March 01, 2015, 08:16:01 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 4 ... 14
EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII vs Samsung NX1
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:55:48 AM »
Although I can certainly get great action photos by planning my shots and pre-focusing, having usable continuous autofocus makes a camera much, much more versatile to me. But so far, I've been disappointed with the continuous autofocus performance of almost every mirrorless camera I've used.* Even with these new hybrid AF systems, I still get better continuous autofocus results from most entry-level DSLRs. I was hoping the NX30 would be an exception to that rule.

Unfortunately, the NX30 falls into the disappointing category when it comes to continuous autofocus performance. I have about twenty years of experience shooting high-speed action with autofocus SLRs, including motorsports, cycling, snow sports, etc. With the DSLRs I usually use, I get consistent in-focus high-speed bursts of subjects accelerating towards me. That was not the case with the NX30, though.

I tried all kinds of variations in focus area, point position and focal length, but no matter what I did, the camera's AF system wasn't able to keep up with even relatively slow-moving mountain bikers -- at least not with the 18-55mm and 55-250mm zoom lenses I had for testing. As a control, I also tried shooting bursts as I walked towards a brick wall in bright sunlight. That's a focusing task I think the camera should handle easily. At walking speeds, I did get better results, especially with the 18-55mm kit lens, but they still weren't good enough for me to risk with serious, irreplaceable photo opportunities.

The bottom line is that I need consistent, predictable and accurate performance, and the NX30's continuous autofocus did not provide that -- at least not for the mountain biking that I shoot most of the time. I can't afford to gamble with iffy autofocus. To be fair, the NX30's continuous AF was on-par with most mirrorless cameras I've used, and I was still able to get plenty of great action photos using single AF, planning my shots and pre-focusing. For any kind of racing or paid commercial work, though, I'd leave the NX30 at home and bring one of my trustworthy DSLRs.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:44:21 AM »
The trolling OP, based on his few posts and newly-made account, obviously just made this thread to rile up the fanb0is, notice he never bothered to post here again, and is probably laughing his N0inky a$$ out at the number of posters and replies his thread manged to ensnare. Mods should have closed this thread early on since it's obviously troll-bait and the discussion has been covered in numerous other threads before and since.

If I wanted to read threads like this I would have just gonr to the DPR forums, where the Nikon guys have more posts in the Canon subforum than in their own subforum. Isn't that right bobn2? :P

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:38:14 AM »
50 pages of trolling based on exactly 0 images from this yet-to-be-released camera? I would like to ask the basis for the assumption that this body would have the same sensor as on the 70D. Or is that based on exactly 0 shreds of evidence as well?

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII vs Samsung NX1
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:28:30 AM »
Man, I couldn't wait to use the NX1 with its fine selection of 3 lenses. :P

Given the current state of the art in on-sensor PDAF, the question is how many of those 15FPS would be in focus shooting moving subjects? It would be lucky to get 3 in focus.

I have also just watched the opening match between Brazil & Croatia, and for the duration of the match I have seen several times a non-gripped body attached to a Canon long white supertele, there appears to be several photographers with that setup scattered around the stadium. That is mildly interesting to me since I am used to seeing mostly 1-series bodies or (less commonly) the equivalent Nikon ones being used for matches at this level. I really don't think pros sent by wire agencies, big international newspapers and magazines to cover this event would be using 5D3s or, worse, 7Ds. At the very least they should be using a grip for better balance while using those superteles on these smaller bodies, if that's what they have to use, which I doubt.

OT: As for the match itself, I think that Jap referee erred in giving that very soft penalty that led to the 2nd Brazilian goal, that Brazilian player was already falling down even before he got a mild touch from the opposing Croat player. Ruined the game for me. I must say Brazil was unimpressive, I really expect better from the hosts and one of the favorites. They don't seem to be good at keeping possession or defense. I think they would get exposed by a better attacking team than Croatia. Croatia played better than I expected, I actually wanted them to win or at least get a draw, they deserved that at least.

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.

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

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

Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 25, 2014, 05:27:01 AM »
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)

Also read this book:

How to Lie with Statistics:

Quote 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

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:

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.

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

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:

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.

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

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.”

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

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):

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

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14