April 24, 2014, 09:23:38 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 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 55
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Big Canon EOS 5D Mark II Price Drop Coming
« on: October 01, 2012, 08:05:29 PM »
Older model ≠ outdated and useless. I would have no problem buying a 5DmkII right now (I just did, in fact, 10 months ago).  Looking strictly at the specs, the 6D is not nearly the same quality as the 5DmkII. Canon is replacing the 5DmkII with something less, and charging the customers accordingly.  Sensor aside, everything else about this camera just smacks of consumer level qualities. I wish Canon would have just kept the 5DmkII line, charged $2099 for it, and given it a 'classic' moniker. There's a market for that.

I'm counting on it
hopefully I can sell my PoS 5D2 for more than it's worth now when the new ones dry up and the 6D starts to disappoint for whatever reason.
Also allows me to bide my time in case the 6D is also a turkey for IQ.

Lenses / Re: Manual Focus Lenses: Smarter in F-Mount?
« on: September 29, 2012, 10:28:46 PM »
Sorry for the misinterpretation befor.
You could always get some canon fd L lenses, they are decent quality (unless heavily used), pretty cheap, nice mf, and they won't loose any resale value. All you have to do is buy an adapter, and then you don't have to worry about switching to Nikon if you want to use af. An adapter and 3 lenses will cost you about $1000.
That way you can stay in the canon game with the good dslrs and good af lenses.

This is one of the cheapest ways to get good manual focus lenses, because remember, years ago when mf was the only way to focus, canon was still at the top with their mf l lenses.

Canon's old lenses need adapters to work on anything new
Nikon's old lenses need adapters to work on new Canon or some other bodies.
Nikon's old lenses still work on new Nikon bodies without adapters (with some AF issues on low end bodies)
Therefore, Nikon lenses are more versatile, and there's a pile of old used ones to be found out there, more than Canon's.

Lenses / Re: Wide or ultra-wide angle with excellent corner performance
« on: September 29, 2012, 02:02:56 AM »
If you're on a budget and don't mind manual focus, pick up an old Nikon 20mm f/2.8 AI or AI-s and put an F<>EF adapter on it.  I use one of these oldies on my D800 and it's a terrific lens, sharp right out except for the extreme little bits in the corners. Use it for all kinds of landscape work.

Other than the Canon T&S and the one Zeiss 21mm someone mentioned and there's the 14mm Samyang (with lots of distortion in the central area) there's virtually nothing available for across the frame sharp glass for some reason.

Canon's pricey new 24 and 28mm IS lenses may be decent; i haven't tried them but from what I've seen for tests, published on SLRgear, their corners are much improved but still not great.

Nikon's 14-24mm can also be used with an adapter
and their 17-35mm f/2.8 is better than Canon's 17-40 in the outer regions as well, tho 2x the $.

EOS Bodies / Re: Dynamic Range & Camera IQ
« on: September 27, 2012, 08:36:26 PM »
Ditto. I was pretty excited when I saw the patent from Canon for a layered sensor design. I've looked at it a few times, and I'm not sure it compared to the current Foveon patens from Sigma, but I really hope/wish they would develop the technology further. I could totally go for a 22mp layered sensor. :)

Maybe the 3D is a 46 MP layered sensor. Shut all the Nikon guys up  ;D

Only problem is that if that were true it would cost $10k  :o

I asked a Canon rep if they intended to do anything like that back when Foveon first hit the scene.
The negative response was, of course, meaningless.
Like politicians, mfrs will deny deny deny until it suits them to do otherwise.
So, here's hoping Canon has some geniune ingenuity to show us for next year.

Somehow I can just imaging their engineering staff pacing feverishly, saying, "Dammit!  How could you announce something like that?!? We don't even have a working prototype!"

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 27, 2012, 08:26:46 PM »
.. Some efficient active cooling to keep the sensor below room temperature or even below freezing would go a LONG way towards making 1.5e- ISO 100 read noise and 13.7 stop 7D II DR a reality.

as yet, efficient cooling does not exist
Peltier's terribly inefficient
the electron tunneling technology heat pump device isn't even off the drawing board yet, AFAIK.

HEHE! Maybe they can make it like a backscatter detector on an SEM and add a little liquid-nitrogen dewar with a cold-finger to the sensor assembly.  Charge your battery, spare CF cards and a 2 gallon jug of LN2 and we're off to shoot some high-DR scenery. ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Dynamic Range & Camera IQ
« on: September 27, 2012, 08:19:21 PM »
..the patent from Canon for a layered sensor design. I've looked at it a few times, and I'm not sure it compared to the current Foveon patens from Sigma, but I really hope/wish they would develop the technology further. I could totally go for a 22mp layered sensor. :)

they could, maybe
but isn't that layered sensor exactly what they're now using as the color-sensitive AE sensor that's been used in most bodies since the 7D came out with it...
I like it, metering and AWB has been much better since it's arrived

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 27, 2012, 01:17:27 PM »
So finally a rumor to stop the bleeding of people owning Canon gear selling up for Nikon.

i.e. this rumor was to be expected after the combination of the D800 and D600 showed up Canon's current full frame sensor being found wanting.

Expect the 5D Mark III to have a shorter life than either then 5D or 5D Mark II.
So, are you one of the people "owning Canon gear selling up for Nikon"?

Whether or not I am is not the point.

This rumor is strategic in nature, as will be the announcement of the camera next month, because it is talking to specific feature/performance areas where Canon is currently vulnerable.

Canon need to do something to keep people from wondering whether or not their R&D has fallen behind and cannot keep up with the pace that Sony have set.
With all of the vulnerability you claim Canon is having, one would think you would be the first to be selling your Canon gear.  You say the D800 and D600 have superior sensors, and yet you haven't sold your Canon gear in order to buy Nikon?

Why does buying Nikon gear require selling Canon gear?

I'm only selling the Canon gear that doesn't perform as well as stuff I can replace with competitor's gear.
I keep the Canon stuff that works better than the competitor's for whatever particular uses I may have for it.  But, wherever I can drop using Canon in favor of better raw IQ from competitor's products, I do.
I push my files in post and need better noise performance than Canon provides.  If Canon's noise levels were as high, but at least not PATTERNED I would not be very concerned about shifting allegiance to the competition. 
I hate the noise stripes and plaid patterns on my big prints that come from my McCanon cameras.

EOS Bodies / Re: Dynamic Range & Camera IQ
« on: September 27, 2012, 01:10:42 PM »
Any thoughts on tonal range affecting IQ? Or everyone is so obsessed with DR that there's no point in mentioning this?

tonal range is going to be similar for most cameras because they have a similar overall signal to noise ratios around midtones, despite the differences in overall DR

if the SNR is improved, and thereby DR will likely improve along with it, then it's possible to use more digitizing bits to define a particular pixels signal level and that can lead to finer tonal gradations. (12 vs 14 vs 16 bit for example)

This is where medium format digital has an advantage with their big clean pixels and 16 bit digitizing, they seem to be able to produce better tonal gradients in the midtone and lower levels which make for smoother looking images than you get from smaller sensors.  You can see this same effect to some extent by comparing FF 35mm digital with compact cameras.

however, most of that's rendered moot when final output is 8 bit-per color jpeg or similar 8 bit files used for printing.

until the final output is capable of utilizing more than 8 bits per color you're not likely to get more than 8 bits unless you interpolate downwards from higher sampling precision.

also, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but tonal range reduces as you move towards the darker areas simply because there are less bits there to work with (smaller numbers describing the intensity levels)
I think the tonal levels DxO mark measures are likely done around middle gray.

EOS Bodies / Re: Dynamic Range & Camera IQ
« on: September 27, 2012, 03:03:50 AM »
I've got a 5d2 and a 7d where the banding is quite noticeable without even having to push shadows very much.

image I posted here:


was shot raw with my 7D; ISO 100, 1/1000, f/8, all internal processing and ALO off.  Firmware 1.2.5
PP in DPP used; +0.33 EV, contrast -2, highlight -5, shadow +5 to open up some "depth" in the foreground.

if shadow is left at 0, the banding is almost not discernable.
But any value above 0 the banding begins to appear in the dark area below the trees, this is in an area of RGB value of about 50, 35, 25, as processed, so not exactly near black and this is not much of a shadow push, frankly.

If I'd have had the lens I needed with me I could have shot this on my D5100 and the dark area would have been TOTALLY CLEAN even if I wanted to push it up to where the foreground was completely visible at lower midtones.

attached crop of banded shadow area at DPP settings describe above, (+5 shadow)
crop taken from below left of center

I've only tested 2 7D bodies, they were equally this bad.  Some of you may have better ones, count yourself lucky. 
The readout channel mismatch between the dual processors working on the 7D sensor's dual readout is likely responsible for the 8 pixel wide vertical stripes.

I'm reluctant to even try the v 2.0.3 firmware as it still may be buggy altho v2 firmware did improve my 5D2's banding considerably, if not enough to make me love it.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 26, 2012, 09:54:00 PM »
here's some other rumor links:

70D; 22MP, Digic 5+, 6fps, 19 pt AF


and someone's impression of a 3D and dig that lens  ;)


guess I'd better sell my Canon gear now while there's still SOME resale value left in it...

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 09:40:31 PM »
I'll believe it when i see it.

append, when i see it take top ranking on DxOmark.

What needs to be accomplished to do this is not technically impossible, just probably expensive.

And it's taken things like recent Nikon's, the Olympus OMD EM5 (whatever) MFT to test with better DR than the larger Canon APS-C sensors.  This is the kick in the pants Canon's needed for the last 5+ years.
Even the Fuji X100 from a few years ago appeared to have better IQ than my 5D2.

16b would be nice, if they can use at least 14 of them with good data.
when really pushing the limits on my D800's 14b raw at base ISO, I can get to a point where I'm seeing random noise and no more shadow detail.  If more DR were possible to record it'd actually become hard to use but I certainly won't decline it if it's available.

C'mon Canon, show us what you can do. (even if it means getting humble and licensing better sensor tech from another supplier)

Thank you for the feedback. I was wondering, how effective is M/F on rapid targets? What is your rough % of nailed focusings?

No idea yet, first shots today were to test optical performance for landscape work, I shoulda mentioned that.
AF on static targets was mostly perfect.

When I'm shooting action I use different gear, so far.

.. cuz the stabilized one's only just been announced.
Actually, having expected its announcement back in spring, I opted to purchase the original version in F-mount so I'd have that range covered on my FF Nikon bodies until I could afford/justify a new Nikon version.  Since I mostly shoot all manual, AF speed and even accuracy is of little importance to me.  Resolution tests looked pretty good for the price.

I was concerned about the MF precision with this lens since the end-to-end focus throw is not very long but it's very smooth and lightly damped and works well in the field.  Better MF than Nikon's v2, IMO.

The other thing that worked well in the field is the lens' absolute sharpness performance.  It's amazing, considering the price!  Smooth bokeh, very close focus ability, and it's stupid-sharp! Enough that I was able to generate moire issues on distant brickwork using 135mm FL.  Very low CA too.
I don't know if it's quite as sharp as Canon's v2 of the 70-200/2.8 but it's good enough for pixel-level detail on my D800e and that means I'll be keeping it and not buying the Nikon one.

end point...
If you're hankering for a good deal on a fast 70-200mm zoom, the Tamron is worth considering.  If you don't need IS, it's comparable to the non-IS Canon lens at a lower price.

Lenses / Re: Manual Focus Lenses: Smarter in F-Mount?
« on: September 23, 2012, 01:26:29 AM »
some adapters have the AF confirm chip in them, FWIW.

I sure wish someone could mill the mount off my EF 70-200 f/2.8 L II and put a proper F-mount on it.
What a joy that would be to use on my D800e!

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 23, 2012, 01:19:12 AM »
Watch out for Nikon crew, they're on a roll and they're not done yet.

D5100's 16MP * 1.5 * 1.5 = 36MP D800, and they have very similar base ISO performance

D3200's 24MP * 1.5 * 1.5 = 54MP D4x?, and would have very similar base ISO performance + all the extra goodness a high end body would add... and that's still over 1 EV better base ISO DR than Canon's current best-tested tho were waiting/hoping the 1Dx and 6D will fare better than the 5d3.

But if they're considering a FF version of the sensor tech used in current 18MP APS-C bodies...  Well... no thanks.
Go back to the drawing board, or better yet, the patent office and search for some better tech to license.

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 55