September 17, 2014, 04:01:13 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 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 25
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List
« on: June 28, 2013, 03:57:56 PM »
dual pixel cmos autofocus

To me, this seems to be the same tech they started using on the 600d, but now the whole [...]

I have to recheck my 600D ... I think it was the 650D and the EOS M where it started?!

I am not shure it is just for the video crowd - think about an "adjustment mode" which makes AFMA due to the comparison between the fast phase detect (via special unit) and sensor phase+contrast AF ...u

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 8D?
« on: June 28, 2013, 10:03:40 AM »
What about Canon 8D?


if 8D is "kitted" with 18-55 lens, then it´s not the 7DII replacement.

I think it's a typo:
  - image shows 7D
  - Number 8 is two times 4 and 4 is a number which is associated with dead in some asian languages

(No G4, no G8 etc.)

Lenses / Re: Does it make sense to keep my EF 100mm f2.0?
« on: June 24, 2013, 02:22:45 PM »
I have a EF 100mm f2.0 i use for portraits.

Now i will buy the 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro lens.

I ask myself it it makes sense to keep the 100mm f2.0?
Will i use it when i have the L?

Does f2.0 vs. f2.8 makes such a big difference that i like to keep the f2.0?
I use the EF 100mm f2.0 at f2.0 or f2.2 most of the time. I bought it for shallow DOF.

Or will the Macro be so good that i don´t use the EF 100mm f2.0 anymore?

Anyone who was in the same situation?
What do you think?

I was in a similar situation, but I choose the non-IS 100mm macro lens because
of similar (or slightly better) overall IQ and I will keep the 2.0 100 lens:
  * I like to have f/2.0 for thin depth of field
  * I like the small size/unobtrusiveness of the 2.0 100
  * I like the overall structure/quality of the images at f/4.0-8.0: very detailed and contrasty
     but far from unnaturally sharp
  * I am amateur, so I love to shoot photos (it's in the name amateuer, perhaps amare, to love)

EOS-M / Re: How many people actually like the EOS-M?
« on: June 22, 2013, 12:26:20 PM »
Digital Rev?

Thank you for the tip (RienzPhotoz too)!

The problem is that I am not interested in the EF<>EF-M adaptor at the moment and digital rev shows 576 Euro at the moment. Perhaps this is the price which includes the german tax.

But without the adaptor @ 400-450 Euro it would be interesting - perhaps this bundle will show up sometimes. I bookmarked now and will look there from time to time ...

- Michael

EOS-M / Re: How many people actually like the EOS-M?
« on: June 22, 2013, 08:32:17 AM »
I don't have the EOS M  but

  * I would by it if it were available in Europe as a bundle with the ef-m 22mm lens for 400 Euro instantanously ...
  * ... and buy an FD-to-EOS-M adaptor to use my FD lenses for video ...
  * ... and replace my S95 as high portability cam ...
  * ... and use the EOS-M with the 22mm lens as wide angle in combination with e.g. the 100mm Macro on a 40D.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patents: New 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Lenses
« on: June 16, 2013, 04:07:30 AM »
The mechanics are interesting.

The 50/1.4 is 37mm longer than the current 50/1.4.
The 85/1.8 is 45mm longer than the current 85/1.8.

That'll change how well they fit in various people's camera bags but I suppose this is what's required to add image stabilisation to each of these lenses.

Im not shure that "length of the lens" means the physical length of the real lens assembly - I think it is the length between front surface and the image plane. The values you have calculated are in the region of the flange-sensorplane-distance ...

I have made a simple overlay of the cut views of the current 1.4/50 and the proposed (in the patent) lens. Both scaled to the aperture which should be similar.

I do not see any dramatic difference between both - no IS elements, no retrofocus scheme - just small changes which allow to introduce additional lenses to correct aberrations. So it will not be a reincarnation of the Carl Zeiss 1.4 55mm ...

Best, Michael

« on: June 09, 2013, 06:52:06 AM »
Therefor for serious use I postulate some things which have to be happened until a Replacement of the mirror makes seriously sense:

- adequate electronic wysiwig-viewfinder
- permanent autofokus in the quality of the actual systems, incl. sensitivity under low ligh
- compatibility-bridge to the existing system
- new body-desing to bring serious advantage to the user.


The fourth point is a good one - I would prefer a box like design e.g. a cube of 8 x 8 x 8 cm³ with a high capacity battery and direct controls dials for aperture (ring around bajonet), Time, ISO, EV compensation. Such a camera with the shorty forty is very compact and fits into a lens compartment. The omitted prism and mirrorbox gives space for the rest - like the above mentioned high capacity battery.

... like the classical Hasselblad or Rollei medium format cameras ... and I remember the Rollei 2000 which was a 35mm camera with exchangeable magazins.

PowerShot / Re: Camera for Granny
« on: June 08, 2013, 12:14:00 PM »
I would check if your grandma
  * will use an optical viewfinder or the display
  * needs a zoom or will prefer a prime lens
  * has problems with small (or tiny) buttons
  * want's to go the digital route (=data management) or
     can use a bunch of cards e.g. with a flat screen with card reader.

Perhaps the combination of a medium large camera
with a large Li ion battery and a bunch of 4GB cards
with mechanical write protection might be a good
solution. Cards can be used like film cardridges and
- if it is a 100D - the camera has a large capacity
battery + can be used in a full auto setup.

Just provide a little bit time to make backups of the
cards ...

My 2ct - Michael

« on: June 07, 2013, 07:34:24 AM »

I always chuckle when I see folk wanting full frame mirrorless.  They just haven't got the concept.  Big sensor means big lenses. big. big. Not small.


I am one of these folks ;-) ... because
  * it enables (r)evolutionary lens designs without retrofocus constructions
  * it reduces size, mass, complexity for the mirrorbox and the penta prism
  * it would help to reuse my FD lens collection with their great manual focus rings - for video e.g. - via an adaptor (if a FF mirrorless of canon hasn't a native EF mount).

But your arguments about image quality are very important: I am learning
to get out the most of the 40D sensor technically which has just 10 Mpix and is 6 or
7 years old (in terms of technology). So: APS-C is at least comparable to the
best 35mm film cameras/films if not a lot better.

Tool-wise I am well equipped - the largest "construction site" for me ist to
get out the most of a camera system in terms of technical quality and
creativity - I still have to improve the latter one!

EOS-M / Re: EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Announcement Soon? [CR2]
« on: June 03, 2013, 12:58:34 PM »
This one is really interesting FOR ME:
  * I don't like UWA to much but they are helpful occasionally
  * if the lower max aperture helps to keep that thing very small (compared to just a 10-22 EF-S) it might be a good all round camera (@22mm) with UWA capability)
  * the IS helps to shoot at equivalent light conditions compared to the EF-M 22 2.0 - so there is no need for that lens (except you need bokeh)
  * if the lower max aperture keeps the thing at lower cost and reduces flare by reducing the number of lens groups and leads to a very high quality (straight to the edges) - it would be a good trade off

Just the right EOS-M body is missing - sth. with a higher count of images per battery charge (500 or so) and a viewfinder for bright environmental conditions/video!

Sounds fishy to me. The current sensors have about 50% QE. This means that one can only increase it twice, not 1,000 times.

In principle, "sensitivity" is not a well defined term when it comes to digital sensors. They are photon counting machines, missing every other photon, roughly speaking.

Yes, your thinking mirrors mine.  Perhaps its a deeper electron well that holds more photons, but that implies a longer exposure.  The description of "Wang said the key to his new sensor is the use of "light-trapping" nanostructures that use graphene as a base. The nanostructures hold onto light-generated electron particles for much longer than conventional sensors." is a bit vague and does not explain the predicted usefulness for consumer imaging. 
I can see it useful for astronomy and night time imaging, perhaps even satellite imaging, but for a camera that is used to do high fps or video, I do not understand.

I agree with your statements - so I think it might be a sensor material which allows for 1000x the electrons per pixel increasing the dynamic range by 10 stops (8 stops for real products) - you will have perhaps a native sensitivity of ISO 400 - 8 stops lower sensitivity setting means ISO 4 (!!!) ...
For me it would be very interesting to have the freedom to choose very high DR or very long exposure times at high ambient lighting.

... perhaps "without flash" means that you can lift shadows due to the high DR without visible IQ loss? (this idea came up during writing ...)

The problem of durability could be solved by exchangeable sensors. Would be good idea just with CMOS sensors - I would like to convert my 20D to a B/W camera by removing the RGB Bayer pattern (and increase the sensitivity by a factor of two or three) but would like to have the chance to try the removal procedure on two or three sensors (not cameras).

Lenses / Re: Very Stuck Filter
« on: May 31, 2013, 10:26:05 AM »
Another method:

What is the material of the lens' filter thread? If it is plastic you might have a chance to cool down the METAL parts of the FILTER for 1 minute or so and you can try to remove it with your filter wrench. If the filter thread of the 70 200 mk ii is made of metal you can use the same procedure but you have to find out the timing when the filter thread is cool and the lens thread is warmer.

To cool down the filter thread I would suggest to cool down a thick sheet of aluminum (e.g. the base of a cooking pot) to -20 degree centigrade and keep the lens at 20 or 30 degree centigrade. To cool down the filter thread you put the lens with the filter thread onto the metal sheet and wait - let's say 60 seconds - before you try to remove it. Perhaps you have to repeat the procedure with different timings ...

This procedure is not too dangerous (as far as I see it, no guaranties!) for the lens  - if this doesn't work, I would send it to Canon - as a lot of contributors have said.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« on: May 22, 2013, 11:01:19 AM »


The Foveon has great potential and great flaws.

To fix the latter in a reasonable time, imho, a great deal of resources are needed - the sort of resources maybe only Sony and Samsung have.

The good thing is that manufacturers are understanding that the Bayer sensors (and the mechanical mirrors/shutters) are the bottlenecks of modern cameras' performance. However the Foveon is not the only solution. There's another prototype of sensor (can't recall the name) that uses the energy of the photons to translate it into wavelength and then into color information.

Why not Canon? AFAIK Canon develops sensors in their own company. O.k., they are behind others in some specs + IQ under different circumstances. But in 2005 when I decided to buy a 20D Canon had a great advantage: It's sensor reproduced great color and detail  - much better than other cameras from other brands and it was a Canon developed +produced sensor.
They have to do something revolutionary - evolutionary development of existing 18MPix sensors will not satisfy us and I think we will see some revolutionary sensor within 2 or 3 years.

Good remark about pixel quality instead of quantity. A 12 or 15 MPix FF sensor three layer sensor without antialiasing and high ISO sensitivity would be outstanding!

PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked
« on: May 13, 2013, 01:17:34 AM »
So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Yeah but it will have WiFi and facebook and GPS and other gizmos that people crave - who cares about the lens? I mean seriously?

ME!  ;)
I really like my S95 for its reasonable IQ ... if it has plentiful of light. The lens of the S95 is at least o.k. if not good. The S9x-S1xx cameras are the best option Canon has in terms of IQ vs. pocketability with RAW capabilities in DPP (= I want only one SW for RAW processing).

There is a superstition that Canon, Nikon, etc. have patented solutions that make it one of the brand by far better, fluorite is one such example. All big companies has their own solution as Nikon, Pentax, Leits,Zeiss etc
I spoke with Per Nordlund Hasselblad lens designers for the new wide angels to Hasselblad down at Photokina some years ago  , Per had 21 different types of glass to choose from and analyze to the wide angle  lenses (if I recall it correctly). And the glass is made of Hoya,Fuji  etc etc

Shure? There are a lot of things that can be patented within lenses: Glass isn't the point I see - there are a lot of design features which affect lens combinations e.g. Patent texts are designed to protect a very wide area of design solutions to protect the own claim. Something like "front element with concave front surface to correct blabla" might exclude others from using a lens shape and there is no chance to circumvent such a design restriction by using other glass ... and just solve some glass issue isn't as simple as "going into the lab and creating a new mixture". Optical glasses are a product from something like alchemy ...

ADD: Just to avoid that I would like to see Canon in front of Nikon ... I am shure that a good photographer can take good photographs with Super tele lenses of both companies. But I have seen some emanations of patent wars in different fields and I have seen very often that there is only one way to solve a problem for decades. Think about rechargeable batteries for cars: Lithium since two decades and no other technically and economically feasible solution in reach ...

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 25