September 18, 2014, 05:57:34 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 ... 11

I love when websites compare the 70D/7D2 against mirrorless and give the advantage to the mirrorless camera because they have "200" AF points on the sensor while forgetting that the 70D/7D2 have 20 million (~16million selectable) AF points on the sensor.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 07:38:34 PM »
Exmor does not have 14 stops. That's physically impossible given a linear ADC and 14-bit depth. We will not see 14 stops without improvements in noise beyond Exmor plus 16-bit ADCs.

In my capacity as self-proclaimed ML ambassador: Their dual_iso module outputs 16bit dng raw files because 14bit wouldn't do it.

Dual ISO is like having a non-linear ADC. So yeah, you can easily break the 14-bit barrier and achieve more then 14 stops.

I've always wondered why Canon hasn't redesigned/redefined HTP to be dual ISO. From what I've seen resolution losses are minimal and DR gain, both in terms of total DR and shadow latitude, is quite impressive. It seems like it would be a relatively easy firmware change for them that would result in glowing feature reviews.

ML's DualISO is a great feature and I'm a huge proponent of it, but the version that currently exists really isn't good enough to be released to users as a commercial product.  If they were to utilize the concept along with the dual pixel nature of the newer sensors, however, then I think they could have a winner on their hands.  If they could do this with dual pixels then you should get all the gains, but essentially none of the downsides and since no high order interpolation schemes would be necessary in camera processing should be minimal.


By that sentiment, the D800 was a FAR more popular camera than the 5D III when it came out:

I'll bet good money that it's because there's way more variations on the 5D3's name than the D800.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 09, 2014, 10:34:27 AM »
can someone post links to AF tracking tests that compare 5D MK3 and D8x0?
good and as objective as possible.

The only one I know of is the Northrup test and those results are not entirely credible due to the way the test was conducted so it's hard to say if his conclusion is accurate.

* AF performance - not yet, but AF performance like a 1D-X in a MILC is just a matter of some smart algorithms and enough CPU ooomph ...

If Canon decides to really commit to mirrorless I think their dual pixel approach is going to make this happen pretty fast.  We already know that dual pixel is superior to traditional phase detect for lenses faster than f/2.8.
* battery charge - not equal, partly due to higjher power requirement from EVF/LCD, but in equal parts because manufacturers are sticking freakin' wimpy batteries into MILC bodies that could just as well hold regular DSLR batteries if only the handgrip was made ever so slightly larger

This is my biggest beef with current mirrorless cameras, there's so much of a push to make them as small as possible that they've completely thrown out ergonomics except for maybe the EM-1 and GH4.

* EVF ... in bright daylight not as good yet as a really good EVF ... better than rebel mirror-viewfinders. In really poor light better than any DSLR viewfinder

I strongly disagree with this, low light is where the EVF is weakest.  Tracking motion in bright light with an EVF is fair at best, tracking motion in low light with an EVF is a complete no-go.  I'd love to see a hybrid where you have a traditional OVF with the option to add an EVF onto the hotshoe as need, but I don't see myself give up the OVF any time in the near future given the current state of EVFs.

That technology may also just as well eliminate the need for heavy and expensive ground/polished glass lenses.

I don't know about that, but I do think as embedded processing power increases and deconvolution algorithms improve you'll start to see some very small and optically simple lenses that produce images comparable to much more complex lens designs.  Canon certainly seems to have a large lead in this area with DLO and I suspect they'll try to integrate that into DIGIC at some point.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Otus 1.4/85: The New World-Class Lens
« on: September 08, 2014, 01:37:59 PM »
  I read/saw somewhere that it only takes 250-300 BHP to get to 200mph and the other 800+ BHP to get those last 53 MPH.  Needless to say those extra HP are very expensive.

That doesn't sound right.  Even if you assume that all of the 300 BHP is consumed by aerodynamic drags, such that it scales with the cube of speed, then you only need ~600 BHP, so another 300BHP, to reach 253 MPH.  In reality it will be less than that since some portion of that original 300 BHP is being consumed by factors that scaled linearly.  It could be that you need whatever size engine they put into it to reach maximum speed in a reasonable amount of time though.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 08, 2014, 10:38:34 AM »
The issue the Canon needs to resolve is better metering AND dynamic range. I haven't seen anyone addressing the HUGE problem that Canon Cameras underexpose  because the meter isn't always linked to the focus point. I love my Mark III. But, I would love it even more if it would ALWAYS METER FROM THE SELECTED FOCUS POINT.

Evaluative metering is linked to focus point, it's spot metering that's not linked to focus point except in the 1D series.

EOS Bodies / Re: Silly Photokina Rumors
« on: September 07, 2014, 11:34:22 PM »
The new Canon EF 800mm f/5.6 w/ built-in Trombone and TC conversion. For those of us with a musical side, the new ultra-light 4lb 800 Trombone edition is the perfect lens to take on your trips out into the wild, wild city and set up shop on a corner playing music for tips. When your tired of the bustling noise of city life, you can pack up your gear and head out to the wilderness, where this wonderfully versatile lens, with it's built in teleconverter, will give you 800mm at f/5.6 as well as 1120mm at f/8 max aperture. The added reach of this convertible lens will give you the option of  photographing birds and wildlife from a comfortable distance.

Da da, yadda yadda, blah blah, blah blah... ;)

The .525" version is much easier to carry but the .547" version gives much better Symphonic Range.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 07, 2014, 06:44:58 PM »

He's using it as evidence that Canon doesn't "need" to do anything and that their position in the market is perfectly fine because they simply sell more cameras. Nothing to say about the fact that the majority of those cameras are sold to people just as likely to bury their nice new Rebel DSLR in the back of a closet somewhere as use it...Canon simply sells more. So, Canon can afford to sit on their ass and piddle out minor improvements generation after generation. Until, of course, all the customers that actually care about having the mazimum IQ they can get decide to do exactly what Sagittarian states: Buy a D810 or A7r/s or whatever alternate-brand camera tickles their fancy.

The point isn't that they don't feel threatend enough to innovate, we see a constant stream of patents from them showing they're still doing basic research on sensors, but they probably don't feel the need to release anything yet.  I don't like it anymore than you do but since Canon manufacturers their own sensors and they don't have the economics of scale that Sony does due to their cell phone sensors, they probably have to be extremely careful about how they invest in their manufacturing process.  I'm still surprised that Canon isn't, AFAIK, selling any smartphone camera sensors.  I have to imagine this is probably a top priority for them to break into the smartphone market.  If I'm Canon, I have to think that maybe dual pixel technology is more important as a way to break into smartphones, but now I'm off on a tangent.

In any case the original claim was that Canon was losing a major part of their user base to the D800/D800E.  The counter claim was that Canon and Nikon's quarterly reports didn't support this idea.  The response to that was that discussions of market share don't matter which is why I asked if he was intentionally misunderstanding the response.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 07, 2014, 01:50:08 PM »
Canon loose major part of users because of nikon d800/E/810 project.

In a recent quarterly analyst call, Canon mentioned increased sales of higher end models (including 5DIII) as a positive sign despite lower dSLR sales overall.  During their corresponding analyst call, Nikon mentioned reduced sales of 'higher end models' which included the D800/E (this was prior the D810, but that model is quite new).

So, Canon said sales in that segment are better, Nikon said they are worse.  So...can I ask...where is your evidence for Canon 'losing a major portion of users' to Nikon in the 5DIII/D8x0 segment?

Wow, such great news!!!! Because we all know, as photographers, that we take pictures with market share and shoot video with Canon executive salaries. I mean who needs a dumb Exmor and the great DR or high MP and who needs 4k video when you can shoot and film with market share and executive salaries!!

Gosh, why I do so ever hope they give us more of the same old sensors and 1080p video.

Do you actually understand that he's not using that as evidence that Canon cameras are better?  It seems like you're purposefully misunderstanding him to make what you think is a witty comment.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: And what does Canon do?
« on: September 05, 2014, 06:11:38 PM »
The A7s gathers a million more photons at ISO 51200 than the 1D X. Tht is a LOT. On top of the greater total light gathered, it also tops the 1DX in terms of dynamic range. The A7s 8.8 stops of DR at that ISO, vs. the 1D X's 6.6 stops. That is a 2.2 stop lead.

I find the difference in dynamic range interesting as even at ISO 200K there's only ~2/3 stop difference between the 1DX and A7S in SNR according to DxO and at ISO 50K the advantage is ~1/3 stop.

EOS Bodies / Re: The day of the anti-climatic announcement
« on: September 04, 2014, 03:51:12 PM »
"Canon is proud to present the RC-6 mkii!

This isn't remotely (gettit!?) different from the first but has the mark ii designation!"

You joke, but if Canon started building radio receives into the bodies to accommodate future RT flashes and added a small radio remote like the RC-6 that would be pretty awesome.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 03, 2014, 10:37:16 AM »
I wonder if the anti-flicker thing is a video or stills technology.  If it's video then, meh.  If it's meant for stills to help handle low frequency florescents then that's a bit of a game changer for indoor sports.

EOS Bodies / Re: The day of the anti-climatic announcement
« on: September 03, 2014, 10:24:00 AM »
SONY is about to drop Something that has never done before..A DSLR sensor you use with your phone.

Ergonomics are passé...

If you've held an A7/R/S for more than 30 minutes before you'd probably think that was becoming Sony's motto.

Canon General / Re: Another Northrup - Canon vs. Nikon
« on: September 03, 2014, 10:17:23 AM »
That was nothing more than a 25 minute infomercial.

Knowing that going in, I didn't waste any time actually watching it.

sad think is that he's trying to look serious and professional

I'd like to know where/how he got the (relative) numbers for sharpness of lenses? :o

equations like
22MPx of 5D mk II * 1.0909 + kit lens = 8MPx
where 1.0909 is some magic number so he can say D800E has 50% more resolution
looks too funny to be taken serious, but if someone does nothing (like John Snow  ;D) then he could get convinced it's the way it really works

It comes from DXO's perceptual sharpness value, aka turn all the resolution data from a lens into a single number.  The best part is that he spends 1/2 the video using those numbers as the basis for all of his comparisons and then in the second half he has a section where he looks at a specific lens, and comes to the conclusion that even though the perceptual sharpness number looked incredible for a certain lens, it turned out to be unusably soft.  Oops.

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