January 29, 2015, 07:31:19 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 - x-vision

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33
16
EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII Sensor pixel density done to full frame
« on: September 13, 2014, 12:38:42 PM »
20.2 * 1.6 * 1.6 = 51.71

17
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 13, 2014, 12:04:42 PM »
D610 is the one I think will be most cannibalized ...

If the more expensive model cannibalizes the cheaper one, that's good news for the company, as they are making more money.

The reverse scenario is the one that you don't want.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:35:11 AM »
I did this because there is severe misunderstanding by certain people in this thread regarding the meaning of these two terms.

Canon is using 14-bit RAW files. So, the range between the min and max values will be 14 EVs.

In a high contrast scene, you are likely going to clip both highlights and shadows.
Thus, you will have RAW values a ranging from 0 to 16,384  - which the histogram will show as 14-stops of DR.

The thing is, even though you've captured light intensities ranging between 0 and 16,384 - which is 14-stops of DR (technically) - you are not taking into consideration the noise.

You can't ignore noise, though, as it actually limits DR.
As per Imatest, which you are using as a reference, DR is closely related to noise: high noise implies low dynamic range.

So, you are claiming that Canon sensor have 14 stops of DR - but that's only if you ignore the noise.
Without accounting for the noise, any camera that uses 14-bit RAWs will technically have 14-stops of DR.
But when you consider the noise as well, the real DR will be less.

The engineering definition of DR does account for noise - and so does DxO.

I summary, this is the mistake that you are making: you are ignoring the noise.
Think this through and you will see that you can't do that.

Here's a good article with the theory and some good illustrations (it's from a professor in physics):
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html

19
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 07:09:47 PM »
7DII and D750 are way different markets. 

The D750 went straight to #1 on Amazon today, right after the announcement:
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-DSLR-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3017941/ref=zg_bs_nav_e_3_281052

It would be interesting where the 7DII will land on Monday/Tuesday after it gets announced.
I have my doubts that it will reach #1. We'll see.

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 06:13:07 PM »
I'm not trolling the forum with 1,000 word posts claiming Exmor is dramatically better and Canon users are missing out. Burden of proof was always on you.

Here's an offer for you:
Why don't you just conceded that Exmor has 2-stops of DR advantage over Canon.
And also that this is helpful and meaningful for a lot of users.

You do that and we stop arguing on the spot.

That's the thing: I doubt that you will do that, since you can't admit that Canon is worse.
Instead, you are going to keep trolling insisting that there's hardly any difference.

And yet again: think about what you are going to say when a Canon sensor has 14-stops of DR - same as the Exmors.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 05:33:32 PM »
Yet another strawman  ::)

I'm telling you, man. Your arguments are ridiculous as they are right now.

As I said, think about what you will say about the 14-stops DR of the 5DIV.
You will have to either flop-flop on your DR stance - or you will be accused of being a Nikon troll,
as everyone in Canon land will be excited about the new sensor.

My suggestion is that you cut your loses and flip-flop now  8).

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 03:35:03 PM »

Do you have real world, optimally produced and processed shots with RAW files and production notes yet?

Let me summarize your stance for everyone to understand.

So, you don't accept that Exmor sensors are superior than Canon sensors based on:
  • you don't accept formal test results from DxO and the likes
  • you dismiss any real-world example that is given to you
  • you think that it's fair to compare differently processed files

In short, if we ignore the formal tests and the real-works samples - and then process files differently - we can show that Exmor is no better than Canon.
That's where you stand, basically.

And to top it all, you are doing all this spin-doctoring on Canon's behalf totally for free.

Wow. I haven't seen such devotion and dedication to a brand.
They have a special name for guys like you - Canon bitches fanboys, right ?


23
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:59:34 PM »
All the AF focus points in the world and FPS won't make up for a lack of shutter speed or too much noise. Get the sensor right first, then start piling on the croutons and dressing.

It just doesn't make sense, IMHO, to spend almost $2000 on an inferior sensor. The 70D is a solid camera for the money, and about the limit of what you should pay for APS-C image quality.

Agree 100% on all points (again ;)).

24
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:52:22 PM »
I don't know a single pro photog who uses a crop camera. They all bailed on the 7D pretty quick and never went back.

Exactly.

Whether Canon intends it or not, the 7D2 will be bought by enthusiasts/consumers - not pros.
Same as the D750.

From that perspective, it makes sense to compare the two and ponder who got it more right - Nikon or Canon.

25
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:45:00 PM »
7DII and D750 are way different markets.  You buy the APS-C flagship for use with supertelephotos and the additional crop on the field or in the wild.  The FF/FX camera works better with wide angle lenses and equivalent focal lengths.

I understand that very well.

I mentioned the 7DII here because Canon and Nikon are demonstrating different thinking of what the market needs/wants today.

Canon thinks that the market wants an action camera with pro-AF system but run-of-the-mill crop sensor.
And Nikon thinks that it's a very well spec'd - and yet non-pro - FF camera.

That's the reason I'm mentioning the 7DII here.

26
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:33:20 PM »
They really don't.  They've sold enough D800's and D810's to pro users and now they've crippled it enough so that it will only compete with (or rather replace) the consumer D610. 

Yup - and that's seems to be the intention here.

Just remember that if a more expensive product cannibalizes a cheaper product, the suits at the corner office are popping the champaigne.

27
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:29:24 PM »
This needs to be read by everyone posting here: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html

Too-little-too-late only if you consider the D750 as a D700 replacement.

But Nikon made it very obvious that the D750 is an enthusiast/consumer camera, not a D700 replacement.
The D700 replacement is the D810 - regardless of whether everyone agrees with that or not.

In general, both Canon and Nikon were very conservative with their entry level FF models.
Now that there is more clarity about what cannibalizes what, Nikon is braver.

The skill in spec'ing and pricing a camera like the D710 is to make it appealing to those who would never buy a D810 - and at the same time unappealing to those who would buy the D810.

And judging from initial reactions to the announcement, it appears that Nikon has succeeded.
At the end, the sales figures will determine whether Canon or Nikon got it more right with the 7DII or D750, respectively.
As I said already, I'd rather have the D750 than the 7DII.

28
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 03:55:03 AM »
IMO, the D750 is perfectly spec'd and priced for an enthusiast/consumer like me.

The 6D/D610 are lacking in features - while still being expensive.
The 5DIII/D810 are "big iron" cameras obviously targeted at pros.

As far as I'm concerned, the D750 hits the sweet spot.

I'll wait for a while for the Canon version and then weight my options.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:27:48 AM »
the 7D MK2 will sure be a good camera for sport and wildlife photographer.
thought i donĀ“t think it will sell as well as the 7D.

today there are way more options.

when the 7D was release people bought the 7D who did not really need  sports/wildlife camera.

Agree.
It seems to me that everyone who upgraded from the 7D to the 6D didn't need the 7D.
And, indeed, there are many more options today.

We'll see how things will play out with the 7DII.
There was a time when I was very interested in the 7D replacement.
But the just announced Nikon D750 is much more appealing now.
Times have changed, I guess.

30
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 11, 2014, 10:55:52 PM »
I'm asking this as a serious question, because I know nothing about shooting video, and I'm genuinely curious:

Why were/are so many people looking at the 7DmkII, a crop sensor camera, with such hope for a bounty of strong video features? As mentioned, I know nothing about video, but I would not think that a crop sensor camera would be the best option for that. What benefit would a crop sensor have for video?

Thanks for any clarification.

The Super-35 format, which is the standard movie format, has basically the size of a crop sensor.
So, crop sensors are already standard size for movies; FF is larger than the standard.

As for why the big hopes for the 7DII: there were all kinds of hopes for the 7DII.
One of them was that it would have a new sensor with advanced performance for both stills and video.

In retrospect, it was indeed too much to ask for - knowing Canon, that is.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33