July 22, 2014, 02:17:51 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 - CR Backup Admin

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM
« on: December 31, 2010, 05:31:37 PM »
I like my 100-400.  It works well for small birds around the house.

Even with a 1.4X extender:

Lenses / Re: EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS Review
« on: December 31, 2010, 11:49:17 AM »
Enjoyed the review as this lens is definately on my mind for a future purchase.  One (well two) questions i do have to are regarding the photos posted with the review. In todays modern post processing era,  how much post processing has been done to the photos to juice them up ? and are the originals available if there has been post processing ?
Thanks, keep up the great work.

Digital is different from film. 

Processing of the image pulled from the sensor is always required.  When using jpeg, the processing to add noise reduction, sharpness, contrast, color balance, etc are done in camera according to the settings.

Same thing happens with raw, only its done by your computer according to your software settings.  You have more control over it that way, but its still the same thing going on as in the camera processing.

Processing tricks like HDR, splicing,  removal of unwanted items in the image, might be a example of extra post processing, but not noise reduction, sharpness, etc, but they are often done in camera by some manufacturers as well.

What does post processing mean to you??

I wouldn't be concerned about what you may see under difficult conditions, there can be any number of things stackiing up to make high resolution captures difficult. 

To determine the actual capability of the lens, you need good lighting conditions and a more stationary and frame filling target.  You want to eliminate as many things that are not under your control as possible. 

Once you can determine the best possible image the lens can produce, and are happy with that,  then determining how to achieve the goal of maximum IQ in the real world is a learning experience and takes a lot of expermentation.

EOS Bodies / Re: Shoot 2K, 3K & 4K on a T2i/550D?
« on: December 30, 2010, 12:33:17 PM »
These are good places to start looking:



On other threads in this forum, it has been suggested that 4K video will become popular for consumer camcorders. And when are the 4K televisions being introduced? 4k is a production standard for making movies to be shown on movie screens that are 60 feet wide, but at lot of people I know are watching their movies at home upconverted from standard DVDs distributed at 720x480.

I don't expect to see real 4K camcorders for consumers soon.

We are still waiting for it on mid priced professional models.  Only a very few high end cinema cameras have 4K  at 4:4:4.  Most are 4:2:2.  The Red epic is likely the forrunner of medium priced 4K cameras, but it is stil way more expensive than a consumer camcorder.  Its modular, so you have to buy several pieces to get a working unit. Its estimated that it cost about $2 million for the Red epic, accessories, and lenses for Peter Jackson to shoot "The Hobbit"  The camera itself only cost about $58,000, but it is only a tiny part of the total cost.  This is cheap compared to other 4K 4:4:4 cinema cameras.


You can buy a 4K monitor, but it might be more than your want to pay.




When no video is needed, get the 500D.

Or if 720p @ 30fps (not 29.97) for short segments is your bag - granted it's not great in any but the best light, but it gets the job done.  The whole bumping up the framerate to 60Hz (59.94 but who's counting right) and apparently not leaving in a 30fps option baffles me, especially when clip length is so limited.

A little more about frame rates.

See see http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flash/learning_guide/video/part06.html

NTSC video is usually said to run at approximately 30 fps, and PAL runs at 25 fps. To be technically accurate, NTSC video runs at 29.97 fps.

The reason for the odd frame rate dates back to the transition from black and white television to color TV signals, where the 29.97 fps rate was chosen to ensure backwards compatibility with existing television sets.


EOS Bodies / Re: Shoot 2K, 3K & 4K on a T2i/550D?
« on: December 30, 2010, 10:35:25 AM »

stark, I'm not sure that's correct.  as kandrews noted, 2K, 3K, and 4K are actually resolution sizes, which would relate to the number of lines on a screen.

raw video is a whole separate issue, and I don't know that we'll be able to sneak that out of existing cams purely with a firmware hack.

Here is yet another explanation.

Video Formats

Unlike other video formats, which are specified in terms of vertical resolution (e.g. 1080p, which is 1920x1080 pixels), digital cinema formats are usually specified in terms of horizontal resolution. As a shorthand, these resolutions are often given in "nK" notation, where n is the multiplier of 1024 such that the horizontal resolution of a corresponding full-aperture, digitized film frame is exactly 1024n pixels. Here the 'K' has a customary, improper meaning: it should be the binary prefix "kibi" (ki) instead.

For instance, a 2K image is 2048 pixels wide, and a 4K image is 4096 pixels wide. Vertical resolutions vary with aspect ratios though; so a 2K image with a HDTV (16:9) aspect ratio is 2048x1152 pixels, while a 2K image with a SDTV or Academy ratio (4:3) is 2048x1536 pixels, and one with a Panavision ratio (2.39:1) would be 2048x856 pixels, and so on. Due to the "nK" notation not corresponding to specific horizontal resolutions per format a 2K image lacking, for example, the typical 35mm film soundtrack space, is only 1828 pixels wide, with vertical resolutions rescaling accordingly. This led to a plethora of motion-picture related video resolutions, which is quite confusing and often redundant with respect to nowadays few projection standards.

All formats designed for digital cinematography are progressive scan, and capture usually occurs at the same 24 frame per second rate established as the standard for 35mm film.

The DCI standard for cinema usually relies on a 1.89:1 aspect ratio, thus defining the maximum container size for 4K as 4096x2160 pixels and for 2K as 2048x1080 pixels [1] (either 24fps or 48fps). When distributed in the form of a Digital Cinema Package (DCP), content is letterboxed or pillarboxed as appropriate to fit within one of these container formats.

Animal Kingdom / Snow Birds
« on: December 29, 2010, 10:02:57 PM »
Here in spokane, Washington, USA we had a snowy day, about 10 inches.  I setup a bird feeder last spring, and am trying to keep the big flock of birds that feed there well fed this winter.  I put a bucket heater in the fountain so they have fresh water, it has been down to -15 F this winter, and it keeps on running.

Here is a finch enjoying lunch this afternoon.  They do keep their feathers puffed up a little to keep warm.  The feeder was covered with about two dozen of them this morning.  I used my 100-400mm l hand held with flash and better beamer.  With the wind blowing, its not as sharp as it could be, but it was cold and blowing snow right into my lens, so I snapped off a couple and gave it up.

Canon 1D MK III, 100-400mm L @ 400mm, 1/250 sec with flash, ISO 200. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Patent?
« on: December 29, 2010, 06:05:55 PM »
And, as always, Canon covers all the bases to protect a mirrorless design. 

"Here, it is to be noted that the present invention is similarly applicable also to a camera without a quick return mirror."

EOS Bodies / Re: Disappointed with Canon?
« on: December 29, 2010, 11:43:21 AM »
I hear so many people griping about AF in the 5d mkii... can anyone elaborate on that? is it the tracking that is bad? what about single shot AF?

I've had a 350d and now a 40d and I've never been dissapointed really. Even in near pitch black, the AF is fine to me. If I'm doing night landscapes it will often fail to AF -- but then again, those really are times to use manual focus anyway.

also: people who talk about nikons AF being better --- yes, they tend to have way more AF points. But for those of us who use only the center point 90% of the time... does that matter?

Also, note to those saying nikon has leapfrogged canon right now: just keep in mind, it all depends what you are talking about. For video and megapixels, canon is clearly ahead.

Not to mention, as nikon ups its megapixel count (which it will), its gonna start losing that edge in noise performance.

I actually have a 5D MK II, I received in in early December 2 years ago.  I also have a 1D MK III, and bought / returned a 7D.

Every camera has its strong points and its weak points.  The 5D MK II is strong at autofocusing with the center point, and weak with the outer points.  It is particularly good at focusing in low light, and mine beats out my 1D MK III in low light AF.

Here is a example taken at a local school play where lights were out except for dim colored ones.
5D MK II, 50mm f/1.8 MK I

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: December 28, 2010, 04:46:57 PM »
RAW video is a nerds wet dream. 104Mb/s+ from a DSLR body ? Right.

I have the feeling (Ie. don't have facts to back it up), that dSLR use for videography is still very very niche... it is catching on.. but im not convinced its a big chunk of sales as of yet

Canon is not going to publish figures, they don't always know what you will use a camera for.  However, one only need look at the huge market for ADD-ons for video use of DSLR's to realize that a whole new market segment has been created.

DSLR's are being used more and more for filming commercials for TV, but the 5D MK II use for movies is limited by the compression artifacts which are expensive and difficult to remove thru post processing.  That is why videographers wish for RAW.

check out cinema5d.com to see the huge following that has sprung up virtually overnight.

Better yet, google DSLR video, you might be suprised at some pretty high end TV shows that use DSLR's for all or a portion of their episodes, the list of users is almost endless.

There is a reason why Canon has added video features to its cameras after initial release when they generally do not add features at all.  The interest shown by the video community apparently convinced them that money was to be made, and not in small amonts either.

EOS Bodies / Re: Disappointed with Canon?
« on: December 28, 2010, 01:53:39 PM »
The D300s colors are closer to the reality, the Canon is a little bit reddish.

Try using Custom White Balance and never rely on the camera's built in presets for AWB (especially indoor light).  Use a WhiBal card (or similar) to achieve accurate color which any decent camera should offer the option of Custom WB.  You should be shooting in RAW also vs. JPG which pre-bake's the settings and much more difficult to manipulate.  In RAW you will have full control over your entire image.  You can convert to JPG after proper tweaking in DPP if you like.  JPG's are included in each RAW image by the way.


Digital sensors only detect black and white.  The color is guessed at by the jpeg in camera processor or the raw converter, and can be set to pretty much any color you want.  I am not much concerned by the color rendering of a camera, I have lightroom set to render color the way I like it as images import.

Every person perceives color differently, and has their preferences.  Thats fine and as it should be.  Thats why I don't place much stock in the gushing descriptions of how a particular lens renders better color.  Its all in the perception of the photographer.

Lenses / Re: Canon MP-E 65 Add on's & Tips
« on: December 28, 2010, 01:44:41 PM »

Using live view you will be able to use the lens (with flash) hand held and live view flips the mirror up for you.

You really believe that you can use a MP-E 65 at full magnification hand held???

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: December 28, 2010, 11:19:52 AM »
Actually, I saw a quote from one of the web sites from Canon, saying that they were caught by surprise at the sales volume.  They also mention their suprise on their web site at the initial demand.

Even now, many camera sellers can not get enough for the Christmas demand and sell out in a few days after getting stock.  I'm sure that they will all have them in stock after the holidays.

As to those saying that a company restricts production to increase demand, this is silly.  Demand for the cameras was so strong as soon as they were announced that some sellers stopped taking pre-orders because they had so many that they knew they could not fill them all. 

The reason for shortages is simple, the sales department projects sales, components are ordered, and production of lot sizes to meet sales projections begins.  Some parts are just in time delivered, but I have found that small cheap components are usually run off in large batches by subcontractors, and just held in inventory for just in time shipment to the manufacturer. If demand outstrips the production capability, there will be shortages, but the factory may be able to increase production rates a little due to the parts held in inventory by subcontractors.  However, if the demand far outstrips the provisioning of components, then long lead components become a big problem.  The production of the 21mp sensors is limited to factory time allocated, silicon wafer availibity, and production capacity of the actual machinery.  They are undoubtedly made in batches, so there may not be a window open for another batch, and it requires replanning, acquisition of more raw materials, etc to speed up production.

I have over 30 years experience in product manufacturing, and every company I've delt with faces the same issues.  You can not just simply increase production overnight.

The same applies to overproduction, it is usually less expensive to continue to overproduce for a limited time than to slow down or shut down a product assembly line. 
You did not see this with the 60D.

Lenses / Re: Who do you trust?
« on: December 28, 2010, 10:58:14 AM »
users of these sites, including DXO should be aware that they do NOT test lenses, and do not have equipment capable of testing lenses.

What the sites do test is a lens / camera combination.  What this means to those who read the results carefully, and they tell you this, is that the results only apply to a lens used on that exact camera model and not on others.

I've found that test results on the different sites for the same camera / lens combination are usually very close, but if a lens is tested on a Canon 30D on one site, but a Canon 7D on another, the 7D should always have a higher resolution.

This is due to the fact that the system resolution is the product of the mtf of the individual components, and that includes lens, sensor, in-camera processor, software on your computer, the test chart, lighting, and even a monitor used to display the image.

Its no wonder that testers using different cameras and equipment get different results.  Lenstip, for example, admits that they get different test results from others because they use different charts, among other things.

However, if you pay attention and read the test procedures, and compare ones that use the same camera / lens combination, the results are almost always close.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Canon High End [CR2]
« on: December 27, 2010, 08:23:07 PM »
If they replace the 1D IV next year I'm selling all my Canon junk, buying Nikon and turning into the most disgusting Nikon fanboi - anti-Canon-troll the interwebs has ever seen.

Why?  Do you think that the 1D MK IV will stop working or making money for you?  Cameras get upgraded all the time.

No, but you do understand that this gear represent a certain investment and you don't invested in S___ like this without having some clear idea of depreciation and factoring in the loss in ones accountancy. That is what I'm concerned about, not the camera magically not making me money anymore. Canon has been very steady in update frequency since the 1D.

About the FF debate, meh, don't care, as long as the speed is the same and the pickles stay around where they are now, larger files means more time.

A camera body is not a investment, its a expense.  It will never appreciate in value, and after 3 years will drop to 1/3 or less of its new value.  My bookkeeper writes off the purchase of a camera body immediately, as he should.  A lens, however, may last for 10 years, even more.

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49