March 04, 2015, 03:40:06 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 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 41
EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 24, 2012, 03:48:48 PM »
definately not somethign to pre-order without seeing test results :D  I'm just wondering how much ISO performance has to give in order to get the DR.  its gonna be a good show to watch, but from preliminary indications this won't be seen at very many weddings  ::).  In order to make an industry contribution is appears Canon has to make a fairly sharp distinction between the studio/'scape body and the wedding/event body. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Why are flash sync shutter speeds getting worse?
« on: September 24, 2012, 03:41:10 PM »
more power thats for sure :D 

yea the important thing to the outdoor strobist (who complains about fractions of an f/stop)  is balance of ambient and flash -- its a contest between the sun and the strobe.  Thats why an ISO boost doesn't help -- for every increase in ISO you have to reduce the aperture.  we want high shutter speeds and low apertures so that the strobe has a fighting chance against the sun.

good thing we arn't still at 60th or 125th sync :D :D

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 24, 2012, 02:51:13 PM »
caution is good, me thinks.  my thought is that one shouldn't pre-order this puppy without seeing some test results.  who knows it might be stunning or it might be lackluster

EOS Bodies / Re: Why are flash sync shutter speeds getting worse?
« on: September 24, 2012, 02:39:48 PM »
You guys do realize your complaining about 1/20th of a second difference between the D600 and 6D, right? That is 0.0005 seconds difference! It really doesn't matter that much, and given the design of the 6D as a low-light camera capable of ISO 25600 and AF at EV -3, it matters even less. You could bump up the ISO by a third of a stop for pretty much ANY exposure and compensate for the difference if you really, really needed to. Now, if it was a 1/60th sync speed vs. a 1/200th sync speed, that would matter, but thats not the case.

please stop talking about things you don´t understand!!

ISO affects FLASH and AMBIENT exposure.. it´s obvious you don´t know what strobist are talking about.

yes 1/200s was already bad... doesn´t change a thing that the trend to make it even worse is a bad sign.

I think jrista makes a fair point.  I agree that 1/200 s X-sync isn't good, and 1/180 s is worse.  But the difference is only 1/6-stop. 

OTOH, despite the ISO improvement in recent sensors which would allow you to more than make up that 1/6-stop in terms of noise performance, that's not going to help stop action. That 1/6-stop is well and truly gone.

Aye. I don't disagree that 1/200th isn't great, and neither is 1/250th. But since none of the entry-level full-frame cameras have a 1/500th second sync speed, it doesn't make much sense to complain about a sixth of a stop worth of difference. I wasn't thinking that bumping ISO would help stop action...the flash pulse is for that. I was only thinking if you wanted to compensate for the loss of exposure, you could easily bump ISO without worry on a camera capable of native ISO 25600.

That 1/6th of a stop manifests itself to the budget strobist in the form of additional power required of the strobe itself, to compensate for the smaller aperture necessary to properly expose the background on account of the slower shutter speed. Thats why strobists like high sync speeds and are often found complaining about little things like fractions of a stop. 

no its not much, but it will eat more batteries, affect re-cycle time, etc and is  more relevant to those using small speedlites, especially outdoors, as upposed to those packing around larger strobes and battery packs on location. 

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 24, 2012, 01:14:16 PM »
Let me guess - yet another recycling of the T2i/60D/7D/T3i/T4i/ pixels, just in a larger sensor.

18*(1.6*1.6) = 46.1
Either that or it's a new crop sensor that will eventually go in the rebels and 70D but starting with FF version first. An even greater level of the technology dropping from top to bottom.

well it is a CR-1 rumor so the actual pixel count could have been derived using this arithmetic just to start the rumor and just to watch people get their calculators out and entertain themselves

EOS Bodies / Re: Why are flash sync shutter speeds getting worse?
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:15:05 PM »
I may be wrong, but with High Speed Sync on a flash, max sync shutter speed becomes less relevant.

yep you are wrong.

because you need an HSS enabled flash. and even then you will have less power output.

well, lets be careful and precise at the same time... iMagic suggested that with HSS on a flash, max sync shutter speed becomes less relevant, and that is a true satement.  It does become less relevant, just not in all situations.  In order to call his statement wrong, we would then be saying "with HSS on a flash, the relevance of max sync shutter speed does not change", which of course is not true. 

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 24, 2012, 11:50:12 AM »
It sure would be great to have one of each!  8)

I'm sure Canon will grant your wish and never produce a "one does it all" camera even if they cold - what's better than a customer buying one camera? Buying two :-)!

yea on that note... I wonder if Canon is deliberately segmenting the market, or just playing the R&D that they have in hand.     For example,  The 5D3 appears to optimize high ISO for wedding/event because thats what they thought people wanted.  Then D800 came and showed that higher DR can be had at low ISO and folks started complaining that 5D3 couldn't do that too --  I suspect 5D3 is Canon's high-ISO optimization of their current capabillities.   

So the next crop of Canon sensors will reveal their real capabilites, and telegragh the compromizes they must (or choose to) make, i.e the extent to which the 46.1MP beast has to compromize high ISO noise performance in order to produce better DR/shadow detail, or if new technology will make real and significant contributions in both areas. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Adorama is selling 5d3 for $2745 on eBay now
« on: September 19, 2012, 02:53:04 PM »
Everyone will just wait for the next.

I bet there are thousands checking ebay every now and than, and hoping they'll get THE deal.  :)

Why do you need to check ebay everyday?  Just sing up the deal alert from, and you will get 5D3 deals instantly when there is one.  Guys we are living in information age.

never used so forgive my ignorance;  doesn't this require that someone post the information in the slickdeals forum?  so if someone posts here and not slickdeal, the alert won't catch it. 

So Canon is behind in low-ISO DR and they optimized the 5D3 sensor for high ISO. No one knew that until the D800 came along.

It can be argued that Nikon caught Canon with their 5d3 (and its price) with their pants down. But the depressing thing about the 6d announcement is that Canon had it really coming this time, they knew the competition, they knew the concerns of their enthusiast customer base. And they still ended up just juggling features (1/4000s shutter, 1/180s x-sync, 11 non-cross af) instead of producing a complete camera that can stand the test of time for the next years - at least for $2000+.

yea no argument there I just don't get the 6D.  it doesn't interest me esp due to the areas you mention;  for example 1/180th x-sync makes it hard to to balance with ambient light outdoors at wide apertures, and taking away 1/8000th max shutter speed is just lame, imho.   I'll reserve judgement re:  AF until the reviewers put it to the test.     what DOES interest me is the 6D sensor and the higher AF sensitivity - I'm anxious for the reviewers to get their hands on this one and offer some insights into the mind of Canon in these areas. 

Lighting / Re: Direct Flash - How to make it useful?
« on: September 19, 2012, 09:47:49 AM »
This is an interesting product.  The wing light, at least, addresses one issue that the fong'alizer doesn't -- the size of the light source:  Well at least in one dimension :D   RL please take some portraits outdoors!  I'd like to see at least the 'horizontal light wrap"  capabilities compared to direct flash when there are NO reflective surfaces.  If you get close enough to the subject,  the horizontal light will be large but the vertical light will still be a point source.  that should produce interesting results.

the thing about any device that is small but claims to produce big light is that they all depend on other reflective surfaces -- and this one is no exception.  look at the product video and note that in every example shoot there is a plethora of wonderful white reflective surfaces that would produce bare bulb heaven for even the lowly stofen omnibounce.  A hallway with close walls and ceiling, for example, as shown in the product slideshow, will  make most any diffuser look good.   Personally, bouncing off of the floor seems odd to me, as not many floors are the right color and not many models/subjects look good when lighted from below.  Typically, ceilings and walls would make better light sources. 

However, if you are in a situation where you do NOT have viable reflective walls, I would expect the Wing to assist with the horizontal size of the light source -- like an event where the room is large, walls are too far away, the ceiling is at a reasonable height and you can get close enough to the subject so that the Wing appears "big".   the other advantage I can see is that the Wing would tend to increase the size of the ceiling light source.  how much of a practical dvantage, compared to a bare bulb diffuser, is not immediately clear.

Thanks RL;  show us some photos!

... For example, I haven't heard very many wedding/event  togs wishing  for lower fps, worse AF, or higher MP, and I don't hear many complaints about the 5D3's IQ (including DR)  at ISO 3200

yeah not at ISO3200 at ISO3200 it has very good DR (only 1DX and D4 and D3s are better and the D3s is so much lower res it doesn't really count) it's at ISO100-200 or 400 where the DR is bad. The high iso DR on the 5D3 is better than any camera other than the 1DX and D4 basically.

+1.  Unfortunately shooting outside at ISO 100 even with the 1DX which I feel has the best Canon sensor, the Nikon D4 beats it if the scene has brights spots and shadows...  (I did not mention the D800 because that is not really a comparable camera but still...Canon is way behind here)...

right;  no argument there - so:   Canon wins the high ISO DR war, and is the Nikon camp in a stir because Nikon is behind in that department?  Is the Canon camp applauding that achievement?  Not that I can tell --  I hear more about how disruptive the D800 was in the low-ISO DR department and that Canon should have been able to include all of the D800 Advantages and none of its disadvantages in the 5D3.      So Canon is behind in low-ISO DR and they optimized the 5D3 sensor for high ISO. No one knew that until the D800 came along.    Again I think this is canon putting their best foot forward with the technology they have in hand, and they got eclipsed by Nikon/Sony in the studio/landscape arena.  Its time for Canon to address that, along with the wildlife space as well

Quote from: dlleno
... For example, I haven't heard very many wedding/event  togs wishing  for lower fps, worse AF, or higher MP, and I don't hear many complaints about the 5D3's IQ (including DR)  at ISO 3200

I still hear plenty people wishing it had more DR (and MP) and believe it or not, some of them are pros.

We all wish for better at a lower price,  but you're saying pro wedding togs are disapointed in or expecting better performance at 3200?

 It's quite good, but ISO100 DR a trace worse than the old 5D2 and worse than the even older 1Ds3 is kinda unfortunate. But if you think that is awesome, then Canon won't ever bother. So yeah I like it a lot, but yeah I sure often wish it had better DR and when shooting wildlife I sure wish more MP and a crop mode and for video I sure wish it had the basics like zebra and focusing aids while live shooting and raw hdmi out and crop modes for wildlife.

Indeed we are still left wondering what card Canon will play in the wildlife space, imho.  If Canon stays silent on this topic for the remainder of this year it will be disapointing, thats for sure.  Again, for the 5D3 I suspect they optimized the technology "in-hand" for the market they targeted, and I agree that for studio/landscape/wildlife there are (or should be) cards yet to be played.  tt would have been nice for all those things to  have come together in the 5D3 at the same price :D

Now that all of Canon's cards are on the table for this year...

First of all we don't know this for certain -- Canon could play another card between now and December 31 ,as unlikely as that may be.  Also, there is one card that, while it has been played, its still face down on the table -- the 6D sensor . I suspect after the real cameras appear and folks get a chance to put this puppy to the test we will know alot more regarding Canon's sensor strategy -- at least the strategy that gave birth to the 6D, however long ago that was hatched.  It will be interesting to see what this sensor reveals and what it does not. 

I guess I see things differently than the OP.  Put the 6D aside for a moment -- all I can say is they weren't targeting me with that design... lets wait and see how the sensor itself performs which may be telling.  Anyway, I see  Canon putting its best foot forward with the technology that they have.  ok, so they don't own the low-ISO DR  war at this time, and this allows the geeks and gearheads to pull out the charts showing the D800 with a DR advantage below ISO 800 or whatever it is.  so what?  if thats critical to one's work, i.e. if that advantage will distinguish you from others, and you can show it with real photos, and if all of that is more important than 1DX style AF, high-ISO performance and 6fps for example  then halleluiah thats what capitalism and free market competition is for.  The D800 is for sale. 

What I find amusing re: the 5D3 in particular is that because the D800 stole the marketing show with high MP and because some geeky chart shows better low-ISO DR, people thought thats what they needed, and so they ragged on the 5D3 because I guess it doesn't win the dxo score war.  Then when folks took another look they realized how good of a camera the 5D really is for its intended market (at least thats my observation).    For example, I haven't heard very many wedding/event  togs wishing  for lower fps, worse AF, or higher MP, and I don't hear many complaints about the 5D3's IQ (including DR)  at ISO 3200. 

I view the D800 as disruptive in the sense that it might cause Canon to take a few Red Bulls and tweak  their R&D strategy in the studio/landscape arena, to be sure.  That can't be done in a few months time. Reading in between the lines, I suspect Canon may be scrambling to produce a product that segments the market further -- a camera that is optimized for studio/landscapes.  Their R&D folks are probably working overtime.  That aside   I guess I could "blame" Canon because  it appears they didn't see the D800 coming -- or by the time they did see it, it was too late.  But  that doesn't mean the CEO should resign, although it could mean they should hire a better technology strategist.  Or that Sony kept a good secret and surprised the pants off of everyone. 

Lighting / Re: Direct Flash - How to make it useful?
« on: September 16, 2012, 09:56:15 AM »
the thing about light toys and graveyards is that you must first understand both your needs and the nature of light beore you select the tool.  light travels in straight lines so no amount of diffusion will soften the light coming from the strobe itself. a controlled  combination of direct vs reflective light is better accomplished with a bounce or partial bounce device insread of tupoerware imho.
And what is a bounce device? Obviously ceilings and walls are your best bounce devices as they'll always be bigger than what you can get on a camera. In which case the tupperware works pretty. Don't get me wrong it's far from perfect and I'm always looking for alternatives but it's the best I've found so far. One thing I will say is that I've tested just shooting the straight flash up into a ceiling vs with the tupperware and I liked the look of the tupperware better. But one advantage of shooting directly off the ceiling is the balance in light level between near objects and far objects is improved somewhat since less light is being directed straight forward. For this reason I'm looking at trying out this technique some more.

by "bounce device" I mean a gadget that you put on the camera.  sometimes the fong is great for this -- I've used one in a small room for example, with white walls . fantastic, because it really didn't work as a bounce device per se it worked as a bare bulb diffuser, which spreads the light around everywhere including behind me, where it could reflect off of a wall which became a huge light source.  a free softbox if you will!.  So when you need a bare bulb diffuser, the fongs are great,.  otherwise you are just wasting light by throwing it in directions that won't ever reach the subject in a useful way. 

a "bounce device" is something (to me) that can control the light;  just just spread it around in all directions.  a directional bounce device is perhaps a better term.  with these you can control the ratio of light directed forward versus upward. 

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 41