July 30, 2014, 06:26:36 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 ... 23
Come on now, don't be a spoil sport, how many of you guys own a 4K TV? How many are going to be buy one in the next year or two?
Considering the availability of 8k sets I wouldn't buy another 4k without a very good reason...

"The only bad news is that it doesn’t record 4K on SD card. You will have to use an external recorder."  How many people are interested in doing that? 

People with the skill&ambition to make good use of HD/4k do it anyway. Or: on the fly compression of a 4k stream to SD card-friendly data rates leaves you with the same quality as common (&commonly to highly compressed) fHD, but at much larger handling costs.

Separate versions for 50/60Hz...ouch. While it prevents grid flicker, not that I'd know anyone who'd still use susceptible lights w/o genlock, it also keeps me from delivering video in the requested format half of the time.

I did not say that 4K is a lost train, but nothing indicates that it will be the hegemonic pattern to the end consumer. Perhaps in 2025 there are reliable and affordable media to replace BluRay.

I didn't feel thats much of an factor - you can always downsample to FullHD if media constraints require it - but how much longer the medium will be a major factor?
OTOH increased production cost might be a something to consider -whole production, with the part from sensor to end user being more of a side note-, thats unless one wants the higher res just to reveal previously glossed over and hidden flaws.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sonay Alpha a6000
« on: April 03, 2014, 02:54:15 PM »
Help me to understand why Canon/Nikon full frame cameras don't offer the same wide area coverage of focus points as the Sony A6000???

Because of the mirror - the submirror directing the rays onto the AF sensor has to fit into the body/underneath the main mirror, so its size and position are limited. Which means that peripheral points wouldn't see a thing.
A) a much larger mirror box to accommodate a full sized mirror - plus completely new lenses with a much larger flange distance. Not good. Not at all.
B) throw the mirrors out completely and have a clean optical path between lens and sensor. Have you noticed how far out the 70Ds dual pixels can do PDAF? Works with existing lenses and, if done consequently, reduces costs for both parts and assembly/adjustment.

EOS Bodies / Re: Cinema EOS C200 & C400 at NAB? [CR1]
« on: March 29, 2014, 08:28:39 AM »

New tech debuts when it is ready.

Or from a update schedule POV - We get a new entry level every year, but trice that time between top level devices. The competition would love the idea of reliable top down trickle only progression. Even more then the current pace of new releases.


But on the other hand I can't be the only one with two EOS bodies and eight EF/EF-S lenses.
Depends on the timeframe - That "100-400 still MK I" I had served together with about 5 generations of bodies, the same with the 17-50/24-70/70-200 and some of the primes. Thats less then one lens sold for each body. ;) To get a decent ratio of bought first hand/owned and not just currently used equipment most people would have to keep tons of never used lenses around - if only because they have vastly different service durations.

Canon General / Re: TC switchable like built-in TC
« on: March 29, 2014, 07:16:40 AM »

I suspect that any practical implementation of the idea for general usage would be difficult or impossible because of the need to matchup the glass that switched in to a individual lens.  That would not preclude someone making a dedicated unit for a popular lens like the 70-200 f/2.8L.  It might sell for $700, but some would find it very useful.

You could switch between a TC2 and a daisychained TC1.4 + the Metabones Speedboosters optics. The latter would counteract the TC1.4, giving you something to avoid the extension tube effect. Some finetuning regarding overall lengths and compensation of aberrations would be required, but it would work regardless of the lens its attached to.


There must be an awful lot of people who have only one lens, and don't really need an ILC.

At least a minority doesn't get a new kit lens with every body. A 24-70/105, 70-200, the odd prime paired with successively a 5D, 5D2, 5D3 and you're about to end up in the 1.5 lenses/body-group quite fast. And then you have 3rd party lenses, Canon wouldn't include those in the announcement. ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2014, 12:05:53 AM »

I'm not sure they have had the tech for more DR and it didn't seem like they cared enough early on. A

What could stop them from reading the individual sensor cells of a dual pixel at different amplifications? Blending the exposures isn't exactly beyond high school math either. I.e. thats what you can get via Magic Lantern, just without the potential resolution loss, because you don't have to fall back to sensels that where meant to provide spatial data.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: March 27, 2014, 11:00:38 PM »
I'd like to see quad-pixel technology come out... with a sensor where you can bin all four sub-pixels together and have a 10Megapixel FF sensor with kick-ass low light capacity or access the sub-pixels and have a 40Megapixel high resolution sensor....

Phase One beat you on that idea!  :P
Admitted, going from ISO800 to ISO3200 that way won't get anybody from FF/APS-C-Land excited, but the idea is there.


That's a very informative chart ... surprising that Nikon charges as much as Leica for repairs ... also Nikon's repair time is pretty pathetic only topped by the scandal hit Olympus.

It doesn't tell you what was repaired. For example both Canon and Nikon have quite high repair costs. Is their service generally more expensive then the other brands? Or do for example the (assumed) often rented out for comparable rough use  superteles skew the result?

So I'm genuinely shocked that in my ignorance I believed there was a proper step up in sensor real estate to be lusted after, alas, er... this.

You always could go for backs like the IQx60/IQx80 or some of the newer HBlads - those have sensors that are roughly  the size of the usable area of 6x4,5.
But then there is more then raw sensor size, like design goals or the lenses. A bit of extra resolution, but mostly the lenses and the leaf shutter for me.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: March 27, 2014, 06:46:52 AM »

1920*3=5760 which is exactly what 5D3 got.

That would be a 2:1 aspect ratio, not much love here. And It would require odd blending/skipping patterns to capture standard video. Not much love either.

The first fitting, in tradition of the 5760px of the 5D3, resolution would be 1920*2*2 - to get full RGB for 4k-video and 39.3MP stills. going for the slightly larger 4096 flavor would net you 44.7MP. Current OTS cores can handle that resolution up to about 30fps; in a dual config. that should work even with continuous AF. no line skipping also implies less moire and less noise at higher ISOs. Dual photodiodes allow for higher low ISO DR. Who could argue against such a machine?

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: March 27, 2014, 03:32:50 AM »
I would think the opposite! A mid priced Merc would sell well IMHO.

But only if they
a) manage to keep the level of quality&performance up despite the lower price, otherwise expect backlash.
b) keep the air of exclusivity&luxury that makes the car covetable in the first place.
..think NEX in Hasselblad clothing, though the current state of affairs in that department could be worse.

Something to keep in mind about the 5D800-story: is it just a question of sensor resolution? Or rather a matter of being in an existing ecosystem, or the added effort that has to be made to make actual use of the potential resolution? And then there is the field of pictures in motion, if thats even part of your job description Canon wins more or less by default.

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in 2014? [CR1]
« on: March 26, 2014, 10:19:44 PM »
I have looked closely at the A7r for that reason but there seem to be three big question marks - light leak, AF performance and IQ when using an EF adaptor.

The light leak story is imho overblown, thats unless you regularly shoot with dense ND filters. Mileage varies with lens choice - how tight are the tolerances of the mount and how susceptible to stray light effects is the lens as such?

IQ-wise the adapter contains no optics, its just an extension tube. While the additional tolerances introduced by the second mount are measurable most of the time just about every other source of error will dominate.

AF? I got the A7r for its manual focusing facilities. :)
Esp with the TS-E lenses AF is...well...you'd be waiting for eternity. With native lenses its ok, with promising developments(see a6k), adapted its more a proof of concept to me.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 23