April 19, 2014, 01:51:43 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 - aj1575

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: September 02, 2013, 02:22:26 AM »
I won a Photo Contest lately! My picture had a dynamic range 13,4EV at signal to noise ratio of 37,3dB. The second best only manged 12,9EV an 36,8dB.....

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 30, 2013, 07:45:30 AM »
The 70D...has not improved and is slightly worse than the 9 year old 20D. 


DxOMark measures sensors, but people buy cameras, not bare silicon sensors.  You can rehash DxOMark data until hell freezes over, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has been outselling Nikon for years, nor the fact that the 5DIII outsells the D800. The obvious conclusion is that 'better' sensors (where 'better' is defined as low ISO DR) have not helped Nikon or Sony sell more cameras.

I would even go further; it is not only a question of salesfigures, it also a question of the qualitiy of the camera. Sure the sensor is an important part, but the DXOmark numbers is somehow like playing topcard with cars, and the Nikon has the biggest engine with the highest torque. But this only shows part of the true real life quality of a car.
Sure, Nikon has some nice sensors at the moment, they are better in some aspects than Canon, and somehow this is reflected in the DXOmark score by a wide margin (the sensors in the Sony cameras are also suposed to be better according to DXO, but just compare them against Canon at high ISO and you realize pretty fast that the Canon sensor gives you better pictures in real life). This score system makes it "easy" for everybody to somehow rank cameras by a single number; this is easy, so everybody does it. But as I mentioned befor, it only shows a small part of the whole thing.
For example, to me it seems that Canon has the better chips, their Digic5+ does a great job when it comes to noise reduction in JPEGs, while the RAWs seem to look a bit noisier from Canon, they look better than the Nikons as JPEG (maybe Nikon shooters are all RAW shooters so JPEG is no priority).

So looking at the camera as a whole, I'm happy with what Canon does and how the pictures I got straight out of the camera look.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 03:54:30 PM »
I have to say, I was also a bit disappointed by the DXOMark. But actually I start to question the real world connection of their marks. I was looking at the sample shoots of the 70D at dpReview with their nice tool they have. My impression was that the 70D is quite good at high ISO, even beating the D600 in some areas when using JPEGs. The D600 which should actually be better than the 6D (according to DXO), but at high ISO the pictures look either the same (RAW) or the 6D is better (JPEG).
At first I didn't see much difference at low ISO, until somebody pointed out some parts of dark color cards. There you can see the advantage of Nikon at low ISO. The Canons have some nasty noise in some colors, even at low ISO. But they represent only a small part of the whole picture, the rest looks almost the same for both. At high ISO the Canon files look either the same (RAW) or better (JPEG).

Also interesting, check out the Fujifilm X-Pro1; this sensor rocks! It easely keeps up with all the FF sensors from Canon and Nikon. Sadly there is no test planned for this camera at DXO, this would be interesting to see.

I suggest we make a blind test for IQ of Canon and Nikon (and others). Select some areas of the preview comparison tool, and take the pictures from different cameras and rank them according to the IQ. This could settle the IQ war for a while. The problem is, that one could select areas that suit one of the two better than the other, but it should be possible to make a fair comparison.
I suggest 4 samples of one area at a certain ISO from 4 different Cameras at either RAW or JPEG. Then I would take maybe 6 areas. The cameras can be different in the other areas, but can also be the same. The order of the pictures from one area should be random. For each area the pictures can be put in the order according to their quality. This should give a good idea about IQ of the different sensors.

What do you think?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70d RAW Samples
« on: August 28, 2013, 05:19:29 AM »

I don't know what you're looking at but the D7100 has less noise at low iso than the 7D. This is especially evident in lines K-L of the color thingy (columns 3-4 and 14 to 19).

I've seen it now. I did not look at low ISO samples that close, but you are right. The difference is ore evident in RAW than in JPEG. I also think the pokercard is also an interesting part to look at (queen, in the middle, a little bit in the upper half).
But still, it is quite obvious that the Canons pull ahead at higher ISOs, especially with JPEGs.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 70d RAW Samples
« on: August 27, 2013, 03:40:08 PM »
I just did my own comparison of sample pictures over at dpReview (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-70d/10; it is a nice tool they have there).

I compared the 70D with the D7100, the D600 and the 6D. I mostly looked at JPEG, but did also some RAW comparison. There was no surprise at low ISO, the pictures looked almost the same, hard to tell the difference, though the two FF's had a little advantage. At higher ISO the difference became bigger, and there where also some surprises. The winner to my eyes is the D6, it has the fewest noise and the most details, both in RAW and JPEG. Looking at the RAWs, the D600 is the second best, a little bit ahead of the 70D, and the D7100 falls behind. Switching to JPEG changes the result a little bit. The 70D catches up to the D600; the 70D shows less noise then the D600 in some areas, but the D600 stays a litle ahead in the details (no surprise, but I expected a much bigger difference; FF against APS-C). The D7100 marks the end again with JPEGs at high ISO.

So right now I'm pleased with what I have seen from the 70D. Of course, these were studio shots and real life is still a bit different. I'm also looking forward to the DXOMark results. Usually the Canons fare much worse there then in real life tests. But what is more important, good results in a synthetic test, or good pictures out in the field? It is like buying loudspeakers, the best test results with synthetic noise do not mean much, if the real music does not sound right.

Canon General / Re: Modest Gear - Great Results
« on: August 21, 2013, 08:41:48 AM »
For examples from my flickr stream all shoot with my EOS 350D and different lenses:
1. Buildings shot with EF-S 10-22 some PP
2. Sport-Show indoor shot with 70-200mm f4 IS
3. Concert with 50mm f1.4
4. Flower against sun with EF-S 10-22mm

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D release date question
« on: August 21, 2013, 06:53:35 AM »
Looks like B&H have a confirmed date...


They say available end of August, let's hope this is true. I will check some other stores, to see if they also have updated their dates.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D release date question
« on: August 20, 2013, 07:28:07 AM »
Here is a little round up of mentioned release dates.
November is a little late I think, the same goes for late october. These two dates are mentioned by Amazon outside of the US (Oct.) and Pixmania (Nov.).

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D release date question
« on: August 20, 2013, 07:18:43 AM »
Here in Switzerland the dates mentioned by the stores vary between beginning of september until end of october. I can't imagine that Amazon knows the exact date (oct. 25 they mention), I think this is a date they put in to be on the save side. If the date was already clear, then many other stores would mention it.
I think only Canon Japan knows the real (target) date, it is probably not fixed yet (therefor target date).

I would also not wait for the 7D II, unless you hope it will have some features you really need, because it could be photokina next year until you got it.

To me, it does not really matter if it will be beginning of september, or october; I'm working with my 350D for 7 1/2 years by now, so a few weeks do not matter anymore.

Canon General / Re: Should I get into this industry?
« on: August 19, 2013, 03:59:19 AM »
I think that with the right ideas and some understanding how bussines is done you could make it a career. Unfortunalty I think you won't make enough money with landscape photography, there are just too many people doing this for a rather small market.
What I would do is events, not only weddings (also crowded), but there are many other events you could think of. At most of these events there are people taking photos, mostly dads, moms, friends, partners and so on. Their pictures are maybe okay, but as a photographer you can do better, and this is worth something.
I'm not a pro, but I like to show you what I mean. I was asked by a friend of a friend who saw me taking pictures at kids birthday party, if I'm interested to take pictures at the show of their sportsclub (some kind of gymnastics). I said yes, I just can't guarantee anything, because I never did anything like this before. The event was indoors with colorfull lighting; I shoot the whole thing with my 350D and a 50mm f1.4 (the only thing fast enough I had back then). The pictures turne out quite good; I asked them If I should make calenders from the best shots; they agreed, and I organised everything, sent the calenders directly to them they paid them. And even though I did it because they were friends of friends, they paid me, it was 200$. I did this 2 more times, until they reorganized the event, and somebody else took care of a photographer. They just asked a friend of them with a camera, but the pictures didn't turn out well, so after one event they asked me again to do it.

I think there are many events you can shoot, and there are many people willing to pay some money for that. There are pet shows, car meetings, dance events, many kinds of sports. There are a few important points you should look for:
-your pictures must be good (not perfect, you need many good pictures in a short time)
-sell yourself; go out to an event, ask if you can take pictures, show them some, and sell the rest (it is not analog time anymore, where film and printing cost money, If you can't sell them, throw them away)
-be creative with your ideas about things / events you could photograph
-good service, react fast to the wishes of customers, offer them many things (nowadays you can print pictures on almost anything), show them what you could organize them, and do not wait until they ask
-organize your workflow; time is money, and as a pro you don't have time for a lot of PP and organizing, do it once and to it right.

I know, it is a big decission to start a new bussines, but photography is something you can start small; you basically need only a small kit (with some quality in it), good photographic skills, some idea and a bussines card. If you have some free time just go out and try it.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D what do you think?
« on: August 07, 2013, 04:31:04 AM »
70D RAW file appears to show the same old DR as Canon has been stuck with since 2007 :(. I hope it is not their new process sensor!
How do you conclude that the 70D RAW files have the same DR as older Canon Cameras? Maybe I misunderstand the concept of DR, but I think to measure the DR you need to how light was when the picture was taken; a piece of information that is not included in the RAW file.

Lenses / Re: On a crop sensor...EF17-40L or EFS15-85?
« on: August 06, 2013, 01:58:05 AM »
I would also go for the 15-85; the 17-40 just does not make sense on a APS-C camera, you pay too much, you carry arround too much weight, but you gain nothing.

IQ of the 15-85 is very good accros the (very usefull) range.

I personaly went for the newset version of the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4. The only drawback is the smaller zoom range, but beside from that, it has only advantages (faster, smaller, lighter, cheaper and a little bit better IQ). It suited my profile better than the 15-85, but the 15-85 was second place on my personal list for a walk around lens.

I for my part think that Canon made the switch to a new process with the 70D sensor. Canon admited, that 18MP was the limit with the process they had then. So if they now make an APS-C sensor with 40million photodiodes (there are two diodes that can be read seperatly in every of the 20.2MP), then I think they definitly made the move to a new process.

For those who think that Canon has a problem with high ISO noise, just go over to DXO Mark and check the graphs (not their rubbish ratings, but the real measurments). Take the Nikon D600, Canon 6D and Sony a900; look at the graph, and tell me which camera you would take for low light photography. I think we have a clear winner with the 6D. The 6D looses out in dynamic range at low ISO, and has worse color sensitivity, but DR and SNR are better than the rest at high ISO.

Don't get yourself fooled by the DXOMark Rating, it shows not the whole picture. It is also difficult to judge what a 5 or 10 point difference means exactly.

I'm looking forward to the DXOMark measurments of the 70D; I think we will see some surprises, not that the 70D will storm to the top, but just a different behavior then the recent Canon sensor (which was rather predictable).

Yes.  :)

Looking forward to it. My next camera will be a interchangeable-lens mirrorless camera with
* body size like a Sony RX-1
* FF sensor with resolution and IQ equal to or better Nikon D800
* on-sensor Hybrid-AF with performance equal to or better than 70D
* "Retina EVF" [350+ dpi] with ultra-fast refresh [no more visible smearing of moving objects]
* Electronic shutter, X-sync all the way to 1/8000s
* no mechanical parts whatsoever
* less expensive than a Nikon D800 today ... since it is way cheaper to make one.
And what kind of Camera will you use up until then? It will take some years until everthing you like to have is ready. The main problem is the "Retina EVF", especially the ultra fast refresh/no lag. This will take a few years until it is ready. They already made huge improvements, but the 80% of the work is done in 20% of the time; the remaining 20% need 80% of the time...

It has been said before, but I like to give my 2 cents on this too.

-There are physical limitations for the optics that make it impossible to make them smaller, without loosing some aspects of fotographie (DoF) and qualitiy (diffraction).
It does not make sense to build a small camera, and attach a big lens to it (ever seen a NEX with a 24-70 f2.8 Zeiss).

-The main problem with small cameras is, that there is not enough room for all the buttons needed for fast operation.
So ergonomics is another point why the formfactor of DSLR won't change that much. You can compare it to a laptop computer, it would be easy to make it much smaller with today electronics, but the display and the keyboard need a certain size.

I think that mirrorless (ILC/EVIL) will play a big role in the future of cameras. For many occasions they are a nice tool, small with great IQ. I also think that there will be bigger mirrorless cameras in the future, that will be positioned like a DSLR. Actually, it doesn't matter if there is a mirror or not, important is the image quality and the ergonomics.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11