October 02, 2014, 01:16:31 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 5 ... 313
31
I've updated the original post with a set of example images from this weekend.

Thanks for all this work, it is interesting. One the one hand, as expected (at least by me :-p) there is a clear difference in shadow resolution, but fortunately for us Canon people you really have to push the exposure to see it. The difference in tonality is there, but you need side-by-side shots and Canon seems to be "good enough" for what I do. Last not least, I reckon the 6d has improved a bit over the older 5d3 in the deep shadow department.

One experiment would be nice though: Do a blind test or deliberately exchange and mis-label the Sony/Canon shots next time and see how many people still comment that Canon is sub-par and really needs to get a grip :-p

32
Canon General / Re: How Soon We Forget!
« on: September 30, 2014, 03:20:42 AM »
So there's this "swagger factor" that can be applied, too.  But only if you own the "right" stuff.   ;) ;) ;)

Having a big white lens really helps. I vividly imagine the crowd in the local zoo parting in recognition of "here come's the pro" even with my mediocre 60d :-). So my ego has to thank Canon for painting the 70-300L white, as there's absolutely no technical reason to do so - there are no fluorite elements, and the lens isn't really large.

33
Canon General / Re: How Soon We Forget!
« on: September 30, 2014, 02:50:13 AM »
With all the chatter today about needing more MP or DR, let's not forget where we were just 10-years ago.  For those of you under 30-years-old, 10-years ago seems like a lifetime.  For those of us over 60-years-old, 10-years ago seems like yesterday!

I'm in between, but I skipped the first generations of dslr cameras because the evolution was so fast and the (precious) money seemed wasted to me. I only re-entered with the "good enough" 60d and 18mp sensor, so my memories only include the film area:

* EOS 620 (1/4000s shutter, 1/250 x-sync) and Canon technical date back ... great camera. You could simply exchange the grip for a bigger one for bigger hands, nowadays you have to buy a semi-pro camera for that :-p ... http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/eoscamera/620/
 
* EOS RT: nearly zero shutter lag and you can see the moment the picture is taken which all other dslrs don't manage because of the mirror blackout. Loved it ... http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/eoscamera/EOS-RT/

I think there's photographers and there's people who talk photography. For photographers, it's important to take pictures, for the others, it's all about chat-chat-chat!

I don't see this distinction at all, you can very well like chatting about THE next great lens or body that will rule them all, and still be able to have a serious, quality and matter-of-fact photog side. But for me, the strangest user category bordering on schizophrenic are those posting in an internet forum that people should get a life and participating is a waste of time :->

34
We can't know for sure because it would only have recorded it if he was logged in to the forum.

But we do know how many responses you can generate from a trollish post, that's the Internet for you: 39 and counting...

35
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Posting about sensors and DR!
« on: September 30, 2014, 02:22:20 AM »
And that is what the debate is all about.... cleaner images. We all want the same thing

Nope, I disagree here: For me, dr is not about cleaner images, but about being able to capture a high-contrast scene with movement at all.  This is my one and only point in the whole discussion.

Yes, you can do perfect exposure all the time to make use of 100% of the histogram, you can do extreme postprocessing and lift shadows until you end up with 1 bit resolution, you can even try to bracket scenes with movement and composite bright parts like the sky.

But basically, for me this is about speed, flexibility and freedom of shooting what you want - ignoring that these matter is lacking a bit of imagination what windy landscape/journalism/daylight spots & wildlife/... might need.

so why are we attacking each other over this. Let's get along and try to be respectful.

+1 for that, the reason why CR is the only forum I participate in are the (usually...) nice and helpful interaction between regulars and new members alike. This and and the invisible pro moderation w/o "cleaning up" threads or throwing rules around in every thread.

I understand it is annoying if people feel some point is ignores because of brand loyalism, or on  the other side of trolling or lack of photography knowledge. But personally, I feel we've got a very low level of either fanboyism or trolling around CR - look at some other forums and then return happily to CR :-)

36
What causes the annoying halo?

It's caused by the hdr software being dumb and just assembling the source brackets according to exposure with no concern for the image content (how could it?). I find this to be a great problem with a *lot* of tonemapped shots, even with ones that are considered good by their authors.

Esp. with parts of trees or something else tall reaching into the sky, it's a halo and/or the top part of the object going suddenly very dark. The latter probably like our eye sees the world, but it isn't supposed to be in a single image.

37
There is no such thing as "accurate colors" from RAW files, nothing can be rendered without a camera profile/picture style (well it can but you don't want to see it, it is green and dark with no contrast and a gamma of 1.0) choose one better to your liking, it is as simple as that.

Good point there, and it's easy to miss since at least in Lightroom the most important setting is at the last position of the development module - so usually you get to work with "Adobe Standard" which, after some consideration, is not my choice.

38
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: iPhone 6 gets an Exmor
« on: September 29, 2014, 03:45:58 PM »
Is this a Good Thing™ or a Bad Thing™?

This is a Totally Awsome™ thing because now we can intimidate all these Nikon fanboys by stating that even mobile phones have their Sony sensor, so it cannot be any good! And anyway, who wants to own a camera from a manufacturer that cannot even produce its own sensors :-p

39
bracket the scene, let loose the tonemapping app of your choice and dial everything to 11!

My first entry is also my very first hdr shot, right after buying my shiny new 60d! Seemed like "instant art" to me back then :-p

40
Now we know we're all great photogs, well, at least we would be if our cameras would have more resolution and dynamic range :-p. But there is an infamous fix for the latter: bracket the scene, let loose the tonemapping app of your choice and dial everything to 11!

Looking at the neighboring "best hdr shots" thread, I've got the impression that a typical photog evolution seems to include loving surreal hdr shots with histogram inversion (i.e. parts that were darker in the original now is brigher). So here's your chance to show courage and let the world see your very early creations!

Note 1: Please only link/post your own shots and not those of others around CR, even if it is tempting :->

Note 2: No cheating, only real skeletons in your closet, unlike saying "My weaknesses are perfectionism and forgetting to cash in my overtime slips" in a job interview.

41
Lenses / Re: Yongnuo 50mm f1.4 AF lens
« on: September 29, 2014, 10:59:15 AM »
Are the Chinese lens copies now coming?

Probably, but the thread copies are coming for sure :-p ... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22957.0

42
Lenses / Re: 50mm f/1.4 Canon vs. Sigma
« on: September 29, 2014, 12:53:25 AM »
You're actually asking if a €900 Sigma with 77mm from 2014 is an upgrade vs a €300 58mm Canon from 2005?
The Canon is from 1993.

Thanks, my mistake, I simply looked up the Amazon (sold since) line :-o ... it beat my imagination it's such an old lens.

I, too, am waiting for Canon to refresh the 50 1.4 with IS like they did with the 28 and 35.

Probably the very same reason why the 7d2 was delayed so long: They don't find a "sweet" performance/price spot in the market to compete with Sigma (like Nikon for cameras) without cannibalizing their own high-end lineup (the 50/1.2, like 7d2 vs. 5d3).

43
The way LR reports tonality, it's POST-render!!! In the Exmor, there is WAAAY more tonality in the region that LR reports as the bottom 5% than in the Canon file. I believe it is extremely misleading to utilize LR's dropper tool to measure tonality, since it is not measuring the linear data.

Interesting point, I didn't know that (cannot read all posts about dr :-))

I really screwed up my knee, and weather is blowing in rather fiercely now. I can hardly walk, so hiking up to my landscape spots (Long Lake is a great one, but it's a decent hike up past Brainard Lake, which is a nice area...and I can't take any hikes like that now. :().

Get better soon! If you can manage sooner or later I'd also like to see some comparison images esp. in connection with the low 5% tonality you described.

I am using Magic Lantern to boost the dynamic range, but with the way it works it reduces detail in the very high and low histogram regions where just one part of the interlaced image caputres data. If you happen to have installed ML by now and reached dual_iso in the menu, maybe you can also include a 100/800 and 100/400 ML shot - that would be conclusive.

44
Lenses / Re: 50mm f/1.4 Canon vs. Sigma
« on: September 28, 2014, 04:14:24 PM »
Not asking if it's an upgrade, asking if it'a worth it and asking which has the better looking bokeh.

As always, "worth it" has to be a trade of between your budget and the Sigma's performance - but ignoring this factor, the newer lens blows the Canon out of the water in every aspect and then some (bokeh depends on the lens' diameter - 58mm vs. 77mm ...).

45
Reviews / Re: Canon 16-35 F4 Review vs. 17-40 Shootout
« on: September 28, 2014, 04:11:20 PM »
From the reviews i have seen i noticed that some people have really bad EF 17-40mm copies.

That's always a problem with pro or amateur lens reviews alike - they've only got one copy, and seldom bother to check vs. other reviews if their sample might have issues.

Personally, I had to replace my first 17-40L copy because of bad performance and decentering. To tell what you might really get, LensRentals seems to be the only place having stacks of lenses to test and compare.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 313