December 20, 2014, 01:19:49 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 ... 112 113 [114] 115 116 ... 135
1696
EOS Bodies / Re: No 5D Mark III on Novemeber 3 [CR2]
« on: September 26, 2011, 10:06:51 AM »
Any word on any other imminent Nikon announcements?  After canon dodged the bullet on the last nikon announcement with the pink mirrorless camera, they probably got the impression they could delay and take their time with DSLR announcements... If Nikon did pull their trump card and announced a DSLR with the mirrorless, then i guarantee you the 5D would have been announced the next possible release date...

1697
EOS Bodies / Re: All I Want For Christmas is a 5D Mk III...
« on: September 26, 2011, 10:02:30 AM »
Sounds like a catchy tune... perhaps someone can make a jingle of it and post it on youtube and let it go viral... lets see how quickly one is released then?  =)

1698
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Sensor Pixel Density
« on: September 21, 2011, 03:03:11 PM »
Thanks to you guys, I have a much better understanding of why a bigger sensor is better, and also why we don’t see super-zoom cameras with large sensors (because the lenses would have to be impractically large).

However, I have another sensor-related question or two:

I see a lot of complaining about the megapixel count being too high on some of the small-sensor cameras.  I can see why, as I have downloaded full resolution samples from say a 16 MP super-zoom, and the image is quite fuzzy at full resolution.  But the same picture looks quite good at my monitor’s resolution (1920 x 1080) and even zooming in a few levels.

Question 1:  If I were to set the resolution to a lower setting in the camera, would that solve the issue?  In other words would setting a 16MP camera to 10MP output produce the same image quality of a camera with a 10MP sensor assuming all other variables were the same? (yes, this is hypothetical since there probably are not two matching cameras with only the sensor pixel density being different)

Question 2: If the answer above is "no", would it be better or worse to reduce the image size in software on the computer?  (I know jpeg is destructive compression, so assuming you are not working with RAW images, I would think reducing the size on the computer would be worse since it would be going through Jpeg compression twice)

Thanks in advance for your insight.

Given that the 10MP would use the entire sensor vs a 15mp (50D) or 18mp (60D/7D) shot at a medium setting, You wouldn't get the entire goodness of the sensor... so the 10MP, in this example, would be optimum.  On a disclaimer, as far as raw sharpness goes, the 18mp 7d is not any softer than a 12mp 40D when using good lenses... The higher the MP, the more demanding it will be on the lenses, and quite frankly, it will expose the flaws and softness on cheaper/consumer grade lenses than the lower MP... The only part where the lower MP really becomes an advantage is diffraction on the lens, however between these two cameras you are looking at less than a stop difference.

Now if you were going to shoot 18MP and downsample to the same dimensions as the 10/12MP camera... the 18MP may be as good if not better because if you set photoshop to bicubic, it will come out quite nice and naturally sharpen... On tests vs the 7D and the nikon D300s, many reviews did the same thing (downsampled the 7D to match and then on the flip side up-sampled the nikon to match the 7D...)  It's not a real fair matchup but it is what it is...

What to take from this, dont fear the higher MP cameras if you can afford nice glass... Remember to invest more in your glass than your cameras and you should be fine. 

1699
Canon General / Re: Pro grade AF (not 7D like)
« on: September 20, 2011, 10:33:17 AM »
I laughed when I read that spec: "Pro Grade Autofocus (Not 7D Like)."

I thought, "Geez, I hope they don't come up with something MORE sophisticated than the 7D, it's already way smarter than I am."

I've had mine for over a year and a half now and I have to admit I still don't think I've mastered the autofocus system. No complaints about the camera, just the user.

The longer I own the 7D the more I learn about the autofocus. In my opinion it's one of the most sophisticated features of the 7D and it takes some real work to master. That doesn't mean you can't get good, sharp shots easily, it just means that if you don't use it properly, you can get misfocused shots.

I'm not saying in your case it's user error. But, I know in my case, almost all problems I've had with focus have been my fault, not the camera's.

Haha I felt the same way when I got the 7D... on prior upgrades from the 10D through 50D I felt secure and had a good grasp of how those cameras worked and the upgrade was pretty seamless, just grasping new bells and whistles and layouts from model to model... The 7D was the first camera I had to break open the users manual to learn because it was so sophisticated... 95% of my single shot photos are tack sharp with a margin of error for user error and the rest other burst shots which depending on the situation may or may not be 100% tack sharp or not.  I was able to shoot at the Reno Championship Air Races prior to the major incident which shut down the races with the 7D and 70-300 L Lens and clearly at those speeds and so close the ground, the majority out of 600+ images were acceptable focus with 1/6 being 100% tack sharp and even fewer being portfolio quality in my opinion, but that's based on other factors outside of the camera/lens... Given the tough nature of jets racing nearer the speed of sound, that's not a bad ratio in my opinion shooting in burst modes. 

1700
EOS Bodies / Re: More New Full Frame Rumors [CR1]
« on: September 19, 2011, 01:49:37 PM »
Nikon probably has a new camera planned called the Canon Killer haha.  For what it's worth, cameras at this day and age are so similar and quality is so close such as IQ between 5d m2 and D700 and 7d vs D300s... It will be interesting to see what innovations and new bells and whistles they throw in these puppies... Whether it's a revolution or evolution... I'm not getting excited until I see it in writing in form of a Press Release, however I hope it's soon... I'm not fussed too much about more MP but I want AF, IQ, and sharpness detail without having to turn sharpness up in raw or shooting modes...

1701
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: September 17, 2011, 12:18:37 PM »
Well crap, I had the chance to test out this lens borrowed from Canon CPS at the Reno National Championship Air Races on thursday and spent most friday processing photos until the tragic plane crash at the races.  My thoughts and prayers goes towards those who died or were injured during the race.  (the plane crashed very near my seats I was in the day prior).  Out of respect for the event I'd doubting even showing the photos... what a terrible outcome...

1702
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: September 13, 2011, 07:14:42 PM »
I just got the lens in from Canon CPS and I will begin testing this lens... Some first impressions/observations without playing with it too much... It is short and fat... After using the 70-200 F4 IS, this thing is shorter and fatter... very beefy lens... Those used to lets say the 70-200 F2.8 weight may not be in for as much of a shock, but compared to the F4, it's definitely a beast.  You may say "well look at the specs and you will know how much it weighs... well I did... but it's still something one is never looking forward to... It doesn't come with a lens ring... one may definitely consider it because if you are rough with your gear, it may give way...

Secondly, the focus ring and the zoom ring is a tad too close together... It doesnt help that the rings are reversed from other lenses to the zoom is closer to the hood.  I dont get the reason why this is.  If you have one hand on the zoom ring, your palm is on the focus ring... so that easily could knock off focus... Compared to any of the 70-200's, you have plenty of real estate between those two rings so that isn't an issue... Not a game breaker but something I will have to get use to... From a few informal shots, it is sharp, but I will do MA and run some real world shots and post later...

1703
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 08:53:20 PM »
I'm not sure that I understand the comment about crop sensor cameras being for amateurs only.  There are tons of benefits to having them.  They are typically faster (great for sports) & they have a much higher pixel density (great for cropping).  Both of those are reasons enough to be a number one choice in many situations. 

Don't get me wrong, I want a full frame, but even with one I wouldn't always use it.  If I were taking pictures at a game I would definitely choose the crop sensor, and if I were shooting wildlife I would probably go crop sensor also.  What's the big advantage with having a full frame?  More picture?  You can get just as much picture with a crop sensor - just take a couple steps back.  Now you have a higher resolution image of basically the same thing.  Also, don't full frame cameras have issues with the edge of the picture sometimes?  They are also typical worse at handling noise right?

Either way, I'm curious to hear the reasons why FF cameras are pro cameras and everything else is for amateurs.  By that logic the 1D is basically a Rebel.

Full frame cameras can be prone to vignetting and unsharp corners in poor quality lenses but they make the most a camera can out of an EF lens. Why waste glass and only use the middle of it when you can use it all? The focal length change gives an apparent shallower depth of field as you can then get closer to your subject also. I would hate if my 50mm wasn't actually 50mm...

Another massive reason for full frame is its hands down superior noise handling. No crop sensor compares and noise reduction technologies don't count as they affect the sharpness of your image.

They both have their uses.

There are a lot of pro's for either system, however people need to realize there are professionals who shoot with what they have including crop sensors, full frame, film, and beyond... There are situations where a 7D can shine over a 5d... It's using the best gear for the situation and conditions and knowing how to use the gear to it's fullest potential that makes one a pro (and get paid for doing so)... 

1704
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 12:20:03 PM »
Seriously, those who think they "need" 21 or 24MP would have/should have moved to FF by now. All DSLRs should have FF sensors, maximize the lens mount FFS. Leave the crop sensor to the lowest-end Rebel and the so-called "large sensor compacts" .

There's a time and a place for each body type... There are those who are just learning or basically cannot afford those price brackets and has to make due with what they can get... That being said, I dont mind if manufacturers increase MP as long as they increase the quality so the image quality doesn't suffer... otherwise it was all for not.   

1705
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 12:06:33 PM »
The megapixel wars will not stop anytime soon. Setbacks and slowdowns might occur once in a while as new technologies are developed to overcome barriers but I have no doubt that we will have the same discussion at 50, 100 and 200 megapixels in the not too distant future.

That's fine as long as the image quality doesn't start to suck...

1706
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 11:26:38 AM »
I think we can be getting to the peak (especially on crop sensors) in resolution... perhaps they can bump it up to 21...

Shhhhhh.  Don't tell Sony that.   :P

Haha my lips are sealed (except on this forum that is)

1707
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 11:10:23 AM »

More resolution is more resolution... Kinda like how a photoshop file built to minimum standards of 5x7 will look ok/good but a photoshop 8x10 downsized to 5x7 printed will have that little bit extra...

Yes, but we  cannot get 8mp resolution out of a 2mp monitor... so perhaps it is not about the absolute number pixels.

So perhaps there are other factors to be considered, for example, if the effect of AA and bayer filters less of an issue with higher resolution shots proportionally? I would think yes and that would probably explain some of the difference we are witnessing... What else should we consider?

For the last decade i've been a big proponent for increasing resolution due to more information, bigger prints, more options in post... I think we can be getting to the peak (especially on crop sensors) in resolution... perhaps they can bump it up to 21 but I want to see a big jump in IQ and noise... With full frame I think they have a little wiggle room should they want to but dont overdue it... The bigger the MP the better lenses you need... From this point on though I wont mind more MP as long as other areas are focused more on as far as improvements...

1708
EOS Bodies / Re: A Week in Rumors
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:19:47 AM »
seriously guys, do you always get canon bodies for xmas? i mean, expensive pro bodies...

Not me. I agree that the xxxxD/xxxD are Xmas presents, less so the xxD, and not really the xD.

Personally, I keep a separate 'gear fund' in which I accumulate supplemental income (consulting, etc.).  When there's enough in there for what I want, I buy it. Voilà, Xmas any time of the year!

As for Canon ' concentrating on consumer bodies' for the holidays, it seems that a few years ago they managed to ramp up production of the 5DII around November...

It's all about taxes... At the end of every year just before christmas I always evaluate what i am missing in my lineup and what money i have after bonus's, paychecks, and kids christmas presents goes towards my new lenses, flashes, lighting, etc... Its amazing how much those writeoff's knock you down a few tax brackets in april. 

1709
EOS Bodies / Re: A Week in Rumors
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:15:10 AM »
"It was suggested this was to make sure Canon could meet the production demands that the Christmas and holiday  seasons require"

What demand? There is a big xmas demand for the 1DmkIV? 5DmkII? I think these products are all on the downslope of their sales...there is no large demand. Canon would be foolish to push their releases into early next year if indeed they make higher sales at xmas time.

As for not annoucing new models that won't be available for 2-3 months....isn't this the norm?  Doesn't Canon ALWAYS do this?

The 1DmkIII was announced in Feb and wasn't available until May...I'm no math whiz, but that's 3 months.

The 5D mkII was announced in the middle of Sept and was only shipped at the end of November. um...that would be 2 months.

I'm pretty confident this is exactly what will happen when Canon (finally) announces some new bodies.

sean

You're missing the  big picture... the 1d and 5d cameras (to professionals) are tax write off's... so whatever profits we get and can afford upgrades at the end of the year, we do what we can to upgrade so we can write it off in the next year taxes... almost every company in every industry does this...

1710
EOS Bodies / Re: A Week in Rumors
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:12:02 AM »
No release prior to the holidays seems like a poor decision.  Sure, they want to be able to meet production requirements, but they're going to take a hit if the D5100 becomes the hot selling dSLR for the holidays.  Honestly, if I was just getting into photography, the D5100 would seem a more attractive buy than the T3i.  The latter is essentially the same guts as the 2010 T2i; nearly two years old.  The point and shoot market could take a hit this holiday if the iPhone has another update to its camera and the other phone makers follow suit.  I'm not sure what Canon is predicting it will be selling a lot of camera-wise this holiday season...

From a marketing perspective, i couldn't agree more...

Pages: 1 ... 112 113 [114] 115 116 ... 135