April 17, 2014, 06:45:17 PM

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 - Mark D5 TEAM II

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: February 27, 2014, 07:03:38 AM »
Okay, thanks to both of you. I'd have a look at eBay and see if that Dandelion or Euro EMF programmable chip previously mentioned can be shipped to where I'm at.

2
Lenses / Re: Review: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Distagon T*
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:58:39 AM »
At that price, I would have expected a better looking lens :P. The focus ring looks like it's covered with cheap black electrical tape, and the rest of the barrel looks like it's painted with what ricers use in their Hondas: flat matte black paint for that "prototype-model" look. And yet you still have to "row the gears" yourself!  ;D

3
Reviews / Re: Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Wide Angle Review
« on: February 25, 2014, 06:16:10 AM »
Interested in getting this lens. Which is better, get a Canon mount lens + EMF chip for AF confirmation & correct EXIF data or Nikon Mount lens with Nikon to Canon EF adapter (Nikon mount lens has AE support and focus confirmation) ? In short, which is the more reliable way to get the AF confirmation light & correct EXIF data? TIA

4
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 25, 2014, 05:27:01 AM »
Quote
The McNamara fallacy, named for Robert McNamara, the United States Secretary of Defense from 1961 to 1968, involves making a decision based solely on quantitative observations and ignoring all others. The reason given is often that these other observations cannot be proven. (See the example below.)

It refers to McNamara's belief as to what led the United States to defeat in the Vietnam War—specifically, his quantification of success in the war (e.g. in terms of enemy body count), ignoring other variables.

    The first step is to measure whatever can be easily measured. This is OK as far as it goes. The second step is to disregard that which can't be easily measured or to give it an arbitrary quantitative value. This is artificial and misleading. The third step is to presume that what can't be measured easily really isn't important. This is blindness. The fourth step is to say that what can't be easily measured really doesn't exist. This is suicide.
    —Daniel Yankelovich "Corporate Priorities: A continuing study of the new demands on business." (1972)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNamara_fallacy


Also read this book:

How to Lie with Statistics:
http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

Quote
Amazon.com Review
"There is terror in numbers," writes Darrell Huff in How to Lie with Statistics. And nowhere does this terror translate to blind acceptance of authority more than in the slippery world of averages, correlations, graphs, and trends. Huff sought to break through "the daze that follows the collision of statistics with the human mind" with this slim volume, first published in 1954. The book remains relevant as a wake-up call for people unaccustomed to examining the endless flow of numbers pouring from Wall Street, Madison Avenue, and everywhere else someone has an axe to grind, a point to prove, or a product to sell. "The secret language of statistics, so appealing in a fact-minded culture, is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify," warns Huff.

Although many of the examples used in the book are charmingly dated, the cautions are timeless. Statistics are rife with opportunities for misuse, from "gee-whiz graphs" that add nonexistent drama to trends, to "results" detached from their method and meaning, to statistics' ultimate bugaboo--faulty cause-and-effect reasoning. Huff's tone is tolerant and amused, but no-nonsense. Like a lecturing father, he expects you to learn something useful from the book, and start applying it every day. Never be a sucker again, he cries!

    Even if you can't find a source of demonstrable bias, allow yourself some degree of skepticism about the results as long as there is a possibility of bias somewhere. There always is.

Read How to Lie with Statistics. Whether you encounter statistics at work, at school, or in advertising, you'll remember its simple lessons. Don't be terrorized by numbers, Huff implores. "The fact is that, despite its mathematical base, statistics is as much an art as it is a science." --Therese Littleton


5
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's Stock Hit Hard
« on: August 09, 2013, 11:47:21 PM »
And in related news, Nikon rethinks 1 System and cuts 2013 forecast citing poor sales:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/08/08/nikon-cuts-2013-sales-forecast-citing-poor-mirrorless-camera-sales

Quote
Nikon has lowered its estimates for sales volume, sales amount, and operating income downward for the entire fiscal year, which ends on March 31st, 2014. Reasons for this include slow economic recovery worldwide, even worse compact camera sales than predicted, and slowed growth in mirrorless cameras. 

The actions that Nikon is taking to improve the situation include:

-    'Accelerating shifting newer products in the entry class of DSLR'
-   'Reconsider product planning of Nikon 1. Nikon 1 represents the majority of sales volume reduction of 550,000 interchangeable-lens type digital cameras'
-    'Revise development plan for new compact [cameras]. Although our market share had been expanding in recent years, sales volume will diminish more than the estimated market shrink. Will maintain profitability as is.'


In short, small-sensored MILCs sUx0rs canal water, and Nikon has seen the light and will put up competitors to the Canon SL1 and similar small DSLRs. Then again, we all should be buying D800s anyway, according to the Gospel of St. DxO, patron saint of Banding-Hunting Band of DR Brothers.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Finally upgraded from 1st Gen EOS Rebel - Canon 7D
« on: August 02, 2013, 12:20:49 AM »
Is this the one you bought?  :P


7
EOS Bodies / Re: An Update on the 75+mp Camera in the Wild
« on: August 02, 2013, 12:15:36 AM »
Apparently some people are so busy pixel-peeping at 800% they forgot to read this notice highlighted in blue at the top of PZ's reviews:

Quote
Please note that the tests results are not comparable across the different systems. This does also apply for the new EOS tests based on the EOS 50D because of differences in the sensor system (e.g. AA-filter) as well as different RAW-converters.





8
EOS Bodies / Re: 'Revolutionary' Dual Pixel AF Explained
« on: July 28, 2013, 03:52:31 AM »
From the PDAF PDF:


Quote
Miyanari: “Even new EF lenses equipped with USM and STM that
had fast AF drive already, it could be proven that they were even faster,
and amongst the lenses that supported Dual Pixel CMOS AF, in particular
lenses developed awhile ago, and low priced lenses, you will find that the
effect of Dual Pixel CMOS AF is quite significant.”

9
EOS Bodies / Re: An Update on the 75+mp Camera in the Wild
« on: July 28, 2013, 03:22:45 AM »
Uh, that DR-obsessed guy reminds me of that notorious poster on the DPR Canon forums who is a self-confessed Nikon fanb0i and yet most of his posts are in the Canon forums (hint: his avatar is a balding cartoon guy drooling). That's like listening to good 'ole (also) self-confessed Nikon fan Thom Bombadil prognosticating about Canon roadmaps & future tech when it is in his financial interest to promote Nikon products because he is selling Nikon camera guidebooks that he himself wrote!  :P

10
EOS Bodies / Re: 'Revolutionary' Dual Pixel AF Explained
« on: July 28, 2013, 03:14:47 AM »
Birds in flight, you say? If this video doesn't convince you how fast Dual Pixel PDAF on the 70D is, I don't know what will.  It can track a BIF over a field (2nd video from the top of the page, around the 0:46 mark): http://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/70d/info/af-tech/index.html

After seeing this I'm even more convinced now about this revolutionary tech.  8)

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Dual Pixel AF Performance
« on: July 28, 2013, 03:11:35 AM »
Has anyone seen any videos of the auto focus continuous?
I want to now how well it would do with a constantly moving subject like a bride walking towards you down the aisle.


Do the brides you shoot move as fast as a bird flying over a field? This video shows how Dual Pixel PDAF on the 70D easily tracks a BIF over a field (2nd video from the top of the page, around the 0:46 mark): http://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/70d/info/af-tech/index.html

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Dual Pixel AF Performance
« on: July 05, 2013, 01:44:34 AM »
This is the way to test the Dual Pixel PDAF continuous AF tracking:

EOS 70D 「デュアルピクセルCMOS AF」 Small | Large


Unfortunately for Canon, the lens & firmware used for this test showed it can't keep up with the head of the train at close distance...

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Dual Pixel AF Performance
« on: July 04, 2013, 12:00:02 PM »
My observations:

- Ring USM is still faster than STM. STM is just for smoother & quieter focusing, not speed.

- I can't be sure due to the video quality, but it appears there is still some sort of CDAF-style "focus racking" (albeit minor), most apparent in the 1st & 3rd vids. It doesn't "snap" into focus like one would expect from PDAF.

- Not sure how the continuous AF tracking was set up for the 4th vid (or if it was even set up correctly at all), but it clearly showed that that particular L USM lens+body combo couldn't follow the hand as it moved backward & forward from the initial point of focus lock. I hope that's the worst case scenario already (too fast movement), and the firmware is still not yet finalized.

Overall, still pretty fast compared to existing solutions.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 04, 2013, 05:20:21 AM »
Yes, the above DPR preview doesn't contradict the info from CPN Europe. Notice there is no mention of AF point expansion & Spot AF in the list you quoted.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 04, 2013, 04:09:58 AM »
Confirmed from the Canon Europe 70D site: it may have the 7D's 19-pt sensor array & dedicated AF processor, but it doesn't have the same degree of flexibility & customizability. The 70D appears to only offer Single Point, Zone, and Auto 19-point; AF point Expansion and Spot AF are MIA. The dedicated AF area expansion button near the shutter button should have been made a programmable M.Fn button instead, just saying.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12