September 02, 2014, 03:13:11 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 - raptor3x

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 26, 2014, 09:50:16 PM »
Yeah Canon may eventually add 4k. That just shows Canon is no longer an innovator, just a  follower.

Errr, Canon released a 4K DSLR 2 years before anyone else.  How is that considered being a follower?

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 26, 2014, 07:38:06 AM »
...I started seeing this fundamentally mocking behavior.

Yep, it's just popping up all over the place!

Dur...oops... Infinity!

WOW...   :o  Well, clueless is as clueless does, I guess... You've definitely "clearly" proven your point...whatever your point actually is.

Heh, touche. Although, I tried the reasonable approach first, over and over, and he's been asking for it for days. He makes it very, very hard not to sometimes.

Did you see my post here?  The loss of resolution is really minimal.  The D810 will obviously give you better results, but not hugely better.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 11:08:18 PM »
Quote
Technically speaking, the lowest level in every sensor is black, or ZERO. By EVERY definition of dynamic range, the range from zero to any number is INFINITY.

0-16384 (14 bit ADC) is infinity?  ???

Do you need an education in basic mathematics?

What happens when you divide any number by zero? What happens when you take the logarithm of zero or infinity?

Mathematical formula for DR:

Code: [Select]
20*log(FWC/RNrms)
FWC divided by noise. Hmm, let's see:

Code: [Select]
20*log(16384/0)
Dur...oops... Infinity!

Introducing real math? How rude, he thought he had a zinger.  But seriously, try DualISO if you haven't already.

19
Post Processing / Re: Post processing, coma removal
« on: August 25, 2014, 08:54:17 AM »
It wouldn't!

The choices are:  Peripheral Illumination, Chromatic Aberation  (R & B), Color blur, Distortion.

The other corrections are all controlled by the DLO slider, you can't adjust them individually like the ones you listed.

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 08:09:21 PM »
Just to be clear, I have no intention of "switching" brands. If I do anything, it will be adding another brand to my kit. There are still problems with that. I despise the fact that Sony chose a lossy "raw" format...it doesn't even qualify to be called RAW since it's lossy. I'd have an A7r already if not for that. I also have never lied about my opinion of Nikon ergonomics. So, it's not an ideal situation. However...for my landscape photography...which, how often have you seen me share landscapes? Rarely. :P I have never cared for the editing latitude of my Canon files at low ISO. Even with good NR, you still have to pick some balance between shadow detail and shadow noise. I'm quite good with Topaz DeNoise 5, it is a very effective program. But even that still eats detail for breakfast if you really push the NR far enough that Canon shadows look like Exmor shadows.

I think I'm in the exact same boat as you where the dynamic range limitation is something I rarely come across because of what I shoot but when it does I find it really annoying.  Originally I was considering picking up a D800E+14-24 for the little bit of landscape shooting that I do, the main reason I was pushing that off was because I've never been terribly fond of Nikon's ergonomics (although they're still miles better than any of the mirrorless cameras I've tried).  When MagicLantern released DualISO, switching to Nikon pretty much went out the window.  I did pickup an A7 to try out the Exmor sensors, but honestly that camera feels like a chore to use plus the high ISO performance is surprisingly poor and I'll probably get rid of it sometime soon.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 07:47:36 PM »
Let me compare the 70D to the A6000.

I know I specifically mentioned the A5100 when talking about the sensor, but I was speaking generally of Sony's crop cameras compared to Canon's in terms of overall camera capability so I'll use the a6000 as my example.

The a6000 is much cheaper at $800 (actually $648 now on Amazon).

Ok, that's true.


The a6000 is full metal compared to 70D being plastic.

I haven't seen any information on the internals so have no idea on whether or not this is true.

The a6000 shoots up to 11fps compared to the 7fps on the 70D

Good luck actually tracking anything that's not moving in an easily predictable way.

The a6000 has a 179 focus points compared to 19 on the 70D

And exactly zero of those are cross-type whereas the 70D has 19 cross-type points through the VF and ~20 million line-type on the sensor.

The a6000 shoots 60p video at full hd (note: also with better quality)

This is true.

The a6000 has 100% viewfinder coverage compared to 98% on the 70D

The A6000 viewfinder has better coverage but it's tiny as hell and overall pretty awful.

On top of that, it has a superior sensor with more dynamic range, color sensitivity, and tonal range.

These are also true.

Another thing you can't overlook is that the A6000 has the typical godawful ergonomics and controls that all Sony mirrorless bodies share.

22
Canon General / Re: CPN Interviews the Men Behind the EOS-1 Series SLRs
« on: August 21, 2014, 05:22:19 PM »
I believe the last bit is the most interesting for me:

"I believe that the trend towards compact, lightweight equipment is a certainty among categories encompassed by advanced amateurs, and even professional equipment, [so] the entire [EOS] system will move toward a more lightweight form.

The technical challenges are: lighter, stronger materials; glass materials with a high refractive index and high permeability; improvement in low power consumption design and compact, high-capacity battery; electronic parts with a higher degree of integration.”

Ugh, I hope this isn't too true.  The 5D series are the smallest cameras that are actually comfortable to hold, I'd be highly disappointed if they started making them smaller.  By far, the worst feature of the current mirrorless cameras is that they're all incredibly uncomfortable to hold since they're so tiny.

23
Lenses / Re: Development Announcement of a New 800mm f/5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2014, 12:14:05 PM »

These lenses, now that they are so light, are eminently hand holdable. I hand hold my 600/4 II all the time, with and without a 1.4x TC. The IS is invaluable for hand-held work like that. Even when used on a tripod, there are things, like vibrations caused by wind, that IS is still useful for.

I thought all the whites version II had an detection inside to find out if they are used on a tripod, and if that's the case then IS would be switched off. Or am I wrong ?

It doesn't turn the IS off, it just prevents it from going into the feedback loop that caused problems in the early IS lenses.

24
PowerShot / Re: What Else is Coming for Photokina? [CR2]
« on: August 17, 2014, 10:13:47 PM »
Given that I'm looking at my "90 Percent Off" Pixma Pro 100, I might hazard a guess at one of the printers that will be replaced.

It's only been two years since the Pro-100 was released so I'm not so sure about that.  I'm pretty sure the reason the printers are always so deeply discounted is because Canon is running on the blade and razor business model.  The ink and paper is really where they're making their money.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Exmor vs DualISO
« on: August 17, 2014, 09:25:51 PM »
I wonder how good will be a Canon 6D with dual ISO.   ;)

Not a huge difference since the read noise difference between the 5D3 and 6D is neutralized and the 6D doesn't have a huge advantage at ISO 1600 over the 5D3.

26
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 05:09:38 PM »
However, all of the Canon DSLRs I've used have a plastic screen cover, and I'd be surprised if that were not true across the board.  Plastic is a lot more flexible, albeit at a cost in terms of getting scratched a lot more easily.  On the other hand, you don't put your DSLR in your pocket, so scratch resistance is less relevant.

The 7D,5D3, and 1DX have glass screens that are bonded to the LCD panel while all other non-touchscreen DSLRs have a replaceable plastic cover over the LCD.  I'm not sure about the cameras with touchscreens though.

27
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 04:19:09 PM »

"Innen wird ein Aluminiumchassis
von geformten Kunststoffelementen
geschützt – das schafft ein sicheres
Gefühl von Zuverlässigkeit."

Inside an aluminum chassis is protected by moulded elements made from
plastic - this gives a feeling of reliability.
I think your conclusions are right, that the EF mount is mounted via a plastic (of high quality) to the inner frame  - just change from steel to aluminum for the inner frame. As I remember the EOS 20D has a steel frame - perhaps steel applies to the 5D mark I ?

Great find!  And yes, the only camera that I have a service manual for is the original 5D, so I'm not surprised that there are minor changes but that the fundamental construction is the same.

28
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 03:53:50 PM »
Not a lie, but it's showing the magnesium shell.  That shell is attached to a composite/stainless steel skeleton whereas the Nikon has a magnesium skeleton throughout.  The lens mount, for example, is mounted to the composite mirror box.  My suspicion is that the shell is largely structural, especially around the mount area as there's a lip on the lens mount that mates with the magnesium shell, but I don't have any good way to demonstrate that without taking my 5D3 apart.  If you read Roger's article you can see how it's all put together.

Roger doesn't seem to say anything about it, that I can tell.  A reader comment suggested the mirror box was composite, Roger indicated the circuit boards were screwed into composite, but there could be metal under it.  The words 'magnesium' or 'steel' aren't used on the blog page.

It's interesting that the Canon mag-alloy frames seem more tightly constructed, using fewer pieces (at least, that's how it appears).

In other images of the 5DIII chassis, the 'mag allow shell over steel skeleton' isn't apparent, although it does seem the 5DIII's bottom plate may be steel (it's a different finish than the rest of the frame, at any rate).

So, I'm still not sure where you're getting this information...   ???

That's coming from the 5D service manual.

29
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 03:52:49 PM »

I think your premise here is that the Nikon has the lens mount fitted to the outer shell

Not quite.  The nikon mount seems to be connected directly to the internal magnesium chassis, while the Canon mount is connected directly to the composite mirrorbox which is then connected to the stainless steel chassis.  Neither are directly connected to the outer shell, although my suspicion is that the outer shell on the Canon is giving some structural support to the lens mount based on the lip from the lens mount that sits flush against the magnesium shell.

whereas the Canon has it fitted to the internal chassis. I bet there is a reason for Canon to fix it to the chassis, possibly accuracy, after all the sensor is fitted to the chassis, not the outer shell. I would very much doubt that a D800 is built 'internally' to the same standard as a 4D, and my experience with the Nikon 'prosumer' grade of camera is that they are not inherently built to the same standard as the equivalent Canon, in fact I'm fairy convinced they are a cheaper unit, and the mount affixed directly to the chassis may be part of this.

Whether it's better or worse is really something that only their structural engineers can really tell you, as there can be very real advantages to composite parts (precision, toughness, thermal stability) other than manufacturing cost.  As for them not being up to the same standard, I can believe that the internal sealing is probably superior on the more expensive bodies I'm not sure that the internal construction methods used will be all that different on the Nikon side.  On the Canon side, the 1D bodies look similar to the D800 internally so an increase in build quality for the 7D would probably involve using a more unibody like construction for the internal chassis and/or better weather sealing.

30
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 02:36:24 PM »
Found a picture of the insides of the D300.  Same full metal skeleton as the D800/1D/D4 so I don't really think this kind of build quality can be that expensive to produce.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9