Messages

91

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D Mark IV and 7D (this is not a comparison thread)

« on: May 22, 2012, 02:42:43 PM »

Seems to me the 1D X would just have very diminishing returns for me, personally.  Thanks everyone!

How so?

Canon's best autofocus. Canon's best framerate. Canon's highest sensitivity.

If you can benefit from a mk4, you can benefit from an x.

Holy crap you have an enviable assortment of glass!

92

EOS Bodies / Re: Post Processing...PC vs. Apple, Photoshop vs. Aperture...???

« on: May 17, 2012, 10:54:48 AM »

I use an OSX machine (mac book pro) and a Windows machine (home brew).

They do the same thing.

Some things about OSX bug me. Some things about Windows bug me.

If you run multi platform, Lightroom > Aperture since you can go between machines. If you don't, Aperture offers managed libraries, but Lightroom has arguably better development tools.

I'm 99% LR. Only dip into photoshop on rare occasions.

93

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DXOMark website - mistake and careless on their part...

« on: May 15, 2012, 01:14:42 PM »

I work in a legal role where a one word error in my writing could have significant consequences for the organisation I work for, so these things certainly can matter.

I work in a technical role in the aerospace industry. If misspellings mattered in technical documentation, airplanes would be falling out of the sky.

I don't think this wrong word says anything about the accuracy of DXO's measurements, nor do I believe that DXO's measurements hold a heck of a lot of import for photographic equipment consumers.

Much ado about nothing.

94

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DXOMark website - mistake and careless on their part...

« on: May 15, 2012, 09:12:20 AM »

Doesn't DXO do its testing not primarily as a service but rather to support its own software?

Should I shy away from DXO Optics Pro because I happen to like a lens that didn't perform well in their testing? Come on.

95

Lenses / Re: Canon 50 1.4 worth the upgrade?

« on: May 11, 2012, 01:15:46 PM »

I found the 1.8 frustrating; focus is too slow. The USM in the 1.4 is noticeably better. As mentioned above, the bokeh is much more pleasing than the 1.8.

So I have the canon 50 1.8. 
I just recently upgraded to a full frame camera.
I'm noticing the 35 2.0 that I used a ton... isn't the focal length I'm looking for as much on full frame.
Has anyone been in a similar situation and have some advice? Thanks.

Moving to a FF Camera, you will want to look at the 85mm f1.8 to to use in place of your 50mm; it will provide a similar field of view that the 50mm did on your Crop Body.

... unless he got the larger frame camera because he wants to make use of the larger frame

96

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D3: How to find / calculate / figure out the Group in which a Lens is in?

« on: May 07, 2012, 09:23:40 AM »

Take a look at this, pages 37-39:

http://downloads.canon.com/CDLC/EOS_1DX_AF_Guide_CDLC.pdf

97

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 Dynamic Range

« on: May 05, 2012, 10:54:13 AM »

http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/

It also talks about noise in addition to dynamic range. There are books to read about this subject as well.

BTW, that site:

98

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: nikon d800 video recording sensor size is smaller than 5D???

« on: May 02, 2012, 10:15:39 AM »

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikonD800/3

"Movies can also be shot at two different crops from the sensor, FX and DX. This makes it easy to vary the field-of-view for grabbing footage, even if you’ve got a prime lens mounted. However, the ‘FX’ size is a significantly cropped version of the full sensor (it’s 91% of the sensor’s width), so the field-of-view will be a little narrower than you’d expect for any given focal length."

99

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Combining Sensors...is it possible?

« on: May 01, 2012, 09:30:27 AM »

For a multimillion dollar aerospace uses where a multi million dollar supercomputer reassembles the images over a period of days with a staff of scientists to manage it is one thing, a consumer camera is another.

The alignment/reassembly shouldn't be that difficult. It's that essentially what Hasselblad's H4D-200M does (albiet by moving the sensor rather than combining sensors, thus eliminating your first set of concerns re. color, brightness and heat).

100

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New monitor

« on: April 27, 2012, 01:29:36 PM »

Thanks for links/ideas.

Another question:

Once I buy a monitor, I need to calibrate, right? What is the easiest way to do it? (I know there are special calibrators, but i dont want to buy it for a one time job)

They come calibrated for whatever environment the manufacturer thinks is appropriate. However, that likely doesn't precisely match yours. Also, LCD's degrade with time, thus the profile needs to be updated on a regular basis.

I like the ColorMunki tool that profiles monitors as well as printers (and projectors, but meh).
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=550833&Q=&is=REG&A=details

101

EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras

« on: April 27, 2012, 09:31:41 AM »

A high megapixel 10fps camera is coming. It's not some distant future but probably just a couple of years. Nikon could make it right now if they threw in an extra processor or two into the D800.

That would be on the order of 700MB/sec, so I think they'd have to change memory formats or add a huge buffer too.

102

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New monitor

« on: April 27, 2012, 09:19:35 AM »

I use the U2410 ultrasharps as well. They're great for the buck compared to other builders - like apple - who use the same LG IPS panel.

Note however that it's an extended gamut monitor, and out of the box may give you wonky colors unless you calibrate it, and all the software in your workflow will have to respect color profiles.

103

EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras

« on: April 26, 2012, 03:18:13 PM »

Sensor density will more than likely continue to get cheaper with time. But no matter how advanced the tech of the wafer, a 22X15 frame sensor will always be 40% of the size of a 36X24 sensor, which cuts two ways. Even if they were perfect and larger sensors weren't more likely to have defects, fewer sensors can be made for the same material cost.

104

EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras

« on: April 26, 2012, 09:22:03 AM »

It's probably cost prohibitive. They get significantly fewer sensors per wafer with FF dimensions.

105

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D600

« on: April 26, 2012, 09:18:02 AM »

Actually the only reason I bought the 5D3 was that I was really waiting for what I call the 2DX.  A full frame camera with 44 mpx, 2 digilogic 6 processors, USB 3, uncompressed HDMI out for digital recorders and field monitors, 1D style with the vertical grip built-in for around $4,500 (maybe $5,000).  I think 6 fps is sufficient and of course the 1dX autofocus that the 5d3 already has.

I guess they could call it the 4DX.  I at first thought it would be called the 3DX but then I realized that calling anything as the 3D anything might be misleading....  Unless they actually build a .....

Calling it the 10000X would be more appropriate given the price point a camera with those specs would likely come in at.