April 17, 2014, 12:18:57 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 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 55
I've seen some really good images from iPhones but I'll take my 10 yr old Canon PowerShot G3 over any of them, any time. Most phone photos I've seen look like marginally better than webcam quality.

Firmware does not change the sensor. Raw images have little manipulation in camera, its all in PP.  The jpeg images might be better, but I do not use jpeg.

I was hoping they'd add a startup routine to better calibrate the ADCs between the 2 digic processors.
The dual-readout mismatch seems to be the major cause of banding on my 7D with solid 8-pixel wide stripes.

This is a misnomer if / when comparing against the 5D Mark III FF camera.

I thot about the 5d3 instead of 5d2 + 7d but 5d3 is not enough IQ improvement for what I usually want to warrant the trade.

I'm also concerned about AF issues some are experiencing.


right now my 7D and 100-400 AF performs extremely well, would hate to lose that.

Has anyone who's experienced shadow banding issues with their 7D tried the version 2 firmware to see if it made any improvement over version 1 firmware in this regard?

I was considering trying it but had some concerns the v2 firmware raw files might also play differently with older software I'm still using, or more correctly, might no longer play at all.

None of the other changes in v2 firmware for the 7D are of any use to me so I have no point in upgrading and possibly breaking my post-processing workflow just to test this and it's too much like work to try hack back to the earlier version.

When I had my 5D2 it seemed to have more pronounced midtone banding (e.g. blue sky) using v1 firmware.
After the v2 firmware updates the midtone banding on my particular 5D2 camera was rarely noticeable, altho shadow areas are still an issue of course.

FWIW, the only reason I keep the 7D is because its works great on my 100-400mm L zoom and gives me great reach for birding and wildlife while also providing a more reliable AF system than any other crop body I've used on that lens.

Lenses / Re: 85mm lens
« on: October 11, 2012, 12:04:12 AM »
I'll add in a vote for the 100 f/2.0 as well (if only because i've got one).


EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 10, 2012, 11:53:37 PM »
Could you share the information what ps trick or 3rd party software is supposed to remove banding noise? I'd really like to have it in LR, but I've got some pictures that needed shadows raised a lot (high dr shots with moving objects) and that I'd really like to postprocess to a usable state?

TopazLabs DeNoise

it works OK on weaker banding like the 5d2 but on my 7d it had to smear too much detail to remove the strong 8-pixel wide vertical striping.
might be workable on the slightly better performing 60D,
..which reminds me... I need to try it on a 60D shot I took as a quick candid with a friend in deep shadow without flash or wrecking the main subject exposure. When I pushed it hard the 60d banded nearly as bad as my 7D but I don't think the subject would mind being smoothed out a little.  ;)


Lenses / Re: Canon should change name to Coma
« on: October 10, 2012, 11:44:43 PM »
That's a general problem of most lenses.

Nikon and possibly Zeiss?..  made a line of lenses called Noctor I think.  These are specifically optimized for use AT NIGHT because they reduce this coma effect of regular lens designs especially when used wide open.

I'd seen a sample shot of a night scene with bright hilites done with the regular lens vs the noctor -
heck of a difference!


EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 10, 2012, 01:09:52 AM »
There are a few ways you could do it. The simplest would be to take a bunch of dark frames of the same exposure time as the image you wish to remove that kind of noise from. Blend those frames together in something like Photoshop to create a single pattern noise frame. You want to stack them in some kind of additive way to enhance the effect of the noise.

To remove that noise from a photo, you can do so in Photoshop. Just blend the noise frame with a "difference" setting, then adjust the opacity to tune the degree of noise removal. Keep in mind that the way pattern noise exhibits is dependent to a certain degree on exposure time, so you'll need to create a dark noise frame for a variety of exposure lengths for this trick to really work. You don't necessarily need a noise frame for EVERY shutter speed, but if you frequently use 1/15th, or 2 seconds, etc. then you'll want to make a noise frame for each of those exposure times.

Its not perfect, some pattern noise (FPN and HVBN) will remain, but you can eliminate a lot of it that way.

You can also use one of the more advanced noise removal tools on the market. They keep getting better, and some are pretty good at removing pattern (including banding) noise.

I've already tried that trick in PS, didn't work worth the effort for me.
I was hoping you know of some great raw file hacker software.  ;)
Especially since a few people on the CR forum seem to be able to extract pixel level numerical data from raw files

.. so if anyone's willing to fess up...  ;D

I'd like to effect this sort of debanding subtraction frame directly on raw file data matrix before importing to a standard image editor.  I'd even approached one software Co. with the idea of doing this but they did not respond.

Some of the commercial NR software I tried did de-band the dark areas but also smeared the actual image textures so much as to look obviously processed.
I'll keep the shot, and the dark frames I also took, Justin Case somebody comes along with even better NR tools in the future.

EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 08, 2012, 01:52:26 PM »
..  You can easily create a bias offset frame to remove FPN/HVBN, ..

What is your preferred method for performing this bias offset and what software do you use to perform it?

If it's not too onerous, I can readily perform this on more than a few landscape shots I took with my 7D before I realized it was not going to hold up to any push in post.

I'd like to salvage a few otherwise sweet shots I took with my 7D where banding renders the image unusable for large print.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rented a D600
« on: October 08, 2012, 12:35:48 AM »
Glad another person with an open mind tried the competition and discovered it's worthwhile.

I too am still caught in the Canon user interface paradigm and sometimes wish my D800's controls were easier to locate at times.  More time spent with it and it's becoming familiar.

And I can trust the camera to be an excellent imaging tool that provides me with raw files that have far more adjustment latitude in post than anything I've ever shot with a Canon label on it.

Yup, more of my Canon gear is on Kijiji this weekend. :)

Once I sell some if it I'll be off to my local shop to see if I like the lighter weight and simpler control layout of the D600 better than the full-buffet of mechanical controls on the D800.  I don't normally need much for customizable options, just the basics and killer raw IQ.  And I won't always need the higher resolution and would occasionally prefer the slightly better SNR of the D600 over the D800 for low light work.

I DO miss the incredibly good live-view performance of my 5D2 for manual focusing in low light.
The D800 is disappointingly noisy in this aspect altho I found I can trust the focus rangefinder function to be very precise in most lighting conditions with any focus point i select so I can still MF with confidence.

Next I need to get used to Nikon flashes...  They seem simpler.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon EOS-1S the Name? [CR1]
« on: October 06, 2012, 02:54:15 PM »
This is still just a testing the water rumor mill stuff, altho plausible.
Canon's certainly aware that, altho Nikon's D800 is a serious bit of kit, they still have only hinted at what a D4x could be by the time it's released.  A D4x series camera is what this new Canon would be competing with.

Nikon has the technology NOW to make an even higher MP FF body (54MP) with better performance than anything Canon could build at this time.  They also have the option of building a high performance FF body anywhere between 36 and 54MP to select a balance of noise vs DR and speed.

Canon would have to make HUGE improvements in their low ISO read noise issues to even be competitive with Nikon's currently shipping products.  Let's hope they finally accomplish this and install it into bodies the rest of us can afford next year.

This is a bit like a chess game, two major players are prepping their flagship, high MP, FF cameras for release to an eager but highly critical market.  Whomever outs their product first risks being leap-frogged by the one who waits.  And there's more than sales at stake here, this is bragging rights for the next few years based on product release cycles.  The marketing results of which will greatly affect sales of all lower end products where the real meat of profits are realized.

So, altho these new high MP bodies are going to cause some concern to medium format digital mfrs, this is really going to be a boon for all of us who rely on more mainstream gear when the technology finally finds its way down to Canon's prosumer/enthusiast equipment.  Nikon shooters have been enjoying the fruits of that tech improvement for a couple years now.

This is even more interesting than watching US election runups!  :D

Street & City / Re: City Skylines
« on: October 06, 2012, 12:31:47 AM »

London Bus, Big Ben, Westminster Bridge by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Cool shot that.
I usually opt for rear-curtain sync for shots like this but this one really gives the lights a sort of solid look projecting in front of the bus!

I had a similar problem with a first generation 18-270mm.
it was capable of really sharp images but only on tripod with the VC off

If VC was on, it actually caused blur by moving the VC group at the moment of the shot!
I was often able to make sharper images with the VC turned OFF when hand-held in good light.

Since then I'm slightly hesitant to buy another VC Tamron in case that issue recurs;
The non-VC Tamrons I have work great.

I was about to buy this very same lens you have in F-mount this weekend because of the good performance it rates but I'll be buying from a local source even tho it's costing me a bit more.

Best try get yours to a real Tamron service location.
Ahh.. the savings of buying from Hong Kong..  :-\

Street & City / City Skylines
« on: October 05, 2012, 03:40:25 AM »
Shot these in some nicely transforming lighting conditions before and after sunset.
The vivid sunset colors, reflected on the windows of office towers in 0622, were not even visible from my shooting location.  A string of migrating geese can be seen near the top, above the tall white building.

I hadn't actually intended to get something out of this shoot, was just testing an old 400mm prime lens that was dropped and has some fungus issues.  The lens has its flaws, but they're workable and decent results can be had with some work in post.

Got some interesting looking city skyline shots?
or other shots that turned out well even when you didn't intend to "commit photography?"

Pile them on.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM on the Way? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2012, 11:35:55 AM »
18-200mm is full of compromises but, if you avoid its weak areas, it still can deliver some pretty decent images. I kept one around for single SLR travel use because it performed far more consistently than Tamron's 18-250 and first gen stabilized 18-270.

And that's typically the use of such a lens, comparing it to shorter zooms is a bit apples-to-oranges.
EF-S 18-200's central areas is almost always quite sharp and for simple, centric compositions, it works.

I far prefer the 15-85mm range tho but the 18-200mm preceeded it.

Lenses / Re: About to buy the 135L, and then saw this....
« on: October 01, 2012, 08:09:32 PM »
Did you also read up on fringing/CA on the 85 1.8? Yes it's incredibly sharp and has great DoF bokeh but the purple monster made me sell my copy. I'd rather have the 100 f/2 and the 135 L. of course.

for a "cheap" prime I'd take the 100/2 over the 85/1.8, even tho the latter works PDG.

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 55