Messages

46

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 19, 2013, 05:45:20 AM »

You are right and you are  wrong, the APS has a break point in low light and if you compare that with a 24x36mm area  it is around 800iso
second, it is the surface size who are important, not the pixel size, if we not are discussing very low light. and the results should be seen / compared at the same size.
third, APS are earlier in the development stage , it means better QE, etc than the 24x36mm sensor who are last in the chain because of costs and machines

read more here http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html

ps : smaller pixels results in less noise

From my limited understanding of pixel / sensor design is that the pixel etchines are all physically the same size on all of Canon DSLR cameras. Every pixel is pretty much the same. but the bucket or well which they sit in in varies in size. On top of this arrangement is a microlens which helps direct as much of the light from the bucket surface into the smaller pixel at the bottom of the hole. Which is why Canon and Nikon made such a fuss over their gapless microlenses. Canon haven't made 
much advancement to their pixel design for a very long time because they were using the microlenses to mop up more or less light as required in their design brief. Nikon went a bit crazy and added gapless microlenses in their D700/D3. Keeping their mp low at 12mp, meant that they had a real advantage over the same generation of CAnon cameras. But it was a one off advantage and one which wouldn't be sustainable in future products as their MP increases. Canon's idea was far better and offered future scalability in MP. Then Nikon proved this point and released the most barmy camera ever...the D800, which created confusion in their product range. No one wanted an ultra high MP camera riddled with iso noise. The D700 was snapped up by pros who saw a big iso and AF advantage over Canon...but within one generation have been soarly let down by their new chosen brand. When I look through their camera portfolio, there's nothing there that inspires me. When I look at the Canon camera portfolio...it's looking very strong. The 6D is sweet, the 5DIII is amazing and the 1Dx is probably the best DSLR ever made. 

47

Software & Accessories / Re: Wonderpana System from Fotodiox

« on: April 16, 2013, 04:49:24 AM »

Oh I know the 17TSE wasn't made for that, but I have done it a few times shifted down in a bright room where I didn't have to get it perfect. No handheld tilt, though... I will have to take a look at the Fotodiox rig.

Did you see the site/blog run by a German photographer of architecture who bought a second 17TSE lens cap and made a filter holder out of that?
I found the URL in my OneNote files:
http://digidaan.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/polariser-on-17mm-tiltshift/

very interesting blog.

Yes, that particular mod has been around for a while. It's Ok, but the filter isn't quite big enough to cover the whole tilt and shift range. The WondaPana system is currently the only system which allows full movements with a single filter.

48

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 16, 2013, 04:36:23 AM »

The problem is not the megapixel number, just that Canon is using technology from 2009 in a world of Moore's Law.

That's like Apple sticking with the camera from the 3GS for the iPhone 5.

18MP is the sweet spot?  So when camera comes out with a 24MP sensor with better DR and ISO than this 2009 relic, what will you do then?  Stick with your 7D because "no one needs those megapixels"? 

An 8MP cellphone sensor with tiny plastic optics can out-resolve a 5MP one.  Do you know what a DSLR sensor would be like at that density?  There is a ton of growing room, 18MP is just the beginning.

I think the question one should be asking is "what am I going to use this camera for?". Does 15% or 25% more resolution (which the lenses are unlikely to be able to capitalise on) make you a better photographer? The major dofference between a 60D and 70D is the GPS and wifi, not the sensor. If Nikon or Sony have a bigger megapixel camera available which has the same or better iso ability (which I seriously doubt), will it be able to get better pictures or print much bigger? Or is it about bragging rights and owning a camera with the highest MP rating?

I'm a professional photographer and I'm really happy with the resolution on my 5DIII and 5DII. My landscapes are sharp at 100% and I can enlarge upto A1+ using my big Epson printer. The prints are crisp and sharp close up. When I had a 7D, I was happy with it's resolution too...it's just that the iso ability of that camera was seriously lacking. Iso 400was as high as I'd push that particular camera. It was a great camera bit the IQ wasn't that great. I hope that the next gen of 1.6x crop sensors from Canon can match the last gen full frame sensors for ISO ability and general pixel quality. Then they will have another winner on their hands.

49

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 400 f/4 DO IS II

« on: April 16, 2013, 04:25:24 AM »

The cost of the 1200mm, like the cost of all the other supertele primes, is all about the amount of glass.

Glass is melted sand. Glass is cheap -- even cheaper than a silicon wafer. Even fluorite is cheap and abundant.

What costs money is first the R&D; even Canon's very intelligent and skilled and very well paid engineers with all the equipment they might want at their disposal haven't yet truly figured out DO in the first place.

And what next costs money is the tooling. So you've got a bag of sand. How are you going to sinter it with the right trace elements into a bubble-free block the size you need? How're you going to grind that into the shape you need to the tolerances you need? How're you going to make however many thousands of these elements you need for the lenses you're going to sell, and where're you going to keep the individual machinery you're going to need for each different element? Or, how're you going to make a general-purpose lens manufacturing machine that can handle a broad range of the very different elements you need?

And let's not forget the housing, autofocus motors, IS gyros, and circuitry / firmware -- very little of which can be reused from lens to lens, especially with the big exotics.

Now, take the cost to make all the machinery -- again, the materials are a rounding error -- and divide by the number of lenses you expect to sell. Add in all the salaries you have to pay, all the taxes, all the shipping, all the environmental cleanup fees, all the rent, and a few pennies for the shareholders.

If you're going to sell lots of these lenses, you can spread that huge cost over all of them and wind up with a rather modest sale price.

But if you're only going to sell a few thousand, as I expect is the case with the Great Whites, then you have to make each buyer pay through the nose to offset all of that.

Think about it for a moment.

Do you really think that a 1200 is as expensive to make on a per-lens basis as an exotic luxury sports sedan? Or that a 400 f/2.8 costs more to make than an econobox?

No -- of course not!

But the sales volume is so low for the lenses....

Cheers,

b&

I love the way so many "lens experts" come out of the woodwork on camera forums...have you hand grinded any of your own optics??? Have you designed your own lenses and popped them on a camera? No...I haven't either.
According to various websites, the optics for the legendary ef 1200mm f5.6 were taken from the stock of FD 1200mm f5.6 lenses that Canon had. They made a new set of EF lenses, bu the optics were taken out of existing lenses. Canon haven't ground any EF front optics which is bigger than the current range of big whites (400/2.8, 600/f4, 800/5.6). Which leaves one to wonder if they no longer have that capability or they outsourced the original FD lens optics, which would explain why it's so darn expensive! It would also explain why Canon raided their old FD lenses to make only a handfull of the EF variants.

50

Software & Accessories / Re: Wonderpana System from Fotodiox

« on: April 15, 2013, 08:30:36 AM »

GMC,
To confirm: your CPL is from this Fotodiox system and is used with their holder arrangement? It's optically good enough?

I have the 17 and use it mostly inside but have been reading about various solutions for getting something out in from of the "dome". Agree about the half-ND stuff although for some travel situations it was good to have the hand-holding half grad solution available.

...not hand holding the 17 too much... have done, though. <grin>

Yes I have a CPL from Photodiox and is used in their holder. It's fine, simular in quality and polarising strength as a Hoya or Lee unit. Not quite as good as the Heliopan CPL's I'm currently using on my 16-35IIL. But their CPL is the best I've tried so far.

The TS-e 17L isn't really an hand held type of lens. The wide angle of view needs more meticulous care when adjusting the movements than other TS-e lenses. It's really a tripod only lens, so ND grads aren't very appropriate with this lens.

51

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Development Announcement in the Fall? [CR2]

« on: April 14, 2013, 06:14:32 PM »

Agreed, but to say the 85L II is sharper than the 135L is stretch. Even though we're comparing razors to razors.

I can only state what my particular lenses show. My 85IIL is a bit sharper than my 135L. Both are sharp, no argument! My 135L is about as sharp as my 70-200 f2.8 L IS II.
But my sharpest lens is easily my 400 f2.8 L IS and then my 100 LIS Macro. Both of these lenses are bonkers sharp. My old 100mm USM macro was sharp but not as sharp as my L version, other people used to rave about theirs, mine was a little so-so.

52

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Development Announcement in the Fall? [CR2]

« on: April 12, 2013, 10:29:11 AM »

nice, I have them also, but DXO means that the sigma 85mm is better than my Canon 85/1.2mk2, and cheaper.
what to do?what to do?

The sigma 85mm does not render better than the 85L II. It just doesn't.

I didnt say that, I say that DXO gives the Sigma lens higher score than 85/1,2 mk2

There is more to a lens that just a score. 

Their 85IIL must have been seriously out of spec and shows just how laughable DXO testing really is. My copy (which I use wide open all the time) is sharper than my 135IIL and 70-200 f2.8 L IS II. It's a stunning optic. I've tried the Sigma, it's was nice but not in the Canon league. It's Focussing was erratic and the images just don't look as nice....plus it's not quite as bright and certainly not as well built. The Canon 85IIL is an engineering masterpiece. My copy is now 5 years old and still looks new and it's had a hard life....good luck with your Sigma in that regard. I've had a lot of Sigma glass over the years and I've completely lost faith in the brand.

53

Lenses / Re: New Tilt-Shift Lenses in 2013 [CR2]

« on: April 12, 2013, 10:26:45 AM »

WHEN!!! It's now 2013, any more news on when? what month? I need these lenses now, and don't want to rent anymore, and don't want to buy, just to have the new one come out a week later.

Why not just buy them, and then sell them later when the new one comes out? Just consider it an extended rental period with an up-front deposit...

TS-e 45 and 90's are very reasonable on the S/H market. Look for mint copies and you'll sell them for what you paid for them...essentially, it'll be free use for the time you have them.

54

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Development Announcement in the Fall? [CR2]

« on: April 12, 2013, 09:49:06 AM »

well, the megapixels gives you freedom , the DR also.
IF Canon has the same camera as Nikon, what should your answer be then?
I do not like resolution, or a great DR

I like 24L II, 50L, 85L, 135L. :|

I have those as well...very nice lenses indeed. The 24L II is a real gem, I tried the Nikkor version on a D7000 when it was first launched and I was quite dissapointed in what I saw. It just seemed to miss focus a lot (randomly) and I didn't like the pictures from it either.
The 50L...well it's an odd ball but unique lens...I hope Canon replaces this with something worthy of the L moniker. My 85IIL is my most used Tele, it's just sublime. The results wide open are so sharp and beautiful...a truely unique and amazing piece of glass. The 135L is again quite unique. I don't use mine as much as I used to, great results and lovely images. But these days I tend to go for my 70-200 f2.8 L IS II (I use it for larger wedding receptions). I'm kind of hoping Canon will replace it with an IS version which is F1.8...but still just as sweet optically! If Canon did this and made the MFD a lot closer, I could sell my 100mm IS L Macro and use this at weddings a lot more. My real sweet heart lens is still my 35mm f1.4 L, I've not tried the Nikkor or Sigma versions but I've been using my Canon copy for about 5 years now and I'm still thrilled with it. 
When I look at the Nikkor lens catalogue, there's nothing there which particularly inspires me. I've got better options in the Canon range.

55

Software & Accessories / Re: A chicken in every pot and a SSD in every computer

« on: April 12, 2013, 09:29:18 AM »

If you are using a desktop or a 17" laptop with 2 drive bays (Yeah baby!) it's best to use a fast SSD as a boot / OS/Apps drive and a slower but larger mechanical drive for data. I'm currently using a Vertex III 240gb as my C: and a Western Digital caviar blue 1 TB for my data in a Dell XPS17....and it rocks. Win7 64bit, Quad core I7 and 16gb Ram...it flies through Lightroom Photoshop. With Lightroom, I've set the database and previews to the SSD but the RAW files are stored on the 1TB drive. According to Adobe, there is no performance gain in putting your RAWs on the SSD. And yes...it rocks.

56

Software & Accessories / Re: Wonderpana System from Fotodiox

« on: April 12, 2013, 09:21:48 AM »

Anyone have any experience with the filter system from Fotodiox. I am looking for a system that can fit the Samyang (Rokinon) 14mm f2.8 or the T3.1 lens and this is the only product that fits this lens. Other option is the Hitech system from Lucroit. I have no idea if their (Fotodiox or Hitech's) ND and GND filters have any color cast issues. Any insight on this matter would be very helpful. Unfortunately, Lee filters dont work with this system yet (I think).

I have a ND 5 stop and a CPL from this range, which I use with my TS-e 17L. They are massive filters and that's the difficulty in using them. I personally don't bother with ND Grads, they are a left over fad from film days and rarely produce convincing results. I get far better results using a tripod and combining two exposures in Photoshop.
The ND 5 stop has a gold colour cast, but I've yet to handle a ND or ND grad that doesn't have some sort of colour cast. Heliopan, Lee, Hi-Tek, Hoya, Cokin, Singh-Ray, B+W....they all have some sort of colour issues. I think the trick is to get one that is pleasing and looks nice.

The system certainly works well, although it's too big to leave on the lens and then put in a camera bag. It's well made, but not up to Lee standards. With a single filter, I can fully tilt and shift. With 2 filters, I can shift 10'..which is fine for most correction.

57

Lenses / Re: Which Lens ... 24-70 II or primes?

« on: April 11, 2013, 09:12:04 AM »

The prime is a lot brighter and creamier Out of focus rendering as a result. But it's harder to use, exact focus is critical and composition is harder work and slower. The zoom has far more versatility, it's wider and a lot longer in it's focal range. It's beautifully sharp, as sharp a prime. It's quicker to use due to the zooms versatility, it's got a quicker AF system too. A pair of primes and matching cameras is required to cover a simular focal range...but still lacks the versatility. I tend to use three cameras for my wedding work: a 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.2 and a 16-35IIL for wider stuff. But, a single 24-70L is far easier to work with in brighter weddings. 

58

Lenses / Re: New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]

« on: April 04, 2013, 05:03:21 AM »

Okay, I am interested in this lens but...  I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"

Just guessing, but I think 500/5.6 puts it into the ~$4K range based on element size.  I doubt we'll see one - over 400mm, Canon wants more of your money than that...   

 

Don't tell Canon, but, I would probably buy it at $3500-$4000.  I really think there is a missing $3-$5000 hole in their lineup.

I'd be pretty interested in a 500 f5.6 IS at that price expecially if its not too bulky and has an integrated lens hood like the 300f4L and 400 f5.6 do

Yeah me too, I'd be interested. 

Front element size should be around 10 cm (IS lenses are always a little bigger than fl/aperture).  That's still very portable.

However at that price I'm looking towards Sigma, not Canon.  As for 100-400, I think a Canon 100-400/4-5.6 L mk2 will come in around $3.5 to $3.6 k.

Which Sigma? I don't think they have anything comparible in their catalogue to the Canon 200-400. I've used a 120-300 and it was a nice lens but there is so much focus breathing, at min focus distance there's not much benefit over a 70-200/2.8. It might state 120-300 on the lens casing but it rarely is. By my estimates it drops down to a very poor 240mm at MFD. Pop a 1.4x TC on it and it barely scrapes 335mm f4....which isn't much better than a 300mm f4. It's not worth the cost, size or weight in my opinion. Far better off saving for a proper mk I white lens (300/400/500/600).

59

Lenses / Re: Canon Inc. Announces Development Of 35mm Cinema Prime Lens, Sixth In A Series Of Compact, Lightw

« on: April 04, 2013, 04:56:58 AM »

So what's the F/T stop of this lens?

Come on Canon! I can't believe you would release all that nonsense surrounding this lens and not tell us what it opens up to?

Unbelievable.

I bet Canon has repacked the EF 35mm f/1.4 L into a cine lens body, and has the same F & T stops.

Or more optimistically, perhaps its a new design that bits of will find its way into a soon to be released 35mm f/1.4 II...

That got me thinking.

Stills lenses often suffer from focus breathing, while - so I've read - cinema lenses do not. Do Canon cinema lenses focus breath? Does Canon repack optics from EF lenses that do not focus breath? Does it fix the design to prevent focus breathing?

Only on zoom lenses...not primes, which this lens is....

60

Lenses / Re: Canon 50 L II

« on: March 28, 2013, 05:02:24 AM »

Hello there,

I Have now a 50 1.4 and thats the length that I love most for portraits. I tried more 50L but I dont fell them that much better than my 50 1.4.

What do you guys think? When will a new 50 1.2 be released?

-Nate

By yesterday would be nice....the current 50L is the optically weakest L lens in Canon's current Luxury line up. It's ok, it's fine, it gets the job done but optically it's not stellar. Every other design part of this lens is though....it's robust, well made, focusses well, weather sealed, flare control, contrast (way better) and colour rendition.