February 01, 2015, 08:35:53 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 205
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Where is the EOS 5D Mark IV? [CR2]
« on: January 31, 2015, 10:54:31 PM »
And we all know that Canon doesn't design products that internally could be seen to compete.

Well explain the 5D MkII that killed the $7,000 1Ds MkIII for all but a very few purchasers, or the 70D that must have had a big impact on 7D sales.

2
EOS-M / Re: EOS M3 24 MP Sensor?
« on: January 31, 2015, 10:26:37 PM »
Image quality can be objectively measured. It's been demonstrated for years that those measurements do have a bearing on IQ. (I'm not talking about DXO scores here, either...I'm talking about measurements.) Not necessarily in every single image, but that's not what we're talking about here. We are talking about the potential to produce quality images...as it is an image producing device under discussion.


Objectively speaking, the device is either more or less limited in it's ability to produce quality, on a RELATIVE SCALE of cameras currently available. Canon's high read noise puts it at the lower end of that scale.


When it comes to what image quality is dependent upon. Let's list the criteria:


Sensor
Readout System
ISP (Image Signal Processor)
AF System
Metering System
Lenses


The user is a factor, but let's exclude that for the moment. Canon lenses? Awesome. Canon metering system? Excellent. Canon AF system? Excellent. Canon ISP (DIGIC 6)? Highly competitive (NX1 may trounce everything, though. ;P). Readout system? Hmm. Sensor? Hmm.


Canon excels at everything else that affects image quality except their readout system and sensor. Therefor, it stands to reason that the sensor and readout system would be the area Canon should put their focus, no?


So what's involved in an image sensor and readout system? Electronics and signals. What do electronics and signals have in common? Noise. What can be done to improve the quality of the signal coming off the sensor? Reduce noise. What does reducing noise do? Increases tttmnbso*. Oh. Oh. Ooohh!


There isn't anything else to it. Signals and noise. That's what an image is. In an image, a reduction in image noise increases SNR. In a device, a reduction in read noise increases tttmnbso (which is the potential for the camera to produce quality).


I'm trying to keep things objective here, not subjective. With objectivity, we have a level playing field. It doesn't assume one person's perceptions or opinions are better or worse than anyone else's....it simply relies on the cold, hard, emotionless little facts. It's a device we are talking about, something that has POTENTIAL to create images of quality. That potential can be higher or lower. Sony, Toshiba, Samsung? The potential of their sensors (just sensors, readout systems are included on-die & not all of them actually have cameras) to produce high quality is high to very high on a relative scale. Canon? To date, the potential of their sensors and readout system to produce high quality is lower, on a relative scale.


Emotions and perception doesn't play a role here (or at least, shouldn't play a role.)


Well, that's all for now, folks!





* TTTMNBSO: The thing that must not be spoken of

You are so fu--ing boring...........................

3
Yes, I would.

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Backup body for extreme environment
« on: January 31, 2015, 03:01:57 PM »
hi everyone, I'm going to be living and working in Antarctica soon and I'm looking for a good backup body to take with me. My main body is a 7D mark I which I love and has pretty much everything I need.
I would be looking to use the camera for a range of uses across various environments (at sea, Falklands, peninsula, mainland continent, icebergs, low-light, astro, birds etc.) and would ideally need to be weather sealed and cold weather tolerant (-55 Celsius).
I'm going to be down there for 18 months so although my main body will be used most, it is a long time and all gear breaks, there is obviously nowhere to get it fixed/replaced should I need to.

I was thinking about getting a FF backup and wasn't entirely ruling out a nice and cheap 5D mark I, it's obviously old now but still an excellent body. I had even considered all the way up to a 1Ds mk III, so a fairly flexible budget.

It doesn't need to be FF but already have a great APS-C body so something different wouldn't do any harm and weather sealing would be very much preferable when I'm up in the more northern wetter areas.

Any suggestions?

1Ds MkIII.

I use them and for adverse conditions it is far and away the best bang for the buck, and the IQ, especially at low iso, has not yet been bested to any degree by any Canon camera.

5
Sports / Re: Big Boat Fell Over!
« on: January 31, 2015, 02:59:30 PM »
Hi Private By Design.
Did you ever get your sail training ship to the Tall Ships gathering held in Southampton?
That sort of renaming seems a bit not in the spirit of things, maybe a bit crooked! Telling us about things like this, no wonder you remain private by design!  ;D

Cheers, Graham.

Haha, I used to be a ships Captain, it was a sail training ship. If  you want to see blatant and borderline legal name changing go to St. Eustatius in the Caribbean, it is, effectively, a sanctions busting 'oil storage facility'. Ships come in, unload their oil, rename, reload, and then deliver 'clean' unsanctioned oil. It really is quite comical.

No, I wasn't a tall ship, I was a pretty large schooner, 105' masts. It wasn't a classified training vessel, we all had to hold true commercial grade licenses (which training ships crews don't), but the crew turnover and type of job it was meant I did teach hundreds of crew and the owners felt it was, and treated it like, it was a training ship.

6
Sports / Re: Big Boat Fell Over!
« on: January 31, 2015, 02:55:00 PM »
Hi Domino Dude.
More to the point, it potentially saved 25 lives (including the pilot and captin and I always say you have to rely on the urge for self preservation of the guys in control), and prevented the port of Southampton being closed to large vessels for the duration of any salvage operation, which on a sunken vessel would probably still be in the planning or possibly the preparation stages, saving even more money and possibly jobs too.
None the less a smart and gutsy move as you say.
Not sure I would want a car that had been trapped in such a salt rich environment, bearing in mind there was salt water sloshing around on the inside rather than the outside like normal!

Cheers, Graham.

Thanks for the interesting post, Graham!
I heard about it on the radio when it happened, but hadn't looked at any photos. I certainly didn't imagine this. A smart and gutsy move that saved a lot of vehicles, and indirectly money.

This is the ballsiest intentional beaching I ever heard of http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg545/docs/documents/monarch.pdf over 3,000 aboard, middle of the night and an intentional beaching. For those interested in this stuff read the bit about WTD #10 not being closed, I'll bet most passengers thought their Christmas was ruined, yet he saved 100's of lives.

7

.......

Now try 170.170.185, note there is a 15 point difference between the two values, lower that three stops and you get 139.139.151, you now have a 12 point difference between the two values. THE TONE HAS CHANGED as well as the luminance.


This could be solved if working in LAB color mode? I think so. Lowering three stops in "L" channel will leave "a" and "b" channel (which contain colors) the same.

That is an excellent idea, though there are issues associated with converting to Lab and back. So I tried it. It is much better, the difference only changed by a couple of points, but you have intrinsic issues of Lab.

But I have cracked it in RGB and I am going to do a problem image with it asap.

Do your curves-exposure etc adjustment, but use the Luminosity blending mode! Doing this maintains the 15 point spread on the above tone.

Maybe we can force extreme ETTR to work better, if so this could be a significant advance for some images.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: More About the EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R
« on: January 31, 2015, 12:23:11 PM »
I gotcha.  Yeah the grips do get a bit bigger on the DX. 

I find the accessory grips to be bulkier and less comfortable to hold than the 1-series.  Balance is more important to me than weight, and the grip balances most L-series lenses better, meaning my hands don't get sore after a day of shooting. There's always flex between the body and an accessory grip, that can be an issue for tripod use (and swapping the grip off/on isn't very practical), so I far prefer the integrated design.  But it's definitely a personal preference.

That's a problem with the design, not a problem with integration versus separate.  The 1 series bodies should be designed like the 1V/1VHS.




Have you ever used a 1VHS? I have two here.

There is flex between the grip and body when using the tripod socket of the grip. Also the design is necessarily bigger and heavier than necessary for an all in one design, you have to have two bottom plates strong enough to take the tripod sockets and the grip needs a top plate.

It is a nice idea in theory, in practice, even the 1 series designs fall short in application as to make it 'better' would necessitate even more weight and space in materials.

9
Sports / Re: Big Boat Fell Over!
« on: January 31, 2015, 12:03:39 PM »
.
Thanks, Graham. Nice to get local information and perspective. I think if I lived there, I'd be on that ferry every day!! I love ferries.

The renaming of these ships has become quite common, or so it seems to me. I watch maritime activity using marinetraffic.com and vesselfinder.com since we have a waterfront here. There's been lots of change, consolidation, etc. in the shipping world, especially since the rich people stole all the money in 2008. I sometimes watch a video done on the "Portland Senator" in 2008 -- "Ten things I have learned about the sea."

https://vimeo.com/19823932

If you look for that ship today, it's the "Hanjin San Diego."

A lot of the ships I shoot on our waterfront here have had different owners -- and name changes.

Also, for anyone with an interest in marine shipping, I recommend the book, "Ninety Percent of Everything" by a wonderful writer named Rose George (a more English name I couldn't imagine!).

http://www.amazon.com/Ninety-Percent-Everything-Shipping-Invisible-ebook/dp/B009LRWJKW/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1422721054&sr=1-1&keywords=90+percent+of+everything

Haha, I used to be a ships Captain, it was a sail training ship. If  you want to see blatant and borderline legal name changing go to St. Eustatius in the Caribbean, it is, effectively, a sanctions busting 'oil storage facility'. Ships come in, unload their oil, rename, reload, and then deliver 'clean' unsanctioned oil. It really is quite comical.

10
Lenses / Re: EF 11-24 f/4L USM Specifications
« on: January 31, 2015, 10:19:47 AM »
As for CPL's, here is my 145mm CPL on the 17TS-E, which I often shift stitch to an 11mm fov.

The CPL, as NWPhil says, can be used very effectively for water and shinny services, I use mine for controlling glare and reflections on swimming pools, granite worktops and bathrooms.

I strongly suspect Fotodiox will have an 11-24 version of the Wonderpana out pretty quickly.
I did not know they had this solution for the 17 TS-E and I could not find it at B&H. I would be most interested and if you could provide full name and number, it would be most appreciated.

Hi there Eldar,

It is the Fotodiox Wonderpana 145, they do several versions, the 145 that just has a 145 filter thread, the 66 which has slots and the 145 thread but doesn't rotate, and the 66 FreeArc that has slots the 145 thread and does rotate, I have the basic 145 because I only use round filters, but they also do one called the FreeArc that has slots for grads etc. You need to work out what functionality you want/need first then narrow down the large range of kit options that include various filter packages.

For the 17TS-E it works with zero vignetting at all shift amounts, and even with full shift and 4ยบ tilt, or full tilt and a touch of shift, far and away the best solution for the 17.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=fotodiox+wonderpana+17+TS-E&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Afotodiox+wonderpana+17+TS-E

11
Lenses / Re: EF 11-24 f/4L USM Specifications
« on: January 31, 2015, 10:10:42 AM »
As for CPL's, here is my 145mm CPL on the 17TS-E, which I often shift stitch to an 11mm fov.

The CPL, as NWPhil says, can be used very effectively for water and shinny services, I use mine for controlling glare and reflections on swimming pools, granite worktops and bathrooms.

I strongly suspect Fotodiox will have an 11-24 version of the Wonderpana out pretty quickly.

Darn, and I believed my 95mm filter was big....

Seems that the new 11-24 has an integrated hood, similar to other newer UWA lenses.
That alone is going to create issues adapting a filer system to it.
For sure I will wait to hear and see test results on this new lens - hopefully, it will at least be equal to Nikon's 14-24 f2.8.
I would not be surprised with the rumored price if the lens was a f2.8 - @ f/4 seems bit too much, but again, maybe it's really even better than Nikon's offering, and sharp right from f/4

The overall size and exterior looks seem fine for me, and if indeed supports a internal focusing design, then even better.
Maybe f/4 is the new f2.8, now that Canon is coming with higher MP cameras and what seems to be a more robust iso - time will tell.
Meanwhile, is very entertaining reading about all this in the main forums   ;D

Not really, Fotodiox have done a good job with all the other ultrawides with built in lens hoods. They all use the same 145mm filters both round and rectangles for the grads.

12
Magiclangern provides a button to "expose to the right". Adjust exposure in postprocessing to fit your needs. Problem solved, case closed.

And how, exactly, do you do that? Because if you are using the 'Blacks', 'Shadows', 'Exposure', 'Highlights', or 'Whites' sliders you are not getting the tonality of the scene.

If you use tone curves on each colour channel seperately, if you are using the camera calibration panel etc then yu might be getting close.

You seem to be missing the point that 'simple' adjustments to an overexposed file do not get you back to the same tonality as a 'correctly' exposed file.

The RAW data is linear. If you expose to the right, you just collect more photons. In software you have to reduce (or increase) the exposure by the same amount that you adjusted while taking the picture. Then you have the same raw data without blown highlights (when decreasing exposure taking the picture) or with less noise (when increasing exposure when taking the picture).

You do not need to change the channels separately. You do not need to change the tonality curve.

The required correction is only one single value. E. g. +2EV while taking the picture and then -2EV to reverse that effect in software.

That is the theory and software which does that is fine but there are many things that can go wrong. One big difference is the tonality curve of the camera (software) which is applied to convert linear RAW data to JPEG values. You cannot work with those JPEGs, you need linear RAW. But even then the RAW is preprocessed by software and that might do some things like change the color of dark/bright parts. E.g. reduce the color of dark parts to avoid color noise.

You can simply test your software. Switch to manual mode and take a photo of some dark objects before a dominant white wall and expose like the camera would do (make the white wall grey). Then expose to the right and remember how many EV you increased the exposure. E.g. 1/100s camera exposure vs 1/25s ETTR exposure = +2EV. Then use the RAW files and convert them with your software and apply -2EV exposure to the second picture. Now they should have EXACTLY the same color properties but the ETTR picture should have less noise. If not, your software is not up to that specific task.

Using the camera JPEGs here will lead to totally wrong colors, banding etc. due to all the "optimizations" applied to the RAW data in order to get good looking JPEGs.


At the end of the day the goal is to take a picture and to expose for that specific subject and the sensor noise may actually be low enough that you are satisfied with the exposure suggested by the spot metering of the camera. In that case you can directly use the camera JPEGs and be fine. Heavy postprocessing is only for low volume activities or people with too much time.

RAW data is linear, all rendering software that actually gives us a realistic output image applies a gamma curve, it has to, it also treats green very differently to red and blue for all cameras with Bayer arrays.

Now if you had taken a couple of seconds to actually test your ideas you would know they do not hold true for anything other than black, white and grey.

As I explained in my earlier reply, when you have a coloured pixel the R,G,B values fall at different points on that gamma curve, now if you move all three values the same vertical distance on your exposure scale they move different amounts on the horizontal, numerical, scale, this means that the tone changes.

A couple of examples.

128.128.128 lowered three stops in post goes to 50.50.50 it is still an even toned grey just three stops darker.

Now try 170.170.185, note there is a 15 point difference between the two values, lower that three stops and you get 139.139.151, you now have a 12 point difference between the two values. THE TONE HAS CHANGED as well as the luminance.

Both tones and their -3 adjustments are shown below. As the tones get lighter in capture and the more you bring them down in post the more the impact.

When you work on darker tones the differences are too small to see, when you work on lighter tones, especially images with very subtle tonality like, as I first pointed out in the thread and Sporgon seconded, a nice bright but subtle toned sky, then you cannot get the true saturation and tonality close to how it looked if you do extreme ETTR as suggested in the original article.


13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Lineup Restructuring?
« on: January 31, 2015, 12:50:23 AM »

That is all. Any thoughts?

A lot of wishful thinking. The Low End is dead, never to return. The casual non-gearhead photographers have switched to Smart Phone. Take a look at all the gearhead sites (SonyRumors, 43Rumors, FujiRumors, NikonRumors, etc) and everyone is talking about the latest high-end cameras. Canon 5Ds, Sony a7s, etc. Rebels and D3300 not so much.

Do you not think that is because the only people hat frequent rumoured sites are gear heads?

When the low end really dies we are all in the the sh1t, it is the low end that pays the bills, and always has.

14
Lenses / Re: EF 11-24 f/4L USM Specifications
« on: January 31, 2015, 12:31:17 AM »
As for CPL's, here is my 145mm CPL on the 17TS-E, which I often shift stitch to an 11mm fov.

The CPL, as NWPhil says, can be used very effectively for water and shinny services, I use mine for controlling glare and reflections on swimming pools, granite worktops and bathrooms.

I strongly suspect Fotodiox will have an 11-24 version of the Wonderpana out pretty quickly.

15
Lighting / Re: No 600EX-RT discounts this holiday?
« on: January 30, 2015, 05:52:16 PM »


When the 650 or 700 comes out, which I don't expect soon.

Having said that put your email down with Canon Price Watch, when the refurbs come in they are often priced at $373 with free shipping and Canon 12 month warranty.

good call. I will do that today. P.S., Gordon at CanonPriceWatch is amazing. seriously, he responded to an order email within 20 minutes on Christmas day. That is insanely good customer service. Too good in fact.

I believe he is a secret early attempt by Google or Apple or somebody at a future intelligent auto response system.  :)

It doesn't seem to matter what time of the day or night, what day or timezone you are in, he gets the right answer to you personally within half an hour.

I will never by a Canon product again without emailing him first.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 205