September 30, 2014, 05:02:31 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 - Drizzt321

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 112
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 06:14:23 PM »
My big question is, what were the recording settings? Was this the clean HDMI out to a quality recorder and then transcoded with a professional package? I assume (given I'm not a pro) that output at 4:2:2 via uncompressed HDMI will probably make a pretty big difference. Otherwise, probably not too big a surprise if they used the same codec to save out from 7d2 & 5d3. Canon probably didn't really change that around.

EOS Bodies / Re: Chuck Westfall Talks Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 18, 2014, 01:40:11 PM »
Something I keyed in on, they Dual-Pixel is 2nd gen, while 70D is 1st gen. So it sounds like they have done some additional sensor work for sure. Although it might be other hardware and/or software for 2nd gen.

I like to own the software I purchase.  I think I'll pass on CC.  If lightroom ever goes CC, I'll just use something else.

+1 legal terms you own a perpetual license to use the software. Not the software itself. But I agree with the sentiment expressed.

Actually Win 7 and Win 8 / 8.1 are built on a Vista engine....neither are new products.

Don't be deceived by Windows version numbers. Because they're not used in marketing materials, they are used in a more "technical" way. Usually they are bumped when there is some big changes in the underlying kernel. That's why Windows XP and 2003 were still version 5 like Windows 2000, although they were big improvements as well. There are also big improvements in 7 and 8.x over Vista, especially perfromance-wise.
But one reason Vista gets very little support nowadays is it is very little used, its market percentage is in the single digit range. Thereby developers prefer to target 7 and later, and take advantage of some new good features not available before. Even MS Office 2013 requires 7 or better, despite being Vista still supported, but I guess not for too long. Expect most new software drop Vista support soon, especially now XP has reached is end-of-life - what was written to run on XP would have run on Vista also. Especially for graphic intensive applications (but not only), 7 and later are far better than Vista.

Yea, Vista had a ton of underlying framework changes which were part of the reason why it was pretty Meh. But, it did set the groundwork for Win7, which is what they should have released, except they were on a deadline. Although I bet Win7 launch would have been pretty rough if Vista hadn't had all the hardware/software guys time to shift, at least in part, over to the new frameworks.

Win7 made fixes & improvements on the core services, as well as fixed the UI. Win8/8.1 has added additional core services functionality & tweaks over Win7, as well as a massive UI overhaul. So even so, Vista kernel + core services are quite a bit different than Win8/8.1 kernel + core services, even if the official 'NT version' is the same. They are definitely different products. Vista just set the stage for the newer versions. Kinda like how Win2000 set the stage for WinXP in a huge number of ways.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Spyder4Elite for $169 from Amazon
« on: May 27, 2014, 02:57:32 PM »
When I click through on the link, I get the full price :(  Anybody still seeing the good price?

Give it a try, there is a free trial.  I found that it is very slow, so, while it does a good job, its not a tool for processing thousands of photos in a short time, but if you only do a handfiul at a time, its great.
It is improving on the speed with each now generation, but unless you have a very fast computer, be prepared to wait a while.

Thanks. Yea, I should just bite the bullet and try out the demo. I don't really have deadlines, so generally I can wait some extra time. I do have a 2nd gen Core i7 quad on my laptop, so I do have some CPU horsepower available.

Have you tried it on any film scans? I know that might not be it's strengths, but some of the non-optic correction feature?

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deals: Lexar Professional Memory Cards
« on: May 22, 2014, 07:05:26 PM »
This is just way too good a deal to pass up. 64GB 1066x CF for under $100?! Yes please!

So, looks like OpticsPro 9.5 integrates pretty nicely with Lightroom. Does it's features (optics corrections, noise reduction tools, etc) make it well worth the price and generally superior to Lightroom?

Unfortunately it looks like for 5d3 support I'd need to go with the Elite, which at $200 is definitely a savings over the regular, but do I want to pay that much extra over the Standard...?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Flourine lens coat vs no coat
« on: May 20, 2014, 02:06:54 AM »
Nikon has a nifty video out showing the how awesome their flourine lens coat is. I'm going to guess that Canon, etc lens coat does something pretty much the same.

I noticed that Nikon are trying to push that their fluorine coatings and Fluorite elements are "better" than what Canon has.

Better, worse, whatever. In practical terms, I imagine there's little to no difference. Probably only something someone like Roger @LensRentals would be able to measure, and even he would say it has little or no visible difference in the real world.

Third Party Manufacturers / Flourine lens coat vs no coat
« on: May 19, 2014, 05:33:19 PM »
Nikon has a nifty video out showing the how awesome their flourine lens coat is. I'm going to guess that Canon, etc lens coat does something pretty much the same.

What unfocused said.

Plus, while I have a gripped 5d3 and love the grip, why are you needing a grip? Or is it because you want the dual batteries so you don't have to change in the middle of a field somewhere?

As for the 6D, it's a great camera from everything I've heard. The center AF point is very good, although the rest are meh.

As for memory card, from what I recall, 6D supports up to UHS-1. So pick a card that has UHS-1 support, and then pick you're preferred brand & speed.

Last bit, landscapes. You can do them without a tripod, depending on your style, but if you are going to end up being rather serious about them you should definitely consider a good quality tripod, which will run you $500-600 and up. But, if you just sorta have an interest, leave that for another time. Also get a cable release and learn about mirror lockup.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Sensor Technology Talk [CR1]
« on: May 02, 2014, 01:16:11 PM »
Nothing indicates that Canon  have a  new sensor ready.
I do not understand all the rumors that are flourishing.
That a Foveon-like sensor is  to be launched is a joke, what is the probability that Canon could do anything better than the five major sensor manufacturers? Sony alone has over 50% of the  whole world wide sensor market.

Someone stated that the color accuracy would be Foveons strength, this is completely untrue.
It takes a lot of processing power to get the colors  tuned in a Foveon-based sensor, there are many articles written about this topic and problems.
The desire for a new sensor from Canon is larger than Canon's ability right now to manufacture one.
But we can all dream

And we have lots more processing power, even in camera, available to the average user, to say nothing of the systems that are available for design simulations. Not saying it's automatically a solution, just pointing out that we have a LOT more CPU horsepower, to say nothing of a properly designed camera chip having a few specialist bits as ASICs.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Sensor Technology Talk [CR1]
« on: April 30, 2014, 08:46:19 PM »
I think they lost me at "Foveon-like". 

So it will have all the negatives of a high MP camera, like massive files to store, and a slowed FPS, and a faster-clogging buffer, but none of what you actually want from all those MP's, namely higher resolution and more detail to spare when doing things like shooting at high ISO, or cropping heavily.

Am I missing something wonderful about Foveon?  If so, then so is everyone else based on the failure of Sigma's Foveon bodies to fly off the shelves.  Why not copy FUJI sensors instead?  That more complex, non-bayer pixel, no filter thing sounds much more interesting to me, anyway. 


I thought with Foveon-like you'd actually have higher effective resolution & detail, because no de-bayering needs to occur. Plus, no anti-aliasing filter generally needed. Granted, based on Wikipedia, the way in which Sigma resolution (the number of actual pixels) doesn't add up to the same spatial resolution (number of actual pixel buckets), but 3xPixels since they considered each photosite, even those within the same pixel bucket, as being part of the Mega-Pixel count.

That said, based on the Wikipedial article, a Foveon sensor likely would outperform a slightly higher spatial resolution bayer pattern sensor in general.

If Canon has a improved QE significantly, and individual color response for each photodiode and improved the read-out times, it might make for awesome photos, even if the actual spatial resolution stays at it's current value, or even decreases slightly.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: For a bit of fun - Selfies by Kai
« on: April 30, 2014, 05:22:40 PM »
lol, ok, so that was mildly amusing for one of their not so subtly sarcastic videos.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Sensor Technology Talk [CR1]
« on: April 30, 2014, 05:16:18 PM »

A 7d2 more focused on fast action definitely makes sense. Birders & sports guys will probably love that.

5d4 features...hmmm...

I'd love to have metering based on focused AF points, even if it's not the full RGB of the 1DX, it'd be great to still meter based on the AF point.

Dual CFast slots, or at worst, dual UDMA7 CF slots.

More AFMA points along a zoom could be nifty, not sure if needed though. Add in an automated AFMA adjust (with appropriate target of course) would be awesome.

USB3 port instead of USB2.

Full, uncompressed 4:2:2 via HDMI, and it'd be great for similar off of the USB3 port, but I find that unlikely.

'Dual-Pixel' sensor Phase Detect AF could be handy, although I'd rather the better color accuracy/DR that Foeven-like might bring.

Probably a few other things that would be great, although I highly doubt I'd buy it day one. My 5d3 is working great, but eventually I imagine I'd go for a 5d4. Some day. Unless I win the lotto first *crosses fingers*

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 112