September 17, 2014, 05:48:50 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 - Drizzt321

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 112
16
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DmkII + Magic Lantern question for ML users
« on: April 28, 2014, 07:59:33 PM »
I've used it on my 5d2 & 5d3, no problems at all. Unless you get the bleeding edge Alpha, it's generally pretty safe. Even the bleeding edge Alpha I've heard usually won't b0rk your camera, although it may not be stable.

17
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 25, 2014, 12:55:51 PM »
Wouldn't you also end up having to deal with a significant drop-off in number of photons hitting the photo-diodes? After all, you're essentially turning one 'pixel' site into 3 sub-pixels, none of which covers the entire area of the 'pixel'. Not that I don't want them to try innovative new things like that, but I don't think it's practical except for maybe some specialized applications.

I don't know if you'd lose any additional light. Right now, there is a color filter immediately covering two diodes. If you had two smaller color filters adjacent to one another, you aren't going to halve the light, though you may move it around. Rather than "all light hitting here is red", it would be "some of the light hitting here is red and some of it is green," and they would have varying intensities. I think. :P

Well, you realistically would. Since a photon can only hit 1 of the photo-diodes, if you give a photo-diode less surface area, there are less photons that can hit it. With the current, you end up with 2 photo-diodes that get the same color of light, which ends up with nearly as much surface area combined as a single photo-diode at the same pixel location.

It probably would also screw up the phase detect AF, since now you have different colors of light be compared for the phase, and which you can't be sure you're getting the same _amount_ of light of the different colors...so it'd probably be really, really hard to accurately do phase-detect. Then again...I'm no scientist, so maybe it's not so bad and you can reliably correct it via software.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 24, 2014, 12:30:39 PM »
Wouldn't you also end up having to deal with a significant drop-off in number of photons hitting the photo-diodes? After all, you're essentially turning one 'pixel' site into 3 sub-pixels, none of which covers the entire area of the 'pixel'. Not that I don't want them to try innovative new things like that, but I don't think it's practical except for maybe some specialized applications.

19
EOS Bodies / Re: A speculative thought on Canon test bodies
« on: April 23, 2014, 08:13:27 PM »
Laptops and cell phones eat batteries during testing, too.  Whenever you're working with software, there's a good chance you're going to have bugs that cause excessive CPU utilization.  Any time the CPU is doing work, it is consuming a lot more power than when it is idle.  It only takes a tiny bit of activity every few milliseconds to seriously impact power consumption by preventing the CPU from ever reaching an idle state.

Hopefully, those bugs get fixed before the thing ships, but it isn't at all uncommon to have them during development.  I'd be really surprised if anything other than the CPU were responsible for the high battery drain.

Well, Intel's CPUs generally use less power than AMD's CPUs.

Intel has greater IPC (instructions per clock) than similar level AMD CPUs at the same clock speed. More complicated than that, but basically Intel CPUs of similar generation as an AMD CPU at the same clock speed will do a good bit more work than the AMD CPU does. This lets the Intel CPU do a "race to sleep", which is to say get the CPU back to it's lowest power usage state. If a bit of software keeps the CPU active, even at low levels, it ends up using quite a bit more power than it does if it can if it is in it's lowest power state (at which point it's not really doing much at all).

Like dgatwood said, a tiny bit of activity every few (or even more often) milliseconds can result in the CPU staying at a higher power state longer than it otherwise should, and using much more power than it would otherwise. Also, don't forget that when it uses more power, it's also using part of that to generate waste heat. I don't know the formula, but I believe, in general, as the power usage goes up, for the same conductor efficiency goes down and more of the power is released as waste heat, rather than getting to where the work needs to get done.

20
EOS Bodies / Re: A speculative thought on Canon test bodies
« on: April 23, 2014, 06:40:44 PM »
I think you're referring to what they call triple-CCD (or three-chip) cameras in the video world, right?  I've wondered about that for a long time, too, but don't know about how practical it is in terms of size for an SLR.  I know the pro video cameras had them for many years (and still do?) as they were supposed to produce better color and be better in low light.

Yea, but they're also quite a bit bulkier than a DSLR, even a 1D size body. At a guess, you'd need quite a bit more back-length at a minimum, because the prisms have to cover 100% (or slightly more) of a FF 35mm sensor. I'm pretty sure those 3-ccd video cameras had/have a much smaller sensor size than even APS-C, which requires a much smaller set of prisms.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Petition to Canon regarding the EOS 5D Mark III
« on: April 23, 2014, 06:38:17 PM »
Have you tried using AI servo in low light?  Wouldn't it have been nice to have your AF point illuminated in red so you can actually see what your focussing on?  Without the illuminated AF points, AI servo would be crippled in low light for me.

There's no reason why this feature shouldn't trickle down to the 5D, or spot metering tied to AF points given the fact they share nearly identical AF systems.
You sound quite certain about that…I'm not so sure. 

For AF point illumination in AI Servo, as I understand the issue, the problem is that the the light which illuminates the AF points also affects metering.  In prior 1-series bodies, the illumination wasn't an issue, since the light was at a different angle to illuminate the AF points etched in the focus screen, compared to the points displayed on the transmissive LCD.   It's not a problem in One Shot, as metering is done once.  But in AI Servo, metering is done continuously, along with AF.  The solution for the 1D X required that the illumination blink on and off, but I also suspect it may involve altering the way the data is read from the metering sensor, so the data from the red channel are eiher ignored or given less weight.  That would be possible with the RGB metering sensor of the 1D X, the 5DIII doesn't have an RGB metering sensor. 

Regarding AF point-linked spot metering for the 5DIII, while the AF systems are nearly the same as you state, the metering systems are vastly different.  Here are the 61 AF points superimposed on the 5DIII's 63 zone iFCL metering grid:



The resolution of the 5DIII's metering sensor simply may not be high enough to support spot metering with the AF points, whereas the 100,000 pixel metering sensor of the 1D X can do so.  Even when the 1D X's metering sensor reverts to zone metering (in very dim light or for flash exposure metering), it's divided into 252 zones - 4 times the density of the 5DIII's metering sensor.

I can't say for sure that those tecnhical limitations are absolute, but you might consider the possibility that there are technical reasons for those features being available on the 1D X but not on the 5DIII.  After all, they did add f/8 AF to the 5DIII.

I'd LOVE #1. However, you do raise a good point that the metering systems are quite different. I'd still like to see it if possible, however I don't know if we'll ever know if it's possible because I highly doubt Canon will bring that to anything other than the 1D line. Maybe the 7d2 (or equivalent replacement) as a crop-factor equivalent of the 1D.

22
Photography Technique / Re: Slides
« on: April 23, 2014, 06:30:48 PM »
And I'm afraid Kodachrome processing has gone the way of the Dodo. I believe it is possible to development as a black and white negative but that is hardly what you want.

Really? That's interesting.

23
Photography Technique / Re: Slides
« on: April 22, 2014, 06:54:16 PM »
Far as I know, you can't get Kodachrome to be developed anymore. Anywhere. I could be wrong though.

Not sure about the Kodak Elite Chrome 200. if it uses the same chemicals as others such as Velvia/Provia, you probably could get it developed just fine. Or you could always just have them cross-process and see what that brings out.

24
Software & Accessories / Re: Lots of CF or Tablet+OTA cable?
« on: April 21, 2014, 01:27:45 PM »
If you're that worried, you can always grab one of those portable HDD with an integrated card reader that will copy from the CF card to the HDD, and then when you get home you plug the HDD in and pull off the images. There's a few different ones out there.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d IV vs. 7D II
« on: April 16, 2014, 07:10:51 PM »
Do the experts here think the overall land speed of the unicorn will match or at least come close to that of the dodo? 

 ;)

Well, while it appears the Dodo was fairly swift. Using a modern proxy, the  ostrich (as a large, land bird) runs about 40 mph, I'd put an uneducated, non-scientific guess at about 25-35 mph peak speed.

Assuming that the origination of the Unicorn is from people seeing Rhino's, the White Rhino can run about 31 mph at peak.

If, instead, the Unicorn is really someone's great practical joke and it was simply a horse dressed up, a Quarter horse can run about 47.5 mph.

So, if a Dodo and a Unicorn made a bet as to who would get the land-speed record, if it's a Unicorn based on a White Rhino, it might be a toss-up. If it's a Unicorn based on a dressed up horse, pretty much the horse would win.

And now I feel all proud and geeky and self satisfied that I have go through the time and effort to attempt to make an absolutely meaningless point about something completely unrelated to the original topic.

26
I'd say if you need the wider spread AF points for sports, 70D is the way to go, while for the rest of the photography the 6D will be superior. The center AF point on the 6D is actually really very good, and it has better low light capabilities than the 5d3 AF points, although on the 6D it's only the center AF point.

Video, it's somewhat a wash, but if you want to be able to have it AF for you (you tap on the LCD), then 70D is the way to go. If you are comfortable with manually focusing for video like you are now, doesn't matter too much, although the 6D will have a shallower DoF, all other things the same, and will have better low-light IQ.

27
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 16, 2014, 01:15:19 PM »
It looks like lots of people got good images.  It started out hazy here, and degenerated into a overcast, so I gave up.  The night before was clear.

I got fairly lucky. I was up a few hundred feet above ocean level on the side of a mountain, so above the low-level fog/haze that we sometimes get. Then while there were some high level, thin clouds (cirrus I think), there was a good wind and they were moving fast so there was sufficient clear air for me to get decent shots.

28
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Calumet Store Closing Sale
« on: April 15, 2014, 08:43:15 PM »
Thanks this, totally missed it. Fortunately the LA store is listed. Doesn't say when it starts, should I assume now? And anyone know what hours?

29
Canon General / Re: How to remove image information
« on: April 15, 2014, 08:41:55 PM »
Let me Google that for you...

And for future reference, it's called image metadata or EXIF tags.

30
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 08:04:34 PM »
Equatorial mounts are a lot easier to use than that. They sound very technical, but they are actually simple and elegant devices. All you would really need to do is use the hand controller, set it to lunar time tracking (vs. sidereal, which is the default used for stars), pick the moon to point, center (there is always a bit of pointing error), and start imaging. Once you set it, you can pretty much forget it. The only extra bit of work is the meridian flip...once the moon passes the meridian (from east to west crossing the imaginary "12 o'clock line" overhead), you need to tell the mount to goto the moon again, and it will flip the mount to the inverse orientation...then you can image for the rest of the night.

Jrista, you have failed to convince me that an attempt by me to mount the equator would in any way be seen as elegant.  Plus, I live in Texas and such an act is probably illegal.  I am also concerned that if I tried one of those meridian flips, I would end up in the hospital.  Take care, thanks for the tips and keep posting those great photos.

++

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 112