September 19, 2014, 10:12:58 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 - dilbert

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 195
Canon General / Re: Canon Developing New-Concept Photo-Storage Device
« on: September 16, 2014, 07:42:17 AM »
bleah, just wait for the non-name copies of this idea from China. They'll be 1/4 of the price and work just as good.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 16, 2014, 07:40:58 AM »
Of course I need high ISO.

I need to take photos of black cats in mines chasing mice and to stop that action.

EOS Bodies / Re: How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
« on: September 16, 2014, 07:40:00 AM »
I'm no longer sure if the 5D4 will even be able to match Exmor or have 4k video. Everyone who has spoken with Canon reps is sounding super negative all of a sudden about the chances for even the 5D4 to get 4k video. I find that shocking and hard to believe. But I'm getting told that if I expect 4k on the 5D4 that I'm most likely setting myself up for disappointment as Canon still feels 4k is a super premium feature only fit for the $8000+ class buyer for the foreseeable future. And they don't even see them giving it basic low end features like focusing aids or zebras and such since those are 'ultra premium' features in Canon's mind still, apparently.

Hmmm, sounds like the Kodak disease.

And some feel that they may not even have an Exmor like sensor ready even for the 5D4 either.

I've purchased 6 different and 7 total Canon DSLR, but I'm getting a bad feeling it may be time to quit. :(
For the first time I'm really stating giving all sorts of other items from other brands really serious looks.
I can't believe how negative the impressions of where Canon may be going I'm hearing from people who went to the trade shows. They are all saying Canon seems to have lost the plot and afraid they will total drop the ball on the 5D4 (no real sensor improvements other than some more MP and no 4k or anything really interesting for video at all beyond DPAF :( ). Some said Canon told them forget 4k or any video usability features unless the market and users literally force them into it with extreme demand made clear. They insist all that stuff it for high-end people owner and far beyond DSLRs. I hope it was just reps trying to push current stuff and some misinterpreting going on. But even the guy who works for a different Canon division who met some DSLR guys said that was his impression too.

Everything you've heard matches up with what people were saying of Canon 3 to 4 years ago now so obviously the ship that was put to sea then hasn't changed direction.

Canon is sitting pretty because they got a whole bunch of people to buy into Canon around 2004 - 2008 when DSLRs were starting to become affordable.

It would seem likely that there's going to be more 2nd hand Canon equipment come to the market in the coming years....

EOS Bodies / Re: How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
« on: September 16, 2014, 07:16:00 AM »
How can the 5D3 be improved for the 5D4?

Put a Sony Exmor sensor in it. Either the 36MP or 24MP one.

Other features:
- realtime zebras for focusing
- histogram based on raw when shooting in raw mode
- image review focus highlighting
- automatic ettr mode
- better battery performance
- open API for ML developers
- shutter delay programmable rather than fixed number of seconds
- 100% viewfinder with 1.0x magnification
- viewfinder that doesn't require your nose to be chopped off
- hybrid viewfinder with horizontal and vertical leveling superimposed
- red/IR focus illumination light built into the body

And review of ML software features for other ideas...

EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:52:48 AM »
In the text there are bits like this:

65-point* all cross-type AF system for high-performance, accurate subject tracking with EV -3 sensitivity (center point) for focusing in extreme low-light conditions

I haven't seen anything indicating what the *'s are for?

Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:49:23 AM »
Why do they bother with lenses like this?

Towards the edges at the wide end, it is just rubbish.

Also it would appear to offer close to the same IQ as the 24-105/f4L, if not better. Be interesting to see what photozone, etc, have to say.

However it will perform very nicely on APS-C cameras.

EOS Bodies / Re: Digic 7 Development
« on: September 14, 2014, 07:31:26 AM »
The DIGICs are much more than just a relabeled ARM chip. Much more important for their purpose is the signal processing part of those chips, the ARM is just there to control those and run the firmware + interface. So having a faster ARM core is only half the battle won.

My gut says that everything they do with DIGIC (except for the ADC functionality, which really ought to be moved onto the sensor die anyway) can probably be done with a decent multicore ARM and a decent mobile GPU package.  I could be wrong, though.

You don't suppose that DIGIC is just a fancy name that Canon uses "DIGIC" as a brand-specific term for its own combination of CPU/GPU package, do you?


The 1D/1Ds created product confusion amongst Canon's customers.

The 1DX is a unified product to remove confusion.

28MP APS-C sensor? Interesting!

Good thing that Canon has moved from 18MP to 20MP. Really jumping ahead there.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 13, 2014, 06:09:35 AM »
I think the D810 is still quite a bit at risk of cannibalization, especially due to the price difference.
D610 is the one I think will be most cannibalized, unless they lower the price substantially.

Better that you cannibilize your own sales than have someone else do it.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 05:04:29 AM »
However, the majority of his picture will have been produced from under severely exposed data. When compared with someone using a superior technique / process, his image will be inferior even if that someone is using old tech such as  20D, or D70 or whatever.

There isn't a "technique" that makes up for the sensor's misbehavior in situations like this.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Surprise Cinema EOS Announcement for Photokina? [CR1]
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:18:55 AM »
Interesting rumor. Cinema Eos on Photokina? If it's true and we see a development announcment, then it's clearly designed to push down the ridiculously high interest/pre-orders of the just-announced Sony FS7. That FS7 just disrupts the market, it's clearly the end of the current C300/1Dc/C100 sales, therefore they will HAVE to respond very soon.

If anyone is not following the FS7 it:

-S35 sensor inside the F5/FS700 (therefore absolutely lovely image and very sensitive)
-Records 4K 10bit 4:2:2 XAVC internal like the 30K $ F55
-Records 180fps at 1080p and 60p at 4K
-Outputs 4K raw at 60fps and 2K raw at 240fps to external recorder
-It comes with everything ready to shoot, a nice EVF, shoulder pad, articulating grip, internal ND filters,
-It's the most well designed camera I've seen in years
-It's 8000$. Half the C300 and just 1.5K over the C100!

Does the FS7 come in a PL mount version?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 03:52:48 AM »
You have under exposed for this scene. Pic 0 histogram shows this, pic 2 shows that you have too much highlight detail after bringing in down 100.

No, actually I haven't. I've got just the right amount of highlight detail.

Did you bracket for such a scene of difficult EV range ? If you had a 2/3 or 1 stop over exp you would be able to work the data much better.

I did bracket it. At +1 EV the highlights are unrecoverable.

The snow is *really* bright and the shadows in the tree quite dark.

As per the attachments, pic6 is "out of camera" at +1 EV and pic5 is -5 in LR showing that there is no ability to recover the blown areas.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 03:06:51 AM »
pic0 is out of camera, exposed to ensure the highlights on the top of the mountain are preserved.

pic1 is a 100% crop of the church/tree with exposure +1, shadows +100
noise has already destroyed any tree detail

pic2 is with highlights -100 showing the detail in the snow has been kept but that the mountain side is unusable

pic3 is pushing the exposure up as far as I can go without blowing highlights. noise can now easily be seen in the trees. no shadow detail present amongst the trees.

pic4 is turning up the shadows (and I've also turned up NR). Notice the absence of any detail in the shadow area of the trees, especially those on the mountain behind the church.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:37:30 PM »
Come on then, show us how it is done.

Show us what YOU have done in this arena to compensate for Canon's sensors.

It's a problem, sure, but if you shoot landscape, it's not an issue if you know how to properly exposure blend.  That's what fine art landscape photographers have been doing for over a decade now.  High DR just makes things more convenient.

sure many shots didn't need to DR, but plenty enough along the way could've been helped for sure

Waiting for real world examples of what we are all missing  ;D

Go shooting in mountains where you've got snow and sunshine hitting the snow and shadows deep in the valley. There you want to keep "detail in the snow" (so that you don't just have big white areas) plus you also want to keep shadows from and in trees, etc.

Is that real world enough for you or are you going to say "Post a picture or it doesn't exist"?

Since I've shot scenes like that and not had a problem: pictures or it didn't happen.

I'm sick of words. I'm sick of opinions. I'm sick of theorizing. I'm sick of people misremembering underexposure tests as "real world normal exposure and there was banding!"

Pics or it didn't happen. If I was a mod it would be: pics or you are banned for a week  >:(

Since you claim all of these things are possible, why don't you lead from the front and show us how it is done?

Where are your pictures showing that Canon doesn't have a problem with keeping highlights and shadows?

Lots of people saying Canon's cameras can't do it and you're insisting that they can.

Show us.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 195