April 19, 2014, 10:29:51 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 55
61
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 08, 2014, 05:46:26 PM »
If you are shooting static subjects, how hard is it to bracket and merge to 32bit in photoshop and get all the DR in the world with even the worst camera.

And if you shoot moving targets, how often do you actually use iso 100 which is where this advantage actually exists? I at least virtually always use much higher ISO to freeze motion and well at high ISO it is actually Canon that got the best DR according to DXO.

I find it funny when I hear this too.

Even a landscape can have dynamics that prevent working around DR limitations by bracketing and merging.
If it's small and static, then it can be lit to fix it... unless it's not practical, you know, like outdoors.
So these workarounds aren't always viable either.
Then you shoot something else that you can shoot.  For most of us, that's just not a huge disaster.  The reality is that this whole DR argument is pretty much a non starter an any practical sense. 

As I said earlier, if it were the huge issue that people like yourself seem to think it is, nobody would buy the equipment but that isn't really what we see in the real world, now is it?

altho I participate in, I'm not ON the DR bandwagon.
My peeve is FPN, which contributes to low DR; a different but directly related issue.
I have low DR cameras that don't have serious FPN problems, I still like and use them. (e.g. Oly E410, Pentax Q)
Too many here seem to conflate and confuse FPN and DR when those issues can, and often should, be considered separately for their effects on an image.

62
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 08, 2014, 04:26:41 PM »
You react here claiming you have tested 70Ds (plural!) and draw conclusions based on your testing regarding the difference in noise between the 70D and the 7D.
That might be useful information. When I ask about your test results you come up with a set of lens cap shots pushed 4 stops of a single 70D that most likely never left the shop you tried it at and no 7d results to compare them with.
That’s a bit meager, don’t you think?


for the price? ;)
if you visited my website, you will also find a page dedicated to comparing read noise from a large number of cameras, including the 7D
I've got about 10 other bodies, 70D included, which are still waiting for me to get the time to prepare and add to that page, including some older models.

I have enough data on the 7D and 70D to satisfy my curiosity and I believe I've adequately summarized what I've found, if subjectively, in that CR post.

From all those who claimed to have a 7D (or 5D2) that does not have a pattern noise problem, none have offered or supplied a requested raw file for me to compare.

And the only way those bodies leave the shop is if I pay for them.  That kind of research doesn't come cheap.
If someone wants to sponsor more testing, I'll consider it.  I do enough on my own dime & time.

The web site so many love to hate, DxOmark, provides plenty of basic data for everyone to review and interpret.

www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Canon/EOS-70D---Measurements
www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Canon/EOS-7D---Measurements

Have a look at the FULL SNR tab and compare for yourself.
There really isn't much of an obvious difference between the two bodies, especially in the low ISO shadow region.
But DxOmark does not publish anything on the nature of the measured noise; whether it's random, or patterned.
Visualizing the noise the way I present it provides an opportunity to decide whether the camera's pattern noise characteristic might be an issue for some users.
Compare it to audio; what's easier to tolerate in a quiet music passage, a faint white noise or a discrete 60 Hz hum?

 
Quote
your conclusions are derived from the one thing Canon falls short at and that is low ISO dynamic range...no matter how good the rest of the performance is. 


I'll give Canon an approving pat on the head for everything else they've accomplished.  Truly, I enjoy using their gear and still retain some.
But I really hope they can pull up their socks a little more on the low ISO
PATTERN NOISE PROBLEM. 
DR is NOT what I've been complaining about, PATTERN NOISE is what I've consistently had problems with from Canon's sensors and specifically, DIGIC 4 systems.

Fixed pattern noise is a direct factor in DR measurements, but they are different problems to deal with when producing a final image.

 
Quote
It seems you only like to focus on the low iso part as far as image quality is concerned. I can even understand for some highly specialized photographers having more than 12 stops DR at low iso is important. If so, don’t waste your time on the current offerings from Canon. Buy a D800 or an A7R if you are on a budget or a good medium format camera if low ISO performance is crucial. 


I did exactly that - because every Nikon, Pentax and now Fuji and Olympus body I've added to my inventory lacks the one thing I get only from a digic-4 Canon.
FIXED PATTERN NOISE at low ISO .. that fouls up shadow (and sometimes even midtone) areas and limits manipulation of those areas in post without requiring inordinate amounts of time and compromises to correct.
I should not have to waste time in post to fix problems that are innate to the camera; I prefer tools that don't require me to work harder to achieve something so I choose those that don't have deficiencies where it matters to me.
The newer digic 5 products have improved on the FPN issue, just not yet enough to convince me they will outperform my current tools, as either a sensor or a system.
The 70D's sensor performance is no longer much of a limitation compared to the competition, unlike previous digic-4-based canon bodies. And I say that based on the improved FPN performance, not overall DR.
The low ISO DR is still lower than competitors but, with the shadow noise now more random, it's not as much of a post-processing problem as it was when the shadows looked like a picket fence of stripes if pushed, a'la 7D.

 
Quote
Then I visited the website .. you don’t even have to pay me for this great idea. 


I'm fairly sure "Canon Plaid" or "Canon Stripe" will not catch on as wall art...  But I've been wrong about mass market appeal before.
Do you think Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Fuji, film or Oly fans would buy large prints of that?  After all, they can't produce that kind of art with their cameras.
Hmmm... Maybe you're on to something after all.

63
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 08, 2014, 04:16:03 PM »
If you are shooting static subjects, how hard is it to bracket and merge to 32bit in photoshop and get all the DR in the world with even the worst camera.

And if you shoot moving targets, how often do you actually use iso 100 which is where this advantage actually exists? I at least virtually always use much higher ISO to freeze motion and well at high ISO it is actually Canon that got the best DR according to DXO.

I find it funny when I hear this too.

Even a landscape can have dynamics that prevent working around DR limitations by bracketing and merging.
If it's small and static, then it can be lit to fix it... unless it's not practical, you know, like outdoors.
So these workarounds aren't always viable either. 

65
EOS Bodies / Re: Best Sensor Cleaning Products
« on: February 06, 2014, 11:04:49 PM »
My local Pentax rep demonstrated a gel-stick sensor cleaner to me 2 years ago.. at least.  Kinda like the sticky gel lint roller material for stuff a blower won't remove,.
For gobs of oil on my FF Nikons I've used a simple cotton swap on a stick.  works great if you're careful.
I won't tell you what else I use, it'll cause you nightmares.

66
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 06, 2014, 11:03:43 PM »
Many Canon devotees may also experience sour gripes that those DxOmark base ISO sensor measurements consistently demonstrate Canon's ~2 stop weakness no matter how expensive a body you buy.
Which leads to much knashing of keyboards as staunch Canonites defend their choice to use such gear and providing many valid reasons and lame excuses why it doesn't matter that a $400 entry-level Nikon DSLR has better low ISO performance than any canon DSLR.
Just watch. ;)

As for DxOmark's single numerical score, mostly useless.
Their raw measurements, however, provide a lot of useful and easy to compare information on sensor performance.  As do their lens data, just do your own comparisons.

67
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 06, 2014, 01:15:50 AM »
You’ve tested sevral 70Ds?
In a lab or in the field?
Can you show some of your test results? I like to see the “real world” difference between the 7d and 70d and if there is any copy variation between the 70ds.


This will have to suffice

www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16713.0

otherwise it's $280/hr + incidentals for custom work.

Quote
By the way, “noise metrics” do not only apply to iso’s below iso 1600. Above iso 1600 Canon is on par or preforming better.


yes, it's certainly comparable at the high end... FWIW, even compared to the MFT sensor in the -EM1.
comparison image for editorial purposes from DPreview.com

edit - oops, don't look at the Fuji results.

68
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: February 06, 2014, 12:54:01 AM »
Big sale on Fuji lenses starting on Feb 9:

http://www.fujirumors.com/leaked-all-xf-lens-and-x-body-deals-paper-now-on-fujirumors/

Great to see.  First they generate a fair bit of buzz with their products and now they're making them much more appealing in price.
I've already nabbed some great deals on bundles even before xmas.
Will blow more $ in their direction before the deals end.  I'd like a bit more OEM glass.

69
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: February 06, 2014, 12:48:27 AM »
I'm looking forward to playing with the Xt1's manual controls and seeing how they interact with the 2 standard electronic control wheels and what sort of customizing and functional crossovers may be available.
Many of Fuji's lenses have aperture rings that also sport an "A" so you can set it there and use one of the electronic control wheels to manage the aperture with your right hand without lowering the camera or doing any fancy hand contortions.
I'd like a toggling lock button for the ISO wheel; tho with the Fuji, you can pretty much leave ISO in auto and let it take care of it according to your auto-iso preference settings.
There are still some compromises, for sure, but this is looking like a very fun and flexible camera to use in a variety of scenarios.

70
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: February 05, 2014, 01:58:20 AM »
Money did the talking for me this time, X-e1 with the kit zoom for only $800 is a bit easier for testing than the $1300 xe2 equivalent kit.  the difference will get spent on a 35mm f/1.4 lens and maybe an extra battery.

I tried both cameras with the same lenses at my local dealer in bright and dim light.  The xe2 was slightly quicker to AF in low light and it gained-up the EVF much better but they both seemed to quit working at about the same level of low light and low contrast - hard to tell when in a hurry but I think the xe1 will suffice for most of my slow-paced shooting.  Expanding the AF frame size helped in low light, FWIW.
From my reading it seems the AF pixels in the xe2 provide some AF speed advantage in good light?...  Won't matter to me, I have an X-T1 on the way for better performance, if it even offers much of an improvement over the xe2. It's seems to claim better frame rates while tracking a moving subject at least.
I have enough DSLRs that stand a better chance of catching things that move using their more sophisticated AF systems but I have nothing that's truly fast any more.  7D used to hold that position but I sold it.

71
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 05, 2014, 01:47:10 AM »
I really enjoy my 70D but wonder if the 7D would have better IQ. When I look at DxO scores for these two, it's  pretty much a dead heat. Anyone out there have first-hand experience comparing the two? Thanks in advance.
DxOmark scores also don't clearly show the nature of the noise.
many 7Ds show patterned noise, especially in shadow tones
70Ds I've tested have much less pattern noise
random noise is OK, pattern noise is bad
no noise is even better but we're still waiting for Canon to catch up to everyone else on noise metrics.

72
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: January 30, 2014, 02:56:19 PM »
My only choice now is between the X-T1 and the E-M10 ...  :-\

I hear ya, that's a nice little new MFT unit.  Looking fwd to trying one myself.

I'm ordering an XT1 but am a bit torn between whether or not I'll get an X-e1 or X-e2 also.
I like the built-in flash of the xe series and the available kitted 18-55mm would provide a little more native X glass for me at this time.
Great deals on the older xe1, if any are still around, but I prefer the hardware updates in the xe2.
Despite serious GAS, I do not want both xe bodies..  arghh.. decisions. Or arghhh... lack of funds.

73
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Sony A7R With Canon Glass
« on: January 28, 2014, 10:56:11 PM »
if you want AF performance with that kind of IQ then there's still D800/e. tho I think the Sony has a slight IQ edge now.
or ABC for crop sensor bodies (anybody but canon)

But I've been considering that Sony as well, as it would do what I use the d800s for now and give me plenty more options for adapting all kinds of glass to it that the Nikon cannot take with its long register distance.
darn d800 depreciation...

Oh well, I'll cheer myself up and pre-order a Fuji X-T1 to play with.

74
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: FUJIFILM'S latest, X-T1 ?
« on: January 28, 2014, 05:08:04 PM »
It's kinda funny as far as Canon & Nikon's digital imaging systems have evolved, people are excited to go back to the beginning and buy into a new APS-C system with an 18-55 kit lens.


It's a pretty decent kit lens.

Fuji Canada site has a deal listed; pre-order now with any of their suppliers and get a FREE VERTICAL BATTERY GRIP.

www.fujifilm.ca/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/preorder/index.html

jeez, if I didn't just get a $3k bill from my accountant AND my insurance renewal I'd be all over that!
if I only have to deposit 10-20% to place an order, I just might

75
Lenses / Re: zooms vs primes for landscape
« on: January 26, 2014, 03:06:38 AM »
Plan 2. Add the 17-40mm f4L, 70-200mm f4L IS, and 100mm f2.8L IS. Sell the Sigma 70-200 f2.8. I don't want to buy the Canon 70-200 f2.8L (IS or non-IS) both because of the weight and the fact that for most landscape I don't need shallow DOF. Similar comments apply for the 16-36mm f2.8L. On hikes when I want to minimize weight, I would go with the 17-40, the 50, and the 70-200 f4L. I suppose that I could add macro ability by swapping the 50 1.8 for a 50 2.5 macro.

go with your option 2 and you'll spend and carry a LOT less than many of these guys are encouraging you to and have most everything well covered.
A light monopod with small ballhead can be helpful.
maybe add the excellent bang/buck 50mm f/1.4 USM instead of the 1.8 v2

The 17-40 can be very soft in corners at times, stopped down to f/8-11 and pick your focus and composition to fit the lens a little and you'll do fine.  Experiment with it to see where its weaknesses are so you'll know. It's otherwise not a bad lens and you can spend a lot more in this FL range for only slight improvements. (or Tokina 17-35 f/4)

14mm Samyang when you're ready for it.
consider 24-70mm Tamron too.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 55