August 30, 2014, 04:24:24 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 - dlleno

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 40
391
EOS Bodies / Re: A question about dust...
« on: September 10, 2012, 11:04:13 PM »
incidentally, more to your question sparkle999 according to this review:

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx

the 5D3 has an additional fluorine coating intended to provide additional incremental improvement, compared to the 5D2 The comment is buried deep inside the review, so here is the text (emphasis mine):

"A clean sensor is a strong contributor to good image quality. The 5D III inherits the 5D II's Integrated Cleaning System with the addition of a dust-avoiding fluorine coating. I have read in Canon documentation that the 5D III's self-cleaning sensor system incorporates a more efficient ultrasonic vibration but I'm not certain that this is correct. It was perhaps copied in from 1D X documentation...I have changed lenses on my 5D III a huge number of times and have not needed to clean the sensor since I blew the single factory dust bunny out when the camera first arrived."

392
EOS Bodies / Re: A question about dust...
« on: September 06, 2012, 04:24:22 PM »
ahh -- yes indeed thats a good reason!  to be sure, a combination of lens-changing technique, ultrasonic dust-shakers in the camera, and a good Giottos rocket blower can go a long way to postpone your next date with The Eclipse solution :D  . 

my beach experience is suggesting to me that I should try some PM activities -- the internal shakers are one thing but a good blast of air in combination should be even better.  I'm thinking if the sensor "cleaning" treatment in-camera can run every time you cycle power, then I can arrange  to blow things out more often  :D .   no results yet -- that's just just my latest set of neurons firing.   

393
EOS Bodies / Re: A question about dust...
« on: September 06, 2012, 01:42:05 PM »
its true that lpf cleaning should not be needed very often but if you just happen to be in a situation where you can't avoid changing lenses in a dirty environment, you gotta do what you gotta do and soon or later, hopefully later,  you're gonna need a wet clean to get the so-called "welded" dust off (thats the dust that won't blow or shake off). For example, one time I had to change lenses out on the beach -- no dust there, not even any blowing sand (I was out on some rocks at low tide),  but as near as I can tell the sudden exposure to high humidity ended up welding dust already there to the lpf.  at the time I was without my cleaning supplies so Lightroom's spot removal got a lot of use :D  .  If I had remembered to blow things out before hand I might have avoided or reduced the severity of the problem. 

often, dust can be corrected in post; other times, well no, or at least it would be less work to have cleaned the lpf than to correct the image :D

I have to admit I was once one of the faint at heart, not wanting to touch my lpf.  its totally a personal thing;  some are comfortable doing it and some are not.  for me, once I understood it the mystery was over -- and the right sized swab and two drops of eclipse solution does the magic.   YMMV of course, and you may be just fine with Canon cleaning every 1-2 years.  two cleanings will pay for a lot of DIY supplies BTW :D

I know this isn't a thread about cleaning, so appoligies for the thread drift -- its just important to be able to know and detect if your sensor is clean or not.  If you don't notice anyting on a real photo you can claim success -- but for a more sensitive/severe test, snap a photo of blue sky at some really small aperture (like f/22) with manual focus at infinity -- then look at the result,  In the absense of blue sky I fire up "dead pixel  buddy" (freeware LCD excersizer) in solid light blue and take a picture of the computer scrreen).   


394
EOS Bodies / Re: A question about dust...
« on: September 05, 2012, 10:45:52 PM »
dont be afraid of cleaning the lpf yourself.  i use the "copper hill" method with an inspection loupe and quite happywith the results . 

395
EOS Bodies / Re: Funny thing happening across the camera world
« on: August 28, 2012, 03:08:03 PM »
46 megapixel on a small FF sensor is absolutely a joke. Forget this rumor.

People said the same thing about rumors related to 18 MP on APS-C, 24 MP on APS-C and 36 MP on FF sensors prior to announcement.
I think the same thing even after the announcements  :)

it may or may not be a joke and it may or may not be a good idea, but it certainly feasible.  46MP on a FF sensor happens to be the same pixel density as the aging 7D sensor, a fact which I find oddly coincident with this rumor :D

396
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2012, 02:16:23 PM »
My real question concerning C or H sensor is how many people on here are actually using a 7D with ef-s lens'?  How many people spend that much on a camera, that much more for a 7D II upgrade and then puts $300 glass on it.  Make it a pro crop camera!  C or H, but actually make it a pro price point for the technology to separate it from all of the T series and xxD series cameras!

5D II, 7D, 70-200, L 24-70 L, 16-35 L, and a bunch more

You might want to look up the prices of two important EF-S lenses that provide key capabilities ,found in no other lenses,  for APS-C bodies at high IQ levels. 

an APS-C camera, as a 2nd body for pros and a primary body for prosumers, will be served well by the top EF-S lenses at those focal lengths.  if the camera is a 2nd body or used exclusively for its reach, then thoses S lenses do not have to be mounted up.   

An H camera would be a niche for BIFers for whom the S lenses would provide no benefit anyway, even if they did fit.

397
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2012, 09:00:22 AM »
That's been hashed out here several times in the past, & unfortunately the conclusion is that anything bigger than a 10D mirror will whack into the rear element of an EF-S lens.

yea, and I just don't see the S factor as significant or important in the H discusssions.  If Canon produces another H body, a lot of folks will have to seek therapy but such such a camera imho would target a segment that won't care about S lenses.

398
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 22, 2012, 10:06:27 PM »
The reason that APS-H BIF body discussions go haywire is because they usually contain references to the numeral 7, and that brings all sorts of philosophical musings that don't address the issue, namely "what body does canon expect the BIF togs to use?" 

whatever technology is available in 'C' is also available in 'H' with a corresponding set of well known advantages to the larger pixel pitch.  Whats  compelling to me is the hole in Canon's current line-up -- the BIF/Wildlife optimized body.  The 1Dx does everything except the reach part, and yea I totally get that BIFers are the ones who will take the AF performance hit for the ability to AF at all at f/8 -- so I do see room for a 1D4 successor, as long as we can keep the numeral 7 from coloring those discussions.  Call the body whatever you want, or make it a C or an H; doesn't matter. 

I suspect, however, that if Canon produces another H body, it will of such a price point and specialty niche that no one will care about putting an S lens on it, and there will still be room for a 7D2 in 'C' form.  Frankly I agree with those hoping that a new and disruptive "C" sensor is forthcoming and that the 2nd or BIF body will be the king of crops named the 7D2.  To do that, however, such a camera would have to produce convincingly better IQ than cropping a 5D3 or a 1Dx image to the same FOV.   who knows, maybe the BIF 2nd body will be mirrorless.

399
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 22, 2012, 12:56:40 PM »
APS-H Please! :D

On the 7D, APS-H would ONLY be acceptable if it was accompanied by a versatile APS-C crop mode that worked properly with all EF-S lenses.

no argument there, if 7D2 is aimed at approximately the same market as 7D.  Unfortunately, an APS-C crop mode would not be capable of reducing the size of the mirror, a dimmentional challenge that limits the possibility of using the short-back focus lenses with the larger "H" sensor. I haven't seen any evidence that such a challenge can be overcome. It maybe possible I don't know - I just haven't seen evidence or desire on Canon's part to do it.  I'm aware that some have even modified the EF-S 10-22mm lens for use on a FF (at 10mm the mirror strikes the lens).     so maybe it can be done I dont know. 

maybe the body could operate in some sort of mirrorless mode to use the S lenses, but I dont' see that catching on either.

The biggest benefit, to me, of a crop mode is to reduce the size of the data transfer to increase fps, which is not necessary in the 7D world because of the dual processor and moderate pixel count.  There is no IQ advantage that I can think of -- throwing away pixels is easy enough to do in post.

Assuming that the mechanical challenge can be overcome, the point of a crop mode on such a camera would be to hide the imperfections outside of the image circle of the "S" lenses.  Some sort of auto-detect would be necessary, along with a dual mount capability with the white index mark that we have today.  That part is certainly doable. it just doesn't seem likely to me, that Canon would do this, as it would be too expensive for the market that depends on the S lenses.

Quote
Personally, I would prefer if APS-H was left to a higher-end body, preferably equipped with a multi-point f/8 AF sensor. ;)

yea, and without APS-C mode :D  which this segment would not care about.  The question that still bugs me is "what is the 2nd body that Canon expects the pro wildlife togs to carry"?  These are the togs most likely to appreciate a 2x converter on a 600mm f/4, and would be more likely to accept the AF consequences just to "get the reach" -- and they are not to concerned about the UWA capability on a 2nd body optimized for wildlife.   

400
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 21, 2012, 12:10:30 PM »
yea, and the 5d3 AF ,by itself, is no slouch and a reasonably capable sports body in its own right.   to avoid being a yawn, 7d2 will have to improve upon the 7D in a way similar to the 5D3/5D2.
If the 7Dmk2 is going to relate to the 5Dmk3 as the 7D classic related to the 5Dmk2, they will have to do some remarkable improvements to its "sports capabilities" (as the 5Dmk3 is a significant improvement over the 5Dmk2 in this respect). I dont see how they could do that without throwing in some new, exciting technology (similar to what they did with the on-sensor PDAF of the 650D).

On the other hand, Canon (and Nikon) seems to be reshuffling line-ups all over, so perhaps the 7Dmk2 will instead be targeted at landscape and macro photographers? :-)

-h

I believe 7D2 will be more related to 1DX as a action/sports/wildlife camera rather the 5D3. I believe the 70D will be related to the 5D3.

In the past were: 1DS3 - flagship; 1D4 ( pro body for sports and action) 5D2 as all around affordable FF.

Now we have: 1Dx - flagship; 5D3 as all around  FF, and the APS-C bodies.

It's missing something. The missing link may be a big MP body dedicated to studio/landscapes or a sports/wildlife camera with a lower price than the flagship.
Who knows maybe we will see both  ;)

exactly. I'd suggest that both are missing links:   The Big MP body-almost-medium-format-answer-to-the-D800 may be the 6D.  the sports camera with a lower price than the flagship is more difficult to figure out because of what Canon did to the 1D4.   

The 1Dx embodied the stated changes in Canon's strategy,  which was to merge the 1D and 1Ds lines.  And merge they did -- the 1Dx has best sports/wildlife capabilities and IQ combination to date.  But it is missing one feature:  Reach.  A sports/wildlife camera with a lower price than the flagship would, imho, be either of these two possibilities:

1.  If Canon expects the sports togs to carry a 2nd body, it would essentially be a 1D4 successor -- a king of the crops, and something capable of putting "more pixels on the image" to produce convincingly better IQ than cropping the best FF output for the equivalent FOV .  We've hashed this ad nausium, but imho Canon can't do that with today's "C" sensors.  It would have to be an H or some new and distruptive C sensor that no one has yet even rumored about

2.  If Canon expects the sports togs to "do without the reach", and carry two 1Dx bodies, then in this case the bar is lower and the "sports/wildlife camera with a price tag lower than the flagship"  is a prosumer APS-C,  highly capable sports body with only a small improvement in IQ compared to cropping a FF for equivalent FOV. They could even use the T4i sensor,  which of course would be a big yawn.   

401
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 11:38:29 PM »
No way that's going to happen, 7D would be better than 5D3 in specs but without FF sensor.
But if it so, definitely going to upgrade.

Well, the 7D was better than the 5D2 except for its sensor. No reason the 7D2 couldn't be better than the 5D3 in the same way.
I can only imagine the only thing it will be better at is FPS and possibly tracking...Maybe give it 1dx af system but with fewer points. Else, it won't touch a 5dm3 in my opinion but then we shall see.

yea, and the 5d3 AF ,by itself, is no slouch and a reasonably capable sports body in its own right.   to avoid being a yawn, 7d2 will have to improve upon the 7D in a way similar to the 5D3/5D2. theres no way, imho, Canon can meet the rumored specs in this thread without an H sensor... oh dear did I just open that can again?

402
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 04:35:54 PM »
I got nothin to say till its at least CR2.

like :D

403
EOS Bodies / Re: review the 5D3 reviews
« on: August 20, 2012, 12:44:08 PM »
good point -- had they downplayed the in-camera raw conversion, assuming that RAW shooters won't care, it would not have been a complete review.  They did make it clear what folks need to be aware of.

on the topic of the 5D3 itself, it will be interesting to see if Canon addresses the jpg conversion and video IQ

404
EOS Bodies / review the 5D3 reviews
« on: August 20, 2012, 11:56:51 AM »
sorry if this has already been hashed -- feel free to point to those threads.  Whats your vote for the most objective and useful 5D3 review, and which reviews do you find less useful than others? 

For example, in reading the dpreview piece, I came away wondering why the in-camera jpg conversion was given so much attention as a negative, or "con".  Generally I wouldn't expect users of a $3500 camera body to depend that much on in-camera jpg conversion, but maybe its just me --  it doesn't seem all that critical to me:  Interesting and important to know, to be sure, but just not critical. 

 I used to shoot raw+jpg, using the jpgs as proofs and to help me identify the keepers  but then I discovered the CR2 conversion plug-in for Windows Photo Viewer and now I don't depend on my camera to produce jpgs at all. 

405
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 11:05:50 AM »
Maybe it's the Sony 24MP APS-C sensor  ;D

Or it's rumored by Sony:
1. Start making people dream about 24MP APS-C from Canon
2. Wait for Canon making people dissapointed
3. Advertising: "Come to daddy..."

 ;D

thats hilarious, and maybe even true, lol!   after all, this is a CR1 rumor and no more credible than those before it. I suspect the purpose is to keep the flame alive. 

That said,  the content in this one for the first time mentions noise with an oblique reference to the shortcomings of the 7D in that regard.  Its as if someone is reading the forums and putting stuff out there known to generate lots of activity :D

Anyway unless Canon really strikes with a new and disruptive "C" sensor technology  there's seriously no way these rumored specs will come to life without going to an H sensor, which of course re-hashes all the same chatter again on that topic, for example how horrible it would be to force 7D upgraders to sell their S lenses to 70D owners, how the integer "7" and the letter "C" can never be separated, etc..  Alternatively, if they do have such a disruptive crop sensor, capable of pushing the pixel density limit while at the same time reducing noise, then they already have, "in hand",  successor technology to the 5D3 and 1DX, requiring only the migration to the FF production. 




Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 40