July 26, 2014, 03:16:44 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 - mb66energy

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 22
16
EOS-M / Re: New Job for my awesome EOS-M
« on: May 05, 2014, 10:38:18 AM »
[...]

Yes, So many People come to as me about this fantastic Tiny EOS-M with a big Lens
Enjoy.
Surapon

The EOS M is not far away from an intelligent lens cap which can stay on the lens to be alway ready to "shoot that lens" ...
so the EOS M has solved the problem to integrate a second body into smaller backpacks: It nicely fits into lens compartments with the lens attached!

17
EOS-M / Re: Where is the M-3 with the dual pixel sensor!!!!
« on: May 05, 2014, 10:32:04 AM »
Take your pick of currently available systems from Fujifilm, Sony, Olympus, Canon or Nikon. Loads of MILCs to choose from. Why wait for some mythical M3 that will prob never see a US or Europe release?

The current gear available today is more than good enough. The only limitation is the photographer.

In my opinion your last sentences are mostly true.

I love my EOS M because it has two real advantages:
  - small and lightweight
  - standard zoom is much better than the equivalent standard zoom for DSLRs

O.k., manual mode is awkward in terms of control, an EVF would be very helpful.

But: Give that camera
  - a control wheel near the shutter release button (e.g. for exp time) and
  - a second control wheel concentrically to the lens mount (e.g. for aperture) (like S95 etc.) and
  - an ISO wheel +
  - a tiny LCD which shows just aperture, exp time, ISO and remaining shots/minutes.
  - a larger battery (with it's compartment acting as substantial hand grip)
and that camera is a winner for a lot of people - for these who enjoy photographic tools and are willing to pay e.g. 1000 $/€ for such a body. And it might be a winner for Canon: Advertising for a series of feature oriented EOS M like bodies (larger display, Wifi, 2nd display for selfies, etc.)

For me EOS M has replaced the S95 successfully as "always with me"-camera with extended capabilities and much better image quality especially at ISO bigger/equal than 400 ASA.

18
http://store.sony.com/sony-alpha-77-m2-dslr-zid27-ILCA77M2/cat-27-catid-All-Alpha-77-Cameras
[...]
Curious to see what everyone else's thoughts are on this new Sony and where you think Canon falls within the competition.


(1) Roughly 500 shots per battery charge (CIPA) would be a main caveat for me - if I pay 1000 € or above I think sth. like 1000 is the right amount of shots per battery charge.

(2) Needing an EVF to precheck a possible photo is a further caveat for me - I really like to check things powerless, directly by using an SLR and the focus ring.

Bringing new products to the market every month might show some progress. On the other hand REAL progress in e.g. dynamic range, sensor resolution, etc. is cancelled by some "degression" in the hardware quality of the controls. Comparing my 40D with a 70D will shurely show better IQ but the feel of control over the camera is much better with the 40D. Bad control over camera parameters costs time and photos.

So I am willing to wait for e.g. a 7Dii with better IQ, better control switches, better AF system. Slow net progress has saved a lot of bucks ...

19
Lenses / Re: EF 400L f/5.6 vs. Tamron 150-600
« on: April 27, 2014, 05:00:37 PM »
I have around $1,200 in my new lens budget and am debating between these two lenses.  I'd like to purchase in the next month or so as we plan to take a vacation to Alaska in June and I really need a longer lens for wildlife shots.  After the AK vacation, I would use the lens primarily for wildlife closer to home (wild turkeys, bears, deer, maybe a few birds, etc.) and some limited outdoor sports like baseball and soccer.


For the applications you mentioned IQ matters. I attached three pictures with my EF 5.6 400 (EDIT: All taken with EOS 40D) which I bought primarily for condensed landscape shots etc.
First attached image:
  - Sharpness/contrast close up (meaning 4m distance) and wide open is phenomenal. It is a 100% crop taken with 40D - not a pixel monster but pixel size is close to 5Diii

Second image:
  - landscape through a lot of atmosphere: This is NO ART FILTER of some software like gimp or photoshop, it is a straight image ... The weather was cloudy but with intense sun so you have a lot of turbulence in the atmosphere.

Third image:
  - Moderate agricultural action shot where I had to place things attractively (more or less) without the chance to get the whole apparatus on the photo - here a ZOOM HAD BEEN VERY HELPFUL

My conclusion is:
  - in the close focus or nearer range (<= e.g. 200m) the IQ is dominated by the lens
  - depending on weather conditions for distances of e.g. 200m or more the quality of the atmosphere dominates (or select a weather of stable temperatures, then atmosphere has good optical quality)
  - a zoom is helpful if you cannot change your position or you have no time to do so. This is a very common statement but it applies perhaps to your scenery very often.

My other tele lens is a 70-200 2.8 II and I have a 2xIII extender.  This lens is still really good even with the 2x extender, so maybe I should continue with this combo and save my money toward an 85 1.2 II?


I have used the 4.0 70-200 non IS with the 2x TC mark i - a good combo at f/8, better at f/11 (with TC), but the long exposure times give much more smearing for long distance shots so f/5.6 with the EF 5.6 400 is a large benefit.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=104&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=6&APIComp=2
The CAs introduced by the teleconverter are handled well with DPP or DxO and they improve the IQ substantially.

I think your 70-200 lens with 2x TC is quite a good alternative which gives you acceptable IQ combined with flexibility and no additional cost. Just here correcting CAs will help a bit.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

From reading reviews and looking at the lens sharpness tool at TDP, it appears the 400 is sharper overall.  But it of course lacks the zooms flexibility and vibration control.  At this point, I'm leaning a little toward the 400 5.6 as I expect I would use the zoom primarily at 400+.



Thoughts?


If the EF 4.5-5.6 100-400 would exist as a mark ii version with 4 stop IS and equal IQ @ f/5.6 and 400mm like the EF 5.6 400 for 2300 $ I would think: The 1000 $ premium compared to the prime is well invested and that lens would replace my 4.0 70-200 AND the 5.6 400 - so if you can live with your lens-TC combo do that and wait for some development.
PLUS
Think about renting a 5.6 400 and run your own checks. Lenses are not only about IQ but also about handling, AF speed, mass, size, haptics etc. and the 5.6 400 handles very well.

Just my thoughts - Michael

20
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 27, 2014, 03:07:42 PM »
So I think we have some substantial "overlap" now - great.

The silecs paper is interesting read! It's funny what they put together in these dimensions and 20 million fold to make an image sensor that really works well. But the improvements are gradual and ...


[...]

The alternate "every other pixel" had no deflector, and passed all of the light without filtration. Here is the article:

http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com/2013/02/panasonic-develops-micro-color-splitters.html

The ingenuity of this design results in only two "colors" of photodiode, instead of three: W+R and W-R, or White plus Red and White minus Red.

[...]



... I agree that this is the "Königsweg" as we in germany say, the "kings way": Splitting the color instead of filtering out miswanted colors (throwing light away) at the cost of system efficiency.
I read about that technology and I think they use interference filters which reflect a part of the spectrum and transmit the opposite part of the spectrum.
An alternative might be a sensor which uses a prism or optical grating to separate wavelengths and three or four photodiodes to sense the colors.

These sensors are the counterpart to OLED displays which omit filtering (like LCD displays) and produce light in the wanted colors directly. It is the way of the future.

Before I forget: I found an interesting patent about a dual photodiode per pixel architecture which is used to increase the DR to 120 dB called "Dynamic-Range Widening in a CMOS Image Sensor Through Exposure Control Over a Dual-Photodiode Pixel". They have a pixel split into a L shaped photodiode with 75% area and the 25% area which complets the L-shape to a square (might be not available at the moment due to a web site update):
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/224611868_Dynamic-Range_Widening_in_a_CMOS_Image_Sensor_Through_Exposure_Control_Over_a_Dual-Photodiode_Pixel/file/e0b495219bbfda2524.pdf

Best - Michael

21
Software & Accessories / Re: The best tripod ...
« on: April 27, 2014, 11:41:21 AM »
Hi everyone,

I'm looking to take my photography hobby to the next level, so to speak  :D, so I'm thinking of buying me a tripod and a tripod head. I've done some research online, but I think I'm more confused now, than when I started thinking about tripods and heads.  ;D (I guess, that happens a lot). From my understanding, Manfrotto and Induro seem to be the best tripod brands, so I'm looking to get the above mentioned gear from either of these two. I'm more inclined, however, towards Induro products.

In so many words, what do you guys make of this?

A newer tripod manufacturer is Sirui, a chinese company which seems to make good stuff at moderate prices.

Now I use
  - a 25 year old Manfrotto 190 with screw locking for the legs (very time consuming!) but with some patina :)
  - a MG468RC4 ball head (great stability, locking the ball doesn't move the camera - never had that before)

I am interested in the Sirui M-320?X series (carbon fiber legs) - the ? stands for 3, 4 or 5 and means the number of leg sections. I prefer the 4-section version due to its good balance with transportation size and "medium converion time" from transport to usage.

Has anyone experience with one of these Sirui tripods from the Master series (M-320?X)? How does it compare to Gitzo and RRS?

Thanks in advance - Michael

I have the Sirui M3204X and it is the finest "general purpose" tripod for under $950 that I know of. I also have a very big Gitzo (GT3542XLS), a specialty medium sized Gitzo (GT2541EX) and a little Gitzo (GT1542T). The Sirui gets used the most due to it's ratio of stability/height/collapsed size. Of course it is not nearly as refined or well built as the Gitzos, but it is plenty good enough and costs less than $500. I'm 6'-2" and finding a tripod that is tall enough, without the center column being raised, so that I don't have to bend over while shooting is no easy task. I highly recommend this pod.

Hello brad-man - thanks a lot. So I will take this one into the "inner circle" for my next tripod. It is appealing for me to because extending the center column reduces stability and I am 1.85m tall which is ... sth. like 6' and the rest :)

Best - Michael

22
Software & Accessories / Re: The best tripod ...
« on: April 27, 2014, 09:58:08 AM »
Hi everyone,

I'm looking to take my photography hobby to the next level, so to speak  :D, so I'm thinking of buying me a tripod and a tripod head. I've done some research online, but I think I'm more confused now, than when I started thinking about tripods and heads.  ;D (I guess, that happens a lot). From my understanding, Manfrotto and Induro seem to be the best tripod brands, so I'm looking to get the above mentioned gear from either of these two. I'm more inclined, however, towards Induro products.

In so many words, what do you guys make of this?

A newer tripod manufacturer is Sirui, a chinese company which seems to make good stuff at moderate prices.

Now I use
  - a 25 year old Manfrotto 190 with screw locking for the legs (very time consuming!) but with some patina :)
  - a MG468RC4 ball head (great stability, locking the ball doesn't move the camera - never had that before)

I am interested in the Sirui M-320?X series (carbon fiber legs) - the ? stands for 3, 4 or 5 and means the number of leg sections. I prefer the 4-section version due to its good balance with transportation size and "medium converion time" from transport to usage.

Has anyone experience with one of these Sirui tripods from the Master series (M-320?X)? How does it compare to Gitzo and RRS?

Thanks in advance - Michael

23
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 27, 2014, 06:37:46 AM »
[...]

Every sensor design requires light to penetrate silicon to reach the photodiode.


Thanks to your extensive explanations but I disagree in some important details.

Your last sentence ist truly correct - you need to reach the pn-junction of the photodiode which is "inside" the dye structure.
But after checking a lot of images in the web I came to the following conclusion:

1 micron of silicon would (according to http://www.aphesa.com/downloads/download2.php?id=1 page 2) reduce the amount of light at 500 nm to 0.36^3 = 0.05  or 5 % - a sensor with 1 micron silicon between front and photodiode structure would be orthochromatic (red sensitive).

Therefore the space between semiconductor chip surface and photodiode is filled by oxides. If silicon is the base material the oxide is usually silicon dioxide which is the same as quartz and highly transparent. I have tried to depict that in the sketch "Simplified Imaging Sensor Design" attached here (transistors, x-/y-readout channels are omitted).

According to photodiode sensitivity: You can shurely reduce the sensitivity of the photodiode in a system by
(1) using a filter
(2) initiating a current that discharges the photodiode permanently
(3) stopping integration during exposure independently
For (1) think about a tiny LCD window in front of the second photodiode of one color pixel: blackening the LCD has the same effect like a - e.g. ND3 - gray filter. Both photodiodes read the same pixel at different sensitivity. The unchanged photodiode has full sensitivity, the filtered photodiode has 3 EV lower sensitivity. The LCD should be closed during exposure but is left open for DPAF.
For (2) think of a transistor for the second photodiode of a pixel which acts as a variable resistor between sth. like 1000 MOhms and 100 kOhms - photodiode 1 of the pixel integrates the charge fast, photodiode 2 of the pixel integrates the charge slowlier because some charge is withdrawn by the transistor acting as discharge resistor.
For (3) you need a transistor too and stop integration after e.g. 10% of the exposure time before the full well capacity is reached.
All methods require to replace information from saturated photdiodes 1 by the non saturated photodiodes 2 (with slower integration rate). It is like doing a HDR shot combined from 2 images which were taken SIMULTANOUSLY (except (3)).

Enhancing resolution (perhaps) slightly (according to 3kramd5's or caruser's description): ( <=EDIT)
Typical pattern is (for DPAF sensor in current config, AF and exposure): ( <=EDIT)


rr  GG  rr  GG  rr  GG  rr  GG
GG  bb  GG  bb  GG  bb  GG  bb
rr  GG  rr  GG  rr  GG  rr  GG
GG  bb  GG  bb  GG  bb  GG  bb


Just resort to this (after AF is done) to the following readout with 20MPix but 2 colors per (virtual) pixel: (<=EDIT)

r  rG  Gr  rG  Gr  rG  Gr  rG  G
G  Gb  bG  Gb  bG  Gb  bG  Gb  b
r  rG  Gr  rG  Gr  rG  Gr  rG  G
G  Gb  bG  Gb  bG  Gb  bG  Gb  b


You are right (and that was my feeling to) that this will not dramatically enhance resolution but I see one special case there it might help a lot: Monochromatic light sources which will used more and more while signs (street signs, logos, etc.) are lit by LEDs. I observed that de-bayering works bad with LED light, especially blue and red light because the neigboured green photosites aren't excited enough. I very often see artifacts in that case that vanish if you downsample the picture by a factor 2 (linear).

My conlusion is that "dual photodiode per pixel"-structures might have a strong potential beyond the AF-method which it provides now. Don't know if the current 70D sensor has this potential but I think there is some headroom for real products.

24
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 26, 2014, 03:25:02 PM »
jrista:
"It won't improve resolution (since the photodiode is at the bottom of the pixel well, below the color filter and microlens),"

I think that the whole structure below the filter is the photodiode - to discriminate both "phases" you need to discriminate light that hits both photodiodes of 1 pixel. So there is a chance to enhance resolution SLIGHTLY by reading out of both photodiodes separately.

Trust me, the entire structure below the filter is not the photodiode. The photodiode is a specially doped area at the bottom of what we call the "pixel well". The diode is doped, then the substrate is etched, then the first layer of wiring is added, then more silicon is added, more wiring. Front-side Illuminated sensors are designed exactly as I've depicted. The photodiode is very specifically the bit of properly doped silicon at the bottom of the well.

The "well" or better potential well of a photodiode is the part of the photodiode where the charge is stored during exposition. It is made of (doped) silicon which is intransparent. The image you provided seems to me a little bit strange: How could the light hit the photodiode at the bottom if the well is intransparent? Please send me the source of the image and hopefully I could find some enlightening information about it!

Thanks in advance - Michael

25
EOS Bodies / Re: dual pixel tech going forward
« on: April 26, 2014, 01:45:03 PM »
 jrista:
"It won't improve resolution (since the photodiode is at the bottom of the pixel well, below the color filter and microlens),"

I think that the whole structure below the filter is the photodiode - to discriminate both "phases" you need to discriminate light that hits both photodiodes of 1 pixel. So there is a chance to enhance resolution SLIGHTLY by reading out of both photodiodes separately.


 jrista:
"it won't improve dynamic range (I've discussed this at length elsewhere, but reading one half at one ISO and the other half at another ISO ultimately results in a net-zero gain"

If you can make one of both photodiodes "less sensitive" by some procedure (I do not know how) you have additional non saturated information about brightness.

Both theoretically possible improvements need
  * the capability to read out both photoiodes independently. That is possible because it is necessary for DPAF
     but it is questionable that you can read the WHOLE sensor in this manner
  * the capability to play with sensitivity curves of both photodiodes independently ...

So basically you are right that - at the moment - the sensor will use the two-photodiode-per-pixel-design for AF only. And binning (adding both photodiode charges) will give reasonable "photosite size".

26
Lenses / Re: Canon teaser for 4/24 announcement -- new fast prime?
« on: April 22, 2014, 08:28:43 AM »
the four character can be translate to "In Praise of Shadows", but no idea what product will be

The EF 24/4.0 STM pancake lens with incredible flare resistance/contrast so shadows in contralight are full of plenty detail.

27
Photography Technique / Re: Panning
« on: April 21, 2014, 03:55:43 AM »
I tried some panning shots today. Gear used was 5D Mark III and the 70-200 II. I shot a reasonable number of images today and these are two of the few shots that I liked. The first shot is at ISO 50, 70mm, f/2.8 at 1/50s. The second shot is at ISO 100, 70mm, f/2.8 and 1/60s. The lens was in IS Mode II.

Issues -
1) I wasn't able to generate a more streaking background despite shutter speeds which I thought were reasonably low;
2) Dropping the shutter speed lower resulted in an extremely poor hit rate;

Please suggest as to how can I improve my panning technique.

Thanks in advance,

Regards ... J.R.

Try an external viewfinder - to enhance tracking over longer periods, just an idea.
 Or use a tripod if you can control the path of the subject in someways: With a ball head lock the ball and use the panning capability of the base of the head (e.g.).

 Never checked it both measures work ... just time for me to do that soon :)

28
Photography Technique / Re: Am I the only one this has happened to?
« on: April 21, 2014, 03:39:04 AM »
It has happened to me with the 300/2.8.  As if a sneak photographer would to be so visible! Ironically, using an SX50 or its many equivalents of much greater range attracts no attention.

+ 1

That is what l would explain someone who accuses me to take pics of people  secretly!

Other ideas to react:
- "I am Mr.. . . . . what is you name?"- politely... to get the name of the other person to show some openess
- offering to call the police because you feel threatened

 Preventive deescalation:
-  pointing the lens while not in use to the ground
-   E.g.  ask dog owners it if is o.k. to take photos of the dogs.  Then you are part of the group and your intention is cleared.


29
Stormtrooper edition available next month?

May the 4th be with you....  ;D

 :) So we use all the Darth Vader-Edition?
 Oh, forgotten. This one has still to come: Black polished surface ...

30
White will reflect the sun rather than absorb it, keeping the camera and lens cool, so hot climates like ...  OOPS, Whats wrong here???

After  a while it produced a grin  on my face! Perhaps this camera is optimized for holy days in sunny and warn countries?

 But - combined with e.g. a 70-200 it would be a nice combo for sunny days. Black cameras (notebooks etc.) will heat up to ~60 degree centigrade, well above specs for electronics and batteries.  7Dii in white  would be very interesting ...

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 22