October 20, 2014, 05:45:18 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 - Aglet

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 70
571
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 14, 2013, 01:07:36 AM »
Don't blame the tools for poor craftsmanship. Infact, since the d800 is doing so well for you, let's see some photos you've taken with it. Please do post.

I've posted heavily adjusted d800 shots on here last year.  They're awesome.
Can't do that with a 5d2!! no bloody way at all
I could tell you where to look  ...  but...

Let's see you post something from your fabulous 5d2... Like some of those test shots I requested.

572
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Takumars, Anyone?
« on: February 13, 2013, 01:17:00 AM »
LOVE 'EM! :)
Just started playing with a small variety of old primes and a couple zooms in M42 on a crop body so no mirror-strike worries.
the super smooth feel, and every one has an interesting character that will lend itself to certain kinds of shots.
prices are rising tho, as everyone hops on board the oldies train.

favorite so far is also the SMC 50/1.8 but looking forward to trying a Mamiya that's still on its way to me.
Haven't take the Helios 44-2 outside yet.
Was quite surprised to see just how well the old SMC performs, very sharp, good contrast characteristics and nice bokeh.  I wonder if new Pentax glass performs as well?
-

573
throw in the stabilization and much lower price this lens is certainly worth considering if you don't have the budget for Canon's latest or the Nikon.
It also beats Canon's f/4 offering at a similar price point.

www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Tamron-SP-24-70mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-A-uniquely-versatile-pro-worthy-alternative

Anyone been using it?  How is it working for you.. subjectively?
Other than it's less-consistent across-the-range performance and likely less rugged build than the Canon, I don't see much for drawbacks to the Tamron for shooters who don't need best-in-class gear in this range.

574
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 07:30:24 PM »
Aglet, why u no Nikon already? My take after eating my popcorn.

Aglet - There is FPN on 5D2 files.

General response - Don't lift the shadows +3 stops. 5D2 is a fantastic camera.

Aglet - Here is a file that shows the FPN.

General Response - Don't lift the shadows +3 stops. 5D2 is a fantastic camera.

Aglet - Well Prove me wrong! supply me photos!

General Response - Here's some photos. Don't lift the shadows +3 stops. 5D2 is a fantastic camera.

Aglet - >:( That doesn't mean nothing!

Rlphoto - :| Pass the popcorn.
Actually, my FF gear is now Nikon, but that's not the point either. :)
FPN on my 5d2 showed up at less than a 2-stop push applied to levels that should have been high enough to not exhibit a problem (e.g. -3 EV down from metered)

Repeating for (who's keeping track of how many times now?)
If anyone of you 5d2-lovers actually HAS one, and are brave enough to show, or at least TELL, us how it performs in simple tests, as outlined a pg or 2 back, then please do so. (RL?...)
I'd like to compare it to mine, which might have been a bit of a lemon in the FPN area.
If you're willing to post a sample of a pushed raw file, kindly include a full res crop so we can see pixel-per-pixel, not scaled down so small as to obliterate FPN in the averaging.
Thank-you.

575
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 07:19:40 PM »
So, I give you a nighttime shot with a classic 5D with a very wide dynamic range and shadows lifted at least a couple, maybe a few stops (I honestly don't remember)...and that's not enough to tell you what you need to know?

why the heck would I want to use your 5dc to compare to my 5d2?!?
only thing they've got in common is the "5" and a tripod mount!
You telling me you'd ask for samples of my 5d2 file and would be satisfied if I gave you a 5dc instead?!?
who's got the fundamental understanding problem here?
I've got a dozen other bodies I can compare it to, I'm asking for 5D2 samples, as outlined.
You really are not good at following instructions.  ::)

What, do you think the 5DII has worse noise than the classic?
don't know, don't care about 5dc

Do you only shoot grey cards and not actual photographs? Have you ever actually wanted to lift shadows more than the extreme amount I did in that shot?
yawn...
re-read your own reply before you post it - edit, re-read, edit, re-read... go have some popcorn

576
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 03:40:19 PM »

Huh? You can't be serious. You think there's some point in attempting to recover from a shot five stops underexposed? Hell, even three stops underexposed is insane. But five?

totally serious, but you misunderstand.
i'm not asking to recover a -5EV shot to 0, or the -4 or the -3.
I'm asking you to try this and see how far you can push your 5d2's -3, -4, or -5EV shot before visible pattern noise shows up on a smooth subject.  IT IS SIMPLE.

Who gives a flying leap how much noise you've got after pushing exposure five stops? And when on Earth would you push exposure five stops other than if you had forgotten to take the lens cap off?

It's like you're complaining that Michael Jordan was an incompetent athlete because he couldn't throw a 110 mph curveball over the strike zone with a football while wearing a goalie's uniform.

If you seriously think you're being serious, I seriously recommend the help of a licensed mental health professional.

Cheers,

b&
I'm only quoting this whole pile above so everyone can clearly see you actually did not understand what I told you.

As such, any further commentary from you will be disregarded until you display adequate comprehension of the problem and can provide valid input.  You seem more interested in a brawl than actually exchanging knowledge.

577
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 03:35:42 PM »

I don't have anything handy from a 5DII, but here's something from a classic 5D, shot not long after I got it several years ago.

Two copies. First is the JPEG preview the camera embedded in the raw file. Next is after I last re-did the post processing a few years ago. I'll probably re-visit it again at some point in the future. I've made 12" x 18" prints and been most happy with them.

If the dynamic range of any of the 5D line of cameras prevents you from getting the shot, you have nothing to blame but your own incompetence.

Cheers,

b&

nice, but another irrelevant comparison/sample.

and again, I'm not talking about dynamic range (DR), altho it is directly affected by noise content
I'm purely interested in the highly offensive appearance of Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN) which is much more of a problem than reduced DR.

Again, anyone with a 5d2 care to contribute appropriate test shots, technique as outlined?

578
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 03:29:24 PM »

Huh? You can't be serious. You think there's some point in attempting to recover from a shot five stops underexposed? Hell, even three stops underexposed is insane. But five?

totally serious, but you misunderstand.
i'm not asking to recover a -5EV shot to 0, or the -4 or the -3.
I'm asking you to try this and see how far you can push your 5d2's -3, -4, or -5EV shot before visible pattern noise shows up on a smooth subject.  IT IS SIMPLE.
In the real world this can by sky, water, various man-made surfaces so it's completely appropriate.

Sorry, I'm not accepting any blame for the camera's metering.  i didn't build it or calibrate it.
If you know how it works, look at the subject and shooting conditions, you should realize why.
Apparently you did not read/comprehend all the info provided. Take more time to understand than to ridicule, it's better all around.

if you have a 5d2 and care to contribute, follow the instructions.  If not, sit back, have some popcorn and join the rest of the peanut gallery to watch the drama.  ;D

579
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 03:17:15 PM »
I'm out of popcorn. :|

Edit: Btw Aglet, I could do a better job with a D30 than what you've shown as samples.

I'll share my twizzlers

and my 40 D can also provide better samples, that's not the point.
Do you still have a 5d2? If so, care to perform the test described and publish your results?

580
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 03:11:59 PM »
So, as a kind of rebuttal against the DR "issues", I had a play with a file or two.

Image was shot with a 1Ds MkIII, effectively the same sensor as the 5D MkII. Here are two images, they are both screenshots from LR with before to the left and after to the right, first is the full frame the second is a 100% crop, the blue is obviously black warning. It was a test exposure shot at a wedding reception to determine ambient levels, there is no point of focus.

I have included the develop module adjustments panel. The exposure is lifted 5 stops, shadows another 1+ stop, only other adjustment was noise reduction.

Now I don't know about you, but I know I could print this to 8"x10" without issue, particularly if I put some clarity and/or contrast in there and did a white balance etc.

P.S. I have got the nads!

Great, you got nads.
But can you do this with a 5d2?!?
I already know the old 1DS3 is a good/better camera, so is my ancient 40D, as compared to the 5d2 I had.  So this contribution is an "irrelevance."

That's the point, comparing my extremely noisy 5D2 to another 5d2.  A 1Ds3 is not "close enough."  internal guts are quite different and it's not just the sensor in the equation but every bit of copper and silicon between the pixel and raw file.

So, will someone with 'nads AND a 5d2 care to show how well their camera can perform in this simple test?

581
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 12, 2013, 12:02:21 PM »
Well, I've yet to see someone post some 5d2 test shots that show it is NOT noisy.  I've sample some other raw files that seemed to be less noise-patterned than the ones my camera created, including the samples at imaging-resource.

There's a fair possibility that the particular body I had was a lemon. Why don't we, and I mean you, find out?
I only had the one 5d2 and it was so bad I did not buy a second, unlike various other bodies i've used.

So, for those who actually HAVE a 5d2. kindly take a white or gray card, use a long lens and the largest f# you can use on it, light it evenly, and shoot a metered shot in raw.  then shoot it again at -3,-4, -5 EV from metered.

Take the -3,4 & 5 EV shots into ACR or LR (or even DPP) and apply + exposure compensation.
Tell me how far you can go before you see any pattern noise showing up.
Simple as that.
Post your results here if you've got the 'nads.

As for those still haranguing about my sample shot being 2 stops underexposed, DAMN RIGHT IT IS!
And I'll take responsibility for -2/3 of that underexposure.  The rest is camera metering.  (sarc)Can't blame any of that on the gear tho, everything Canon makes is perfect. (/sarc)
Give some thought to all the dark subject matter and use of CWA metering, for those who may not know how that works.

582
I am kinda satisfied with anything. Sure, a 1DX would be nice, but that won't be happening anytime soon.

I would really love an affordable ultra wide prime or zoom instead of my manual Samyang, which I am satisfied with by the way, but just to scratch off that manual focussing. Sadly there is no real alternative qualitywise other than the Canon 14mm L II prime itself which is way too expensive. Tamron 14mm, Sigma 12-24mm, Sigma 14mm all are while being affordable far away from reaching the Samyang's image quality.

here's hoping their 24mm Tilt-shift is on the same sharpness level as that 14mm!
Could use something that performs the job for less than the OEM priced options.

583
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!

584
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.

585
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.

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 70