February 27, 2015, 02:59:23 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 - Lawliet

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 37
1
Photography Technique / Re: What is your keeper rate?
« on: February 17, 2015, 03:11:19 AM »
For those that clean up their collection of files after a shoot, what is your goal ratio of those kept vs deleted?

Very dependent on sujet and material.
With high speed stuff there is a lot of trial and error for example, while working with collodium coated plates makes sure you exercise greatest care. On the gripping hand you have commercial shots where the kept shot is selection is based partially on the rest of the content, which will only be created after the shot. So it's wise to give the art director some options.

2
And at f2.8 it looks all but unusable, which begs the question, why bother going to 2.8?
The flaws are easily corrected, with a high res image revealed. (+ Without processing a 22MP raw making a 80MP file feel lightweight in comparison.)
Little astigmatism, coma or folding.

No they aren't, and I am pretty good at correcting flaws.
The problem with self assesments.
Quote
I had a Canon 16-35 f2.8 MkI that looked just like that at f2.8, which is why I now have the f4 version.
The EF-16-35 suffers strongly from those faults mentioned in the last line...requiring deconvolution from a preferable noisefree and pre-demosaiced image. Even trying to fix that with lens profiles is betraying.

3
And at f2.8 it looks all but unusable, which begs the question, why bother going to 2.8?
The flaws are easily corrected, with a high res image revealed. (+ Without processing a 22MP raw making a 80MP file feel lightweight in comparison.)
Little astigmatism, coma or folding.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: Are Zeiss lens users more likely to get a 5dS/R?
« on: February 15, 2015, 02:01:51 PM »
But, to get back to your question, I was really waiting for this camera and looking forward to matching it with my Zeiss primes. But if all I get is a FF 7DII with 50MP, than I´ll pass.

How the 5Ds will perform is one part of the equation, the other involves the competention. Sure, changing mounts is just an evening of work, esp if you already know which shims to use, but I still want to get an actual benefit.

5
Reviews / Re: Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Image Quality Examination
« on: February 15, 2015, 08:19:07 AM »

If I get a look at the night sky (I only have two more nights with the lens before it moves on to another reviewer, unfortunately), I will definitely be looking at coma.

Backup plan: use a LED, from across the room the smaller ones should come reasonable close to being a point source.
A pinhole in front of a larger light source would work as well, just don't set anything on fire. :)

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: The empire will strike back....
« on: February 11, 2015, 05:33:10 AM »
+1 but it will require a new lens mount from Sony ;)

Well, some of my favorite lenses have a user switchable lens mount. 8)

7
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 10, 2015, 01:12:05 PM »
Can someone explain this to me:

The silicone is colorblind, so you need filters to constrain it's response to certain wavelengths of light and collect the information needed to create a color image.
Beginning with the 5D2 Canon found a way to increase the sensitivity of their cameras: by using filters that allow more light to pass. On the downside the the difference in response of R,G and B pixels to a defined color was reduced, using the same tone curves would have lead to washed out colors. Nothing a higher saturation can't fix. At the first glance at least, as both the reduction of input data as well as pattern noise creeping into the demosaicing become apparent.
Getting the color response at least back to 1Ds3 levels would be welcome...

8
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 02:38:52 PM »
Didn't Canon themselves, through Chuck Westfall, say that the 5Ds/R was going to have the same low ISO DR as the 5D III?
That depends on whether you measure on a per pixel or per picture level.
Normally that should be closely correlated, but with the 5D3's banding the second metric looses considerably. If that got fixed the claims can both be true. Not accounting for ambiguity on the sensitivity bracket refered to.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:18:22 PM »
Technically speaking, what (if anything) can be done to improve low ISO DR at the expense of high ISO DR?
By using lower gain (pre-)amplifiers, preferable some on the die to lift the signel above the noise floor. That would cause clipping at high amplification...

10
EOS Bodies / Re: It may be quite a wait for the 5Ds and 5Ds R
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:11:49 PM »
I wish Canon had either been quicker to get these cameras to market or had delayed its announcement by a couple of months.
There is really no way Canon, or any camera manufacturer can win. 

A statement more precise then "somewhen in the future" would be nice. Are we talking about end march or end of september?

11
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 01:01:12 PM »
But remember, better at Low ISO, worse at higher.... You can't get something for nothing......
Based on the 7D2 in the context of a studio(and related sujets)camera the good range goes from iso100 to about iso400,  a drop in quality in the de facto H-settings is to be expected.

12
Lenses / Re: An EF-M f/1.2 Lens?
« on: February 08, 2015, 05:59:40 PM »
After watching the video over and over again I am now convinced that the focusing speed is still the weak point of this camera if you look at the video at 2:15.
You realize that during video recording the focus speed is deliberately slowed down to avoid sudden jumps?

13
EOS Bodies / Re: the "new" medium format?
« on: February 07, 2015, 04:51:43 PM »
you think this will create a price drop for the "big fellows" or
new announcements of perhaps 75-90 meg image sensors?

The impact has been made by the D800, with some shifts in the refurb options (and the associated trade-in offers). Somewhat more resolution& as yet to be determinated per pixel quality won't change much. Not to mention the phantom LS lenses. :)
But raw numbers aside, there are a few deffierences in UI/usability between an IQ2x0 and the new 5D's that on their own can make the back worthwhile, thats if you're working and time is actually money.

14

Instead I am trying to figure out what a Pentax 645z package should consist of. Compared to Hasselblad and Phase One it´s cheap, but still a substantial chunk of money. Next I´ll be looking through my gear, trying to figure out what to sell.

Something to consider: P1 and HB buy old backs back when you upgrad to a current one.
That has two implications: Keeping up to date is not as expensive as it seems at the first glance. And those 2nd hand backs end up somewhere. Mostly as refurbs in the hands of new entrants, an effort to lower the inital investment bump.

Also a set of 40-80LS and 75-150LS (plus the 120Macro or TS) is still cheaper then a single lens of the Zeiss cz trinity :)

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: February 05, 2015, 07:40:42 PM »
Thank you. So why don't we hear much (or do we and I'm just not very observant) about the same issues with APS-C sensors?
Because you get a much tighter framing, here everybody expects to need higher shutter speeds or a tripod.
People keep quoting the 1/f rule of thumb, 1/400s for 400mm and so on. With crop cameras people understood that the focal length has to be the apparent FL to keep the validity so you needed 1/640 under otherwise similar circumstances. Now with the higher res sensor you get the original framing of the lens back, but still require the faster shutter speed from the crop camera - it's the same pixel pitch after all, just with more picture along the borders. That raise from 1/400 to 1/640 would be the one way to get sharp pictures, the other would involve better technique, to get similar improvements at the old shutter speed.
(nota bene: the rule of thumb is just that; between higher resolution and IS it's even less set in stone then in analouge times)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 37