August 28, 2014, 11:20:46 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 - jrista

Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 272
1036
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 06, 2014, 05:13:09 AM »
The conductors inside the ribbon is sealed  by the material of the ribbon already. Therefore the sealing at the joint for the ribbon will not be needed.

The point isn't to seal the ribbon itself. The point is to avoid having to break the camera seal to allow the ribbon to pass through it. Why doesn't anyone get this? It's really simple and strait forward. You cannot seal a camera if you slice open the seal to pass a ribbon cable through it.

1037
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 06, 2014, 01:18:39 AM »
@jrista, did you note the product linked above?



LCD on a hinge joint, waterproof to 10m/33' - that's a little deeper than I'd take my 1D X...  ;)

I did, and I quote myself:

Quote
And there is still the whole ruggedness issue (the fact that Olympus launched some tiny little waterproof camera with an articulating screen only says that someone put an articulating screen on an underwater camera...it says NOTHING of the screens durability or the seal's reliability over the life of the camera.)

Just because someone stuck an articulating screen on an underwater camera doesn't mean it will last. That's the whole point. You buy a weather sealed camera so it will LAST, so it will handle the kind of insane crap professionals throw at their gear every time they take them out. Weathersealing isn't about convenience. It's about durability and reliability. I GUARANTEE you, if my 7D had an articulating screen, it would have broken off entirely a long time ago. I just can't think about that kind of crap when I'm out in the field trying to get a shot.

And I know I'm FAR more protective of my gear than many professional bird and wildlife photographers. If I get mud on it, I tend to try and wipe it off in the field...most pros who get mud on their 1D X's would just laugh at me if they saw me doing that.

Just because it CAN be done...doesn't mean it SHOULD be done. It compromises the durability and reliability of the product. On something like the little Olympus, that's a consumer-grade product (a fact that is further enhanced by the remote ocean island paradise pictured in it's little articulating screen)...it doesn't matter how durable it is. The thing is as likely to be replaced in a year anyway as it is to be broken. On a 1D X? 5D III? 7D II? Nah. Articulating screens have NO place on a product that is built to be robust.

The day Canon adds articulating screens to their xD line of products is the day I jump ship.

1038
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 06, 2014, 12:00:46 AM »
Touchscreens came out on the 70D and you can bet that the 6D2, 7D2, 5D4, and 1DX2 will have it.

Minor correction. The 650D/T4i was Canon's first DSLR with touchscreen. Whether the 5D4 and 1DX2 will be equipped with touchscreens depends on performance of those screens under weather testing. :)

My opening line was "for clarity, I will ignore Rebels, EOS-M, and SL-1 and concentrate on the higher end cameras" :)

Weatherproofing of a touchscreen is the same as for a "normal" screen. Even articulated screens can be easily weathersealed.

The convenience of touch controls will be hard to resist. Tap the screen to select an object to focus on... double tap to select an area to meter on.... longer tap to select white balance, etc etc..  this coupled with the existing buttons and dials makes for a killer interface.

The problem with weatehrsealing an articulating screen isn't whether it can or cannot BE weathersealed. The problems is that you have to seal a joint, which means wear on the seal, which means it had the potential to break down and break at some point. Worse, you generally wouldn't know that the seal was broken, which actually greatly increases the chance that you might ruin your camera by using it in the kind of extreme conditions that you would never use a non-weathersealed camera.

There is a very specific reason why the 1D X, which has the best weathersealing of any Canon DSLR, does not use a main rotatable dial and opts for buttons instead. The wear on a seal with a rotatable dial is greater than wear on a seal with depressable buttons.

You don't seal the joints.... you seal after the joints so the seal is somewhere that does not move and wear out...

Also, nobody ever said that if the 1DX got a touchscreen that it would be a tilt-swivel screen. My bet is that it gets a touchscreen and it is fixed in place like the current one.

You can't do that, though. The joint is what contains the electronic ribbons that transfer data from the main board to the LCD screen. You have to seal the ENTIRE thing...you can't slip the ribbon through some unsealed slot, that would effectively nullify all of the sealing.

There is no articulating screen with the same level of weather sealing as the 5D III and 1D X currently have. It just isn't going to happen. Not to mention the overall fragility of an articulating screen in the kinds of extreme situations that those cameras can be used in. I've hauled my 7D through thick brush and brambles, dropped it in the mud, had it even topple over onto hard ice on my ultra light weight Gitzo tripod because of 60mph high winds up in the mountains during winter a couple years ago. If I'd had an articulating screen, my 7D would have gone bust a LOOONG time ago. I just walked in the door about 10 minutes ago...at the moment, my 7D is once again covered in mud. :P It's just the name of the game...if you want to get anything remotely resembling a true professional bird or wildlife shot (and I'm not saying I've ever achieved that goal yet), you just plain and simply have to crawl through the thickets and mid and get really dirty.

"Articulating screens" and "rugged" or "weather sealed" can't be placed in the same sentence when it isn't pure irony. I understand all the arguments for them in high end models, but I think anyone who actually buys one of Canon's xD models where part of their decision is based on the ruggedness and weather sealing of the body, if they had a choice, they would NEVER choose the option to have an articulating screen.
Three different issues are getting mixed up here.

First: Sealing
The ribbon passes through a seal before it gets to the joint. At that place, nothing is moving and the seal will not wear out. Likewise, where the ribbon enters the display, the seal is after the joint and it does not  move or wear out the seal.

Ruggedized laptops have been doing this for 20 years.

Second: Does a tilt/swivel screen belong.
This is a matter of opinion and there is no right or wrong answer. My personal belief is that a tilt/swivel screen belongs on the lower end models and that it does not belong on a 1DX. As you have said, the 1DX is about ruggedness. It is a camera that is designed to take a beating and movable screens are not going to survive that beating.

Also, the introduction of wireless and (hopefully) decent apps move your tilt/swivel screen to your phone...

Third: touch screens.
Touch screens can be sealed every bit as easily as a non-touch screen. Just because it is a touch screen does not mean it is a tilt/swivel touch screen.

For the ribbon to pass through the seal, the seal has to be cut. That makes the seal useless. You don't seal the camera and seal the LCD separately, with an unsealed electronic ribbon cable passing through the joint. For one, the ribbon would then be succeptible to shorting out if you use the camera in the rain. Worse, you've had to slice into the seal to allow the ribbon through...the ribbon can then be threaded through that...but, moisture, dust, and god only knows what else is ALSO going to get through. You could try gluing the ribbon around the seal slit, but then you have glue around an unstable ribbon that is going to slide back and forth through the slit...and glue wears out even faster. The only way to fully seal it is to have the seal reach through the joint from the camera body into the LCD screen, fully encasing the ribbon.

There is no weather sealing the way you've described with an articulating screen. Just not gonna happen. Even if you did fully seal the entire joint, such a camera still couldn't be graded with the same level of sealing as a 5D III...because now you have a seal around a wear point in the camera.

And there is still the whole ruggedness issue (the fact that Olympus launched some tiny little waterproof camera with an articulating screen only says that someone put an articulating screen on an underwater camera...it says NOTHING of the screens durability or the seal's reliability over the life of the camera.)

As for the touch screen, I'm all for it...so long as it is NOT articulating. ;P If a reliable wifi remote viewing app comes along, I'm all for that, too. It would be awesome to use my 10.6" Surface Pro tablet screen for focusing macro shots. But it would have to come along, and be reliable, for me to believe it's possible. To date, it seems the 6D's wifi is pretty sketchy, and Canon regularly kills it to save power.

1039
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 05, 2014, 08:13:23 PM »
Touchscreens came out on the 70D and you can bet that the 6D2, 7D2, 5D4, and 1DX2 will have it.

Minor correction. The 650D/T4i was Canon's first DSLR with touchscreen. Whether the 5D4 and 1DX2 will be equipped with touchscreens depends on performance of those screens under weather testing. :)

My opening line was "for clarity, I will ignore Rebels, EOS-M, and SL-1 and concentrate on the higher end cameras" :)

Weatherproofing of a touchscreen is the same as for a "normal" screen. Even articulated screens can be easily weathersealed.

The convenience of touch controls will be hard to resist. Tap the screen to select an object to focus on... double tap to select an area to meter on.... longer tap to select white balance, etc etc..  this coupled with the existing buttons and dials makes for a killer interface.

The problem with weatehrsealing an articulating screen isn't whether it can or cannot BE weathersealed. The problems is that you have to seal a joint, which means wear on the seal, which means it had the potential to break down and break at some point. Worse, you generally wouldn't know that the seal was broken, which actually greatly increases the chance that you might ruin your camera by using it in the kind of extreme conditions that you would never use a non-weathersealed camera.

There is a very specific reason why the 1D X, which has the best weathersealing of any Canon DSLR, does not use a main rotatable dial and opts for buttons instead. The wear on a seal with a rotatable dial is greater than wear on a seal with depressable buttons.

You don't seal the joints.... you seal after the joints so the seal is somewhere that does not move and wear out...

Also, nobody ever said that if the 1DX got a touchscreen that it would be a tilt-swivel screen. My bet is that it gets a touchscreen and it is fixed in place like the current one.

You can't do that, though. The joint is what contains the electronic ribbons that transfer data from the main board to the LCD screen. You have to seal the ENTIRE thing...you can't slip the ribbon through some unsealed slot, that would effectively nullify all of the sealing.

There is no articulating screen with the same level of weather sealing as the 5D III and 1D X currently have. It just isn't going to happen. Not to mention the overall fragility of an articulating screen in the kinds of extreme situations that those cameras can be used in. I've hauled my 7D through thick brush and brambles, dropped it in the mud, had it even topple over onto hard ice on my ultra light weight Gitzo tripod because of 60mph high winds up in the mountains during winter a couple years ago. If I'd had an articulating screen, my 7D would have gone bust a LOOONG time ago. I just walked in the door about 10 minutes ago...at the moment, my 7D is once again covered in mud. :P It's just the name of the game...if you want to get anything remotely resembling a true professional bird or wildlife shot (and I'm not saying I've ever achieved that goal yet), you just plain and simply have to crawl through the thickets and mid and get really dirty.

"Articulating screens" and "rugged" or "weather sealed" can't be placed in the same sentence when it isn't pure irony. I understand all the arguments for them in high end models, but I think anyone who actually buys one of Canon's xD models where part of their decision is based on the ruggedness and weather sealing of the body, if they had a choice, they would NEVER choose the option to have an articulating screen.

1040
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 05, 2014, 04:30:51 PM »
Touchscreens came out on the 70D and you can bet that the 6D2, 7D2, 5D4, and 1DX2 will have it.

Minor correction. The 650D/T4i was Canon's first DSLR with touchscreen. Whether the 5D4 and 1DX2 will be equipped with touchscreens depends on performance of those screens under weather testing. :)

My opening line was "for clarity, I will ignore Rebels, EOS-M, and SL-1 and concentrate on the higher end cameras" :)

Weatherproofing of a touchscreen is the same as for a "normal" screen. Even articulated screens can be easily weathersealed.

The convenience of touch controls will be hard to resist. Tap the screen to select an object to focus on... double tap to select an area to meter on.... longer tap to select white balance, etc etc..  this coupled with the existing buttons and dials makes for a killer interface.

The problem with weatehrsealing an articulating screen isn't whether it can or cannot BE weathersealed. The problems is that you have to seal a joint, which means wear on the seal, which means it had the potential to break down and break at some point. Worse, you generally wouldn't know that the seal was broken, which actually greatly increases the chance that you might ruin your camera by using it in the kind of extreme conditions that you would never use a non-weathersealed camera.

There is a very specific reason why the 1D X, which has the best weathersealing of any Canon DSLR, does not use a main rotatable dial and opts for buttons instead. The wear on a seal with a rotatable dial is greater than wear on a seal with depressable buttons.

1041
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: March 04, 2014, 07:10:50 PM »
t does not look like you have used or own the Sony a7/R ... as nice as it is, it is no match for Canon DSLRs ... the only advantage  of Sony a7/R (over full frame DSLRs) is its compact/light size ... for everything else the Canon DSLRs are superior in every way.

The sensors Sony is using is the same sensor Nikon is using in the D800 / D610 which Sony designed & made, the Olympus OM-D series uses Sony sensors, the new Hasselblad and Phaseone backs use a Sony 50MP CMOS sensor and Sony command over 60% of the high end CMOS sensor market according to Image Sensor World.

Canon DO make great sensors & I like their colorimagery the 6d and 5d MKIII are great examples of that but the fact is their sensors are still of an older design sooner or later they know they will need to move to a new wafer like Sony. No I have not used the A7/R but I know pros that have and they say the results are stunning with better resolution than Canon. The Canon 7d in technology terms is long overdue replacement its IQ is now no match for the competition dont believe me look at the DXO scores.

Ready your squirrels, everyone! DXO's been mentioned! :P

1042
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: March 04, 2014, 07:08:57 PM »
Two more images. Two nights ago, we had a fluke clear sky...forecast showed cloudy at sunset, turned out to be clear from sunset until after midnight. I got some imaging done on a number of objects, including Pleiades again.

This shot of the Pleiades was much more deeply exposed than my first attempt, however I ended up having some problems with my guiding that consumed a lot of the detail present in the nebula. I worked on this image for two days, but because of the guiding issues, I think it's the best I can do without trying again with better subs:



I also imaged two other regions of the sky. Orion slipped behind the trees before I had a change to get any exposure time on M78. So I looked a little higher in the sky, in Gemini. I was first looking for Jellyfish Nebula, but it is extremely dim, and I knew the mount was having problems guiding, which would have destroyed a lot of the nebula detail. So looking around the same area, I found M35 and NGC2158, two open clusters about too moon diameters above Jellyfish:



The color is slightly false...the blue stars of M35 (the larger cluster) should be just a touch paler, and the red stars of NGC2158 should be a little more varied. I have to use a light pollution filter from my back yard, and it blocks out most of the greens, hence the skewed color.

I also started imaging one of the galaxy clusters in Leo, however by the time I managed to get that sequence started, the clouds had closed in, and I only managed to get 7 subs before Leo was clouded over.

I am hoping to solve my guiding issues next time there is a clear sky. I also have the option of programming PEC, or Periodic Error Correction, in my mount, which can improve tracking accuracy even further. It's complicated, though, so I haven't tried that yet. I think I'll need about five minute exposures to get good light on the galaxies (and "Galaxy Season" is coming up...once Orion sets, the Milky Way is generally out of sight for most of the night, and the constellations that are overhead, like Leo and the Big Dipper, have bunches of galaxies in them. Until late April, early May, about the only interesting things to image are galaxies.)

1043
Landscape / Re: Critique - Waterfall Shot
« on: March 04, 2014, 07:00:55 PM »
It looks good, overall. A couple things I would have done.

1. I'd have shot the falls at more of an angle, to start. With it being head on, I think you lose some of the sense of depth and shape, where as with a more oblique angle, you'd pick all of that up a bit more. Maybe just ever so slightly increase the elevation of the camera as well, and point it just ever so slightly downward. Again, to help improve the sense of depth.

2. I'd have exposed for longer. The current exposure is just barely on the edge of long enough to accentuate the sense of "flow" in the water. A longer exposure would enhance the dreamy effect, and help smooth out the scene overall, and accentuate that flowing sense of water more.

1044
Canon General / Re: Interview With Canon Executives
« on: March 04, 2014, 06:01:30 PM »
Interesting interview. It was pretty broadly focused, though. I guess I would have liked to have seen more targeted questions about still photography IQ. Canon has it covered in all but one single area, and it seems to be the single biggest area where Canon DSLR customers are complaining: DR. I'm a little surprised they did not directly ask about still photography sensor DR.

1045
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Announcement in Q2 of 2014 [CR1]
« on: March 02, 2014, 04:35:03 PM »
When it comes to identical framing, more pixels will always win,....
Which is exactly what I've been saying.

Quote
in which case full frame sensors with larger pixels will trounce an APS-C sensor with smaller pixels. TROUNCE.

Try to stay on topic.  We're talking about smaller pixels, not larger sensors.

Quote
The images above actually prove my point. The smaller pixels are considerably noisier. They do have more detail, but they are a lot noisier. Your original comment was that smaller pixels were less noisy. That is completely false. Your own images clearly prove they are far noisier.

My point was that smaller pixels on the same size sensor, make better images, even in noise performance.  And my image does show that.

When it comes to identical output magnification, again your images prove my point.

The right-column is at the same output magnification too - and the smaller pixels have obliterated the large pixels.
[/quote]

Assuming identical sensor size, then the only benefit of smaller pixels is the potential for higher resolution. But there is absolutely no way that smaller pixels are less noisy. Not a chance. Your own sample images more than prove that, and in the same output magnification scenario, there is only a very small difference: the top image is definitely noisier!

There is no way on earth, within the realm of reality and facts, that you can claim smaller pixels are less noisy. It just isn't the case. Smaller pixels may resolve more, but they are noisier. In terms of same output magnification, at best you get the same amount of noise from two identically sized sensors with different pixel sizes...but you still cannot improve the amount of noise with smaller pixels. Because noise is intrinsic to the SIGNAL, which really has nothing to do with how big the sensor pixels are...only how large the region of the image circle that is being resolved by the sensor is.

1046
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: March 01, 2014, 10:23:42 PM »
This has all been very interesting and informative! But I'll stick with my plan - my budget just doesn't stretch that far! I think living in a country where the weather is unreliable, many nights ruined by cloud - and not having access to a very dark site - means it wouldn't be worth bothering with high end equipment. Mind you, it's amazing what can be done without telescopes, cooled sensors, etc.

Fwiw my roadmap goes: full frame in-body light pollution filter (just out, though not available yet) ~£130, better tracker ~£500 (minus what I can get back by selling my current one).

The latter should allow me to use the 500mm f/4 for tracked astro work at last, and that should keep me happy until midsummer, when the nights are too short here to be able to do any night sky photography. Come autumn, maybe there'll be room for another upgrade :)

At 500mm, you are going to need guiding. You are also going to need a mount that can REALLY handle the load. That's an expensive lens, and relatively heavy. When you throw in the weight of the guider, the weight of the camera and lens, plus the weight of all the cables coming off them, your going to be around 20lb or so. For smooth tracking without any issues or the chance of toppling over, you want a mount that can handle twice the load. You might be able to get away with an Orion Sirius. The Sirius is $1100, and it can hold 30lb. You can usually find those used for $700, maybe a little less. I really wouldn't recommend anything smaller than that for use with your 500mm lens. If you must go cheaper, then the smallest thing I would recommend would be either the Orion SkyView Pro (which runs about $850 new), or the iOptron ZEQ25GT (also $850 new). You can find both for cheaper used (check cloudynights.com and astromart.com). The SkyView Pro can handle 20lb (your cutting it REALLY close with that), and the ZEQ25GT can handle 27lb (close, but probably acceptable.)

The iOptron mount won't support EQMOD, so it isn't at the top of my list of recommendations. I really highly recommend that you use an Orion mount...either the Sirius or the Atlas. You can find both used for pretty reasonable prices. I've even seen the Atlas mount used for as cheap as $750.

I don't understand what you mean by a guider. There's a new iOptron tracker out this spring here, aimed at DSLRs just like my current one. It takes up to 5+3.5kg according to the specs, although I don't know precisely what they mean. I understand what you're saying about extra capacity, but 5kg is enough for my peace of mind. Here's a link: http://www.tringastro.co.uk/ioptron-sky-guider-portable-dslr-imaging-mount-3683-p.asp

As for the others you mention... are they aimed at telescopes? I found aligning my telescope so counterintuitive I gave up, but the mount I use at present seems straightforward.

To be honest, if it cost any more than that, I'd probably give up at this point. It's too niche an area, even though I enjoy it, for me to justify too much dedicated equipment.

The sky guider might work. It aligns the same way as the other mounts I mentioned, however...you look through a scope built into the mounts RA axis. It really is not counterintuitive, and once you get the hang of it, it is pretty easy and very precise. It does take some time, though.

It does not look like the sky guider is computerized, however. At 500mm, which is like a small refracting telescope, you are going to have a tough time finding objects in the sky. For wider focal lengths, you'll be fine, but 400mm and 500mm, you'll have to spend some time hunting to find the objects you are interested in. Just be aware of that.

1047
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Dual Pixel Tech Coming to the EOS 5D Mark III?
« on: March 01, 2014, 06:34:44 PM »
+1. Dual pixel AF is useless to stills photographers. Now, increased DR and lower noise at all ISOs on the other hand...  8)

I wouldn't say that. For those who primarily use the viewfinder, yes, this is true. However for those who primarily use live view, DPAF can be HUGE. Landscape photographers, macro photographers, possibly even astrophotographers. I can totally see DPAF being a big bonus for macro photographers...it could let them zero in on AF quickly, visually and accurately, then they can manually fine tune for focus stacking.

1048
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: March 01, 2014, 01:12:54 PM »
The Pleiades. The first few frames I managed to get on the first night I set up my telescope setup:



This was stacked from only a few frames, maybe 28. I had originally intended to take about 100 frames or so, but cloud cover and an accidental unplugging of my power cable ended up ending the night before it really got started.

Nice, so this was with the 600mm Canon lens and the 7D?

Yup!

1049
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: March 01, 2014, 01:12:19 PM »
Thank you for all the details, very interesting and impressive!  I must say, the most interesting part from the perspective of photography and photo lenses, is the arrays of them you are talking about.  How does that work?  Do they each feed their own imager that is then digitally summed somehow, or is it mechanical, using prisms or some kind of mirrors to reflect it all into one imager?

They all have their own imagers. It's all stacked in post the same way, via an averaging algorithm. Median with Kappa-sigma clipping is a common one. Such arrays are usually mounted with custom adapters that allow multiple lenses to be attached to some kind of frame, and the frame itself is then attached to the mount. You can read about one of these, the Dragonfly Array, here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1727159/DFPapers/674875.pdf

1050
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« on: March 01, 2014, 01:07:38 PM »
This has all been very interesting and informative! But I'll stick with my plan - my budget just doesn't stretch that far! I think living in a country where the weather is unreliable, many nights ruined by cloud - and not having access to a very dark site - means it wouldn't be worth bothering with high end equipment. Mind you, it's amazing what can be done without telescopes, cooled sensors, etc.

Fwiw my roadmap goes: full frame in-body light pollution filter (just out, though not available yet) ~£130, better tracker ~£500 (minus what I can get back by selling my current one).

The latter should allow me to use the 500mm f/4 for tracked astro work at last, and that should keep me happy until midsummer, when the nights are too short here to be able to do any night sky photography. Come autumn, maybe there'll be room for another upgrade :)

At 500mm, you are going to need guiding. You are also going to need a mount that can REALLY handle the load. That's an expensive lens, and relatively heavy. When you throw in the weight of the guider, the weight of the camera and lens, plus the weight of all the cables coming off them, your going to be around 20lb or so. For smooth tracking without any issues or the chance of toppling over, you want a mount that can handle twice the load. You might be able to get away with an Orion Sirius. The Sirius is $1100, and it can hold 30lb. You can usually find those used for $700, maybe a little less. I really wouldn't recommend anything smaller than that for use with your 500mm lens. If you must go cheaper, then the smallest thing I would recommend would be either the Orion SkyView Pro (which runs about $850 new), or the iOptron ZEQ25GT (also $850 new). You can find both for cheaper used (check cloudynights.com and astromart.com). The SkyView Pro can handle 20lb (your cutting it REALLY close with that), and the ZEQ25GT can handle 27lb (close, but probably acceptable.)

The iOptron mount won't support EQMOD, so it isn't at the top of my list of recommendations. I really highly recommend that you use an Orion mount...either the Sirius or the Atlas. You can find both used for pretty reasonable prices. I've even seen the Atlas mount used for as cheap as $750.

Pages: 1 ... 68 69 [70] 71 72 ... 272