September 01, 2014, 03:51:17 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 - epsiloneri

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 24
61
Lenses / Re: A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2012, 02:47:49 PM »
Speculation:
It might be cheaper to put IS into a medium-quality, small aperture kit-lense, than a 70-200 f/2.8 L-lense. Stricter requirements, heavier glass to move.
That's true for sure. In particular, large apertures seem especially difficult. That's the reason there are no fast primes with IS, the fastest being the immensely expensive EF 200/2.0L (AFAIK).

62
Lenses / Re: A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2012, 02:43:44 PM »
If your referring to the d800, then have fun spending all that you saved buying that body on more CF cards, cause unless you shoot in crop mode the files are huge.   
In addition to the Murphy's law you are referring to, you should learn about Moore's law. CPUs, GPUs, hard drives, RAM and about anything computer related including CF cards, tend to double their performance every 18 months. This stands in stark contrast to the Mpix of camera sensors, which increase much more slowly. You can get fast 64 GB CF cards for $150 today. That's more than a 1000 raw files for the d800. File sizes today is a non issue.


63
Lenses / Re: A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2012, 02:33:22 PM »
Just that IS will have no benefit for wa lens when the subject is moving and you are not panning - IS does not stop motion blur.

There are plenty of pros and cons for IS, and usually IS is by far more useful for longer focal lengths. But to say that IS has no benefit for wide angles is too strong of a statement. Apart from slowly moving scenes (with no accessible tripod), sometimes subject motion blur is actually desired. Think, e.g., flowing water or other situations when motion is to be emphasizied by motion blur. Quite effective but requires a very steady hand, tripod, or IS. Whether this is important enough for you to deal with the cons of IS is another and more subjective matter.


64
Software & Accessories / Re: Are lens skins worth it?
« on: July 02, 2012, 09:46:51 AM »
They are easy to use and take off (somewhat elastic material that provides a good fit). Could help prevent minor dents, I haven't tried that. If you choose an inconspicuous colour it also helps against attention from fellow humans, not only birds, in particular if you have a big white. Expensive but good in my experience (I use it on a 400/2.8 ).

I think they look cool, but might be labeling myself as a noob if i were to go out shooting with them

Best way to become cool is to care less what other people think  8)


65
EOS Bodies / Re: Is SLR dead?
« on: June 29, 2012, 05:23:56 PM »
I think it's pretty clear that optical viewfinders at some point will be replaced by electronic ones, meaning yes, SLRs are doomed in the long run. That doesn't mean they will become entirely extinct (like there are still LPs around today).

Regarding camera size... there are certain limits every future camera will need to adhere to, that can never change, no matter how clever future engineers are. I'm of course referring to the laws of physics. It may sound scary, but is often really simple, like this one: A sensor can never detect more light than is fed to it.

One implication is that we cannot expect sensors to increase their sensitivity indefinitely. Sensors already have a quantum efficiency (QE) of about 50%, meaning about half of the photons of the right wavelength hitting the sensor will get registred. For Bayer-type sensors we can thus expect at most a factor 2 improvement in sensitivity, even for an ideal sensor. With photo-sites that can detect all colours (as opposed to one colour; think foveon-like sensors), we can gain another factor 3 in sensitivity.

Low-light photography dominated by thermal/readout noise can naturally benefit from eliminating those additional noise sources, but the photon noise will always be there no matter what.

Another implication is that a larger lens will always have a low-light advantage, no matter the size of the sensor. Thus you have the option to choose a big lens that will be good in low light (and give shallow DOF), or a small lens that will fit easily into your pocket, but deliver deep DOF and not work as well in low light conditions. This will always be true. Forget about small lenses delivering shallow DOF - the reason the DOF becomes shallow is that the lens is big! Simple.

For perfect optics, the size of the sensor does not matter. In reality, it is much easier (and cheaper) to design satisfactory optics for a large sensor than a small. That's why the EF-S 17-55/2.8 is slightly more expensive than the EF 24-105/4.0L, eventhough the latter sports better build quality, has a larger effective aperture (26 mm at f=105mm compared to 20mm at f=55mm for the EF-S), and has the red ring.

Since we can expect sensors to continue become cheaper I would predict that sensors in general will become larger, and that the optics will become cheaper. I'd be surprised if we hadn't cheap FF P&S with plastic lenses within 10 years, producing better quality images than current P&S to better ergonomics and much better prices.


66
Different hand sizes are a major point with camera bodies. My hands are very much on the large end of the scale (nearly 10-1/2 inch span) so my 7D feels tiny, even the 1 series is not very large for me - so it will clearly be that what fits me wont fit others. Same applies to weight of camera + lens.

Aha, that explains why you claim the 400/2.8 to be handholdable to you :)

67
Landscape / Re: Venus transit
« on: June 06, 2012, 08:25:53 AM »
If venus is in the top part of the moon Sun, is that because all of you guys are northern-hemispheres?

Yeah, you can see on the sun-spot pattern how the Sun is oriented. It's great to see so many contributions from various part of the world! Some show the transit at sunrise, some at sunset, some upside down... When you see Venus like that, a tiny dot on the Sun, it is amazing to think that the planet is of about the same size as Earth. This could have been martians watching the Earth transiting the Sun.

68
Landscape / Re: Venus transit
« on: June 06, 2012, 03:54:06 AM »
We too had clouds :( After a while the clouds fortunately parted momentarily, presenting a spotted Sun along with Venus  8)

400mm+TC1.4x+7D, Baader solar film, ISO100, f/5.6 & 1/400s.

69
Landscape / Re: Venus transit
« on: June 05, 2012, 11:06:16 AM »
Anyone know if that's dark enough? Or should I stop past the local camera shop on the way to work and see if they rent out ND10,000s?
If you live somewhere where the Sun will rise or set with Venus transiting, then you really don't need to go that dark (just as you often can shoot the sun during last part of sunset without filters). If you have the chance to catch the Sun before the transit event, i.e. today, you can try out your equipment beforehand and practice on a couple of sunspots that are on now, and that you should be able to catch. Venus will be much easier to get than those sunspots, though.

70
Landscape / Venus transit
« on: June 04, 2012, 11:12:18 PM »
Is anyone planning to shoot the Venus transit tomorrow? From where I live the Sun will rise with Venus transiting, so I'm considering cool sunrise options (weather permitting). A distant familiar building in the foreground, or just the Sun reflecting in open water are some ideas I have. For planning location, I've found Google Earth useful.

In case you wonder if it's worth it: consider that few alive today will have a chance to see another Venus transit. Next one is in December... 2117.


71
Lenses / Re: The Canon EF 600 f/4L IS II Has Arrived
« on: June 04, 2012, 10:53:12 PM »
"Hand holdable"? I bet hand holding these babies gets old real quick :) Even if lighter than the previous generation, they're still heavy. I have the old 400/2.8 IS and it sees much less use than I'd like to because it's difficult to carry around (and transport on airplanes). Granted, it's a bit heavier than the newer ones, but still, unless you have an assistant carrying gear for you, don't count on taking the superteles too far from the car. That's why I'm seriously looking forward to a 400/5.6 IS, if it ever gets released.

72
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Film is still hard to beat
« on: May 20, 2012, 01:22:32 PM »
For those who think they need a "scientist" to tell them whether they should like a picture, poet Walt Whitman had some advice

This reminds me of a quote from a famous scientist:

Quote from: Richard Feynman
I have a friend who's an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I don't agree with very well. He'll hold up a flower and say "look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. Then he says "I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing," and I think that he's kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe. Although I may not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is ... I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. I mean it's not just beauty at this dimension, at one centimeter; there's also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
― Richard P. Feynman

73
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Solar eclipse questions...???
« on: May 19, 2012, 04:59:05 AM »
In addition to what PeterJ said, note that this eclipse on May 20 is annular, not total. It makes a huge difference, as the sun will never be completely covered. The eclipse in Australia later this year will be total.

Shooting the annular eclipse will be good practice for the Venus transit on June 5!

74
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 60Da in Stock at B&H
« on: May 03, 2012, 05:18:41 AM »
Ok if I were just a casual astrophotographer and trying to get shots of the stars and Milky Way would a 5D Mark III or 5D Mark II serve me just as well with a full frame sensor?

The 5Ds would serve you better. The advantages of the 60Da are (primarily) that it lets through more of the H-alpha radiation at 656.3 nm that is important when shooting nebulae, its lower weight (compared to 5D) and articulated screen. For stars and the Milky Way, the bigger sensor wins (unless you're specifically interested in capturing the HII regions and nebulae of the Milky Way, which can produce spectacular images).

An no, the IR filter is not removed, it is simply replaced by a filter that cuts off at a slightly longer red wavelength. The difference to 60D should be minimal for regular photography.

75
Lenses / Re: waiting for a new 100-400mm lens
« on: April 30, 2012, 12:03:23 AM »
....the hood "looks" cheap....no fancy tulip design, it's a straight up barrel.  It just looks dumpy...but it works.
That's a negative?  So...you'd prefer a 'cooler' looking hood to one that's designed for optimal optical parformance?
Isn't a tulip design, cool looking or not, always the optimal for optical performance?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 24