August 28, 2014, 07:13:46 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 - awinphoto

Pages: 1 ... 109 110 [111] 112 113 ... 133
1651
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon D800 at 36mp, Will Canon Respond?
« on: October 04, 2011, 12:27:18 PM »
If true (very hard to believe) and Canon doesn't respond, then Canon will loose all of its userbase within month.

This cracks me up. You really think that pro photographers are chomping at the bit to be able to take 7,311 x 4,874 pictures instead of 5,616 × 3,744? They will cast off all their thousands of dollars in Canon lenses and flashes and go buy the equivalent Nikon gear? Taking pictures that are 1700 pixels wider is an overwhelmingly compelling feature to a pro? I guess they feel limited artistically by the extra resolution? Get real.

I'm a pro photographer and I would look forward to a canon equivalent to this camera.... I'm too invested and shot too long with canon to switch but I on occasion shoot for backgrounds on tradeshow displays... Now I either shoot in peices and merge the photos in Photoshop to create one large photo or upsample in fractals to get the large print... less upsampling or less piecing together to get a natively suitable shot at 150DPI, the better... and no, medium format or large format digi backs aren't in mine or my clients budgets...

1652
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon D800 at 36mp, Will Canon Respond?
« on: October 04, 2011, 11:34:40 AM »
I wonder how Nikon users will deal with the double think a camera like this will have them spouting.  For years they've been saying that 12MP is in fact better, less is more and other such- more images per GB - clients don't need or want such big files, bigger pixel sites etc etc.  A 36MP camera will suddenly turn all that on its head, and they'll be having to argue the same words that Canon FF users have been using all these years.

I was wondering the same thing

1653
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon D800 at 36mp, Will Canon Respond?
« on: October 04, 2011, 10:59:56 AM »
I think this will be a fine camera, basically an improved D3x at a lower price.

First, there's going to be a gap at Nikon, the D700 is right now at $2600, the D800 will be $4000. I think something at $$2600-3200 wouldn't be bad to release, especially because I think many Nikon users want a new FF camera, just not with that many pixels. So either a D800, D700x that has 24-30MP with faster performance.

That means Canon has to announce a 5D Mark III and another camera, either 5Ds Mark III that could have also improved video, or perhaps a 3D/6D line to compete with Nikon's second model (not the D800).

And about file sizes - luckily it has USB 3.0 so at least at transferring it won't be so long. Editing and saving - well, that's horrible but no one is forcing you to buy the camera. SSD disks are getting cheaper (though not as cheap as most of us would want them to be), speeds are getting better and sizes are increasing.

And about lenses not resolving details - I am very confident all lenses out there, especially prime, will be able to match up to such high pixels.

What makes you think that the D800 isn't the D700 replacement at it's rough price point and the D700 will drop in price, just like when the 5d mark II came out and dropped the 5d in price?  Nikon and Canon has done that in the past such as when the D300 took over the D200 series and such... I dont think the D800 would be just a new camera in the series but a replacement for the D700...

1654
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon D800 at 36mp, Will Canon Respond?
« on: October 04, 2011, 10:48:54 AM »
neuro, you know more about the nitty gritty but if a 5dii roughly matches a 20D crop, then a 36mp would roughly come out to a 13.7mp sensor crop?  Am i on the target... the 40D (12mp) was infamous for image quality and the 50D (15mp) was starting to break apart... perhaps this will fall in that happy medium.  Regarding the storage, I just bought a 1tb hard drive with 800 firewire connectivity for a hair over $100... I'm sure I could pick up a 2TB USB for about that price... I know it's an inconvenience, but just like how you had to organize film in the old days, you got to organize digital files.  Plus unlike film, we can delete the bad images to save space... I'd say bring it on provided image quality and ISO performance doesn't suffer...

1655
United States / Re: Tripod Collar.
« on: October 02, 2011, 08:30:42 PM »
Dont forget about the ebay option... You dont have to get a cheap knock off, see if they have the OEM goods... That's where i got my collar for my 70-200... Dont think i spent more than $30

1656
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 03:28:04 PM »
I'm all for the discovery of the truth, so lets drop the intensity of light debate (even though, all things being equal, the bigger mirror, the more light, even if the center portion that would be collected by a crop sensor may or may not be equal intensities, the extra surrounding information may or may not be enough to affect exposure and light), but lets assume that's all equal... Let's take a 40D and a 5D mark 2 (same AF system)... Assuming the AF points are pretty much in equal or equal like proportion to the frame on the 40D and 5d mark II or at least the individual AF sensor size within the frame, and since the 5D is 1.6x bigger, then that would possibly mean, at least to the layman, that assuming the AF sensor isn't necessarily bigger, but if there were lets say 20 pixels of information per each sensor size on a crop sensor, on a full frame, there would be 36 pixels, hence more information going to the sensor, which allows it to be better in low light, which is the original problem that was in question.  Any debates about this thinking?

Yes.  First, let's just clarify the difference in sensor size so there's no confusion for others.  1.6x refers to the diagonal measurement.  The FF sensor is actually 2.5 times larger in area than the APS-C sensor.

You may realize this but it's not clear from your statements and others may not know.  The AF sensor is completely separate from the image sensor (it's usually at the bottom of DSLR camera bodies) so therefore the relative size, resolution, pixel pitch, etc. between image sensors in various cameras has nothing to do with the AF sensors in all those cameras.  The AF sensors do not need to scale (in terms of size or pixel size) along with the image sensors.

I'm not really sure exactly what you mean by "more information going to the sensor" but that's not really how phase detect AF works.

I should have used some other form of measurement, but I was referring to size of each AF sensor compared from a crop camera to a full frame So in relation IF a sensor in a crop camera covered an area compard to the same sensor in a full frame, all things being equal, would be covering 1.6x more information

1657
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 02:51:21 PM »
I'm all for the discovery of the truth, so lets drop the intensity of light debate (even though, all things being equal, the bigger mirror, the more light, even if the center portion that would be collected by a crop sensor may or may not be equal intensities, the extra surrounding information may or may not be enough to affect exposure and light), but lets assume that's all equal... Let's take a 40D and a 5D mark 2 (same AF system)... Assuming the AF points are pretty much in equal or equal like proportion to the frame on the 40D and 5d mark II or at least the individual AF sensor size within the frame, and since the 5D is 1.6x bigger, then that would possibly mean, at least to the layman, that assuming the AF sensor isn't necessarily bigger, but if there were lets say 20 pixels of information per each sensor size on a crop sensor, on a full frame, there would be 36 pixels, hence more information going to the sensor, which allows it to be better in low light, which is the original problem that was in question.  Any debates about this thinking? 

1658
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 02:06:50 PM »
The focus sensor isn't smaller but the light allowed through to the mirror to the AF sensor is proportional by the diminished light.... Canon isn't going to waste money putting a full frame size mirror into a crop body when it doesn't need it.  Plus by doing so, you would see image you wouldn't be getting anyways...  When you read reviews about the 5D's viewfinder, you read adjectives such as Big, bright, pictureframe... when you do the math, it makes perfect sense...

You are missing the point completely and I won't argue it further than this: When I bounce a laser pointer off a mirror onto a wall, the brightness of the laser dot on the wall doesn't change depending on the size of the mirror I bounce it off of.

And I wont argue this matter any futher. any single point in a F5.6 exposure (with the same shutter) would be letting in 2x the light in every part of the frame than a F8 exposure... Same with the mirror. 

1659
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 12:27:13 PM »
Dont get me wrong, I have the 7D and shoot regularly with 7D... I shoot almost 90% of my shots with that great camera... but it does have it's limitations and when the new 5d's are released... can you imagine what the 7D AF with the more light input of the 5D can pump out?  When that camera comes, if it has the same AF as the 7D, i'm dumping my 7D's in favor of the 5d's...

1660
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 12:17:18 PM »
If i may, the autofocus sensor receives light from the mirror so the more light hitting the mirror, the more light gets sent to the autofocus sensor... they are 2 separate sensors... the 7d DOES have a more advanced sensor, but light being light, if it doesn't receive as much light as the 5d does, it can only do so much...  In good lighting, the 7D kicks the 5d's butt every which way, but in low light, lighting becomes even more important. 

If you will, here's what I mean... the crop sensor is 1.6 smaller than a full frame sensor... a little more than half the size than a full frame sensor... Take 2 softboxes... both pumping out the same quality and strength of light... If 1 is on and the other is off, that's basically what a crop sensor is getting in light... a full frame camera would be like turning on the second softbox of light... you're not increasing any intensity of light but it's a bigger source overall 1 vs 2 and so it's more light and in terms of exposure, that's around 1 stop difference.  The full frame mirror will receive 2x the light gathered from the lens (all the light the lens can send it) and that light bounces into the AF motor.  The crop sensor still gets all that light but the mirror is smaller, sensor is smaller, and a lot of light is then wasted and not used...

The image sensor as you say is not the same as the focus sensor... are you saying the 7D has a crop (1.6x) focus sensor too??  :-\

The focus sensor isn't smaller but the light allowed through to the mirror to the AF sensor is proportional by the diminished light.... Canon isn't going to waste money putting a full frame size mirror into a crop body when it doesn't need it.  Plus by doing so, you would see image you wouldn't be getting anyways...  When you read reviews about the 5D's viewfinder, you read adjectives such as Big, bright, pictureframe... when you do the math, it makes perfect sense...

1661
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 12:09:40 PM »
If i may, the autofocus sensor receives light from the mirror so the more light hitting the mirror, the more light gets sent to the autofocus sensor... they are 2 separate sensors... the 7d DOES have a more advanced sensor, but light being light, if it doesn't receive as much light as the 5d does, it can only do so much...  In good lighting, the 7D kicks the 5d's butt every which way, but in low light, lighting becomes even more important. 

If you will, here's what I mean... the crop sensor is 1.6 smaller than a full frame sensor... a little more than half the size than a full frame sensor... Take 2 softboxes... both pumping out the same quality and strength of light... If 1 is on and the other is off, that's basically what a crop sensor is getting in light... a full frame camera would be like turning on the second softbox of light... you're not increasing any intensity of light but it's a bigger source overall 1 vs 2 and so it's more light and in terms of exposure, that's around 1 stop difference.  The full frame mirror will receive 2x the light gathered from the lens (all the light the lens can send it) and that light bounces into the AF motor.  The crop sensor still gets all that light but the mirror is smaller, sensor is smaller, and a lot of light is then wasted and not used...

You have to remember that each AF point only sees a very small amount of the total reflected light. The smaller mirror means that less total light is reflected, but this in no way diminishes the intensity of each point of light reflected up to each AF point. Using your 2x figure, the full-frame mirror reflects 2 times as many points of light as the crop mirror, but each of those points of light are the same intensity. If the AF points on the sensor are the same size between the bodies, each AF point receives the same amount of light. I do not know if they are the same size and if you have experimentally determined that in identically conditions with the only variable being the body, that the 5D has better AF performance, than this argues that each AF point is larger or more sensitive.

Not if you think about terms of exposure... 2x the light means 1 stop difference... 1 stop difference means more overall intensity of light overall... The light source intensity hasn't increased but adding that extra bit of light makes a world of difference on exposure and in this example, light hitting each AF point. 

1662
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 11:37:33 AM »
If i may, the autofocus sensor receives light from the mirror so the more light hitting the mirror, the more light gets sent to the autofocus sensor... they are 2 separate sensors... the 7d DOES have a more advanced sensor, but light being light, if it doesn't receive as much light as the 5d does, it can only do so much...  In good lighting, the 7D kicks the 5d's butt every which way, but in low light, lighting becomes even more important. 

If you will, here's what I mean... the crop sensor is 1.6 smaller than a full frame sensor... a little more than half the size than a full frame sensor... Take 2 softboxes... both pumping out the same quality and strength of light... If 1 is on and the other is off, that's basically what a crop sensor is getting in light... a full frame camera would be like turning on the second softbox of light... you're not increasing any intensity of light but it's a bigger source overall 1 vs 2 and so it's more light and in terms of exposure, that's around 1 stop difference.  The full frame mirror will receive 2x the light gathered from the lens (all the light the lens can send it) and that light bounces into the AF motor.  The crop sensor still gets all that light but the mirror is smaller, sensor is smaller, and a lot of light is then wasted and not used...

1663
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 11:10:02 AM »
In low light, the 5d Mark II will allow in more light to the focus sensor

What do you mean by this and why do you think that?

Almost every review comparison, by nature of a crop sensor collect x ammount of light and the full frame allowing in more ammount of light because of the bigger sensor, everything from the viewfinder will be slightly brighter, and more light will hit the autofocus sensor... In low light, by all means the 5d is not perfect and will also hunt, but can, in some instances, get focus a tad quicker than the 7D in extreme low light situations...

1664
Canon General / Re: October 26 Event?
« on: September 27, 2011, 11:05:52 AM »
A huge direct print button hotshoe attachment.

You beat me to it... a new and improved super direct print button!!! woo hoo!!!! more buttons

1665
Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus
« on: September 27, 2011, 10:12:59 AM »
In low light, the 5d Mark II will allow in more light to the focus sensor and will get quicker focus in those situations, however there are 5d Mark II owners that complain it STILL isn't fast enough, especially compared to some competition.  The 7d will shine in better lit condition over the 5d mark II but it really is designed and geared for different audiences than the 5d mark II so take that for what it is.  If you cannot use an AF lamp, could you use perhaps an external flash to get some help from the flash infrared lamp?  Also if you couldn't use the larger spot focus or the spot plus 4 surrounding sensors?  Relying on 1 focus mode in extreme situations can be tough but using larger or surrounding sensors (not to be confused with full zone focus or the 9 point focus modes).  Lastly try using live mode with exposure compensation... assuming your exposure is set correctly, you should see the image decently on screen, set your focus point, you can either manual focus or use the live view focus, and shoot away...

Pages: 1 ... 109 110 [111] 112 113 ... 133