April 21, 2014, 08:09:26 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 - 3kramd5

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14
166
... now lets say you take the D800, reduce it to meet the 5d3, the D800 probably is a lot closer in noise, but details would probably be a lot closer if not the same.  .

That's how I looked at the IR stills. D800 still looked better at 5D dimensions.

I'm holding on to my pre order slot, but not ruling out returning the mk3.

167
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DM3 HDR Article
« on: March 14, 2012, 10:24:13 PM »

As expected its JPEG ONLY - so unfortunately gets relegated to gimmick category for me

Yep. Oh well, not a feature I really care about anyway.

168
And look at the d800 low iso dynamic range!!! Holy mother of god! Stunning. Just stunning. I'm guessing 2 stops!

2?

It's certainly more than 2, but my display isn't good enough to evaluate it visually.

Unfortunately it appears canon has once again under rated their iso..as dxo mark has shown previously.  Canon is 1/2 to 2/3 stop lower than advertised. Errrr.

The canon images look *brighter* to me than the nikon images. Shrug.

169
Shrug.

I can tell the difference when sized equivalently. The details I gotta give to the Nikon, particularly the red and green cloth. Elsewhere I can tell the difference most easily because the canon is way more contrasty (wonder if that's a default setting).

170
EOS Bodies / Re: New 5d Mark 3 images
« on: March 14, 2012, 04:32:05 PM »
Pretty amazing for auto exposure shooting.

171
EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone else wish Canon would ditch the 3x2 format?
« on: March 14, 2012, 03:00:05 PM »
While I'd love a 4X5 sensor format (my most common print aspect ratio), for web viewing I like the added length of 2X3.

172
its interesting if it produces a RAW image, most in camera HDR to date have just been jpg only

I don't think any set of blended images could be considered RAW. They may be able to mix and match pixel levels from multiple exposures and pakage it in an otherwise unprocessed CR2 format though. That would be incredibly cool.

173
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Chuck Westfall & the 5D Mark III
« on: March 13, 2012, 03:47:31 PM »
The digital lens optimizer does sound great

I have to admit that I didn't even read Chuck's comments about this feature because I do not, nor will I ever, use DPP.  Building proprietary features into your own proprietary RAW converter software seems like a waste of resources.  Why not work with Adobe to make those features available in ACR and LR?  Or release the specs so that Adobe can do it themselves?  This seems like it would be a much greater service to Canon's customers.

Having said that, I'm completely ignorant on software development so maybe this isn't even feasible.  But regardless, features like this that aren't available to ACR and LR users don't do most people any good.

I don't like using multiple software packages either, but I could see myself running images through DPP on a case-by-case basis, doing nothing other than DLO, and then pushing into LR. It's a bit off putting that doing so will double file size. Seems... odd.

That said, IIRC, this isn't a 5D3/1Dx feature, but that all cameras through the 30D are supported. Pretty cool if I want to reach back and fix some old frames.

174
EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO comparo: 5DIII vs. D800
« on: March 12, 2012, 10:51:05 PM »
Apologies in advance if you think I should take this conversation elsewhere.

I find the tech talk somewhat interesting, but admit that I don't fully understand it. Maybe I'm too dumb or too lazy to learn. I prefer the old school method of looking at a image, and judging the quality of the technology behind it accordingly.

Of course, doing so introduces the human factor.

Both methods (objective and subjective) have their flaws.

Personally, I'm far more interested in the images I am able to produce with a camera than any of its paper stats or what staff photogs are publishing. Hoping my pre-order was early enough that I'll have a "3" in hand late next week. We'll see.

175
EOS Bodies / Re: Cancelled 5d mk III pre-order for D800?
« on: March 12, 2012, 09:07:06 PM »
The D800 has some interesting features that i'd like to have, but the poor high ISO performance is not one of them.  If it were 22 mp and had two stops better, It would be a tougher decision.

For those who believe more mp is better, it might be the right product.  If its right for you, go for it.  Adorama has a 30 day return policy, so if it is disappointing, you can return it.

I have the 5D MK III pre-ordered, and, if its disappointing to me, I'll return it.

That's where I am. I'll try it and ditch in favor of a mk2 and some new glass.

176
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Calculating Dynamic Range
« on: March 12, 2012, 02:56:48 PM »
Noise is fundamental in determining the bottom end of the DR.  The idea is that DR is range between the highest measurable brightness and the lowest measureble darkness.  Highest measurable brightness is easy - you just fill all the wells, they have a capacity in terms of number of electrons they hold (say, 30,000 e-, for example).  But at the low end, noise is the determining factor.  Are 3 photons enough to generate a signal?  10?  30?

Awesome. It's clicking now. Thanks.

177
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Calculating Dynamic Range
« on: March 12, 2012, 01:56:08 PM »
Another assumption, yes, but it's a pretty safe one - it's very likely that for a given ISO setting, the noise recorded with no light input will be the same from shot to shot

What does noise have to do with the equation?

In the film world, If I take a thin negative and a thick negative, can I indeed draw any conclusions about the total range capable of being recoded on a single frame?

I guess what I'm missing is how one takes a completely dark frame and a completely white frame and figures out what happens in between.

Is there actually a brightness gradient in those frames (ie not all 0 for the unexposed an 2^14-1 for the overexposed frame) that is used to generate a curve for interpolation?

I totally get using the physical gauge (wedge block). To me that's intuitive.

178
EOS Bodies / Re: My hands on the 5d mrk iii experiance
« on: March 12, 2012, 10:56:22 AM »
I wasn't focusing on anything..

I just pointed the camea in a general dirrection to see what it would do..

Whew, had me worried that they totally screwed up the AF system.

Thanks for posting.

179
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Calculating Dynamic Range
« on: March 12, 2012, 10:50:48 AM »
The approach of taking a blown out frame and a completely dark frame is valid for calculating DR, but there are inherent assumptions in that calculation (equivalent response between the frames, etc.).

Shouldn't the the inherent assumption of dark frame and white frame calculations be that everything between those two extremes can be recorded by the sensor at one time?

Correct me if I'm wrong again (probably am), it's "black" when all pixels record 0 and white when all pixels record 255, in other words there are a sum total of (2^8) brightness values per pixel that can be recorded.

But we aren't concerned with that, we're concerned with how dark it has to be to black out pixels and how bright it has to be to white out pixels... in one scene.

I can go stand my wife up to the wall next to a window on a bright day. If I expose for her, the window will be overexposed white. If I expose for the outside, she'll be underexposed black. If I expose for the median, there will be a little of each (histogram shaped like a U, I guess), and detailed brightness range between those extremes is the total DR my camera can record. Is that what you mean by usable DR?

Put another way, do these methods suggest anything about where highlight and shadow clipping begins in a high DR scene exposed for the middle tones?

180
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Calculating Dynamic Range
« on: March 12, 2012, 09:52:15 AM »
Rather than hijack any of the existing threads on DR, I thought I'd start a new one.

I'm still struggling a little with the concept by which a few people (LetTheRightLensIn and maybe a couple others) are computing Dynamic Range.

Maybe my understanding of DR itself is faulty.

Is not DR the total range between brightest bright detail and darkest dark detail that a camera is capable of recording in a single exposure?

If so, how does having two separate exposures, one completely underexposed (body cap on stopped down fast shutter) and one completely overexposed (bright, slow shutter) aid in computing maximum potential DR?

Wouldn't you instead need a to meter at the median brightness point in a scene containing a fairly slow transition to complete dark and a fairly slow transition to complete bright (i.e. overexposed white and underexposed black existing together in a single exposure with smooth gradients towards the center) in order to determine useful DR?

I have a technical background, but I'm looking more for conceptual understanding than anything.

Thanks!

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14