April 21, 2014, 11:47:50 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 - noisejammer

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
31
Canon General / Re: Debranding a 5DIII
« on: July 09, 2013, 03:52:44 PM »
It kind of seems crazy to remove the Canon and 5D Mark III and then leave it with a big red ring...

On the white lenses - sure there may be some thermal benefit but the real reason is that they are easy to spot in TV images.... Canon gets free advertising every time a 'tog appears in the background.

32
I think the change is already happening - I dipped my toe in the Fuji Kool Aid and found it worked really well. The image quality is comparable with my 5D2. Sure, it's not quite as good in all respects but let's give it a generation or two and then see. If a $1k Fuji is giving a $3k Canon a run for it's money (body plus comparable lens), it starts to sound ominous.

I think the change will come in a couple of waves. First the XXD series will be compromised, then it's the XXXD. At this point, there won't be enough sales to drive development of XD cameras at a reasonable price and they will also vanish. Since it's technically possible, the question might better be phrased "Is the camera-public willing to pay DSLR prices for a high end mirrorless camera?" I think they are.

As other have commented, there are a few things to fix. The obvious ones are build quality and robustness (this could be greatly improved), user interface (this has been improved), battery life (difficult if the camera's to remain compact), focus speed (already solved - see the X100s or OM-D), larger buffers (easy to fix), faster storage (easy but expensive), frame rate (processor dependent but maybe).

If pressed for a timeline, I'd guess the last generation of high end DSLR's will appear around five years from now. This is depressing - I have a small fortune tied up in glass.

33
Hi Fegarix

I've looked at your images again and came to the same conclusion. Please take a look at your image of the bus. I have no doubt that the left hand image (labeled as a bare ZE 2/100 MP) is much sharper.

I do see some noise present on the LHS of your most recent comparison. (Look at the edge of the monitor bezel.) This looks very like the signature of a slightly over-sharpened image. I can't tell which has more detail.

That speckle will certainly be reduced when the extender is applied - but this does not automatically mean that there is more information present in the resulting image. For example - if an image was 2x larger but the spot size was 4x larger, it would appear far smoother but actually contain far less information.

I understand that the 2x would give you twice the effective distance at the same image scale. The problem with this is that image scale is largely irrelevant. Once again, the important thing is to maximise the amount of information present in the image after capturing and processing it to the same scale. Since the extender clearly blurs the image (quite a lot by my observation), it really can't be helping you.

(For what it's worth, do I own a ZE 2/100 MP and a 1.4 III tc. In the interests of science I'll do an experiment or two tomorrow. I'm not expecting magic though... some matches are really not made in heaven.)

Regards, NJ

34
Sorry - I really don't see any benefit here.

It's pretty clear from your examples that the 200x images from the Zeiss lens are dramatically better than the 100x images from the Zeiss + 2x converter. In all honesty, I am not surprised.

In addition to wrecking the image sharpness, the tc also costs you two stops of light. It drives the lens closer to diffraction (if not completely off the cliff) and adds copious dollops of CA to a lens that's almost entirely free of it.

In what way can this possibly be better?

35
Capture One v6 Express is available for free if you use the coupon code "DCM2013" . Try http://www.phaseone.com/dcm . You will need to create an account but it's a $99 product without the code. Windoze or Mac.  If you want to upgrade to the latest release (that's v7), they're charging $34.50 until Sunday. The Pro version will cost $249 for the upgrade.

Another free alternative is Raw Therapee. This is released under GPLv3. http://rawtherapee.com . I haven't tested this yet but after reading the docs, it looks really interesting. This is a Windoze / Mac / Linux release.

Finally - Iridient - not free and I have no experience of this one because it's Mac only. http://www.iridientdigital.com

36
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: June 26, 2013, 10:01:51 PM »
My dog once pinched off a CC snow-cone... :D


37
Software & Accessories / Re: Right Angle Finder
« on: June 22, 2013, 04:27:27 PM »
The angle finder works well but it is basically a relay lens that magnifies the image a little.

The low tech way is to tape a mirror to the base of your camera and then use live view. The image is upside down but it's nearly free. This appeared here ... http://www.fujirumors.com/mixed-zone-x-reviews-and-x-e1-with-tilt-screen/

If this is too basic, you might think of either tethering it (laptop or iPad or similar, you may need a cameramator) or using an off camera monitor display (like the Marshall.)

38
EOS Bodies / Re: Resale recommendations
« on: June 21, 2013, 10:20:44 PM »
I've bought and sold quite a few things on POTN. You need to be a member (which is free.) If you want to sell something, there's a minimum number of posts required (iirc 30) and a minimum duration before you're allowed to list it.

I've also been active on Astromart (commented on above.) The minimum fee is $15 per year which allows you to browse the listings and make (iirc) 10 so listings but if you don't pay the fee, you don't get to browse. Astromart has sections for digital cameras, lenses, binoculars, telescopes, eyepieces and several other categories. On the whole, there are very few cameras or lenses offered here.

39
Canon General / Re: improving IQ in landscape
« on: June 19, 2013, 11:01:10 PM »
I tend to limit my ultra-wide angle shots to what can be achieved by shifting my TS-E. The TS-E 17 can produce a 60Mp image corresponding to a 12 mm lens. In all honesty, the atmosphere is seldom clear enough to warrant much more. The RRS L-frame has indicators showing you how far to move the camera to compensate for perspective.

I have tried some 3-5 frame wide angles with my 35 mm.... This is dead easy unless you have a lot of foreground when the effects of perspective mess things around.

The single time I attempted a multiple frame using a long lens (I think it was 24 frames with a 100/2 MP) I missed a sliver out... but only discovered it when I got back from Africa. There was lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth....

40
At the risk of Scotty accusing me of trolling... :)

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture but recently picked up a Fuji kit - the image quality is comparable with my 5D2 / Zeiss set but it's half the size and about a quarter of the weight. This matters to me...

Given your budget and interests, I'd sell the 5D2 and jump on the current special. Buy a X-Pro1 (or X-E1) and ignore the 14mm, you could then get the 18-55, 35/1.4 and either the 60/2.4 or 55-200. This would leave you with about $600 in your pocket - so a license for Lightroom, a license for the Nik suite, an inconspicuous bag and a small flash would round out your kit.

41
Apart from the RRS and Manfrotto offerings, you could look at some of the models offered by 3leggedthing.com .

Fwiw, I use a Manfrotto 055CX3 Pro. It has a centre column but the centre column can rotate through 90 degrees so that it's parallel with the ground. This allows the tripod to place the ballhead clamp anywhere between 75 mm and about 1900 mm above the ground. I use a BH55 on this tripod.

42
I think Adobe has permanently weaned me off the hind teat. Even so, I feel no bitterness. Since my money is apparently not good enough for them, I'm not able to purchase their products. Besides, I have licenses for Lr 4.4 and CS6, so I really won't need an upgrade until I buy an unsupported camera.

IFF DXO Labs starts to support Fuji X-trans sensors (strongly rumoured), I may give it a whirl... but  If Nik and Topaz Labs offered products compatible with DXO, the decision would be even easier.

43
I have a whole series of OM-Zuiko and third party lenses with OM mounts that I use on my 5D2 and 1D4... if they work, they work!
Here's one of my favourites - 16/3.5 FE on 5D2

Vrystaat Windpomp by NoiseJammer, on Flickr

44
PowerShot / Re: Best solution for really shaky hands
« on: June 08, 2013, 03:03:07 PM »
My first suggestion would be a monopod - it doubles as a club for when you get out of line. :) A $1 alternative is one of these
$1 Image Stabilizer For Any Camera - Lose The Tripod/Monopod Small | Large
- I find this works quite well.

More seriously- If you don't want a monopod, f/2 means more that $400. You might get a used Fuji X100 for around $600 - $650. This is at the upper end of fitting in a handbag but it's a really nice camera.

Alternatively, if you're after something with zoom, look for a combination with an effective IS (but you're looking at a lot more money too.) Be aware that a $100 lens will not get you 4 stops of image stabilisation.

45
EOS-M / Re: FF EOS-M?
« on: June 07, 2013, 09:09:42 AM »
I always chuckle when I see folk wanting full frame mirrorless.  They just haven't got the concept.  Big sensor means big lenses. big. big. Not small.

Isn't the opposite one of the reason why people like the leica system?
The OM-Zuiko lenses were similarly sized. None of the Leica M-flange lenses offer autofocus which reduces diameter enormously. Secondly, the lens register is 27.80 mm compared with 18 for EOS-M.
Third, the aperture in an EOS-M flange is too small to permit a 24x35 frame to be fully illuminated by a lens with a larger register.

My third point is critical - it forces the lens' exit pupil to lie fairly close to the flange. If you were to use a 24x36 sensor, together with an EOS-M flange, light from the centre of the lens would reach the corners with an angle of incidence of (something like 45-50 degrees. This corresponds to a light cone of about f/0.5 - f/0.4. It's already well established that the sensors have difficulty detecting light from a f/1.4 light cone, so corner pixels wouldn't actually detect any light.

Among my cameras, I own a Fuji X-E1. In all seriousness, it gives my 5D2 a run for it's money. This has lead me to rethink the real value of large sensors.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10