 2013, 09:19:01 AM »
M mode, 1/100 s, f/8, ISO 400, change HTP from disabled to enabled, what happens to the number of photons?  Nothing. No difference.  Av mode, f/5.6, ISO 200, change HTP from disabled to enabled, what happens to the number of photons?  Nothing. No difference.

This is basic physics, assuming of course the situation external to the camera is controlled. Anyone who does not understand this can easily learn it. Admitting one is wrong is another story evidently.

Again, assuming controlled lighting from outside the camera, the number of photons hitting the sensor can only be changed by exposure settings - the f-stop and the amount of time the shutter is open. No artificial computer driven setting in the camera's software can magically create photons or destroy them. That is contrary to the laws of physics.

Hi, How does changing the Exposure increase or decrease the amount of photons hitting the sensor?
It does make sense(brighter/darker image), but i'm just wondering what actually happens.

According to theoretical physics photons flow, and so aperture physically restricts the amount that can pass, and shutter speed restricts the amount in time.

But from what I understand, it is theoretical physics, the emphasis being on theoretical.

Oke, i Must have misunderstood :p, I thought he meant 3 things ( not 2)

I misinterpreted it for exposure compensation , the part of aperture and shutter speed was clear.

But i still wonder what exposure compensation actually does, is it an electronic signal boost?

24
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 03, 2013, 04:22:37 AM »
M mode, 1/100 s, f/8, ISO 400, change HTP from disabled to enabled, what happens to the number of photons?  Nothing. No difference.  Av mode, f/5.6, ISO 200, change HTP from disabled to enabled, what happens to the number of photons?  Nothing. No difference.

This is basic physics, assuming of course the situation external to the camera is controlled. Anyone who does not understand this can easily learn it. Admitting one is wrong is another story evidently.

Again, assuming controlled lighting from outside the camera, the number of photons hitting the sensor can only be changed by exposure settings - the f-stop and the amount of time the shutter is open. No artificial computer driven setting in the camera's software can magically create photons or destroy them. That is contrary to the laws of physics.

Hi, How does changing the Exposure increase or decrease the amount of photons hitting the sensor?
It does make sense(brighter/darker image), but i'm just wondering what actually happens.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D vs D7100 ISO Comparison at 100%
« on: September 02, 2013, 03:41:40 PM »
So is this still serious? or is it just comedy....
It's making me laugh and feel smugly.

Ankorwatt is trolling ? or?
Ankorwatt must have some serious issues, maybe even a complex?
The need to proof himself , wanting to be a skillful credible person ?, Why do you need peoples approvement? Why should they credit you or see you as a skillful person?

Also I think appreciation and admiration is not recieved by a person who is screaming for it.
Summing up all you ''achievements'' and titles is misplaced arrogance and will make most people disgust.
If you have great skills and knowledge, there is no need for yourself to address it , people will see and experience it and complement you for it.

Also, the most credible persons can talk a lot of rubbish


26
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II news
« on: September 02, 2013, 08:13:14 AM »
If true this is good news ....

Hoping it gets 8-10 fps, and maybe a slightly increased buffer (30-35 raw should do)
Also really would like to see the 5dIII AF system in the 7d successor.


27
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 02, 2013, 05:33:45 AM »
So I was looking at some resolution charts for lenses yesterday.

Man the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR 2 sucks, like, those corners are terrible. To think that Nikon shooters have been wasting their lives with glass like that for so many years, almost half a decade now, sheesh, and it's so obvious too. It's like they've all got their head in the sand or something. I mean, obviously whatever talent you have is being severely limited if you use that system.

And yet, do we see Nikon users, 10 times a day, 10 times an hour, beating the beejeezus out of Nikon on the Nikon forums for the wide open corner performance of this lens? Do we see Canon users dropping in on Nikon forums and chortling arrogantly, and constantly posting pics of comparative wide open corner shots?

Why not? Is someone, somewhere, having an attack of courtesy?

It is why I started this topic
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16691.0

People are fixated on sensor performance, and then mostly on DR.

I am not really sure if there are Nikon users in these forums only to bash troll and attack, If so it is rather sad.

Now we just need to learn how to spot and ignore them, If no one replies to their posts their fun will be over really fast , they might even leave for an other canon forum to try and get some satisfaction !

Maybe the reason is that they envy canon glass, ergonomics or other things.....
I like Nikons green tint on the top screen when it's dark, canon has a bit yellowish :(  (altough mine is blue).
I like that they have better sensors....

I think is should go to a Nikon forum and constantly talk about the inferior lenses.....
Keep on going about the extremely poor buffer on the d7100, and that there is no Wildlife camera in the current line up (other than the d4, which has only 16mpix on FF) for wildlife shooters that care about raw+fps+buffer ...... there is ?

Most likely the only response you will get is : But... I have superior DR :D

28
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 31, 2013, 10:45:53 AM »
So what kind of shutter speed are we talking?
Low ISO in extremely dark places, sounds like pictures where you have the time to setup a tripod or lean on something to take a picture.
Wouldn't you also have the time to take 7 pictures then? and make an HDR for some extra DR.....

Sure it is nice to have , but the 'need' for it may be overrated?

You chose to ignore the example I posted, so convenient.

I did look at it, but I didn't think it was worth saying anything about.

To me the 'processed' shot looks a lot worse than your RAW shot.

Now I am not that good at processing either, but I usually end up with files that look better than the original raw image ( to my eyes anyway)

29
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 31, 2013, 05:08:32 AM »
where is the banding?
5D3
ISO 4000
extreme cropped

It is at LOW ISO in the very darkest tones where it has more banding than Exmor not at high ISO. At very high ISO it does even a trace better than D800.


So what kind of shutter speed are we talking?
Low ISO in extremely dark places, sounds like pictures where you have the time to setup a tripod or lean on something to take a picture.
Wouldn't you also have the time to take 7 pictures then? and make an HDR for some extra DR.....

Sure it is nice to have , but the 'need' for it may be overrated?

30
.
After puzzling through this, I concluded you probably mean "consolation."
Ah! Thanks. I was wondering about the relevance.


Oops, sorry my english is rather poor :(, I thought I had the right word in my head , something like make canon users feel stronger/more secure or something

Next time I better use the dictionary for words more complicated than Hello/Goodbye

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11