August 30, 2014, 06:48:01 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 - Aglet

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64
1
Just got one for my MFT mount Oly E-M10.  I'm really looking forward to making some images with this thing.
For a mere $220, delivered, this has to be the undervalued lens deal of the year!
It's corner-to-corner sharp, wide open, on MFT.  Not sure how it fares on the NEX.

I thought the moderate 2.8 aperture would be a bit of a bokeh handicap but it's likely to be just fine for most of the shots I'll use it for and the bokeh is looking pretty smooth on the few scenes I've composed with it so far.
Min focus distance is about enough to make  a bit more than the palm of my hand fit the whole frame.
It even includes a nice nylon carrying case and a hood.

If you've been craving the impressive performance of the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 but balk at the cost, this is a lot more affordable and darn near as sharp if you check the charts on DxOmark.

Some outlining and a bit of onionskin on out of focus highlites is the worst thing I can see about its performance. 
AF is quick and almost silent, likely suitable for video even with in-camera mic's.

It's not very large physically either, tho it is a bit odd looking with the smooth finished barrel, all of which is an MF ring.

I recommend it, good value for the money, especially at this price.

www.sigmaphoto.com/product/60mm-f28-dn-a

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:13:31 PM »
Yeah, the shutter/mirror slap on the 5D III is pretty amazing. Even close up, it isn't really loud. It's actually got a somewhat complex sound, a mix of a slap, a thud, and a "clink"...maybe the sounds together help cancel each other out and that's what minimizes noise. Either way, it's MUCH more pleasant than the 7D slap.

..  and far better than the barn-door-in-a-gale whack of the 5d2.

3
Landscape / Re: Blue Hour scenes
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:10:28 PM »
I really like this picture. Nicely done Aglet.
Thanks.
I might get all photoshop on it tho, if I get motivated.  because of obstacles I was not able to position myself exactly where I wanted to be to juxtapose the foreground and background elements into better positions.  So I may be tempted to move some things to create a better overall balance.  but I was happy to get something decent as a starting point.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:07:12 PM »
Quote
So you are asserting that you get "crisper" shots from the D800 at 3200iso, and 1/6 second @ f4.5 handheld than you did from the Canon at 200iso, and 1/400 second @ f8 (sunny 16 exposure for "bright sunlight")  with the 70-200 f2.8 IS MkII? Or just over EV1 with no contrast compared to EV12 with great contrast.

nope, that's not what I said

Quote
That makes no sense.

that's cuz it's not what I said.  You're trying to pull my statement into la-la-land to make it look absurd.

I just happened to supply a 1 stop slower shutter example at 3200iso as it's still sharp enough to print large and look good even if standing closer than "normal viewing distance" for that size print.
At base to 400 or 800 iso, and as slow as 1/15s with my 70-200 @ 200mm, I can still get very crisp images.  So I'm not up to listening to anybody's nonsense that Nikon lenses can't supply enough sharpness to be used by a 36MP sensor or that there's so much vibration without using a tripod and MLU that you can't still obtain a crisp shot.


Quote
Also, if you are happy to print at 153dpi I understand why we have these differences of opinion.

what's wrong with 150 PPI (not dpi) for a 48" print?
how close do you expect to be viewing it from?
HAHA!  or are you not a pixel-peeper until it's on paper? :P


Quote
You can search my attachments history for some of mine if you are interested.

done, jeez, I wish I'd have started from the recent end!
Aweful lot of educational (kudos t' you for that) and documentary stuff to wade thru before finding some of your T-S shots this month.  Competent enough images, but subjectively, for me, they just don't tickle my art bone.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:32:46 PM »
We're not, we are asking for a demonstration of the actual achievable resolution differences when handheld and when using AF.

As JR said, there's so many variables it can become entirely subjective.
FWIW, I've had handheld AF shots from my 800e with 70-200mm f/4 VR at 200mm that are as crisp at 15th second (yes, low light) as I was getting my my 5d2 and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS 2 in bright sunlight (likely 1/400s @ f8)
Used with good glass and technique, even handheld, the ability to get very high resolution images from the d800 series is not all that difficult.  The 810's mirror action is even smoother, which should help a bit more.

Having seen your work, I doubt it.

I'l show you mine..

www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22441.0

now show me yours.  :P
BTW, the image linked above was at 1/6s, not 1/15.  It'd print comfortably up to 48" high before I'd consider tweaking pixels.  Oh, and there was a slight shadow lift too, as the foreground was too dark for my liking and I wanted a more gradual gradient.

6
Landscape / Blue Hour scenes
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:25:52 PM »
on a late evening drive home in Alberta, conditions were right for a lovely ground fog to form.  Wasn't equipped for night shooting, tripod was at home, but still managed to get a few variations of a fog-shrouded pastoral scene with enough color left in the sky to create an interesting silhouette of a lone tree.  This was my favorite of the group.

The camera direction was NNW almost an hour after sunset.
Hand-held, 200mm with VR, 3200 ISO, 1/6 th second at f/4.5 = sharp enough.
Minimal processing via ACR from raw.
Full EXIF is included in the image.

7
Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: August 29, 2014, 08:30:54 PM »
I'm gonna throw a mirrorless spanner into this gearbox.
I find it a lot easier to nail my shot with my Fuji's since I can not only tweak most jpg settings in the camera but the tone curve as well AND see it live on its EVF. 
Not as much as you can manipulate a raw file in post but I can often use the jpg results from my fuji as-is unless I want to make some other creative mod.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: The Perfect Sensor
« on: August 29, 2014, 02:56:55 PM »
OMG, the levels of philosophical BS predicting the detriment of creativity brought on by better tools is amazing.

art is the product of the artist and their tools, expanding either one increases the possibilities.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 29, 2014, 03:01:52 AM »
We're not, we are asking for a demonstration of the actual achievable resolution differences when handheld and when using AF.

As JR said, there's so many variables it can become entirely subjective.
FWIW, I've had handheld AF shots from my 800e with 70-200mm f/4 VR at 200mm that are as crisp at 15th second (yes, low light) as I was getting my my 5d2 and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS 2 in bright sunlight (likely 1/400s @ f8)
Used with good glass and technique, even handheld, the ability to get very high resolution images from the d800 series is not all that difficult.  The 810's mirror action is even smoother, which should help a bit more.

So JR, if you buy or borrow that d800, don't be drinkin' too much coffee when you're test-shooting hand held lenses.  :D

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 29, 2014, 02:47:50 AM »
Put another way, it took Nikon two generations to come up with a camera that approaches the 5DIII in overall utility...and I bet the 5DIII outsells the D810 just as it did the D800/E.

Same thing one step up – it took Nikon until the D4s to approach the 1D X.

810 doesn't just approach the 5d3, in tech, it pulls out and passes it and flips the bird at it on the way by. ;)

I wonder if Canon has the 'nads to play leap-frog now.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR Camera
« on: August 28, 2014, 09:33:40 PM »
I've got a pile of ML bodies these days:
Fuji XT1
Fuji XE1
Fuji XA1. XM1

Pentax K01
Pentax Q
Pentax Q7

Olympus OMD EM10

The EM10 is my all around favourite ML; works great in most lighting conditions, very flexible tho the minimal number of physical controls makes you think carefully about how you want to set it up for various uses.  It can AF very quickly even with long lenses in less than ideal light; I've been impressed.  The EM1 should be even better for AF.  This is a camera that you really need to spend time with to learn, it's not as intuitive to tweak as most others I've used. EVF quality is pretty good until the lighting gets too low.

The XT1 has impressive overall IQ and low light ability. The EVF is truly excellent and can display so much more info than an OVF.  Still no SLR equivalent in operational terms but it's only really hampered by Fuji's bizarre user interface which means I haven't yet found a way to make it anywhere near as quick to change shooting modes as with an advanced SLR.  The physical controls on this camera look great, the dials feel nice when you're only playing with them, but as far as using the camera, it gets my nod for the worst buttons and control ergonomics ever, puts Nikon's Df to shame.  If they make a bunch of improvements, it will be a ML to reckon with.  As it is, it makes a fantastic still life/landscape camera or portrait monster with the fast primes.

The other fuji bodies are all quite pleasant to use, if not as fast as SLR or the XT1.

The Pentax k01 is an interesting brick of a camera that's OK to use but no EVF makes it a pain to use outdoors, much as any other non-EVF ML body.  All the Pentax ML bodies AF fast enough for most things except certain kinds of sports.

I don't have any Panasonic or Sony but Pany's new GH4 has a hybrid phase + contrast AF system that is fast and accurate enough to make DSLRs nervous about the future.

Live histograms in the EVF mean it's easy to adjust EV and see the results displayed as well as in the histogram.  Nothing to disparage here in any of them compared to OVF, just different abilities and limitations to get used to.

You have to try one. ;)

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 28, 2014, 09:05:33 PM »
*Sigh* I guess I'll be renting a D800 at some point in the near future here, as I don't think anything else but real data is going to prove the point.

@PBD: Your photos of the 4WD are much more brightly exposed. I'd be willing to bet little if any data in the shadows is buried in the read noise, which means the image isn't DR limited. That's another point no one seems to get, but whatever, nothing but two RAW files, one from a 5D III and one from a D800, that I can upload so you guys can compare yourselves, is ever going to settle the issue. :P

I'd like to see the direct comparison too.  I'd turfed my 5d2 so didn't get to compare it with my d800 on the same shot.
I did have my 60D and  I used it as a comparison, taking similarly exposed shots with it and the d800 of the same scene. I've shot plenty of 60D landscapes with sun-in-frame and was able to retain adequate shadow detail when pushing them within reason.  My 60D performed better than my 5d2 in this regard.

The 60D example, which I pushed fairly hard, I posted, way back, in the HDR thread.

www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8065.msg154889#msg154889

When I was comparing the 2,  there was a considerable amount of shade information available from the d800, without showing read noise, in heavily pushed areas like the charred tree trunk, in shadow.  The 60D's file was capable of being pushed even more than I would normally want for print or display without looking bad but comparing it to the same areas of the d800's shot showed a marked difference in quality.
Top-line FF Exmor vs a crop Canon is an unfair fight to start with when, even vice-versa, the crop exmor beat my 5d2.  So, I would certainly be interested in seeing a direct FF comparison if you rent a D800 body.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 28, 2014, 02:09:20 AM »
I'm looking forward to seeing what features it'll have and how well it performs in various metrics.
If it really rocks, I'll consider adding one to my quiver, especially if it still uses the same battery.
The only lens I need it for is my 100-400L

- It must have greatly reduced read noise, even lower than the 70D and definitely no visible banding patterns when pushed 4 stops from low ISO raw.
- AF must be equivalent or better then 7D
- ergonomics must be excellent, I've suffered enough finger cramp on capable but uncomfortable bodies from Fuji and some others lately.
- price must be reasonable, IMO, that means I should be able to snag it within a year for $1500 or less.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 28, 2014, 02:03:48 AM »
The 5D III's banding has actually proven to be pretty difficult to clean up with DeNoise...and it does not seem to be very consistent...the banding changes a bit from frame to frame...as if it is a mix of fixed and semi-random patterns.

When I was studying the nature of the FPN I could find on my 40D there was indeed a fixed pattern noise and another pattern noise structure that was not fixed but varied in location.
I shot some bursts at full speed and when I looked at the noise from those there was a pattern which was the same on all frames and another pattern which traveled vertically from frame to frame yet looked otherwise similar.
I'm guessing these traveling bands of noise patterns are due to high frequency interference from internal circuitry, probably some of the internal switch-mode power supplies.  It could also be ground loop type issues allowing the digital side to contribute noise to the analog side or a few other design/build compromises producing this problem.  Fortunately, my 40D's base noise levels are quite low, allowing me to push shadows quite hard w-o requiring NR but it's still not nearly as clean as a little Nikon D5100.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 26, 2014, 01:40:27 AM »
Hi,
I know.... it's not like it's hard to do....
I can't think of anything at work that does not use at least 24 bit A/D and we have some test equipment that has 64 bit A/D and others that have 48 bit A/D running at 60Ghz sampling rates... I think that the last time I designed something with only 16 bit A/D was back in the 1980's....
Even though I don't know a lot about electronics I'll go ahead and wade in to water over my head.  While it may be easy to implement, it may have implications for the rest of the body.  Presumably, more precise sampling will draw more power proportional to the increase in precision: more bits of A/D will mean more components, all of which draw power.  Then the digital circuitry all the way from A/D to flash card has to be scaled-up to match which also draws more power.  All of this also generates heat which must be dealt with.  In my sophomoric opinion, this would result in slower framerate and heat issues for the sensor.  And that's not even considering the effect on battery life.  It's not impossible, but it's an extra set of engineering problems which incur greater cost, which affects retail cost and profit.

Also, why jump straight to 20 bit A/D when you can sell 14, then 16, then 17, then 18, then 19, then 20.   8)
    Hmm... Pentax use 22-bits ADC many years ago... on the Pentax K10D, but the raw file is only 12-bits... then Pentax K20D use back the 14-bits ADC... just wonder why they change back to 14-bits??

   Have a nice day.
I have a K-10D.  It's a nice tool but unlikely to make use of 22 bit ADC, the noise floor is too high to matter.
I'm wondering if there was a misread quote somewhere in there (dpreview article) where the ADC may have been a more moderate number of bits but 22 bits worth of processing precision were used?..
That said, I really like the color I can get out of that camera when it comes to subjects like deeply saturated flowers.  That and that I got a mint condition body for peanuts.  ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64