October 26, 2014, 12:48:25 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 - pierlux

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Sample Images From the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 08:49:23 AM »
Wow!!!! I'm using a small, uncalibrated monitor at work, yet I can see a difference (small) even compared to the 70D at high ISO. Is it just me or do you also notice an improvement?

I can definitely see an improvement over the original 7D, but I really can't see any improvement over the 70D.

EDIT: Well, I double checked the ISO 25600 and in some parts of the sample I can see the 7D II being better (say the bottle of wine vinegar), in some areas it is the same (say the bottle of pepper oil), and in some areas, the 70D giving a nicer look (shadow noise between the pepper oil and the colouring box).  I think I need to see how the samples will look like on dpreview to get a better idea.

The difference is actually very small, I think we have to wait for some downloadable raws to make a valid comparison.

I'll have hard times deciding whether to drop double the money for a 7D2 or go for the 70D and save something to invest in a longer lens which I have to purchase anyway. The new Siggy 120-600 is approx 2x the price of the Tamron, but then there's also the other unicorn from Canon that's probably about to be announced hopefully sooner than later at this point... The "Year of the Lens" must not pass without the 100-400 replacement being announced, nevertheless, as neuro pointed out, that one lens didn't benefit from the recent price drop, probably meaning it's still selling very well... How hard a decision for me!

Well, I think I'll manage to hold back GAS and wait a few months to take advantage from the price settlement, not a bad idea to capitalize my limited budget. Meanwhile, I'll have fun reading reviews, comparisons, comments etc.

Cheers!

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Sample Images From the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:54:42 AM »
Wow!!!! I'm using a small, uncalibrated monitor at work, yet I can see a difference (small) even compared to the 70D at high ISO. Is it just me or do you also notice an improvement?

18
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 02:47:18 PM »
Possibly I'm wrong, but now I'm thinking that "lens electronic MF" has nothing to do with the C.Fn which disables electronic MF. Otherwise why mention it in a spec list which highlights the most relevant features?

I remember old rumors suggesting that the 7D2 would be geared for video, but the current opinion is that it's not, rather it's a perfect wildlife-sports camera for stills.

Well, if Canon implemented the possibility to manually control the lens' focus "on camera" without touching the focus ring, that would definitely be a nice video feature. And, as suggested by neuro, that 4-way function could be used for silently changing aperture etc. I would definitely say these features, if real, are perfect for video.

19
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 02:08:51 PM »
The more I think about it, the more I feel talicoa is right, an electronic manual focus control is better on that lever than on the wheel, ergonomically.

And, neuro, yes I know it's a 1DX & 5D3 feature, and I remember your previous posts, but I was referring to the rumored specs which cite this function unlike the other cameras, so maybe no longer a C.Fn setting but a hard button function. I agree I shouldn't have defined it mysterious, though.

I have a question for the expert guys: is it possible that, with a dedicated hard control, all the EF lenses with AF could benefit of "on camera manual focus" in addition to those selected few lenses with STM and focus by wire?

20
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 01:44:27 PM »
There are no detents for actual locations.  This is more of an analog switch.  Can you say Servo AF?  That would be a nice addition.  I can't see where else they would do it.

No detents needed.  There are no markings, either...I don't think it's a 'switch' like the Live View/Movie switch above.  If it was a 3-position switch for AF mode (I'm sure the 7DII will have One Shot, AI Focus and AI Servo) they'd mark it.  Rather, I think it's a lever (uni- or bi-directional, probably the former).  You push the lever to go from auto pt selection to zone, push it again to go from zone to single, etc.  Makes it easy to get the selection mode then the zone/point you want, since those controls are stacked.
What about bi-directional, to drive that mysterious "Lens electronic MF"? It must be somewhere, either that lever or on the wheel.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 11:06:45 AM »
At this point I can't wait for the announcement, I want to know more about the sensor and the price.

I'm hoping sample images will show at least some IQ improvement over the 70D, this will be the main discriminative to help me decide whether to purchase the cheaper 70D or the more expensive 7D2. Yes I know they belong to quite different classes, but either of the two will open my way into photographic areas practically inaccessible to my beloved old yet still valid 5D2, I have to admit I'm a bit excited...

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 11, 2014, 04:27:18 AM »
Specs-wise, max ISO 16000 appears to be the most intriguing to me. What does it mean? Should we expect a nominal base ISO value different than the canonical ISO 100? Maybe around ISO 64? Should this be confirmed, maybe the sensor is actually somewhat different from the 70D's one. What do you guys think?

i have no big hope for the sensor anymore.

better DPAF, yes.
better image quality, no.

but maybe they have fixed the shadow noise problems (banding).
that would be nice at least.

Actually I'm leaning towards the "approx 1/3 better ISO performance over the 70D" option, but it would be a first... the most probable option is that it's not true at all. Maybe the Japanese site just copied the old CR rumor  ;D ;D ;D.

A few more days to dream a new sensor tech, heck, we can dream, can't we? Imagine what would this forum become until the next FF camera announcement, if only this kind of dream comes true...

@ neuro: please, don't bring me back to reality too soon!  :) :) :)

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 11, 2014, 03:54:34 AM »
Specs-wise, max ISO 16000 appears to be the most intriguing to me. What does it mean? Should we expect a nominal base ISO value different than the canonical ISO 100? Maybe around ISO 64? Should this be confirmed, maybe the sensor is actually somewhat different from the 70D's one. What do you guys think?

24
Rome, Italy.

Ciao!

25
Canon General / Re: Canon Celebrates 80th Anniversary of Kwanon
« on: September 02, 2014, 08:08:56 AM »
Great, we need some new product worth of that anniversary :)
What about a retro styled FF mirrorless? Unfortunately it's not going to happen... and if it happens, it'll fit in the set of the most unexpected and secreted projects from Canon.

26
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 07:30:21 PM »
Lee Jay, jrista, and also sarangiman , sorry for the delay, but my ex-wife lives 40 km away from me so it took me a while. Plus, I'm very slow in writing.

Thank you guys for the effort spent in replying, you almost convinced me.  I think I have to re-read your replies another couple of times to fully understand all, but I'm nearly convinced. I have a couple of questions. I still don't get what
...the 2.04 micron pixels of the S3IS provide better IQ behind the same lens as the 8.2 micron pixels of the 5D.
actually means. Problem is, comparing sensors having different resolution, we are far from "all the other conditions being equal" here. Are you sure those images are ISO 800? My old 6 MP 300D at 800 ISO is noisy as hell, and it's APS-C. The fact is that I still have problems in regarding normalization as a fair mean of comparison.

Moreover, I still think the following logic is flawed. jrista, you say
Your only thinking about the individual pizza slices here. Your missing the bigger picture: The eater who eats 1/6th of a pizza eats 1/6th of a pizza SIX TIMES!! Therefor, the eater is not eating one pizza slice...the eater is eating A WHOLE PIZZA!  ;D This is the critical point that everyone seems to miss. If an eater eats two 15" pizzas, one cut into 6ths and one cut into 8ths...has the eater eaten less total pizza when eating the one cut into 8ths? NOPE!! He's still eaten a whole 15" pizza, same as he did when he ate the one cut into 6ths.
but I still think the eater here is not the whole sensor, it's each individual photosite. If the eater was the whole sensor, you'd obtain zero resolution, no detail. But you need detail to produce a meaningful image, so you must compare the eater to the single photosite. So the more the eaters (the higher the resolution), the less amount of pizza each eater eats.

I know BSI sensors have the wiring on the opposite side, and that large sensor only marginally benefit from this configuration, that's why this more expensive and lower yield technology is not used in larger sensors, but this is true for (relatively) low density photosites per area unit. The higher the density, thus the smaller the photosites, the greater the benefit. I don't know the numbers, but are you sure the wiring of conventional sensors matter so little in the light blocking effect on the photosites? Does a 24 MP APS-C sensor, even at 180 nm, still marginally suffers from the interposed wiring? jrista, it seems you know where to find such information, I'd like to deepen my knowledge, why don't you post the most interesting links you find, every now and then, on CR? I mean not now, don't get me wrong, but you're one of the most active posters here, I'm sure at least some CR members would appreciate some technical reading sometimes, I for sure.

Thank you all guys, it's very late here, good night!

Ah, my son and I had pizza for dinner, irony!

27
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 04:01:51 PM »
Too many of you claim that a higher MP sensor does not have more noise than a lower MP one, all conditions being equal, and support this claim with mathematics, but that's not true in the real world. Some even claim that smaller photosites have less noise than bigger ones: now, that's the kind of claim that should make all of us invoke Santa, bigfoot and rainbow-pooping unicorns going on vacation together with a flying saucer. The real world behaves differently.

Oh, really.  Same ISO, same f-stop, same shutter speed, same focal length, same subject, same lighting, shot in raw, same raw processing tool.  The pixels on the left are 1/16th as big (in area) as the pixels on the right.



Which ISO? Which f-stop? Which sensors? Could you provide a link, please? I've found this

ISO 800 (the highest setting available at the time on the small pixels.  The cameras as the Canon S3IS and the Canon 5D.

So the 6 MP p&s S3IS has better IQ of the 13 MP full frame 5D? Could you provide a link please so that I can see all by myself without asking you more detail? Thanks. Sorry, but I'm going to board my car in 5 min, as I said I have to pick my son to spend the weekend with him. I promise you I'll publicly apologize if you convince me, but please Lee Jay, read all my post and tell me where my logic is flawed. See you tomorrow (or tonight, I'm on the other side of the world...)
Cheers!

28
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 03:28:44 PM »
Too many of you claim that a higher MP sensor does not have more noise than a lower MP one, all conditions being equal, and support this claim with mathematics, but that's not true in the real world. Some even claim that smaller photosites have less noise than bigger ones: now, that's the kind of claim that should make all of us invoke Santa, bigfoot and rainbow-pooping unicorns going on vacation together with a flying saucer. The real world behaves differently.

Oh, really.  Same ISO, same f-stop, same shutter speed, same focal length, same subject, same lighting, shot in raw, same raw processing tool.  The pixels on the left are 1/16th as big (in area) as the pixels on the right.



Which ISO? Which f-stop? Which sensors? Could you provide a link, please? I've found this

http://photos.imageevent.com/sipphoto/samplepictures/Pixel%20density%20test%202%20detail%20filtered.jpg

but I can't find the exif, nor a caption. Sorry, I'm not particularly smart with computers... help me. Thanks!

29
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 03:04:56 PM »
Sorry, it's a long post, maybe too long.

In physics, the Carnot cycle is an ideal representation of a perfect engine having 100% efficency. It is a useful thermodynamic representation to explain energy conversion. In the real world, such a system does not exist.

Too many of you claim that a higher MP sensor does not have more noise than a lower MP one, all conditions being equal, and support this claim with mathematics, but that's not true in the real world. Some even claim that smaller photosites have less noise than bigger ones: now, that's the kind of claim that should make all of us invoke Santa, bigfoot and rainbow-pooping unicorns going on vacation together with a flying saucer. The real world behaves differently.

Saying bigger pixels let more light in is like saying cutting a 15 inch pizza into 6 slices instead of 8 gets you more pizza.

No. Your logic is flawed.

If the pizza represents the sensor, the number of slices correspond to the number of the pizza eaters, represented by the sensels, i.e. photosites, i.e. pixels. An eater who eats 1/6 of the pizza eats more than one eating 1/8 of it. An ideal 24 x 36 mm sensor being a single light sensitive unit is a one pixel sensor which, let's say, collects 1 billion photons at a given time unit and luminous intensity; it has the lowest resolution possible, but it would be capable of letting you know if even a bunch of photons have hit it or not with 100% certainty, i.e. with zero noise. Ideally, if you divide that single huge photosite into 1 million smaller photosites (1 MP sensor), each photosite receives IDEALLY 1000 photons under the same conditions; in the practice it's less than 1000 because of the wiring and the spacing between photosites which equally absorb the photons, but do not convert them into a useful signal, instead convert them into heat, which is detrimental. This 1 MP sensor has sufficient resolution to resolve enough detail for a very small print, and with today's tech you could probably use it at 204,800 ISO or more with very low noise (and before any of you reply that you can reduce the size of the image and therefore reduce noise and equally obtain the print, try exposing a 36 MP sensor at 204,800 ISO or higher if you can...).

Again, the same sensor with 20 MP exposed in the same conditions does not collect 50 photons per photosite, but MUCH LESS this time due to massive wiring and lots of wasted space between photosites, so you have a high resolution image, but with a lot of noise.

Actually, in my example with 1,000,000,000 total photons hitting a 24 x 36 mm sensor I think you'd have only random noise at 20 MP, but it was for the sake of explaining. I'm not talking quantum efficency at all here, it's just the number of photons you can effectively use I'm talking about. Moreover, we don't have a linear relationship between number of photons and noise, so it's not as if you have half of the photons per photosite you double the noise, the situation is worse in the real world.

The Canon 1Dx is 18 MP; in the Nikon D800, being 36 MP, each photosite collects LESS than one half of each of the Canon's photosites, that's why the 1Dx is much better in low light. And the D800 holds because of its superior sensor tech (let's face it, fortunately Canon's system is better as a whole), otherwise they wouldn't have made it 36 MP in the first place.

In the pizza analogy, the more you cut the pizza, the more breadcrumbs, morsels, atomies you produce, leaving the eaters with less and less pizza to eat to the point that, putting together all the slim slices of pizza eaten by all, they add up to not even a quarter of the original one. And, actually, a pie should be a better fitting analogy.

It's like having a 100 x 100 ft room all for yourself, 10,000 square feet is plenty of space. But if you want to accomodate 100 people inside it and offer them a bit of privacy, you have to build walls which eat space, not to mention furniture, so you end up with much less than 100 sq. ft for each dweller.

Still not convinced? OK, you may say "who are you to stand up and make such claims against my maths?", so let's look at what Canon's engineers have done, I bet they know more than me or anyone else on CR about silicon performance and noise. This is what I wrote in a previous post:

"There's a reason the 1Dx has the best (to my eye) IQ of all the DSLRs available to date (yes, better than any Nikon I think): its 18 MP FF sensor. And there's a reason why Canon developed a prototype sensor with photosites 7.5 times larger than the 1Dx: to capture quality video in candlelight (candledrkness sounds better, though). Don't know if you remember, but check these:

http://www.canon.com/news/2013/mar04e.html

http://petapixel.com/2013/09/13/canon-debuts-exciting-prototype-sensor-exceptional-low-light-capability/

And Sony? Compare the the 36 MP Alpha A7r(esolution) and the 12 MP A7s(ensitivity), then say again that more MP does not mean more noise if you dare. At base ISO maybe, but try going at 800 and beyond...

And should somebody dare claim again that smaller photosites means less noise as I've read too many times, remember Santa & Co. are watching us from their flying saucer... And again, at base ISO maybe, but what's the point of shooting 36 MP and then reduce resolution in post to lower the noise and make small prints or web sized images?

I'm going to spend the weekend with my son, so I'll be having a look at CR every now and then, but I'm not going to post, sorry. Have a nice weekend you all, too!

Peace!


30
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 28, 2014, 08:46:56 AM »
If what we posted turns out not to be true, it will be the greatest hoax of specs that I have seen in the 6 years we’ve been around.

But it could still be 20.2 and be a new improved sensor (not identical), what you've posted still true and for you not to have been hoaxed though, no?

I remember voices from past Canon Rumors claiming different prototypes were around, couldn't it be the leaked specs are a mix of several different "experiments"?...

The good news is that if it is a totally new sensor, it may be much better than the 70d and it will have better high ISO noise at 20.2 than 24 mp. Im all for a smaller sensor in aps-c. Truthfully, I wish it was closer to 12 or 16. We'd have a killer crop camera!

Partly agreed.  As I said in Don Haines' poll thread, either a low res/good high ISO IQ old tech sensor, or a high res/supposedly better high ISO IQ new tech sensor would do for me. I put better high ISO IQ than the 7D on top of the specs in order of importance, otherwise to me it's 70D or 80D.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10