April 16, 2014, 12:19:26 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 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 55
The lady sitting beside me in the plane..... As we are passing over Winnipeg, at night, at 35000 feet, the pilot announces "and if you look out of the windows on the right side of the plane you can see the lights of Winnipeg". She whips out a DSLR and starts taking flash pictures of Winnipeg.

Why isn't my flash bright enough to light up a city from 35,000 feet? Why won't my camera magicaly cancel out the reflection of the flash off of the window? Does this mean I have to upgrade to FF and the new magic super sensor?

egads, some Co. I don't remember even has a MODE for this on some of their small cameras!

I wish that there were more options for people such as myself who seem to have monstrous hands. It makes it hard to want to carry a camera all day thats just wayy to small.

Used to be a time, back in film days, that there were some interesting add-on accessories that would be helpful.
There sure did add a lot to the overall bulk of the system tho.
Friend of mine with big hands has similar complaints with his 7D, even with a grip it's kind of small for him.  Kinda funny to see him try use a little Rebel.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 01:22:37 AM »
It's probably because your photos are awful and nobody gives a S___ about what some hack "photographer" has to say. The 5D2 is a venerable piece of equipment that has served many, many people very well. Let us know how much better your D800 is at recovering the shadows when you underexpose your next subject's black pants. ::)

you missed the part where a -3EV exposure shows pattern noise with +1 EV
no way that can be described as a good performing camera, no matter what the subject.
SNR on that thing is far worse than DxO published measurements convey because they don't accurately evaluate detectable noise pattern

if you expect me to show you SNR problems at higher EV levels you don't understand how this works.

I am still waiting for one person to post a single optimally exposed image where the Canon DR ruined the shot but the Nikon made a worthwhile one.

you just SAW one example, not gonna waste my time providing others.

If people can't infere or extrapolate real world performance from an example or controlled tests then the camera's IQ isn't the only problem.

I would not say the 5d2 is useless, but it is very limited in its usefulness.
I did say that it was a very disappointing product for the price and even compared to its forerunners, never mind comparing it to the competition.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d2 shadow noise and how I eliminate it...
« on: February 11, 2013, 02:37:52 AM »
I have discovered over the years that the best way to get super clean shadows with the 5d2 is to overexpose the image. I have not really tried it much with portraiture but in industrial, landscapes and architecture and interiors it works very well. I am quite surprised how much detail there are still left in what appears to be 'overexposed' highlights and because the shadows are 'overexposed'  they are clean when I 'pull' them in post processing. More images and some thoughts why I think my 5d2 is still good enough for most applications here at..http://www.ivanmuller.co.za/blog-item/expose-right

It certainly can be good enough for a lot of things, and some technique can extend that for sure.
BUt, I got rid of mine tho, as I'd purchased it for landscape when it came out and it was the most disappointing camera I've owned.
Just did some extra test shots before I sold it recently; flat shade target, shot at 1 EV intervals from -5 to +3 as metered.
Histogram peaks line up perfectly on the grid in DPP at those levels.
Then pushed them a little in post using ACR or DPP.  Don't even need to go +2 stops before I saw pattern noise on not only the -5 EV shot, but the -4 and the -3 EV shot would show FPN with as little as +1 EV push!
That, to me, is a camera with severely limited dynamic range if the appearance of any FPN is the criteria.
That was a deal-breaker for me, should have got rid of it long ago.
I did get some great shots with it, but it just didn't work the way I needed/wanted/expected it to.

I'd like to know if other 5d2s fare as poorly with the same kind of test or if mine was just a complete lemon.

6D seems considerably better, not sure if enough to appease me yet.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 10, 2013, 01:13:58 PM »
Is everybody sleeping in this morning?  Where's the ruckus I expected to find over the 5d2 samples I posted?  ;D

In one more kick, at a camera that I think is junk with too many flaws, primarily its terribly noisy low ISO shadow performance, I ran a quick test on some files I had shot for this purpose just before I sold it to some poor sap.

I'd shot 1 EV steps from -5 to +3 of a smooth toned nearly neutral surface. Under wide-specrum flourescent, unfortunately, the sun was on the other side of the planet at the time so I couldn't use it.

Going from my real-world e.g. back on pg 8 of this thread, the ladies black pants seem to be responsible for the -5 EV hump in the histogram.
If the 5d2 has nearly 4 stops above 0, and I'm being generous here, then the 5 stops below are only 9 EV worth of DR out of what it's claimed on DxO to be over 11 stops.

Well, if one wants to do ANY pushing in post, the DxOmark measurement for this camera's DR is still misrepresented, it's still woefully optimistic.

By my simple measurements, if you need to do a +2 EV push in the deep shadows, for whatever reason, then

the 5D Mark II has a USEFUL DYNAMIC RANGE OF LESS THAN 9 STOPS before pattern noise becomes a problem.
= = = = = =
ADDENDUM 13-02-10 2320mst:
I knew it was likely even worse than this so I quickly checked a couple other test shots:
the -4 EV shot, raised less than 2 stops, also shows FPN
the -3 EV shot, will also show FPN if raised by 1 to 2 stops!

5D2 is now down to a 7 or 8 stop DR camera if any appearance of FPN is the cutoff point.
Little wonder I was not happy with it.
Anyone else want to do the same tests with their 5D2?  It might be satisfying to know I had a lemon.
OTOH, you might not want to know the truth about your own camera.
= = = = = =
That, my Canon-loving friends, is what I call a P-o-S camera and that's why I got rid of mine.
That, is why the 5D2 was the worst camera in my stable for my purposes and the most disappointing piece of Canon gear I'd ever purchased.
That, is the kind of useful information you can get from shooting dark frames and pushing them in post.
That, is why the 6D is looking like a major low ISO IQ improvement over the 5D2 and one main reason why I'd recommend it over the 5d2 for anyone who can afford the price difference, if they want to shoot Canon.

And finally, that is why I'd like to see a lot less moaning on this topic in general from people who haven't done any basic tests on this camera.  Maybe I had a lemon, it was one of the earlier made ones.  I doubt it.  Altho it did meter with too much variability compared to my other, older bodies.

If you don't push in post, ever, for any reason, then your 5d2 will likely serve you well enough.
IF you do need to push in post, for creative reasons or merely to recover from an underexposure error, then the 5d2 could be a disappointing camera for you.

Since this is a 5d3 thread, sort of, shoot your own tests and see what you come up with. I don't have one, don't want one.
= = = = = =
another addendum - I-R agrees with me. See their DR results page, closer to the bottom
and their sample images look to be cleaner in the shadows than shots from my camera
= = = = = =

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 10:21:54 PM »
Usually, great tools helping us to get a good photos. But sometimes great photos doesnt mean come from a great tools. We need to find the solution to cover our tools weakness. In this topic, we talk/complaining about canon weakness is DR.

So find the solution how to cover canon low DR problem..in the same time we can learn something new..

Dont limit our creativity by our tools limitation. Just have some fun, shoot, learning and enjoy our camera.. :)

1st time im upgrading my 7d to 5dm3, Im not impress, but when I read the manual book and take some pictures, I found my 5dm3 is really amazing camera.. and now..im still using my 7d for landscape and xploring my 5dm3..
You are correct.

I don't have as much problem with limited DR as with HOW it's limited.
My 40D and old Rebels have virtually no detectable banding as base ISO. My 5d2 and 7D were pretty bad if I had to push the shadows.  I've pushed the 40D and even the old rebel bodies the same way with much better results.
And THAT, I believe, is the key of the whole argument.  Seems some recent Canon cameras were a step backwards in IQ at low ISO.  And it also seems to vary in severity from body to body of the same model.  I think I had a 5d2 and 7d that were somewhat flawed.  Sold them, was tired of the disappointing results compared to my other cameras.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 10:11:53 PM »

Please can you post the same image before you did any adjustments? The untouched RAW file with everything zeroed, obviously, with the necessary masking. I well understand your dissatisfaction with the image as posted, but as it is a devoid of strong shadows and you used flash it doesn't, on the face of it, appear to be a dynamic range issue.

Quite possibly a shadow detail one but not a dynamic range issue, it would be very nice to talk this one example through.

Done. Appended it to the originals on pg 8.   Flash was 580EX II.

I've sometimes wondered if this camera also had a metering flaw, despite the -2/3 EV as shot.
I usually used it in full manual mode to get consistent results; it would occasionally be over or under by multiple EV if AE.
Light was changing too fast that day to rely on manual.

Just before I sold it I took a few shots of a blank white sheet to check the metering.
Was in aperture priority AE, set 0EV exp at 1.0s.  resulting histogram was centered right on 0 in DPP raw tab.
when +1 EV was dialed in it gave me a 2s exp.m hist was on +1
when +2 EV was dialed in it gave me a 13s exp! hist was blown out of course
I completed the series in full manual. histogram was as expected in remaining shots.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 09:48:46 PM »

Yes, Canon DR not good as Nikon, but Canon still great at other categories.

Dont worry about DR, just enjoy your camera and get the great shoot  8)

Keep in mind..im just newbie in photography..

Very nice images.
But I'd rather not multi-shot and do all the extra processing to do that.  And there are many times I can't do that even when I want to.
It's easier to use a better imaging system.

I still like using Canon for plenty of things. And my bodies shadow performance is better than my 5d2 and 7d could perform.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 08:51:07 PM »
No, I don't want anything of the sort,..

here's the shot I got permission to use from the last time I used the 5d2 for anything semi-useful.
Was gonna put it into the other thread but I'm not gonna spend much more time on this topic so here, have yerselves a field-day with it. :)

Conditions, mid-day, rapidly variable sky, shaded outdoor area.
For metering info the two adults were wearing medium green and mostly black upper garments.
EXIF the rest.

This was shot while experimenting with variety of outdoor settings we were in and done in a bit of a hurry.
Client LIKED this shot for the facial expressions and overall look, I did my best to make it work.

Shot was initially adjusted with DPP, exported 16b TIFF to PS to touch up some cosmetic details and saved.
16b tiff then toned and adjusted in LR3 for printing and displaying in low light viewing conditions.

They loved the end result.
I'm bothered by the crosshatch noise on the ladies pant legs.  And no, it isn't fabric texture.

Note: the detail shot was from a scaled file supplied to the client, not the full res version which is somewhat larger and the crosshatch noise even more prominent.  It's less visible when printed, but still detectable if I look at it.

EDIT - added 4th image, original file, everything flat in standard style.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 08:17:12 PM »
..your clients are blind.  compare the two below.  the first one, which is yours, is what i am calling snapshot.  if it is mine, i send it to trash can right away


I don't see a request anywhere.  I recommend that that you edit your post to remove them immediately.


OK, there's your technicolored hero.  As before, oversaturated cliché.
and irrelevant to the topic of this thread.
As is generally the case around here.  ::)

If you want to have an artistic merit discussion there's a different area for that.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 07:18:16 PM »

So show us a reasonable selection of images that are not contrived test scenarios where skillful use of the capabilities of the available tools fails. We are not talking unnecessarily underexposing images by 7 stops, as in the video.

Please show us a good selection of real world images where the lower DR of the Canon's have let you down and where the Nikon has ended up producing a really notable image.

It seems the primary benefit you espouse is for covering incompetence! I assumed, you being an "ART" photographer, would have a basic understanding of exposure and your cameras capabilities.

Awe Dude!  You see, this is the kind of stuff I mean!

You want me to go shoot a whole bunch of real world tests shots with multiple cameras to appease your request?!?  Are you friggin' kidding?!?  ::)

And then you insult me?.. no minced words about it.

Tsk Tsk Tsk.

I'm not going to play with you.
Go shoot your own test shots.  Gheez, are you an only child or something?  How'd you get to be so spoiled and demanding?

"FWIW, irrelevance is not even a real word"

i know what it meant from the context, still doesn't matter.  You used it to insult Mikael.  His dictionary probably doesn't have it as a real word either.  ;)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 07:02:37 PM »

you can take a look at his images right here http://a2bart.com/... thinking of one day i am going to take some of his images and send to "scott kelby blind critique" and then post back result of the video in this forum to see how good his skill is  ;D i guess that we probably have great laugh in this forum since scott is pretty straight...

note:  my 7 years old daughter can create much much nicer a website layout than the one listed above (unbelievable entire website is still used html in these days, no wonder why his image and the other irrelevant-er  have no improvement...)

YAWN!  ::) I've seen what you've posted on this site, ishdakuteb, you've got a long road ahead of you before you can think about stepping into my shoes.
And frankly, I don't care what you think artistically - you probably like the Ken Rockwell style of over-saturated, over-contrasty clichés.
And if your kid's so much better at building a site, good for her, there's some talent somewhere in your family.  ;)
Meanwhile, keep shooting.  You'll benefit from the practice.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 06:49:33 PM »
PBD: I called Mikael an irrelevance, which by my understanding of the word is not an insult, because his comments in these threads are so often irrelevant.

IMO, you are directly disrespecting the man with that statement.
You seem to have an adequate grasp of english to be able to understand that you did not refer to his IDEAS with that comment, which you've repeated more than once.

If you were to do so, you'd have said, "Hey, your opinion or comment is irrelevant."
FWIW, irrelevance is not even a real word, but you're putting it into a context that comes across as disrespectful.
I also find your badgering of people for their raw files a put-off as well.
What do you hope to accomplish from someone else's raw files?
If you want samples of D800 or 5d2 files, you can find them, shot under very controlled conditions, on various sites.  Imaging-resourse is a good example.
Download them and play with them.  See how they compare for yourself.
I see little need to duplicate their efforts to appease such requests.

PBD: Like his eye comment..
you did not need to respond to that, he didn't contradict what you said, he merely added to it

PBD: Can you show us some images where the DR of the Canon just can't work but the slightly higher DR of the Nikon saved the day and made a worthwhile image? It appears not.

I can show you where, if I had shot Nikon, it would have provided an image that _I_ would have liked much better.  My client didn't care.  I'm a much fussier customer than my clients.

PBD: However, what we are constantly asking for is examples of where the Canon equipment lets you down in real world shooting,

Right, and when I actually started a thread on this exact topic a couple days ago I got 2 pages of crap from various fan-boys on this site who weren't patient enough for some examples to be posted by me or anyone else.  Very few others even braved the flames to actually try to participate.  I feel bad for them because they were interested in the topic but were likely turned off by the resulting brawl.  I certainly was.
Why should I, and some others, waste our time trying to share our experience and knowledge when the response is ridicule or disrespect?  Many of the people on this forum have something worthwhile to contribute, even if they're newbies.  However, I've often seen too many responses in a condescending attitude from certain participants; that does not create a healthy atmosphere for participation.
And it must the crankiness that comes with old age but I'm gonna call it when i see it.

PBD: where maximising the lower capabilities of the Canon are not enough, where worthwhile real world images could only be shot with a Nikon. In truth I have never been shown one, not one single real world image, only lots of artificially set up and badly exposed "tests".

What I've generally stated is that the superior sensor performance of the other mfr's cameras allow a lot more creative freedom in post and simplified shooting in the field because we don't have to try wring the best from a mediocre product.
I and others have also stated that it's certainly a benefit to be able to recover from an underexposed shot, or to be able to compress the contrast in a shot with lots of dynamic range, so that the shadows aren't wrecked by pattern noise.  There are enough real-world situations where this is an issue.
I've made prints from my 5d2 and 7d that people think are great!  Sure.  I wonder what they'd have thought about the same images if I could have lifted the dark levels a little like I wanted to, so a hint of the detail hiding there could be seen - preferably without the stripes.

I don't know who said it but taking your dark print outside to view in sunlight to see the shadow details is not often an appropriate option!
This is when shadow range compression (lifting) is beneficial and when patterned noise cameras, like most contemporary Canons, are not up to the task in the more extreme cases.

Artificially contrived tests are what you use when you do research.  It's called a controlled environment to minimize variables.  It's daft to suggest such tests do not have merit, people need to understand how they work and how the results will apply to real world shooting.  If someone can't understand that, it's gonna be pretty hard to teach them much of anything.

PBD: I shoot a lot of very high dynamic range images, a Nikon would not serve me better.
That's true, but it is irrelevant! ;)
HDR can even be done with an 8-bit compact camera.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 01:23:53 PM »
To me, the primary benefit of the technology is that if you have a bad exposure for whatever reason, you can lift the shadows a bit and fix it.  You clearly have more leeway in this regard with the later Nikon gear than the Canon stuff and that is mainly due to the pattern noise, not the random noise based DR difference (that DxO measures).  This is a huge benefit for the Nikon gear; however, in fairness to Canon, I have never really had a problem with their equipment for any real world work I have done.

OK, you  DO get it. :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 01:21:43 PM »
.. For some reason it is deemed highly important to some Nikon users, while some Canon users find it utterly unimportant. I expect that situation to flip if ever Canon release a 15-stop DR DSLR.

but I aint waitin' for Canon to produce such.  Even 11 or 12 stops of CLEAN DR provides a workable imaging tool.

The aspect that's constantly under-rated by most who crow about the adequacy of Canon in comparison to the sensor superiority of other mfrs is the damn pattern noise.
I'd have kept my 5d2 and 7d with the DR they had if only the base iso noise didn't look like a plaid overlay or picket fence, respectively.

..We continue to be treated to the same me tired, contrived examples that are completely devoid of any artistic value ..

Use your imagination.
I'ts nice to know you have gear that CAN do whatever you want in a challenging situation or to allow recovery from an under exposure error than to have gear which has technical limitations that would require more labor and effort to overcome.
If you're gonna pound that DR nail you could beat on it with that model 5d3 wrench or you could smack it down in one clean blow with a d800 hammer.

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 55