November 22, 2014, 07:06:12 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 - dlleno

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 41
back on topic --

Isn't the 6D rated at -3ev while the 5d3 is rated at -2ev?

the single AF point in the center is rated at -3EV sensitivity, yes.  However, per Canon product support the other 10 AF points are -1EV sensitive.  so -- the stationary "focus, then frame" approach with only the center AF point should yield a not-surprising one-stop advantage in very low light compared to the 5D3.  Note for interests sake that -3EV is four stops less light than requried for the exposure meter itself to perform up to its rated specifications!  so you can focus, but you  might want to get to know how the metering system behaves under those same conditions. 

Someone correct if wrong, but Canon also confirmed to me that all 61 AF points of the 5D3, on the other hand, are sensitive to -2EV.

Don't forget that EV sensitivity is not the only measure of success for the AF system.  for example, Roger over at lensrentals put these puppies to the test and discovered a wider variability in AF accuracy (std dev = 28 I believe) for the 6D compared to the more consistent 5D3 at std dev = 17.   thats a considerable difference. 

...The answer is that it is well-established practice among photographers to express luminance in terms of their camera settings using the EV terminology, by assuming that ISO 100 is used and that a nominally "correct" exposure is being obtained by the camera settings indicated by the specified EV. Since photographers probably communicate best when talking in terms of their camera settings, EV makes for an easy way to understand the level of available brightness for a photographer when this common practice is used.

Anytime exposure value is used to speak of the amount of available light, the assumption is that a CORRECT exposure will be obtained from that EV of aperture/shutter speed AND a sensor sensitivity of ISO 100.

+1 helpful nice summary.  now can we get back to discussing the 6D's AF performance in terms that make sense and communicate the right story?  Lets use the term "EV 0" as it is nearly universally understood in terms of evaluating important camera capabilities. 

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body is $2999 Most Places
« on: December 06, 2012, 01:10:16 PM »
I pick door #3:  These companies operate independantly and their respective marketing departments came up with different pricing models to fit their own company goals, given their own market assesments, research, expected profitabiilty, support and sustainability goals.

its capitalism.  thats what companies do.  Canon can charge whatever they want without our approval,  and we can choose whether or not to buy without theirs.   language such as "fair" or "overpaying" are distractions -- if you dont want the puppy in the window for the displayed price then don't buy it.  If you want to wait until the price of the puppy goes down, then wait.  or go next door and buy a different puppy!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D vs 5D MKII (Focusing?)
« on: December 06, 2012, 11:21:57 AM »
interesting observation skitron .   whether its related or not, Roger over at lensrentals  has done extensive testing on the AF accuracy ,and measures this via standard deviation of AF accuracy.  His work showed that that auto focus of the 5d2 and 50d to be in the same ballpark. this makes me wonder of the AF "confirmation" behavior is different..

phase detection AF accuracy of the 6D was measured as being similar to the 5D2

just FYI this is just interesting stuff :D

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs 5Diii today...
« on: December 06, 2012, 10:24:37 AM »

... noise and iso babble among some. 
...narrow box of iso claims for the 6D with limited data from few sources.
good to see I'm not the only one with such a perspective.  I wouldn't call it babble necessarily, cuz its necessary dialog and part of the discovery/vetting process, but I do agree that the theoretical merits of the 6D have been stressed over the practical.  That said, I suspect the 6D will fill an important gap in the price/performance lineup and represents a  brilliant marketing move on Canon's part.  It may even become a proving ground for features that may end up in the higher end bodies.   The Wifi features themselves pack a lot of wahoo and are very well received.   
the higher end FF bodies simply offer more on AF, build, and other pro-friendly features. If you are entering the digital FF arena and you can afford them, they offer more room to grow, whatever your level of expertise. They will also hold their value once they settle into their market-bearable target price.

+1.  moreover, without seeing some actual photos where the 6D "gets the shot" and the 5D3 does not,  the -3EV center AF point isn't  so much about improving upon the 5D3.  It may be a preview of  a 5D4 with a boatload of AF points all at -3EV or lower [/quote]

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs 5Diii today...
« on: December 05, 2012, 08:34:51 PM »
:D :D  well, we have to lighten things up once in a while!  For perspective, consider that the 5D3 can focus at all AF points in the amount of light requiring a 30 second exposure at f/2.8 (iso 100), or EV -2, while the 6D would trip and fall at that level except in the center where it can acheive AF if the light is low enough to require a 60 sec shutter. How many shots would you loose if the center point could not acheive focus for the longer exposure example?  probably important to some and not for others.   

Conversely, "off center" the 6D requires EV -1 (15 sec exposure) while all 61 AF points of the 5D3 do the snoopy dance down to EV -2.  How many shots would you loose if the "off center" points required EV -1 instead of -2? 

oh, and don't forget that the exposure meter itself requires a lot more light than the AF system does, to meet its rated performance and accuracy. Both the 6D and the 5D3 metering systems require +1 EV

I'm tracking you  -- this is bad for the aparent QC during manufacturing, but outstanding information re:  how to resolve this.  I suspect the story is not ended yet though - Canon technical support told me that the AF assist beam is not supported with this combination (5D3 and 600ex), and one wonders why that would be and what unofficial or official result will come about.  Maybe they fixed it silently without acknowledging the issue.   

So, to bring clarity:  you're saying your 5D3 uses the AF assist beam just fine with half-pressed shutter, or that it focuses great in low light when you press the shutter all the way down. 

now then, bring me up to speed or refer me to a previous post I've overlooked:  What was it about this forum that enabled the "return" versus repair option? 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D vs 5Diii today...
« on: December 05, 2012, 05:29:30 PM »
fyi just to compare numbers I asked Canon product support what EV the 6D's "other" focus points were sensitive to, and the answer came back "2 stops more".  that means -1EV "everywhere else" and -3EV in the center.  that information seems to contradict what I've seen elswhere can anyone confirm and reveal sources of different information?

As for comparing with the 5D3 I note that all the focus points are -2EV, which means that 5D wins handily for any focus point other than the center.  moreoever, given the std deviation numbers posted elsewhere, even at the center point the 5D3 will nail focus a greater percentage of the time , in acceptable lighty of course (granted, not at -3EV).

if I were making the same decision today I would choose 5D3 simply because if I'm shooting anything that moves, in low light,  i'm gonna appreciate all those non-center -2EV focus points, not to mention the tracking capabilities and fps.   ALso -- I for one am tired of being locked into that center point AF "focus then frame" technique where I know that my center AF point is more sensitive -- which ultimately means I don't use the other ones because the center is more trustworthy.  And if I'm shooting under low light conditions, its not likely to be inside a coal mine during a power outage, so the difference between -3EV and -2EV just doesn't seem like a practical wahoo to me (corner case advantage, to be sure, but what scenarious would really make me say "o dern I missed the shot because my center AF point was only -2EV)   Ergo I would opt for the greater percentage of keepers  in lighting situations that occur most often.

thanks RustyTheGeek that is really good to know

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 05, 2012, 01:40:25 PM »
Granted, dileno, I should have said "my experience," rather than "the facts." That said, the concern I see here about the screen being ripped off while chasing a moose in heavy brush or taken out by an errant elbow in a crowd (I've used my T3i in both situations) fails to recognize that in those instances you can merely flip the screen back on itself and fold it into the camera body so that it looks and behaves exactly like the fixed screen on a 7D or 5D.

In short, flip-screens add moving parts, are less weatherproof, and when protruded can increase the possibility of damage. But, the design is well engineered and has survived the test-of-time, at least in my experience. I've never had to send my T3i in for repair. I've never had a weather-related issue, although I am careful about using shower caps and such to keep things dry. And the protrusion issue is easily solved by flipping the screen around and folding it into the body. Hence, there is much utility and convenience to be gained by the flip for self-timers, low-angle macro, high-angle crowd shots, and even the occasional hold-the-camera-out-on-the-end-of-the-tripod-and-shoot-with-a-wireless-remote shots.

I'm not suggesting that the flip-screen doesn't have downsides, just that they're overblown. Or more simply, I find the pros well outweigh the cons. That's why I am hoping that the 7DII, with all of its hoped for improvements, includes a flip-screen.

no argument here, especially for occasional wildlife adventures and general purpose photography in good weather or indoors. in fact, should Canon target the 7D2 toards that market i suspect it will have the screen.  Its the serious outdoor wildlife 'togs that are not likely to to reach for the 7D2 if it has the screen because it won't be up to the weather sealing standards of those who chase moose regularly in the rain, and the ergonomic consequences of having it there (but not using it) are unsavory. 

time will tell where the 7D2 is positioned, i.e. if it is closer to being a 1D4 successor or simply the flagship crop  body with better specs than the 70D. 

As for the crop bodies winning the IQ contest in focal length limited scenarios (for larger prints especially), I suppose there is even a point of diminishing returns at very long subject distances (and very long focal lengths) where the "reach" advantage starts to erode due to environmental/atmospheric conditions.  To the extent this is true,  Canon is probably optimizing both IQ and their profits to move the pro 'togs to FF and longer glass (while abandoning the 'H' sensor), and positioning the crop 'reach' cameras for mortals who can't afford the longer glass.  This puts the "reach" debate in terms of "focal length" limits rather than "distance" limits, as neuro has done.   Thus,  when the glass budget is unlimited, the scenarios where the crop sensor produces better IQ than the FF sensors are few. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 05, 2012, 11:30:14 AM »
I do understand well that some of the consumer can afford more than one camera body. Each one for a different use, but not all of us can. For those who can purchase only one camera that one should have as much features as possible. If some shoot only sports, well just don't need that flip screen. If somebody is just taking pictures at the birthdayparty, than he just is ok with a xxxD. But if you find interest in shooting many different things you want a camera that offers all the needed featurs like flip screen, fast shooting, fast af and so on.
That camera would be the right one for me, because i can only buy one an not 2 more as a back up.

you're not the only one.    For example, some will buy the 7D2 even if it has an articulating screen if they are not likely to hike through the brush during the rain chasing moose.  Those who stand shoulder to shoulder in a crowd using a monopod, worried about that screen getting bumped by a flying elbow, may think differently.

And Miah your experience is important, to be sure; I just wouldn't go quite as far as saying that your assesment is factual for all wildlife/action 'togs.  I'm sure there are a number of situations where the 1D4 and 1DX would wink and smile where the xxD and Rebels would die.   

In the end,  Canon's marketing research has to describe the  target the market that will make them money, and then go after it.  Some will be closer to the target audience than others.   I'm reminded of Canons announcement that 1D and 1Ds would merge into the 1DX, and all the speculating around Canon abandoning the 1D4 market.

EOS Bodies / Re: April 2013 firmware update for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: December 05, 2012, 12:28:14 AM »

EOS Bodies / Re: April 2013 firmware update for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: December 04, 2012, 04:38:01 PM »
maybe they will include other goodies too, like 6fps with less than 50% battery and support for the AF assist beam when using flash in low light. 

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body is $2999 Most Places
« on: December 04, 2012, 01:43:57 PM »
... Those who paid the early adopter price weren't milked by anyone.  Those who bought it early made the calculation that it was worth paying extra to have the camera 8 months earlier rather than 8 months earlier.  If the camera didn't deliver good value for them at $3,500, they would not have bought it.  You can call it "grossly overpriced" but the camera market seems to be very competitive, with plenty of alternatives at many price levels.  If photographers are willing to pay a higher price for a particular camera, then it is worth that price to them at that time.  Canon is a business, not a photographers' aid society, so they're allowed to make a big profit if they deliver something highly desirable to their customers.  Sure, people have a right to complaint about anyone's pricing.  But with the number of the businesses making a big profit in the world, such complaining can become a full-time occupation.

+1 its funny folks forget that Canon is free to charge whateve they want and customers are free to choose whether or not they want to pay it.  The consequences of anything different are rather unsavory...
Yes, and keep in mind that they don't make any profit on the first batch of cameras, no matter how much they charge.  I'm guessing that before a camera like the 5DIII is released, there are several years' worth of research and development by a very advanced work force.  There is likely a huge "money suck" of salaries, benefits, facilities, taxes, etc., before the 5DIII earns any money.  Once the camera is released, they have to sell quite a lot of them to even break even on their investment.  So whether the camera is priced $3,500 or $3,000 initially, they are probably not making any profit at that point, just recouping a very substantial investment.  I'm just guessing, of course, and I have no idea whether or why Nikon would do things any differently.

certainly there is an intial investment that Canon amortizes across the expected life to produce x amount of profit over time. I'm sure that is carefully modeled and my guess is that the 5D3 project was approved under that (and other) scrutiny.  Whether the financial models  include a high into price or not I don't know, but I suspect so.  If they  made a few hundred more on the first few thousand units that would be money in the bank, to be sure. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 04, 2012, 01:33:57 PM »
Sad_Dave:  see?  there are important reasons behind the comments and speculations here.  Generally, the ones who expect all features on one camera are without a firm grasp of tradeoffs, target markets and cost consequences. 

as far as the discussion itself goes, -  A wildlife camera should be optimized for the environments it is expected to be used-- outdoors in less than ideal conditions.  It should not be have the ability to place a portion of its hardware in a mechanically  vulnerable position, increasing chance of equipment failure in enviroments more hostile, for example,  than an indoor birthday party.  Moreover, a wildlife/action 'tog is not likely to appreciate the cost, durability, weather sealing,  and ergonomic consequences of having such a screen but  simply avoiding its use.   

That said, the general purpose consumer who wants to chronicle family events, adding  a few cool portaits, landscapes, and macros along the way, would likely be happy with a general purpose camera with an articulating screen, especially if there is no desire to chase moose in the snow. 

I do acknowledge (and even suspect) that if Canon strengthens the wildlife/sports orientation of the 7D even further in the 7D2, and perhaps even produces a worthy successor to the 1D4, that there will be some disspointed consumers who want the status of a single digit camera with the consumer features of the xxD

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 41