January 28, 2015, 07:09:36 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 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 371
2056
EOS Bodies / Re: L Lenses for crop bodies
« on: November 22, 2013, 08:33:07 AM »
The only real "crop factor advantage" is that the sensors are cheaper, and thus the cameras they are in are also cheaper.

... and the mirror is smaller, so with the same level of engineering of the 1dx a crop body could get a much higher fps than a ff - at least it's my guess that the mirror size and mass is the limiting factor. Of course this is very unlikely to happen even with the 7d2 since mirrorless gets a much, much higher fps at no cost.

Another "crop factor advantage" that comes to my mind is that you can put it into smaller (and shallower mirrored) bodies, I always found that a crop sensor in a 7d size body looks very strange and lost.

Sony currently is going for latter, here in Germany the environment is plastered with Sony adverts not only telling us they own 50%+ of the sensor market, but showing their new mirrorless aps-c right next to their traditional dlsr line, comparing the size in a way favoring the mirrorless design as it has the same iq in a smaller package.

2057
Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 22, 2013, 08:20:40 AM »
Light gathering with f1.0 vs f1.2 isn't important to me, it's the dof.

My suspicion is that some people might not be precise when choosing terms for what they want - personally, I want strong background blur (subject isolation, no background distraction) & nice bokeh (interesting look and highlights). What I usually do not want is thin dof because at larger print/view sizes most of the subject is out of focus unless it's 90 degrees angle to the lens.

Now thin dof and strong blur are interdependent, but you can also get a strong blur by changing the focal length and camera-subject-background relation w/o the negative side effects of thin dof, which is what I'm usually trying to do... it really depends if you're a fan of the "only one eye in focus" shot type.

2058
EOS Bodies / Re: L Lenses for crop bodies
« on: November 22, 2013, 07:12:32 AM »
I'd bet most or even all of your 6D + Canon lens combos would beat the 70D + Sigma lens combos for AF speed and accuracy.

That might be true for speed, but I'd wager to guess not necessarily for accuracy because ...

1. the 3rd party lack of speed would be to gain an adequate accuracy, and the 6D system (unlike 1dx/5d3) doesn't have seem to have the closed loop system and cannot use the improved accuracy of Canon's latest lenses.

2. the missing x-point @f2.8 of the 6d will loose a lot of accuracy in real world comparisons even with a Canon lens so the 70d+Sigma with a better center point might be more than up on par.

Last not least, the af performance of either system in absolute terms is very good even if there are relative differences, meaning the optical performance matters more for usual print/view sizes and not shooting sports or events.

2059
Lenses / Re: Ken Rockwell reviews canon 50mm f/1.0
« on: November 22, 2013, 06:41:49 AM »
And if Canon made a new one, being the same size and even being heavier than the 85 L at 4500 usd , I would stop writing this sentence and place the order.

From a marketing perspective I don't quite understand Canon not updating or releasing a f1.0 lens - given all the enthusiasts with deep pockets out there they'll sell tons of it no matter the price.

Most likely Canon feels that using digital sensors and esp. the upcoming high mp versions the light gain of f1.4+ is too little since today's cameras can only harvest a small part of it and the manufacturer has to cheat raising ISO. Last not least as argued and the usability of such a thin dof is extremely small, and again the larger the sensor resolution gets people looking @100% crop are bound to complain.





2060
I disagree that -2LV is "enough", though.

I think we agree this is not about agreement, but just about if some shooting styles requires it or not...

If I understand it correctly, -2LV means @f2.8 (the fastest speed you'd expect the af to work flawlessly and not require mf tricks) and iso12800 (arguably the fastest speed that makes a residual sense) ... 1/4s. Personally, I'm unlikely to shoot with 1/4s handheld requiring phase af, let alone 1/2s of -3LV.

The one situation where -3LV might make sense for me is with a IS prime which axes up to 4 stops from non-IS handheld, and @24mm you just might be able to handhold 1/2s if you've got low blood pressure... but I don't have such a lens, so it's not necessary for me, I'm more interested in *fast* phase af at lower light levels.

2061
Needless to say the images sucked but it focused ok

Indeed :-> ... and that's why -2LV is probably enough for available light shooting, -3LV imho only makes sense if you want to flash something but don't want to use the af assist (or don't have the flash on camera).

The one thing that might be interesting if a -3LV camera is faster at focusing @-2LV than one onle rated for -2LV peak - but I haven't read anything conclusive on this yet, just quick/subjective tests.

For simple "shoot in the dark" on tripod there are alternative solutions like Magic Lantern which can boost your LV to work as a night mode, then you can contrast af or just use focus peaking.

2062
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 19, 2013, 05:11:17 PM »
I'm going to go with "not cheap" as a baseline. If they only lose 50% of their chips per wafer that's $50-$500 per sensor in raw materials. I guess that's a big spread, but the possibilities are kind of scary to think about.

If I understand pp11 correctly at 0% loss worst case a raw ff sensor would be $250 ($5000/20) - strangely the article gives such a large price span for a dslr-sensor quality wafer, so I guess the cost would be much lower than this to prevent doing the exact calculation we're trying to do.

The big question is how much yield they get, maybe not as much as in computer processors as these are designed to work around defective circuits while on a dslr sensor a big flaw cannot be covered up.

Btw the paper is from 2006 and the aps-h advantage seems to have gone by now - maybe a lot of other things have also changed since then.

2063
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 18, 2013, 12:53:38 PM »
but remember just based on size, a full frame sensor will always be roughly three times the cost to manufacture as a crop sensor

... now the one thing that would be really, really interesting how much in *absolute* $$$ a ff sensor costs - ff cameras aren't so expensive just because of the sensor, but because they add other expensive features (yes, even the 6d...) and have a price premium as they produce the best dslr iq.

2064
Software & Accessories / Re: 5D III - SD card that will write fast?
« on: November 18, 2013, 11:34:28 AM »
All interesting stuff.  I wish that canon had just installed 2 CF slots.  Would have made more sense to me.

Then guess why the 1dx has dual cf slots while the 6d has single sd :-> ... Canon is really good at deliberate juggling with specs, while the mediocre speed on the 5d3 is probably unintentional while in the 6d canon didn't find it necessary (even with uhs-1 max 40mb/s).

Anything faster than the 45mbps card like the one below is pretty much a waste

It's not so much about the max read speed on the card, but cards vastly differ in write speed and how long they can sustain it - for example some 16gb cards are much lower than their 32gb brothers, a micro-sd with an adapter is much slower than full sd even if the cards says otherwise. Be sure to read reviews about the very exact sd card you're trying to buy.

2065
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 18, 2013, 04:30:06 AM »
Time is flying at the moment so in my mind, at least, it won't be long before the 7D-II is released  ;D

But not before at least a dozen of other [CR2] threads pop up about the 7d2, of course quickly followed by a couple of [CR3] before the announcement :-p ... this shows how slow 2013 has been for Canon in the enthusiast/semipro market segment :-o

2066
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Safe to clean the sensor?
« on: November 16, 2013, 06:33:53 PM »
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/04/how-to-clean-a-camera-sensor

^^^ this, I do it their way and it works just fine - why go for a fluid which might leave residue when the dry method works?

Cleaning a sensor so you it's spotless even @f32 and to all edges is more difficult as it seems though, but few of us will shoot uniform areas at closed aperture so that the specks show.

2067
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D Custom Settings Help Requested
« on: November 16, 2013, 11:20:58 AM »
Also, are they 'Global settings', or just for a C1, C2 or C3?

All camera settings including the C.Fn custom settings are individual to C1/2/3 and the rest (Av/Tv/M/...).

Mostly the C dial settings are either used to *quickly* get to different settings (like static/moving wildlife) or for very different settings like normal shooting and tripod macro which would be a pita to manually set each time otherwise.

The C.Fn setting most useful would be of course the af tracking settings and the button assignment while I find most of the others are really set once and forget - at least one the cheaper cameras like my 60d/6d, on the 1d there seem to be lots of more things to customize to your liking part of which is covered by Magic Lantern for the rest of us.

Two settings are important though: C.Fn I-1 (exposure level increments) and C.Fn I-2 (speed setting increments), for stills shooting you'd want to choose full iso stops only and either decide if to use 1/2 and 1/3 ev and stick to it because you'll get used to these settings after some time.

Last not least "autofocus micro afjustment" is buried as a C.Fn setting while it is very important if you're using fast lenses, you will want to check if you need this if you haven't done so already (use either free Magic Lantern dot_tune or FoCal software or a measuring tape).

2068
many people seem to hate the 6D AF system but it is actually very reliable at least the center point is.

"Hate" is probably the wrong word, it's about knowing the limitations, try to work around them (or not) and make an educated decision if spending nearly double the amount of money for 5d3 is "worth it" because of the af system.

the center AF point of it is more sensitive than any AF point of the 1DX , the 5D3 or my D800E.
I tested my D800E vs my 6D vs my D600 vs rented 5d3 in lowlight , the 6D actually handled extreme lowlight best, no contest here.

These tests are always interesting, but only if you can give the LV of the scene (iso, shutter, aperture, lens used), i.e. when the 6d starts to outperform the other cameras. That's because the 5d3 is supposed to af up to -2LV which already should cover most situations, so the question is how often you encounter -3LV and when the 6d af starts getting faster even above -2LV than the competition...

2069
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 13, 2013, 06:34:16 PM »
Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR.....  ;D ;D ;D

Won't happen, this is exactly what Nikon/Sony patented (exmor) and so far Canon doesn't seem to be willing to license it, just as they devised their own operating System (DryOS) rather than license an existing one. For Canon, it's all about high iso, look at their latest line of ultra low-light security cams.

2070
Software & Accessories / Re: software for correcting distortion
« on: November 13, 2013, 05:58:19 PM »
...my 2gb hd is now nearly full ...
2 GB?!?  You using a computer from 1996??   :o

Well, the speed of my laptop certainly sometimes feels like 1996 :-o but as you guessed this was a typo, I'm actually using a patent-pending holography quantum storage with 2pb, that's why I had only money left for a 6d :-p

Pages: 1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 371