November 23, 2014, 11:20:31 PM

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 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 134
1801
Lenses / Re: why????
« on: July 25, 2011, 12:49:51 PM »
I disagree with the thought of the crop sensor cameras going away any time soon.

10 year flashback - remember all those folks who said film cameras would never go away?  Granted, they're not completely gone, yet.  But then, there are still some people using rotary phones, and I'm sure you can find a working teletype or two somewhere in the world.

When (becuase it's not 'if' it's 'when') full frame sensor cameras drop down into the sub-$1000 range and thus into the mainstream consumer price range, APS-C will die off.  EF-S lenses?  They'll just join FD's on the auction block.

While I would wish and hope that full frame sensors become the norm and drop sub $1000, i just have the feeling that wont be for another 5-10 years... The cheapest full frame camera now is what?  $2500?  Well, correction, NEW full frame camera disregarding the used market.  With the increased MP and technology going into these sensors, I would think that they would have to either dumb down a full frame sensor to go into a rebel or really cripple the featureset more than it already is to afford to justify putting a full frame sensor in... perhaps full auto with just a shutter button?  All kidding aside I cant see that happening.  I could see the 7D and xxD series getting the change before entry level... at least they could then justify price increases in market prices, but until then...

1802
Canon General / Re: hello, and another request for suggestions
« on: July 24, 2011, 11:00:55 PM »
I hear a lot of pros that say the 5d af in lowlight is shoot and pray, but it also depends on the speed the the lens using. 2.8 lenses will give better af than 5.6 lenses.

Too bad they do not own one.   The 5d MK II AF is better than the 7D, the 1D MK III, and the 1D MK IV in low light.  I have a 1D MK III and a 7D, as well as a 5D MK III, the 1D is close, but not quite up to it.  The 7D can't even take a decent image at ISO 6400, much less focus.

Well just throwing the lens advice out there for consideration for future purchases. Regarding the 7d in low light, I can at least say the af with good lenses is good up to 1600-3200. Iso has minor noise that easily is taken care of with NR and or other means. I shoot 100% professionally and really don't get all the hate on it's ISO compared to other cameras in this price bracket and the 5d. The AF is very good (for me) in low light. It's up to individual expectations and experience level.

1803
Canon General / Re: hello, and another request for suggestions
« on: July 24, 2011, 03:21:25 PM »
Like others said, I wouldn't take any dslr running with u unless you like bruises from it banging the side of your body. I've heard pilot/aviation photogs that shoot while flying saying IS on lenses is worthless cause all the vibration and the only way to work around it is shutterspeed. The 7d has a much better af than the 60d. In good to ok light the 7d will have better af than the 5d. In lowlight it can be a wash. I hear a lot of pros that say the 5d af in lowlight is shoot and pray, but it also depends on the speed the the lens using. 2.8 lenses will give better af than 5.6 lenses.

1804
Canon General / Re: Suggestions for a difficult choice
« on: July 22, 2011, 11:59:56 AM »
Neuro, if you were to take the 7D sensor dimensions and apply that to the same 7D sensor dimensions, that is what I was applying with the "digital zoom" affect... P&S uses a smaller portion of the sensor to create that affect and with their processors, interpolates it to appear to be a normal size file, but in some P and S cameras, the physical size of the camera cannot interpolate it, such as entry level P and S and camera phones, the file is cropped and left as that.  It displays on the LCD as zoomed but in raw information, all it is, is cropped.  I suppose if you take similar density cameras, 20d and 5d mii, compare file size and effective resolution, it would be similar proportions to what I am describing... 

"Slightly cropped?  I'd say more than slightly - it will be cropped by a factor of 1.6x.  I was assuming that the subject chosen for the scenario was small enough to fit within the APS-C portion of the image circle." 

-Exactly what I was getting at... in order to compare magnification and overall image between the cameras they needed to be equaled out so they can be as apples to apples as possible... however the 5D in most situations SHOULD out-resolve the 7D in that situation.  In your original post you were comparing the 5d to 20d and 5d to the 7d... I was getting that the 7D and 5D should be very similar in magnification and the 5d should have more "magnification"  because of effective resolution assuming everything is equaled out.  I was also getting that even if you compared the 7D to the 20D, the magnification would be identical in perspective, but you can "zoom" into the picture more because the 7d has more than double the MP than the 20D hence more detail and more room to crop in post.  Most people assume when talking about magnification, the overall image is somewhat altered or different perspective overall but I'm just confirming the 7D and 20D will have the same perspective/image/overall magnification... the 7D will just have a ton more information to work with and you can zoom in a lot closer. 

1805
Canon General / Re: Suggestions for a difficult choice
« on: July 22, 2011, 10:51:44 AM »
... it will crop the image so it appears to be closer but really isn't... in all reality.  ...It outputs the exact same info it would send to ANY camera but depending on if the camera see's all of the info or not will depending on how the camera "sees" the image. 

Also keep in mind given the high density of the 7D,

But that higher pixel density does result in apparent magnification.  For example, if you choose FF vs. APS-C with the same pixel size/density, e.g. comparing a 200mm lens on a 5DII vs. a 20D (21 MP vs. 8 MP, but same pixel size), and take pictures of the same subject at the same distance then view them 100% on your computer monitor, that subject will be the same size in both images (although the 20D image will show less of the background).  But if you do something similar with the 5DII vs. the 7D, the subject at 100% will appear much larger on your computer monitor, because that subject projected onto the 7D's sensor will cover a lot more pixels.

Actually thinking of your comparison, you are wrong in your analogy and i'll tell you why... The 20D despite having the same density will be slightly cropped than the 5D taken at the same distance and same focal length and settings...  Now assuming you are shooting a 20D and 7D at the same settings... If you take that file and PRINT it as is at 8x10 for each file adjusting DPI so you are printing the full frame within the 8x10, there will NOT be any magnification, they should be the same because the SIZE of the sensor has not changed.  The 7D vs 20D SHOULD show more overall detail and you could in fact take the 7d file, crop it tighter (just like additional digital cropping effect) and have a similar quality of print of a 20D vs a cropped picture from a 7D and you'll be able to see detail you couldn't see from a 20D because of size of sensor density, BUT the overall image should still be the same, you just have more detail and information to work with. 

Now if you take the 7D vs 5D mII and use different lenses or compensate so they are the same perspective and relation, the image overall, printed the same way at 8x10 within the same restraints will still be the same image, no magnification.  Level of detail maybe a lot closer because the effective resolutions are so similar 18mp vs 21mp and in theory you should have a hair more detail from you 21mp than the 18mp.  If you do NOT correct for the Focal length effective "digital crop" then yes, you will have magnification as far as the crop is concerned. 

1806
Canon General / Re: Suggestions for a difficult choice
« on: July 22, 2011, 10:43:58 AM »
... it will crop the image so it appears to be closer but really isn't... in all reality.  ...It outputs the exact same info it would send to ANY camera but depending on if the camera see's all of the info or not will depending on how the camera "sees" the image. 

Also keep in mind given the high density of the 7D,

But that higher pixel density does result in apparent magnification.  For example, if you choose FF vs. APS-C with the same pixel size/density, e.g. comparing a 200mm lens on a 5DII vs. a 20D (21 MP vs. 8 MP, but same pixel size), and take pictures of the same subject at the same distance then view them 100% on your computer monitor, that subject will be the same size in both images (although the 20D image will show less of the background).  But if you do something similar with the 5DII vs. the 7D, the subject at 100% will appear much larger on your computer monitor, because that subject projected onto the 7D's sensor will cover a lot more pixels.

It appears as magnification the same way a digital P&S applies digital zoom... (but digital P&S sensors are not as sophisticated and up to date in processors) so the digital zoom looks crappy as a result. 

1807
Canon General / Re: Suggestions for a difficult choice
« on: July 22, 2011, 10:21:51 AM »
all depends how far away you are....  the 7d has the 1.6 crop factor so for distance will boost your 70-200 to a max of 320mm...  5dmk2 no crop factor, so that'd be the decision maker for me.

i do hope that visitors of this forum realise that crop factor does not mean one can multiply crop factor with focal lenght of lens. 55mm is 55mm regardless of crop factor. so when 200 mm is put on 1.6 crop factor camera image is no closer, just croped because it is being projected on smaller sensor, so more detail is being lost then on ff sensor. that means 200 mm on 1.6 crop sensor is still 200mm lens. it will never become 320mm because it does not zoom in more, it just crops image.

As long as you work under good light conditions and the higher light gathering capability of a FF sensor can be neglected (from what I have seen on the 7d up to maybe ISO 1250) the camera stays competitive to a 5d MKII as the 7d acts like a (theoretical) 18MP x 1.6^2 = 46MP FF camera for the croped part if would be scaled up to FF sensor. The question I would be more concerned here is with the theoretical limit of lenses if it really comes down to this. if higher ISO capabilities become important that is of course another story ... 
However in reality I guess few ppl look at pictures this way, so I guess the 1.6 magnification that the 7d delivers is good enough for most persons who just want to have a longer Telephoto range for eg occasional wildlife without spending a fortune on a 500, 600 or 800mm lens   

but there is noooo magnification whatsoever. none.

The best way to think of it (for those who ever used crappy digital PS cameras)... it's like digital zoom... it will crop the image so it appears to be closer but really isn't... in all reality.  The lens doesn't magically get extra elements and magnify an image just because it senses it's on a crop camera... It outputs the exact same info it would send to ANY camera but depending on if the camera see's all of the info or not will depending on how the camera "sees" the image. 

Also keep in mind given the high density of the 7D, it can produce stunning images but it will require stunning lenses.  If you use the 7D with the kit lens 28-135 at high ISO, it's going to look like crap.  If you use the 7D with L primes at high ISO, it will yield more usable images.  At then end of the day, I still say between the two, get the 7D or 60D, get some awesome glass, and then later if the 5d m3 comes out, then all means sell the 7D and get it.  Glass will be as big if not bigger factor in overall image than the camera will be in most situations. 

1808
Canon General / Re: Switching to Nikon
« on: July 22, 2011, 10:12:09 AM »
if you wanna go to nikon just go dont bitch about it just leave

He's not "bitching." He has respectfully requested opinions on
his dilemma. How can you possibly have a problem with that ?
   
yes i do have a problem if you wanna switch just switch don't go seeking attention in canon forums I'm sick of it if you go to nikon rumours they like to slate us they stick together and its clowns like this that annoy me as far as I'm concerned canon make the best yes the focus system on the 5d mk2 may not be the best but i wonder how much of peoples problems are actually down to user error id say a lot of them.so what I'm saying is if anyone want to switch to nikon then goodbye and good ridens sell your gear make us happy then get outta here :D

God forbid we bring up user error.  =)  It can NEVER be user error because we all know that world class AF has been around for, what 30-40 years?  What?  It hasn't?  Well maybe the early 90's?  What?  No?  Well then how the heck did photographers EVER focused without a worldclass AF?  Ok I'm off my soapbox now...

I kinda have my perception people who post things like this really are peeved BUT waiting for someone to talk them out of it... Secretly hoping some high up CEO of Canon is snooping on Canon Rumor and come across his thread just to shower them with gifts and kissing his rump to stay.  Dont let them get to you. 

1809
Canon General / Re: Switching to Nikon
« on: July 22, 2011, 08:52:29 AM »
I know I will be dating myself to some newer photographers, but when I was in college, at the beginning of the digital revolution, my school had several Nikon D1x's and only a few Canon D30's...

Dating yourself? i think you're dating yourself young, and at a rich school to boot.

What school did you go to if you don't mind me asking? I graduated from Brooks in 04. It wasn't the cheapest school, that's for sure, I was dearly reminded every time my student loans came up for renewal.  The first half of school was all film from 35mm to medium format to 4x5's and then I switched to digital cause post was so much easier than our darkrooms and cheaper. Our instructors were Pains in the butt, but was a good reality to industry expectations...  If your photos were not up to par or if you pissed them off, it wouldn't be uncommon to find your photo assignments in the classroom trash can.  If your overmat you were required to cut for assignments was overcut or your mounting job wasn't glued on enough where they can peel up a corner, they'd rip if off... But after the years of abuse I'm kinda hardened to harsh critiques.  It was rumored that one instructor was so peeved with his class that at the end of the class/term he passed out McDonalds applications to all the students. 

God forbid I bring up film on these forums, it might as well be a f word. I've noticed on these forums there are 2 types of photogs. Those who are Pre-digital and used film and post digital who never shot with film. I'm just enough into the pre digital to be labeled an old timer in many photogs perception.  It's kinda depressing how many "professional" photographers there are who never shot film.  Film you had to know exposure/printing/darkroom because if you screwed up camera exposure, you had to adjust your film development... If you didn't do that, you had to use stronger filters in printing or else it came out like crap and it literally cost you time and money to fix your mistake.  Now people complain about time in post-processing in photoshop now... It just makes me chuckle thinking about the hours in the darkroom testing and trying to get the perfect print and the tiniest thing able to screw it up. 

1810
Canon General / Re: Lets Play Chess
« on: July 21, 2011, 01:01:11 PM »
Am I the only one who's noticed the King/Queen are the wrong way around?

(queen on her own colour, king on the different colour)

There is no rule in chess that I know of that requires you to move the queen only to a space with her color.  This is taking during the game when pieces are obviously not in their original positions.

Dr Croubie is correct, the board setup is wrong.  Yes, it's during play, but given that pawns move only forward, there's no way for the white king and queen to have switched positions at this point in the game.  Clearly, though they are experts when it comes to camera gear, when it comes to chess, the folks at lensrentals are ROOKies (sorry, it just slipped out).

I admit i'm a ROOKie in chess but I'd love to play this game... Now I just have to convince my wife to let me buy haha.   

1811
Canon General / Re: Switching to Nikon
« on: July 21, 2011, 12:37:41 PM »
I know I will be dating myself to some newer photographers, but when I was in college, at the beginning of the digital revolution, my school had several Nikon D1x's and only a few Canon D30's... The D30's were more of an afterthought as far as the school was concerned... you can use them if you wanted, but why would you when you have the nikon d1x workhorse... It would be only about 2-4 months until canon either released the Canon D60's (or 2-4 months when my school got around to buying them, not sure which).  Anyways after learning the D60, everything from menus to interface to lenses to everything was so much nicer, in my opinion, to the nikon and so I stuck with canon and bought my first canon digital when the 10D came out.  It could have changed but I just hated Nikons interface and menus... It was like photoshop, there was 5 menu things that did the same friggen thing and each could counteract each other... I never got comfortable with the D1x. 

Canon does have it's bumps and the grass always seems greener on the other side, but remember it could just be a mirage...


1812
Canon General / Re: Switching to Nikon
« on: July 20, 2011, 10:36:52 AM »
While dead pixels are on the same ranges of death and taxes, on a 3 month old camera would raise some hairs on my neck.  They probably set the camera to "map out" the pixels and fill them in with surrounding data (instead of replacing the sensor), but it is what it is.  While I haven't had any overtly negative experiences, my cleanings and warranty repair has been somewhat satisfactory before... I cant speak for nikons service or any other service, but it's just my opinion overall "service" has kinda deteriorated over the last few years across the board for all companies.  I bought a TV from best buy and it had dead pixels in a cluster and they sent out their techs and determined it was a fluke that wasn't covered by my extended warranty... tough luck.. If you aren't doing something warranty related, I recommend sending stuff for repairs to mom and pop stores... more service, they tend to go over and beyond to meet your needs, and in this economy they need all the work they can get. 

1813
EOS Bodies / Re: New Canon 5D Mark III rumor
« on: July 19, 2011, 02:27:58 PM »
It looks like nikon are announcing 2 new FX camera bodies in late august ( prob the D4 and D800 ) wont even bother asking about the 5DIII, looks like next summer from some rumors, but then thats what they are... rumors, could be longer could be earlier, i cant see canon bringing out the 5DIII before the 1DsIV though.. :-(

Just to play devils advocate... people blamed the 5d mark II for killing sales for the 1Ds being the same MP and a fraction of the cost... Couldn't Canon look at that... release the 5D M3 FIRST, let the mad rush and demand die off, then bring out a much superior 1Ds flagship and rake up the sales on the flagship?  That way instead of people compromising on the 5d and killing 1ds sales, each can have their own hype, have separation between the two, and have people "upgrade" and or "splurge" on the 1ds?  Just saying

1814
Canon General / Re: Suggestions for a difficult choice
« on: July 18, 2011, 02:53:03 PM »
Actually, I started with a T1i/500D, upgraded to a 7D because the AF of the Rebel wasn't as effective as I wanted, then added the 5DII mainly for improved ISO performance.

Thanks for the clarification on your history...

Agreed.  All else being equal, I'd take a shot with less noise over a shot with more noise.  But...the IQ is only better if the shot is in focus, and if your subject is moving, getting an in-focus shot is a lot more likely with the 7D than with the 5DII. 

AF issues aside, what you gain with the 5DII FF sensor vs. the 7D/60D/550D/600D APS-C sensor is ~1.3-stops of improved ISO performance.  Noise tolerance is specific to the individual and the final use of the image, so it's all relative.  But that means if you find the noise acceptable with the 7D at ISO 1600, you could be shooting at ISO 4000 on a 5DII.

True enough... better noise is always better, but as we agreed its about personal taste and preference.  In my experience dealing with print and customers expectations, I've had more customers comment on lens quality (and that's not often) than ISO... Some clients want me to use their gear for insurance purposes and then are surprised when file quality and IQ isn't far superior... That being said, for my needs the 5d II just isn't enough of a leap in improvement to make me plunk that money down now when I can wait to see what will come and plug away with my workhorse 7D now.  Only the end user can determine if they need to buy FF over crop and what file quality is hence why I always suggest to test before you buy... Nobody is right or wrong when dealing with their individual needs and requirements... While I'd love a Full frame version of my camera, I just have to wait and see what happens with the next 6 months or so with the 5d m3. 

1815
Canon General / Re: Suggestions for a difficult choice
« on: July 18, 2011, 12:28:41 PM »
For both neuro and mt spokane, if i'm not mistaken first had 5d's and then got the 7D's as a second camera... Those who drive porsche's will always see fords as inferior... Those who drive kias will see fords as step up... everything is regarding perspective and need.  I do shoot for a living and 100% of my income is from my 7d's... I have never had clients complain with High ISO issues with my 7D and especially when printed on commercial presses for magazine shots, etc... high noise up to 1600 is barely noticeable. 

Is the 5d cleaner at high iso, yes, but is the 7D useless at high ISO, especially when the original poster is coming from a Rebel XS, No.  Yes, if i pixel peep at iso 800-1600 on a 27" imac screen, I can make out some noise in shadow/midtones if I really want to nit-pick, but it's not noticeable on my home 21" 1 year old imac.  That is what I'm getting at about perception and monitor to monitor variation.  When i take the same file, print it on my epson at 11x17... it's probably going to fall somewhere in the middle between the two regarding visible detail/noise.  It isn't anything where you should count out the 7D solely on. 

Plus when you take the featureset of the two, considering my car analogy earlier, it would be like a top to the line ford mustang vs a porsche sports car with a 4 speed automatic tranny.  The porsche is still a fine car, but it leaves a lot to be desired in it's current form.  Once it gets updated though, all bets are off.   

Pages: 1 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 134