December 22, 2014, 07:51:26 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 5 ... 18
31
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: December 02, 2014, 10:47:11 PM »
I also did a comparison between the 7D-II and the NX1 (see attached). The 7D-II (with it's 14% smaller sensor) appears to be an equal to the NX1 in terms of high-ISO noise and apparently offers more accurate color SOOC.

You are free to make up your own mind, but so far I cannot agree with people who say that the NX1's high-ISO noise performance is close to "some" current full frame cameras, I'm just not seeing it. Even the "worst" current full frame sensors (the 6D/5D-III) are better it high ISO. Anyway, this has just been my subjective assessment of moderately high-ISO. I'm keen to see actual measurement data from DxOmark and others.

I did a similar test in another thread and saw that while the NX1 is about equal to the 7D2 for high ISO in bright light, it's worse in the DPReview lowlight test with both downsampled to 8MP and a small amount of chroma noise reduction applied.  The quality of the NX1 noise was odd and detracted from the image quality.

33
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: December 02, 2014, 02:19:20 PM »
I'd expect the noise levels to be unacceptable with 500 ┬Ás lag time.  You'd be shooting with faster than a 1/2000th second shutter speed.

Since when is a 1/2000th shutter speed out of the norm?  Esp on a bright sunny day?  Last I checked, I think most DSLRs shoot at up to 1/8000th or faster.  And wasn't insanely fast shutter speeds (1/32000th mentioned above) supposed to be one of the advantages of mirrorless that 'mirror slappers' can't match?

Maximum shutter speed has no relationship to DSLR vs mirrorless; that has more to do with focal plane vs electronic shutter.

34
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 02, 2014, 11:26:11 AM »
... without any moving parts inside, more robust, more durable, immune to misalignments of components ... with zero vibrations, zero noise ... with stabilizer working with all lenses ...

This combination would indeed be quite impressive,  ;D.

35
At least it wasn't shot with a Nikon lens.

Indeed.  Remember the promo footage for the Nikon D800that was shot with a Canon 5DII?   :o

Advertising agencies tend to be clueless about things like this.

Canon USA's marketing department does seem particularly clueless lately.

36
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 01, 2014, 06:42:09 PM »
Canon has a loooong long way to go to fix some major problems with bigger steps. Problems such as DR pattern banding when pushing the shadows, where Sony sensors (not cameras) has already fixed that

The random noise component of the read noise is still an issue, but the 7D2 has fixed the pattern noise issue more or less completely.

37

I have exactly the opposite experience. Per-pixel color noise isn't difficult...the real difficulty with color noise is the blotches...the stuff that spans 50-100 pixel areas. I believe Neutral knows what I'm talking about. It shows up in shadow areas and at high ISO, and it is nearly impossible to clean up without obliterating detail. I've tried using TGVDenoise as well as several multiscale noise reduction routines on it within PixInsight, and it is just NOT easy to clean up, and impossible to clean up without a visible cost to detail (due to it's scale...you have to factor in large pixel areas, so of course it's going to affect detail.)


This is what surprised me about the comparison I posted above, the 7D2 is on the left and the NX1 is on the right.  From the DPReview low light samples what I'm seeing is that at 6400 (and 12.8K although I didn't post it since the NX1 seems to fall apart more significantly over 6400) the 7D2 definitely looks worse before chroma noise reduction but then the 7D2 looks considerably better after a small amount of chroma noise reduction.


Are you reducing the noise on Neutrals screen captures? If so, the NX1 has been downsampled. Reduce noise at full size then downsample, and no matter what you do to the 7D II, the NX1 still look better.

I applied the standard chroma noise reduction to the RAW files and then downsampled to JPGs.  The 7D2 definitely looks better at 6400 and 12800; the NX1 has a kind of funky quality to the noise.

38

I have exactly the opposite experience. Per-pixel color noise isn't difficult...the real difficulty with color noise is the blotches...the stuff that spans 50-100 pixel areas. I believe Neutral knows what I'm talking about. It shows up in shadow areas and at high ISO, and it is nearly impossible to clean up without obliterating detail. I've tried using TGVDenoise as well as several multiscale noise reduction routines on it within PixInsight, and it is just NOT easy to clean up, and impossible to clean up without a visible cost to detail (due to it's scale...you have to factor in large pixel areas, so of course it's going to affect detail.)


This is what surprised me about the comparison I posted above, the 7D2 is on the left and the NX1 is on the right.  From the DPReview low light samples what I'm seeing is that at 6400 (and 12.8K although I didn't post it since the NX1 seems to fall apart more significantly over 6400) the 7D2 definitely looks worse before chroma noise reduction but then the 7D2 looks considerably better after a small amount of chroma noise reduction.

39
Very interesting....

Let's hear from the DRones.... What do you have to say now?

The first question you have to ask is how are they defining dynamic range?  This seems to be the step wedge type of dynamic range test rather than a statistics based definition.

40
Can't really start a poll within the thread, but which of the two images below do people think looks better?  Both are crops of ISO6400 shots that were downsampled to 8MP and with minor chroma noise reduction but nothing else.  You'll need to click on the image, or even better view it in a new tab, to see the full resolution.

.

41
Lenses / Re: Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Sample Images
« on: November 27, 2014, 12:15:37 AM »
Anyone have any thoughts or knowledge of why Canon went EFS instead of EF with this lens? Seems like a good match with the 40 for FF.

They most likely need to get the rear element closer to the sensor to maintain the pancake design and that can't be done with an EF mount lens.

42
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:58:50 PM »
Canon had difficulty actuating a mirror at 14fps, hence the reason they had to invest special resources to achieve that in the 1D X. But it is no lesser feat to process all that data and achieve the kind of per-frame intelligent processing it does to identify, focus on and track subjects across the frame at 14fps.

The 1DX doesn't actually move the mirror at 14fps, only at 12fps.  In 14fps mode the mirror stays up.

43
All I can say is...WOW. I'm hooked on the NX1!! :P I think it may be my new high speed birding camera some time next year, assuming the lenses pan out. I think I'd get this before I got an A7r even...as I am well and truly impressed.

I also find Samsung's entry into higher end ML to be quite interesting and might consider one myself, especially if there's a nice post-intro price drop next year.

Did you read the link in the post I made a while back?

www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=8958f61376cc00ed7968518a7299d155&topic=23052.0

it mentioned a bit about the hardware tech inside the camera, an aspect of which I think that you, given your vocation, might find extra appealing. :)


I returned my 7D2, mine had some serious initial AF lag issues which may well be improved in a firmware update but for now, ALL of my ML bodies and comparably long lenses can AF faster than the 7D2 I tried with its initial firmware. EDIT:  that's with the long lens I tested it with, the venerable, original, 100-400mm L.


I hadn't read that yet, but yeah. Incredibly impressive technology. Programmable hardware...as hardware? I've never heard of anything like that in a consumer product. That's incredible! Bringing apps to cameras in a way that is actually meaningful to cameras...that kicks ass.


Yeah, I think Samsung has a solid winner here. All they need to do now, now that they have some seriously competitive sensor and ISP technology, is to build out the ecosystem...lenses and customer support. I hope they do that properly.

Sounds like they're using an FPGA at some point in the pipeline.

44
@jrista
Have you done the arithmetic yet to estimate FF and MF mega pixels with NX1 pixel density?

It would correspond to a 63MP FF sensor.

45

The 5D III does seem sharper...not sure why. It almost seems as though the lens is not fully focused with the NX1...but, that kind of seems to be par for the course for IR. I've never felt they get the best example images.


Seems like the NX1 is using a more aggresive NR setting for the JPGs.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18