September 01, 2014, 11:34:57 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 ... 25
31
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 08, 2014, 05:18:30 AM »

Does anyone shoot both Canon and Nikon - Canon for long lens and Nikon for wide angles?  Experience?  Thoughts?


With the D800 I can get better image quality , but there are a few caveats: minor vibrations are a problem (that in my case doesn't occur that often because of flash useage. Which highlights something important to me: I only need about 60% of the flash power compared to the 5D3) and you need lenses that make actually use of the resolution. The 24-70/2.8s and 70-200/2.8s of both brands get me about equal detail, with the tilt/shift lenses its 3:1 for Canon. That and the RT system make the D800 a special purpose tool, unless you're hitting hard limits that cut into revenue with the 5D3 I'd see what we get for a 5D4 - either its the long term economical choise or the D810 has settled to a market determinated price instead of MSRP.

32
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV To Feature 4K Video?
« on: July 05, 2014, 03:36:00 AM »

5) The "Canon needs to protect the 1DC" argument also shouldn't prevent a 4K-capable 7D II. The 1DC isn't a new camera.

The "Protect the 1Dc"-angle is odd even if one thinks only in the present. Why? Because the 1Dc always felt like a kludge to me. Basically as if they wanted to release something 4k-capable and put the feature into the only still camera that has more or less enough processing power to do it.
The 5D3 got its horizontal resolution as a multiple of fullHD, I'd expect similar considerations for a designed as such 4K-camera.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: The Always Hidden Camera at the World Cup
« on: July 05, 2014, 03:13:30 AM »
Hey Fox Mulder, the 90s wants your conspiracy theories back.

Maybe its a social experiement; take any camera you have at hand, make it unidentifyable and track how fast the rumors spread and how they evolve.

34
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS
« on: July 01, 2014, 03:39:12 AM »

I understand that but merely considering the image quality?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=949&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=773&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3
Not much difference, other factors will most likely dominate.
So we're back to handling and utility for other uses, thats where the Canon wins in my book.

35
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 29, 2014, 04:08:08 PM »

And chances are, they would.  I'm amazed at how big Canon's CR2 files are.  My 6D's RAW files are somewhere on the order of 25-30 megs for an 18 MP photo, which comes out to (on average) about 12 bits per sample, or only about a 5–10% reduction over raw, uncompressed 14-bit data. 

Step 1: throw the jpg preview that has to be of high enough resolution to check for details&focus out.
Just convert the actual crop from the raw for high magnifications.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 27, 2014, 01:17:49 PM »
the blue pixels would register the blue photons and the red pixels would register the red photons just like our eyes do.

No, sensels seperate wavelengths relatively sharp via filters, while L- cone cells are still somewhat sensitve to short wavelengths; akin to the spectral response of a Foveon sensor.
Take a sample of cobalt violet for example, light reflected of it as no spike in the red band, it absorbs red light about as good as black.

37
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 27, 2014, 12:21:12 PM »

"Red/blue blend" and "shorter wavelength than blue" doesn't quite jive... can you explain further what you mean?

You can get violet hues either directly from the pigment or by mixing red and blue(additive color mixing is the key word, or two flashlights with gels for experimenting) - your screen does the latter. Nature has a bit of both.
Now look at a picture, preferable a drawing, not a photo, of a rainbow; the colors go red(long wavelength) orange yellow green blue (and now the violet hues the camera mistakes for blue, because the red you'd require to mix the color is so far away it doesn't register on the corresponding sensor cells).

Now you can have two problems: really bad reproduction of some colors, think flowers, minerals and such. And the other occurs if two things have the same color, but use the different ways to get it as described at the start. half the stuff will be properly pink, magenta, violet - but the other renders in blue. Now you can't even explain that this is the way its supposed to be...

38
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 27, 2014, 11:50:15 AM »
This is likely to mean very near IR and very near UV, and thus existing lenses would be okay.  Far UV would be removed by the glass, as would far IR. 

Very near would be enough to solve for example the purple/violett problem, i.e. colors that would be represented as a red/blue blend in RGB, but due to being of shorter wavelength then blue only register on those blue sensor cells and shift colors.

39

What's the more realistic and scientific explanation, then?
That question is about as smart as DXO or and lens review site boiling their whole results down into a single number...
But complacent reliance on market inertia has historical precedence, lets seewhat has been learned from those examples.

40
Nikon did (with help from Sony), and the Canon model in the same price bracket sells better.  You can ignore the realities of the market if you want, Canon will not.  There's your 'why' right there.

Thats a very simplified view of "market".  For example does the 5D3 sell better because people feel its in a sweet spot, or are there factors like depreciation rules that make a quick switch unviable?
The idea that sales of one particular item within a complete system in the context of a long term commitment is an accurate reflection of how well it fits unbiased customer demands(i.e. thats all we get, so it has to fit) is somewhere between naive and intentionally bad science.

41
We just got back a damaged pelican case at work.... Air Canada ran a forklift through it.
We once had a case fall overboard - and promptly having an argument with the boats propeller. Ended not that pretty for either, but the gear inside the case was fine.

42
Lenses / Re: EF 50 f/1.2L II Gets a Mention by Canon
« on: May 20, 2014, 05:10:55 AM »
Why has the video & link disappeared?  :o
Either because having a (confusing) typo around leaves a bad impression, or they've got the attention they wanted.

43
EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: May 05, 2014, 11:15:07 PM »

The 6D has 11 AF points. 

 :D
Alas...9 points and that 8way+center controller actually made sense...so it had to be changed.

44

Cropping does not change anything I've stated. A cropped photo is still a conglomerate of millions of pixels. Maybe not the tens of millions your sensor has, but still millions. If you are cropping so much that your final image can only be printed at native size on a 4x6, or cannot be downsampled, then your cropping way too much, and you seriously need a better camera. :P

As for detail to draw viewers in, sure, but again...you are either downsampling to some acceptable "web size", or printing, and in both cases, the amount of detail that can be effectively displayed at a comfortable viewing distance is generally going to be significantly less than what your photo started out with at 100%.


Thats unless you do, for example, commercials - first the final crop will depend on the layout, framing tight might make the image unuseable. Second the file is expected to hold up when zoomed in, because you have details from the overall image enlarged in dead spaces. The whole image to set the mood, the and enlargements to sell the actual product or draw attention to specific details. Enough resolution is approximatly when you can go from a full length shot with some scenery to a closeup of a piece of jewellery...

45

I didn't know Tamron and Sigma make lenses for the Sony E-mount. Now, if you are talking about an adapter (read: bulk), then what is the point of getting an A7?
Well, the battery grip is mandatory anyway, just to make it big enough to hold for exended times, or that the additional bulk compared to some Moves plus their heads/LSTs is nonexistent...
The point is obviously to get more sellable images, preferable for the same or less production costs, partially because of the sensor, partially because of things Canon just could throw into a firmware update, plus a bit of this and that.

Quote

I don't know if designing one camera after another thinking third party manufacturers will cover the lens end (pun unintended) is a sound business strategy.
They're actually releasing native lenses quite rapidly. About as fast as the overhead of changing production lines for different models would likely permit.
From the users perspective - what gives me the most sellable image? ATM files from the A7r net me the most money...

Quote
The A7/r can be someone's second or third body, and definitely is (e.g., Dylan). But I doubt any high-end photographer will invest entirely in the A7/r. That is losing a big market share, right there.
Considering that(aside from brand ambassadors) I don't know a single high end photographer who is invested entirely in a single brand...

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 25