February 01, 2015, 12:37:57 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 - itsnotmeyouknow

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:05:18 PM »

Fixed that for you ;)

To say that sensor has nothing to do with IQ is folly.

To be clear, I wasn't saying that.

My apologies, I should have been clearer.  I suspected that wasn't what you were saying.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: January 28, 2015, 11:45:12 AM »
If they all have the same level of input, then yes.

Which belies the notion that IQ is a sensor property. It is about much more than JUST the sensor. It is about input, signal chain, and post.

Fixed that for you ;)

To say that sensor has nothing to do with IQ is folly.  It's like in the old days saying that it didn't matter what film you use.  The differences are, I grant you, lesser between sensors than say between Velvia 50 and Portra 400.  The capability of the sensor isn't everything, but it is an important cog in a complex wheel.  You do need good glass the get the best from a great sensor, but if good glass simply magnifies the weakness of the sensor, then where are we?

It's been a while since I posted, and eve longer since I've shot with a Canon.  I now shoot predominantly with the Pentax 645Z with the D800E as my back up.  My problem with the 5D3 was twofold: Dynamic Range and the noise banding at low ISOs.  I just couldn't live with the banding at all.  Lower DR wasn't so much an issue.  Now with the 645Z I can push at least 2/3 stops from the shadows with little or no IQ penalty for it.  I don't need to ETTR as I have so much latitude in the first place. 

Am keeping an eye on developments as I still have the best of my Canon lens setup. 

Also on a side note, in forums I see so much dismissiveness about manual focus lenses.  For action shots I get the reason for the objection.  For portrait and landscapes I don't understand the objection.  The Zeiss lenses are superb.  I have the 35 f/2 and I'm sure the Otus 55 is mindblowingly good.  I wouldn't exclude them because they are AF as a landscape shooter.  My 35 f/2 Zeiss wipes the floor with 24 - 70 of any variety at that focal length. 

EOS Bodies / Re: NEW CAMERA - EOS 80D?
« on: January 09, 2015, 07:31:57 AM »
That's it.(booooring)

Edit: Did some posts about giving improper credits just get lost? I wanted to comment on them, stating that I disagree - but now I cannot find it anymore. Strange.

Interesting bearing in mind the events elsewhere in the world that mods are deleting posts that criticise the admin of the site.  Especially as mine was actually fairly constructive.  Having comments link to a forum is clumsy, and causes misunderstandings. 

I don't know anything about this, but I keep hearing the point & shoot segment is shrinking due to smart phones having good cameras that do stills and video. Makes sense to me given how most people react to photography.

The issue seems more redundancy than perceived camera quality or versatility. I don't think people buy smart phones for their cameras although they may play some role in deciding which specific smart phone to buy -- phone vs phone, not phone vs point & shoot camera. The smart phone is the desirable object so it gets acquired. And once you have it you pay $1000 or more per year to operate it. Most folks aren't committed enough to photography to add more expense with a dedicated small camera. Why buy a separate thing if it only does what the phone will do? The photographer community can argue better image quality, increased versatility, etc., but most people don't care that much. The phone gets a picture -- instantly they can send it electronically to friends & family. Even a point & shoot with WIFI is going to be dependent on a WIFI connection so it may not be instant gratification. If they want a print they can go to Walgreen's or CVS and get one for five or 10 cents. Hell, even the cheapie little "portrait studios" at Walmart and Sears are shutting down.

For several reasons, photography one of them, I used to carry a small compass. Now I have one in my smart phone so I'm not buying a compass anymore. Redundancy. There was a time I carried a small reference book with lots of photography info -- DOF guides, ASA (ISO) info, flash guides, a gray card, etc. I don't consider buying such guides today because all that, and much more, is in my phone (well, not the gray card, I guess!). Redundancy. I see and hear a trend toward younger people not using wristwatches -- their phones give the correct time. Redundancy. I've even stopped wearing a wristwatch most of the time. I also often carried a stopwatch, especially for sport events -- my phone does that now. Redundancy. The greatest stopwatch/watch/compass/etc. ever made for a smart phone has no influence on whether I buy any of those objects individually. They get the job done in the phone, and that's all I care about.

Anecdotally, I just don't see people using point & shoot cameras anymore. I see either smart phones or bridge/DSLR cameras.

The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously.  In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry.  The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.

Site Information / Re: banning people for nothing at canon rumors
« on: June 20, 2013, 09:21:46 AM »
I actually think "banning" someone is itself kind of childish and needs to be reserved for extreme cases.

I think the exact opposite. I encourage the mods to set high standards, tolerate little, warn quickly, oust almost as quickly. Send 'em back to their mums for some retraining.

Friendly forums, like CanonRumors and almost any photographers' community, should be filled with over-the-top friendliness, courtesy,  support and a generally happy vibe. It needs to be over-the-top sugar sweet (but genuine) because written comms is terribly poor at getting nuance and intent right, we are not all Charlotte Brontë, so there really is no place for any sort of put-downs, sarcasm, or hostility, because even writers with no ill intent will find themselves posting things that look like they do have ill intent, or at least like they lack good will. Give up the subtlety, be really friendly.

Also, I don't see any '18+' box to tick before entering the site, so we can assume children are welcome here. I would certainly LOVE to think any young person male or female with an interest in photography, would feel comfortable browsing and learning here, and unafraid to post -- and not feel it is necessary to announce one's age first to avoid being bullied.

So please,  ::) find your happy space first before posting here, and try to be part of building something fun and open-armed to all. And if that thought makes you feel sick in your stomach and tempted to post sugary sarcasm,  maybe just park that post and stick to reading, or get up and do something off the computer.

I'm sorry but that comes over as incredibly naiive.  Everybody has an off day and says something they might regret.  As you've said, tone is difficult to read online so it's easy to be misunderstood.  I don't want this or any other forum to be 'over the top sugary sweet'.  That sounds like artificial sweetener.  It would be a bad thing for all if no-one was allowed to have a disagreement.  Healthy disagreements and exchanges of views are beneficial for all.  Yes they should remain respectful, but it is inevitable that there are times when things will overflow. 

Site Information / Re: banning people for nothing at canon rumors
« on: June 17, 2013, 07:28:53 AM »
This thread makes me think of this what the duck cartoon strip:

WTD1403 by itsmeitisss, on Flickr

why f8? Could use f5.6
why ISO 200? using f5.6, you can use iso100
light is a bit on the harsh side, due to time of day and altitude (guessing).  Consider a circular polarizer or a variable nd filter or ideally own both.

Why not use f/8?  I shoot a lot of landscapes and rarely use a larger aperture than f/8 - am usually between f/8 and f/16. 

You have to be careful which VND you use as many of them leave colour casts.  yes these can be removed, but you will remove not just the cast, but also other colours at the same time. 

You can do street photography with a DSLR.  Sometimes you might have to stay in one spot for a while so people adjust to you being there, and you fade in to the background in people's eyes.  I find that the thing that makes me stand out more is when I have a hood on a 24 - 70 lens.  The hood marks you out as 'pro'.  Canon's longer lenses being white don't help you fade into the background though!

I'll agree that in street photography, standard lengths are better as I always see street photography as including the environment the person is in.  It's not a simple photograph, a street photograph is in the street so its about the person's relationship with the background at least as much as it is about the person. 

I have both the 5D mk III and the Nikon D800.  The Canon is great at low light, and is a perfect camera for gigs with its real silent shutter.  The Nikon has great DR. End of.  I shoot mainly landscapes, so I want good low ISO performance.  The mk III forces me to use noise reduction at ISO 100 - 400.  This is a terminal disease for me, so I don't use the mmiii for very much at all now.  The mk III is dead in the water as far as I am concerned because of the noise banding in shadows.

You must have a bad 5DIII, for my landscapes it's been quite amazing and the appalling Nikon Live view effort puts me off any Nikon DSLR for landscape work. The D800 might have less banding and slightly more DR, but bracketing and digital blending is still required for high contrast imagery. If you are using NR on your 5DIII, then I would suggest your camera is out of spec, are using poor metering technique or you are rushing your landscape work. If you are pulling so much out of the shadows, then there is obviously a meeting issue or you are cutting courners with your bracketing and blending.
This image below, I combined the foreground and sky exposures into one image, I had to wait for the sun to kiss the foreground but the sun position was then wrong. So taking the two images created a better photo and one which looks balanced for exposure and has a stong visual feel. The difference between 30+ and 20+ mp is mute here and I get to utilise the camera's low 100 iso virtues because the 2 source images were taken using the camera's optimal performance.

I rarely have to use multiple shots with the D800 whereas I often had to with the mk III.  In my experience I can also get more detail from the shadows without getting the noise banding.  I agree that the Live View is far better on the Canon than on the D800, but then I very rarely use Live View in any case as I still prefer to use the viewfinder.  I'll often shoot handheld which is something I do with my medium format 645D also.

My experience:

                                        Canon   5D mkIII                Nikon  D800       

Live view                                 better                                           worse

Silent shooting                        much better                                  hardly much quieter than normal shooting

Dynamic Range                       worse                                            Much better

Low ISO noise                         much worse                                   Much better

Shadow recovery                     much worse                                   Much better

I'm no fanboi.  I judge from my images.  The Mk III can take some great images, but the pattern noise killed it for me.  That being said, I haven't yet sold all my L glass, so I am keeping my head in.  I operate a two camera set up: D800 and the 40 mp Pentax 645D.  The resolution isn't the be all and end all.  BUt is good to have the ability to print to about the same size with both.  The D800 is the best of all three for dynamic range in my experience, but the 645D gives a different feeling.  It also doesn't give me the pattern noise that the Canon does.  And I'm not the only one reporting that.

Nikon suffered from that until some younger blood finally got to the top.  The trouble is, they also need to make a profit.  Innovative ideas do not keep a company in business if they don't turn a profit.
Nikon is building a giant plant in Laos to open this fall, apparently hoping to ultimately get their costs down.  They also (I think) understand that the warmer weather means more floods and they need to have plan(t) B.  I hope it works out for them, lower prices are certainly welcome, and Canon is in the drivers seat right now as far as cost of production is concerned.  They drop prices and still make a nice profit.

Great analysis. One reason Nikon has problems with profits is they tried too hard to displace Canon as market leader. But Nikon must also improve their quality control. Obviously, their standard has taken quite a hit recently with the D800 left side misfocus and D600 sensor debris problems...

I think Nikon has far worse issues than a few tech bugs. Their last generation of DSLR's all robbed each other's sales and divided their own markets...a sure sign of a panic with their pro cameras. The D700 totally divided the D3 sales. Who would buy a D3 after a D700 was launched? Practically the same specs for half the size and cost...lol. Nikon was so desperate to grab market share they lost their long term perspective. When the next batch of cameras came out, the D4 wasn't properly shaken down and has had loads of tech issues. The D800 isn't the same genre/spec division of the D700 which has really peaved off a lot of Nikon shooters. Many Pro photographers (whom Nikon were courting) ditch Canon, sold a lot of kit and re-invested in Nikon glass...only to find that the next round Nikon wanted them to buy D4's at a huge price increase over the D800. Most of those pros looked at the D800 and considered it to have inappropriate specs. The very reason for them to consider Nikon (low mp, hish iso and the best AF in the business) were no longer valid and many have quietly gone back to Canon. While the D800 is a very innovative camera, it's not right for the buying market it's in. Nikon needed a true D700 replacement and hasn't delivered. The 5DIII is easily the most versatile DSLR ever made and the new ex 600 rt flash is simply the best flash gun ever made. Nikon have seriously upset their user base and handed the game back to Canon. If I was a Canon to Nikon switcher...I certainly wouldn't trust Nikon again.

I have both the 5D mk III and the Nikon D800.  The Canon is great at low light, and is a perfect camera for gigs with its real silent shutter.  The Nikon has great DR. End of.  I shoot mainly landscapes, so I want good low ISO performance.  The mk III forces me to use noise reduction at ISO 100 - 400.  This is a terminal disease for me, so I don't use the mmiii for very much at all now.  The mk III is dead in the water as far as I am concerned because of the noise banding in shadows. 

United Kingdom & Ireland / Re: Jessops close to administration?
« on: January 09, 2013, 03:46:23 PM »
I'm only 23 and I wasn't around 20 years when people tell me Jessops for more for the professional photographer as well as enthusiasts. Currently it is easy to tell from looking in their shops their market is now the enthusiast. Their sales assistants are of a similar breed to those found in large technology stores such as PC World, Comet and now in administration Curries and Dixons.

The same process has happened to the outdoor leisure shops - their main focus is the middle section of the market - it is more profitable to sell 500x £250 cameras a year than 50x £2000 products.

I must say London Camera Exchange is very different and a much better place to buy as even their sales assistants have a genuine interest in photography.

I think also the presence of online shops drive the higher margins found in places like Jessops to pay for unit rent and staff salaries which in turn puts off professional photographers due to markup on products. It's a shame but something that is only going to continue into the future.

I'm now told that jessops are looking into home printing solutions - canvas etc a way to keep turning profit.

Not only do online stores not have to pay store rent, many of them like Amazon fiddle their books so they don't pay UK tax. 

Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: December 07, 2012, 12:50:01 PM »
Thanks for all your thoughts.

Whilst I was very excited by the zeiss i went with the canon. It was a lens I have wanted for a long time, and I haven't even looked into the zeiss very much because I just always assumed Id never have one. So i went with what i had researched most. Plus i got the guy to know an extra £20 off, chuck in postage. And it has filters, and its weathersealed. So im happy. I think :s lol.

The best thing about both lens' is that they both hold their value so well. So if I practise manual focus on this, if i decide i prefer the colour or the slightly wider feel of the zeiss I can always sell it and buy a zeiss if the opportunity comes up again i guess!

Thanks again. I love that I can always count on this forumn for some input.

For the sake of completeness, the Zeiss lenses are shielded - they have a gasket at the back. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Is 22Mpx Really Enough?!!!
« on: October 26, 2012, 07:09:10 AM »
I think people get so obsessed with technology that they often forget another word starting with tech - technique.  It's not just about sharpness.  There is so much more to it than that.  I have been at exhibitions of the main photographer for Mohammad Ali and an exhibition of Cartier-Bresson's work in Seoul.  Sharpness is not the most important thing in either of their work.  Capturing the moment through technique is.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon EOS-1S the Name? [CR1]
« on: October 08, 2012, 11:26:47 PM »
i can't see it having a sensor any bigger than the present FF sensors.  The lenses won't have a big enough image circle otherwise.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17