November 23, 2014, 11:18:19 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 338
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 22, 2014, 08:06:52 AM »
I browse this website quite often since 2012. I have never seen so many negative comments about Canon these days in comparison with before.

Here's my take:

For many, buying into a dslr system is a major investment you cannot revert w/o losing a lot of €€€ and time to re-learn procedures. And of course there's an emotional attachment to a brand that was in your pocket for all your life. For all this time, people were happy with Canon, keeping lenses longer and changing camera bodies more frequently. Canon made a good transition from film to digital.

But now, with mirrorless arriving and sony having more resources (and probably patents) for sensor research, I feel uneasiness grows if you've bet on the right horse. Canon might very well pull a rabbit out of the hat and surprise us all, but flat out denial that further sensor enhancement (dr or resolution) can be can be beneficial to some is counterproductive: No smoke without fire. Calling people names doesn't help either.

Furthermore, with more cpu power there are more opportunities to harvest this new resource - but Canon seems to be very set upon continuing exactly what they've done for the last decade. So apart from the hardware side, a very conservative software policy results in very stable, working products. But question if this balance won't tip to their disadvantage some time - Magic Lantern won't be around forever for the rescue like with focus peaking, raw histogram and raw video.

Last not least, there's the "value" aspect and the pure competition pressure from Nikon/Sony and 3rd party gear (lenses, flashes). If you are able to afford $15k+ gear, I imagine you're fine with Canon. But seeing what offers are around, you wonder if some rubber rings for weather sealing, a lens hood, ..., shouldn't be a given w/o buying their premium model(s).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D or 7D mkII?
« on: November 22, 2014, 07:48:52 AM »
If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C.
i don't know why people say that. there are a lot of good, reasonably priced uwa lenses for aps-c.

+1, actually uwa is the one area where aps-c excels: The mirror is smaller = the end of the ef-s lens is nearer to the sensor = you can build a better uwa for the same price since the construction is less demanding!

EOS Bodies / Re: what is the body you want to see canon release next ?
« on: November 22, 2014, 04:50:40 AM »
I really want Canon to give me a compelling reason to stick with their pro-DSLRs.

They do - selling and buying another brand amounts to a loss of money and getting used to another system :-> ... and then there's their cps service that's said to be good in comparison to what Nikon & Sony provide.

Technical Support / Re: 7D mark II battery drain
« on: November 22, 2014, 04:49:22 AM »
So far been really pleased with the body till I found out that it drains the battery flat in about 4 days while turned off.

You double-checked gps is off? Otherwise "off" mean (nearly) no battery drain with such an expensive product, and I only expect cheaper companies like Yongnuo to kill your batteries if you don't remove them physically.

Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM - Loud noise from IS
« on: November 22, 2014, 04:08:20 AM »
First, it does make noise during operation

... one of the reason why Canon introduced stm lenses!

Second, it only seems loud in otherwise silent environments.

In that case, your IS is fine - some IS systems (I mentioned the 100L) have the uncanny habit of producing scratching noises you can hear in *any* environment, and feel the lens vibrate and rock for a second.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D or 7D mkII?
« on: November 22, 2014, 03:04:12 AM »
This is an example of a picture of mine that I love

For 100% crop you probably won't be happy with a 7d2+f2.8 lens either for this. The shot shows motion blur, so 1/500s was too slow for this kind of movement - and with 1/1500s you'd be still @iso6400 with the 7d2 (if the shot was properly exposed).

Question is how much magnification you're interested in, i.e. if you are ok with downsized web resolution. If not, most of your shots on flickr I just looked at don't have thin dof *and* motion, but sometimes a bit slow shutter speed. For most movement from *afar* like basketball the 6d will be fine if you're ok with loosing some shots because the af screwed up. But all other lower light shots on your flickr stream would profit a lot from thinner dof of full frame and higher iso capability. Your call :-)

Note that rodeo with fast movement off center in lower light would be a problem for the 6d, but this is a really difficult scene and there's a reason people buy $15k pro gear like 1dx+600mm for this. With the 6d, focus & recompose you have to be ready to have a low keeper rate. With ff, you also lack the reach advantage of crop so your 200mm might be too short if you cannot get closer.

Post Processing / Re: POLL: Do you need to fill the histogram in post?
« on: November 21, 2014, 06:57:29 PM »
I use the histogram when shooting, not editing. I make sure that images are exposed properly in the camera, but after that the histogram does not get any attention.

Interesting how much the approaches differ - apart from the topic (fill the histogram or not) I often look at it in postprocessing to see the effect of operations on the channel distribution and if some channel clips. When starting with digital photography I was completely oblivious to it, but I find it more helpful the more I work with it. My impression is that is also speeds up recognizing what basic adjustments need to be done about the image.

This makes me miss Lightroom :( When I was doing proper editing (before my computer broke) I did fall into this habit. I think as others have said, you should do what looks good to you. But I liked the look I got this way

Good to know I'm not the only one. I just looked through a pic thread on CR, and on every other image I think "Come on, this is clipped as hell on both sides by too much contrast" or "Ugh, this looks way too flat, you should have looked at the histogram and not just at your personal output device (whatever that is)".

One advantage of this "semi-normalization" approach is that I can quickly see by now how much work (i.e. local editing) a shot will need, and I can improve by getting it better in camera next time. With a subjective "I edit it according to my current feeling" approach I doubt I'd learn as much from my mistakes.

Post Processing / Re: My RAW Processing Workflow
« on: November 21, 2014, 06:00:02 PM »
What secrets are there for website color-management.  I assumed that sRGB should be the right output.

It is. Do you have a wide-gammut monitor? When rendering sRGB on that, you need to be extra-careful - afaik a reason why pure web-devs prefer a high-quality sRGB monitor.

I'm not sure how to post an example of what I'm seeing.  I can say this... I know for certain that using Firefox or Chrome yields very different results than IE for viewing... with Firefox or Chrome being much more accurate than IE.

You can enable color management in some browsers, too. Chrome seems to be broken atm, IE seems to work by default, for Firefox see this link and try again:

Test web pages: and

Post Processing / Re: My RAW Processing Workflow
« on: November 21, 2014, 04:56:10 PM »
and I'm happy to expand on the why for any of the specific adjustments

It's indeed helpful, unfortunately too late for me as I've figured out a lot for myself before you posted it :-o

For specific enhancements that might be elaborated, imho the highlight & shadow controls of ACR might be a good point. That's because there are 2 times 3 different ways to adjust these, and I find each shot requires different options. As ACR's process version 2012 is "intelligent", it's not easy to predict what a slider does anyway because it always depends on the settings above in the ACR hierarchy:

  • highlights / shadows
  • whites / blacks
  • tone curve

Btw one annoying habit of ACR vs DxO is that if you recover highlights, often saturated color borders appear on edges - example: tree branches that reach into the sky get a blue border. The only way I know around this is to de-saturate that color (or probably wait for LR6).

EOS Bodies / Re: what is the body you want to see canon release next ?
« on: November 21, 2014, 04:25:03 PM »
* The ability to program the shutter button, so when it is pressed down half way, the autofocus points can be moved with the joystick on the back of the the Nikon D4

I guess this can be done through Magic Lantern, if you want it do a feature request in their forum.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Sending my 7D2 back due to high ISO noise
« on: November 21, 2014, 03:52:04 PM »
Although I'm sure there are folks who think the 5D3 has awesome AF. It's all relative I suppose.

Indeed. Try a 6d :-p

As a viewer, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to make of these things as I play around with them (e.g. "Ball, Fuzzy Boy; Boy, Fuzzy Ball".)

I agree changing the dof seems to be rather childish (like I laughed my a** off as a 5-year old when seeing a movie backwards). But I am impressed by the interactive 3d effect you can create when "focus-stacking" the whole dof region of the camera. Imho ( :-p ) It's not only nice to play around with, but you can even change the composition in post.

Post Processing / Re: POLL: Do you need to fill the histogram in post?
« on: November 21, 2014, 02:34:29 PM »
If the scene was a chess board then you would have very little between the spikes at close to black and close to white, if the scene was a grey card you would have one spike just below midpoint.

Indeed, that's why I was writing natural as in "grass, bush, tree, sky, horse" which usually results in one or two histogram bumps around the center (at least around where I live and shoot).

If there were blacks and whites in the scene then setting the black and white points makes complete sense, but very often we are missing one or both of those within the scene so introducing one or the other is 'painting yourself into a corner'.

That's just it: There are black and white in every scene, it just depends where you define the black and white point to be. Basically it's about how much you change the relative histogram distribution in post. Lazy /me usually doesn't change it lot, but I try to find reference areas I can pull towards the left or the right if possible.

For me (again, in "natural" scenes") having these white/black points results in a more pleasing look as my eye has a reference what white/black is supposed to be. Only then can I recognize "this image is low or high contrast", otherwise it could just be that the specific output device or print is high or low contrast by default.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony - Question of a Differing Variety
« on: November 21, 2014, 02:16:56 PM »
If it were possible at some point to get usable performance with adapted EF lenses, I think full transitions into the Sony ecosystem would be much more painless especially with some of the new features being offered in the latest body announcements.

It doesn't seem that easy as Canon doesn't release the lens protocol to everyone. Afaik some 3rd party lens manufacturers licensed it, and some tried to reverse engineer it. For the latter group, there's always some hassle and the danger they could have gotten something wrong and the next Canon lens won't work anymore. And Canon certainly won't help Sony/Nikon/Whatever use their lenses, it's one of the few things they've left in the competition.

Fyi the newest Canon bodies (5d3,1dx) and lens generations have enhanced af precision, usable only in this combination. I doubt 3rd party manufacturers have gotten around to tap into this yet.

EOS Bodies / Re: what is the body you want to see canon release next ?
« on: November 21, 2014, 02:13:23 PM »
Mad small & cheap yo.

Your wish might become reality - Yongnuo already cloned the 50/1.4, maybe they get around to release a whole Canon-mount dslr sooner or later :-)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 338