October 20, 2014, 05:03:06 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 321
16
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Yongnuo YN600EX-RT now available for $186
« on: October 17, 2014, 02:45:02 PM »
Now seeing it available for $186 blows my mind. I was expecting it to be ~$250. Was anyone else looking forward to this flash?

I'm really looking forward to a working and *reliable* Canon 600ex clone. The new Yn being priced so low and near their bare-bones transmitter makes me suspicious though, there might be strings attached - so lets for real-world real user reviews from people who know their flash photography.

This is because after the complaints about the Yn transmitter, one popular argument was "Well, this is made for the Chinese market and for that price you cannot expect the same performance as the Canon, can you?"

17
Software & Accessories / Re: Windows 7 install
« on: October 17, 2014, 02:40:46 PM »
Can anyone give me an idea how long it will take to do a 'clean' install of Windows 7 ???  It will be installed on a new machine with an Intel i7 4790 4GHz processor and 16GB of DDR3 RAM.

Easiest way: get a Windows iso (cd image) file, dump it on a usb stick, boot & install from that. Lots of tutorials around the net for this. There are also custom windows isos around the net that have all recent updates already in place "slipstreamed", and there's nothing dodgy about that, you simply activate them with your very own retail windows key. Think "murphy78".

Also, are there any potential pitfalls to be on the lookout for ???

Not really, the installation of the newer windows versions is very streamlined and if you've got standard components all essential drivers required are already there.  One possible pitfall is partition size - you probably don't want one large partition, but a system and data one. Im that case don't chose a system partition size too small. Good luck!

18
Street & City / Re: Famous icons in your city
« on: October 16, 2014, 02:40:54 PM »
Hey guys, how you going!

Interesting thread, I guess when you're living near some sights there's no way around taking some pictures of them sooner or later. Here are two snaps from my town, probably almost pictured as often as the pyramids - or at least so it appears if you count the people with dslrs in the vicinity on a good day :-p


19
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 15, 2014, 02:40:39 PM »
That was my point, I don't see any intentional crippling.  People griped about it and it got re-added

People complaining had nothing to do with it, or they could have simply re-added it with a 60d firmware upgrade. But of course they didn't because they removed it to protect the 7d1 in the first place..

The reason why it has been re-added to the 70d would be because they added other crippling (removal of spot af from the 7d1->70d) and the 7d2 is so much better than the 70d that Canon seems to see no harm in giving afma to the 70d. Of course afma isn't in any Rebel, people griping or not...

20
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 15, 2014, 11:57:01 AM »
Saying "no RAW option" is just foolish -- the S95 had RAW.  Comments like these don't make sense at all.

Your sensible opinion is very much appreciated - I should have amended a :-p to the above comment. That doesn't affect the gist of my argument though, but please do feel free to elaborate your thoughts in your own, well placed words.

All Canon would have to do to a 6DMKII for it to sell like hotcakes is to upgrade the AF system on it.
Of course Canon are aware of that - but why would they want to do such a thing?
So that people buy the 6DII and not the D750 ???

Won't happen, see the initial 5d3 pricing vs. the high-mp d800 and the d610 vs. the current 6d1. Except pros with special requirements few people are volatile enough to switch brands, meaning new usability and exchanging all brand gear for a lot of hassle and loss of money.

What people do is complain in the forums, but those who wanted to switch to exmor/high mp/d6x0 are already gone. The bulk of the Canon shooters left either doesn't know, doesn't care or will take a lot of punishment by crippled cameras or high prices.


21
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 15, 2014, 08:20:31 AM »
Canon did exactly that though. They crippled as much as possible whilst still getting sales.

I'm sure they'll learn from that experience and either cripple the 6d2 even more (like in now raw option?) or move both 6d2 and 5d4 up €1000 :->

22
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 15, 2014, 07:26:01 AM »
All Canon would have to do to a 6DMKII for it to sell like hotcakes is to upgrade the AF system on it.

Of course Canon are aware of that - but why would they want to do such a thing? They'd rather have the more expensive 5d3/5d4 sell like hotcakes and leave the 6d1/6d2 for those who would otherwise switch brands w/o an "entry"-ff camera from Canon available.

If you look at the 6d1, it's not a camera born out of enthusiasm or pride to deliver the best product possible, but a pure necessity. Lucky us you can still take great shots with it once you manage to get something in focus.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 02:43:40 PM »
Personally I think it's funny it took Nikon 4 cameras to compete with the 5d3.

If it would be Canon, people would call it clever because Nikon managed to sell 4 models to their customers before they now all want to upgrade to the d750 :-p

24
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 09:12:18 AM »
I think most people would rather see a $1499 full frame camera, but Canon seems to be marketing the EOS 7D Mark II on par with the 6D as far as image quality goes, so that might drive the 6D upwards, which in turn could also move the next EOS 5D body up as well.

Agreed, that sounds just like Canon, they like to have a straight model lineup and an overlap crop/ff is bound to "confuse" customers and prevents them from being upsold to the next, "better" model. And if Canon are happy with the current 6d sales, it means less expensive Nikon/Sony models with more features don't hurt them.

This in itself doesn't mean anything about the 6d2 release though, I'd be surprised if they'd upgrade the 6d1 before releasing a 5d4.

25
Lenses / Re: Do date codes matter?
« on: October 14, 2014, 09:06:31 AM »
For other lenses, it can be important.  Take the long in the tooth 100 - 400.  This lens has been around for 16 years and while an L lens, the push - pull mechanism seems to be a dust magnet.

Good point, most like plastic/sealing parts also age with, well, age.

And if they do matter, and if I'm buying the lens online (say, from B&H) how would I verify that I'm buying the later / "better" date code version?

You can try add this kludge to the order ("only if datecode after xyz") I doubt a large retailer will take the hassle unpack the lens & decode the date - but you don't know unless you try. With smaller online retailers or esp. a local shop, try probably want the sale of an expensive L lens bad enough to have a look.

26
Photography Technique / Re: Noise in 5D III - Concern or my fault?
« on: October 14, 2014, 07:01:25 AM »
My understanding is for some of the "expansion" of the ISO, the lower is pushed and the upper is pulled, and the pulled ones, because under exposed, are cleaner. You are losing some DR, but you gt less noise, so if that is your concern, 160 will produce less noise than 100 or 200.

Generally, "pulling" means just digitally(!) moving the data to the left side of the histogram, the "analog" sensor setting is exactly the same as in the base iso it's "pulled" from. It's all bout Canon's very high read noise that drowns dynamic range on lower iso (hence the flat nearly flag dr curve at the start != Nikon exmor). But "160 better than 100" is an urban legend, at least with the camera models I have (60d 18mp sensor & 6d).

Read this where I've asked the Magic Lantern people about this, and their answers are in-depth: "Do have iso160-multiples have more dr & less noise?" http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9867.0

27
Photography Technique / Re: DoF question
« on: October 14, 2014, 06:08:56 AM »
Sorry if this has been answered before

The activity in this forum would stall if people would get used to using the search option, so ... :-p

but I wonder if someone could explain to me how to derive the relation between DoF and f number.

Smart question, because you noticed that the f-number is important, and not the physical aperture (I only learned this recently)

Say that I have determined that using a 50mm lens and f/6.3 I have enough of the picture in focus to do a family shot (let's not debate this, it's just an example).  If I move twice as far away from the family and use a 100mm lens (to achieve the same framing of the subject), can I still use f/6.3 or do I need a different setting?

To just find out the result, you can simply use your trusty dof calculator like here:  ... http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html ... for your example:

Family @5m with 50mm =  standard dof 4.4m (in front 1.37 m (31%) / behind 3.03 m (69%))
Family @10m with 100mm =  standard dof 3.91m (in front 1.59 m (41%) / behind 2.32m (59%))

Which proves the rule of thumb that with shorter focal length the dof distribution is 1/3:2/3, with longer lenses it gets nearer to 50/50. And it demonstrates why small f-numbers with long lenses gets tricky, the dof is becoming very thin - for example with my 70-300/f5.6 I often need to step up to get the subject in focus, no matter how bokehlicious it would look If I had a f2.8.

Beyond a simple yes or now, can someone explain the basic optics here (as at least a quasi-math rule of thumb).  I would even be happy with a pointer to a detailed analysis.

I'll let the CR heavyweights post the maths behind it, but from a simple users' pov you should read a thread like here why dof is just the subjective(!) "acceptable" sharpness and depends so much on print/view size: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15884.msg293901#msg293901

28
Photography Technique / Re: Noise in 5D III - Concern or my fault?
« on: October 14, 2014, 04:21:29 AM »
Bad choice, only use full iso stops (100/200/400/...) or you lose image quality.
I am fairly certain that is an urban legend with no basis in reality.

Well, I'm not one of the CR heavyweights, but in this point I'm positive: The Magic Lantern guys have tested the iso steps a lot, and you simply need to look at the dr values of intermediate iso stops: When shooting raw anything except full iso stops just nudges the data left or right, so you gain nothing, but lose dynamic range.

Edit: Due to Canon's read noise problem, iso160 can have an itsy-bitsy-tiny amount of more dynamic range than iso200, but nothing to write home about. Imho it doesn't justify getting confused about the iso settings, if you need more dr just use Magic Lantern's dual_iso (at low iso) and/or wait for their upcoming mini_iso module providing +1/3-1/2ev more dr for free with no hassle attached.

29
.... but the reality is that there is very little of the picture where this extended range would have made a difference and in the end, you probably could not notice the difference.

Here's an example of this from today, the sky was clipped, but after some brushing around in LR it doesn't matter since it was all grey anyway (well, bluish grey).  I call the shot "Thinking of DR discussions" :->

30
EOS Bodies / Re: AA Filter: Still Relevant, Marketing Ploy, or Obsolete?
« on: October 12, 2014, 05:07:12 PM »
If anti-aliasing is so hard to do, then how do computer games have 16x AA filters running at video game frame rates?

:-p, indeed, probably we should replace the (analog, optical) real life we shoot with (digital) cgi - then we can just upsample, downsample and postprocess do our heart's desire.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 321