October 01, 2014, 01:08:07 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] 4 5 ... 27
EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 04, 2014, 08:26:24 AM »

Yes, other brands do offer 4K for consumers - as it is a fairly easy gimmick to sell people on even if it has no benefit.

You're forgetting how bad for example canons HD video is in terms of actual detail retention. An artefact of the whole reading only parts of the sensor thing.
Even if you don't have/take advantage of a 4K-device for output rescaling the footage will get it closer to actual 4:4:4 without unwarrented blur for common fullHD.

You have to think about the costs to store data safely and efficiently, not only that have a machine that can deal with loading the images quickly for efficient workflow for PP.

At the same time factor in the time it costs to do the cleanup necessary to match the results of competing data sources. Considering reasonable rates thats the biggest factor in the equation for me.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 04, 2014, 07:14:06 AM »

As for products that 'lack spark', that's completely subjective.  Their products spark enough interest to keep them the market leader...

Sounds eeriely familiar to the talk about Nokia. Could even be a verbatim quote...


I'll give an A7r rental a try. I'm wary of the compression, but as you say...it can't be worse than the shadow noise on the 5D III.

Lets put it that way: In the last weeks I had both file sets from sessions shot with 5D3 vs. D810&A7r, the latter took the retoucher on average a good deal less time to get ready for delivery. Actually that costs saved paid for the D810.

Well, that pragmatic approach beats any theoretical discussion in my book... 8)

EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina / spot metering
« on: September 03, 2014, 02:38:25 PM »

I suppose I am confusing a "spot meter"proper, with camera spot metering.

Yes, its about the changeable lenses, how the in camera meter works and how weird a fixed angle meter with different focal lengths would handle if it worked.
In cameras the size of the spot meter is given as the percentage of the area of the viewfinder area sampled.
Well, either that or as the diameter of the metered circle, making it easier to put it relation to width/height. (Just rememder that not all sensors are 36x24mm²)

How about people take responsibility for their own decisions for a change?

In the context of system decisions that would be a a valid suggestion if, and only if, there are binding roadmaps - otherwise making informed decisions is impossible.
Have you seen one?


What's striking to me is why anyone would buy a product (and in another thread one of the most vocal complainers said he spent $25,000 on Canon gear) they don't like. And, if they bought something they didn't like, why would they choose to take their dissatisfaction to a forum, which is about the most ineffective way imaginable to complain. Just return the product, or sell it and chalk up any loss to experience.

That's called vendor lock in.
For a company it has the advantage of making the cost of changing prohibitive...until the wheel turns and you have to fight an uphill battle.

I was wondering if even SoNikonians sometimes complain, for example,
Any thoughts?

ATM mostly about availability at rental houses. First come, first serve vs. changes in demand.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Perfect Sensor
« on: August 31, 2014, 06:30:25 AM »

The unconstrained mind is not creative.

Tell that anybody who does CGI - physics, and even logic, are purely optional, yet people still create great work

EOS Bodies / Re: Differences in color of lcd screens
« on: August 31, 2014, 06:23:58 AM »
A calibratable off-camera monitor is a feature they could add a generation or two from now though...

The big problem here is the adaption of your perception. A monitor that gives you an accurate impression here might be quite of if you just step a bit to the side, because over there the ambient conditions are different. And even with a sensor detecting them the camera has no idea how much your brain is compensating for them at the moment.
That's why the prime requirement for color sensitive work is a suitable workplace, calibration comes only second.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 31, 2014, 06:16:33 AM »

Is there a better way to isolate the read noise and see just the read noise?

If you want clean data & isolated variables - no, nothing that could be done at home.
If you want to stick the fingers into your ears and hum really loud...well, you want a test that does just the opposite.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 30, 2014, 10:18:24 PM »
Just get out and take some pictures, the kind that reliably make money, everything else the same one camera gives you:
resolution diff. limited to f/11, constant light motion blur of 1/320, flash motion blur of 1/1000s, 1fps
the other
resolution diff. limited to f/16, constant light motion blur of 1/160-1/200, flash motion blur of 1/400s, 0,5fps

With (some) the Canon crop cams having no black bars at 1/320 things get a little paradox in terms practical utility. :o 8)

EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: August 28, 2014, 02:54:26 AM »
With all the hype on the forum about the 7D2, the question is asked.... "Are you going to get one"?
Lets first see what we get eventually. :)

Depends on the little details that don't make nice bullets on the feature list.
From the actual sync speed over processing lattitude to clean HDMI out and not super softening processing.

EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 28, 2014, 01:36:27 AM »

If you have shots that make it "crazy clear" you are not testing what I am asking.

To get the results you want you have to approach the issue in about the most ham-fisted way possible. That's not evaluating the gear, but manhandling it - not exactly the best way to find out if one could get better results using proper, or at least reasonable, technique.

Sure, you could use a filter made from ground glass and declare that as standard to proof that a smaller pixel pitch makes no sense...but anyone interested in results will take it off and invalidate your conclusion.

Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 28, 2014, 12:17:39 AM »

Agree, but have you tried handling an A7? 

Add the battery grip and it improves to "somewhat awkward".

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 27