September 23, 2014, 04:35:11 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 - dilbert

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 197
16
Or do you wish to become one of your own DRones and insist that the extra bit-depth and thus DR is all of a sudden important?

Do you not understand that he's deliberately channelling you here?

If the situation was reversed, no question that you'd use it as another stick to beat Canon with, because then it would suddenly be really "important"...

Like how on the 1DX, if you want to shoot at 14fps (rather than 12fps) then you can only write 8-bit JPEG files?

Canon has already beat me to it :)

I'm kind of curious how many people enable the "14fps mode". Then again I imagine that all of the sports shooters that have no time for dealing with CR2 files do enable it.

17
It has nothing to do with being late to the market, both Betamax and V2000 refused to release pornography on their systems. V2000 had perfect slow motion and freeze frames and play backwards, it would have been the biggest hit because porn is the reason why there was such a huge thing made out of the perfect freeze frame on VHS.

Same reason why the Laserdisc (another Philips invention / shared with Sony product) was also a failure and why the internet is such a massive succes: porn.

Give people what they want or they will walk away, sooner or later.

How right you are!

The Internet is for Porn!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-TA57L0kuc

Enjoy!

18
The Samsung does 420MP/Sec.

The Samsung is also saving 12-bit files during continuous shooting vs. the full 14-bits in single shot mode.

So what?

You keep telling us that DR (and by extension 12bits vs 14bits) isn't important except to a small number of people so therefore this difference that you've highlighted is also relatively unimportant. Or do you wish to become one of your own DRones and insist that the extra bit-depth and thus DR is all of a sudden important?

Context, dilbert...context.  As usual, it eludes you.  If one is going to compare data throughput rates by multiplying MP x fps as Bob was doing, the underlying assumption is that the bit depth is the same.  In this case, that assumption is not true.

Strange because when people calculate MP/sec, it is generally fps * MP/f and the bit depth never comes into it.

Kudos to Samsung for deciding that when you're doing continuous shooting that you don't really need the extra bit depth - just like you keep saying, Samsung decided that the extra DR from the extra bits isn't important. Are you sure that you don't work for Samsung?

Or are you trying to say that we should calculate in bits/second to be fair?

Samsung NX1: 5Gb/sec
Canon 7D2: 2.8Gb/sec

Looks like the Canon 7D2 is just over half the speed of the Samsung NX1, which is an improvement on the 420MP/sec vs 200MP/sec where the Canon camera is under half the speed of the Samsung NX1.

Does that make you happier?

Oh, you like to hold up the 1DX, lets see how that does: 252MP/sec and 3.5Gb/sec. Still slower than the Samsung NX1.

Feel better now?

Oh wait, the 252MP/sec & 3.5GB/sec are in JPEG only mode (which is 8bit output).

So if we were to focus on keeping all 14 bits (as you've pointed out is essential as throwing away 2 bits out of 14 is just not on) then the 1DX is 216MP/sec and 3Gb/sec.

Theoretically (using the above numbers), the Samsung NX-1 could shoot at the same frame rate as the 1DX (12fps) and keep 14bits.

19
Lenses / Re: Do you keep all your boxes?
« on: September 21, 2014, 09:43:37 AM »
Only if I need to use them for warranty returns to a shop.

Otherwise, they get tossed.

If I'm buying a lens 2nd hand, I don't care if the box is present... and I won't pay extra because someone has the box.

20
The Samsung does 420MP/Sec.

The Samsung is also saving 12-bit files during continuous shooting vs. the full 14-bits in single shot mode.

So what?

You keep telling us that DR (and by extension 12bits vs 14bits) isn't important except to a small number of people so therefore this difference that you've highlighted is also relatively unimportant. Or do you wish to become one of your own DRones and insist that the extra bit-depth and thus DR is all of a sudden important?

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 10:10:23 AM »
Seems everyone missed this paragraph:

Scroll up a few posts to see how you are wrong yet again.

Yup, I read that after I posted and could have deleted my post (or modified it before you replied) but it is good to see you've concentrated on pointing out someone else being wrong rather than wondering about the content of Thom's post vs activity on this website.

Good to see my toy hasn't gone away :)

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 08:50:30 AM »
DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

Lol. You yourself don't even believe those purchasing a C300 are doing so because of DPAF. Troll.

Edit
My mistake. I guess you're just bad at getting your point across:

My point wasn't that people are buying the C300 for DPAF, but that Canon...decided to offer DPAF as a feature upgrade on a $12000 camera aimed at the professional market.

So...what is your point, exactly?   That you need things spelled out explicitly because you can't grasp a simple inference, perhaps?

Well given that you've muddied things quite considerably, perhaps the answer to your question is "yes."

Indeed, Canon have put DPAF in a $12000 camera but professionals that are using it for filming aren't going to buy the C300 for it or not buy other cameras because it isn't present.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 08:31:07 AM »
Seems everyone missed this paragraph:

And speaking of growth, what’s with Canon? It appears they’ve raised their 2015 interchangeable lens camera sales forecast (i.e. are not predicting another decline for next year, but rather significant unit volume growth). Given what I know of the market the only thing I could see driving the kind of growth they seem to now be predicting is another new interchangeable lens camera of significance. Coincidentally, there are now rumors floating around that Canon might introduce a new mount with smaller sensor (ala the Nikon 1).


Why aren't there any stories on *THIS* website about that?
Hmm?
Why don't the editors have stories about that?
Or are they just not publishing them?

24
EOS Bodies / Re: Sample Images From the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 20, 2014, 05:14:25 AM »
I opened the CR2 files at 100ISO of the 7D and 7DII in PhotoNinja, turned off all noise/color enhancements and pushed the shadows:
* Pattern noise seems to be gone.
* Shadows are still noisy. Maybe 1/3rd Stop or 1/2 Stop more dynamic range than the 7D. But more useable due to the lower Pattern noise.

So, it is the same sensor technology with little enhancements.

Sigh.

:(

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 11:09:23 PM »
...
I know that DPAF locks onto subject well, but from what I'd seen, although people are impressed with the tracking, it isn't as good as what you get with a person actually pulling focus. There are often little blips where focus is just slightly out then it corrects, which IMO, isn't quite good enough for critical work. I'm sure it will improve...I'm curious to see if the 7D II's sensitivity improvements help that or not. I think moving from DPAF (which is basically just having horizontal detection) to something like QPAF, or another innovation that achieves the same thing (allowing horizontal and vertical detection) will improve tracking. Long term, someone will get to full double cross type technology, where phase detection can be performed in the horizontal, vertical, and both diagonal directions.
...

DPAF or QPAF doesn't work with those Zeis PL cinema lenses that are all manually focused.

As jrista has said, professionals behind cinema cameras don't use any sort of automated focus that is camera based and Canon knows this which is why all of its cinema lenses have focus gears on them.

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

26
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Mark-II in response to the D750
« on: September 19, 2014, 01:39:13 PM »
Seeing your "potential specs" (and not even discussing them in detail) there has to be a 5D4 release first. Otherwise Canon is cannibalizing their FF cash cow 5D3.
IMHO this won't happen untill mid to late 2015 and then there has to be some additional 3 to 5 month until a 6D2 would be released.
Conclusion: I'd say +1 to marsu's statement.
Some people suggest that the semi/pro 5D-line has a longer update cycle (4-5yr) whereas the 6D, which is more consumer oriented, could have a shorter update cycle (2-3yr).

The 5D line's update cycle should be 3 years. Too early yet to tell what the 6D's will be.

27
Everyone and his/her grandmother seems to hit the market now with some version of 35mm F/1.4 - F/2.0, and I really wonder who buys all these 35mm lenses, especially when the market is pretty much covered by Canon's 35/2IS (cheap and effective), Canon's 35L (expensive but says "Canon L"), Sigma's 35A (moderately priced, but says "Sigma") and Zeiss's Otus (expensive&MF but optically excellent).

Bokeh, color, contrast and transparency of the lens are very important to some folks. Each lens manufacturer has their own recipe for their glass, thus each one looks different even if they're all equally sharp.

28
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Mark-II in response to the D750
« on: September 19, 2014, 10:54:09 AM »
An update of 5DMkIII is the proper response. D750 is not an entry level FF.

Correct answer.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: Sample Images From the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:47:24 AM »
We'll have to wait and see what happens with DxO testing and elsewhere to see if there is any banding evident but it is a pity that Canon didn't put the same effort into improving IQ between the 5D2 and 5D3.

30
EOS Bodies / Re: Chuck Westfall Talks Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 12:13:18 AM »
Sadly, it sounds like moving the 7Dii to video is more important to Canon.
Very disappointed.

I have no idea why one would think this camera suggests "video is more important to Canon." Because honestly I see this camera as living proof that Canon actually couldn't care less about video. The video capabilities of this camera would have been interesting about four years ago. As it is now, for cinematographers, this camera is dead on arrival.

You're wrong - Canon cares a lot about video. Canon especially cares a lot about the folks in video that have money to spend. And Canon wants as much of that money as they can get (Canon is a corporation afterall.)

So why would Canon sell you a $1800 DSLR to do video when they have a $10000 video camera that they'd rather you buy instead?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 197