August 22, 2014, 07:55:38 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 - Don Haines

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 197
1
Don't equate what people on this forum think is important with what the target market thinks is important. The 7D is targeted to upper tier users. Most upper tier users are not worried about the things that people on this forum obsess over. These specs would indicate that Canon did their market research and found that features like a top-notch autofocus system are more important to buyers than small improvements in dynamic range.

For me, there is the "blue sky wish list" and then there is reality. I know that my wish list will not be met and quite frankly, that doesn't bother me very much. What I am really looking for in the camera is greatly improved autofocus capability, and if the rumoured specs are right, it will do the job and I will order one.

I also shoot video with a DSLR. I am VERY happy with having a headphone jack... that's a bonus! I expected 1080 at 60Fps so that's no surprise. I did not expect 4K video so no surprise there.

I am disappointed that I will not have the ability to remote control by WiFi, but that isn't a deal breaker. As said above, I will order one ASAP.

2
What is "built in flash with radio trigger function"?  Is it just saying the on board flash can act as a master?  That is not "radio trigger".  Is it? 

It would be pretty cool if it had a built-in radio trigger for RT flashes, wouldn't it?

"It can't have WiFi because it is a metal body and there is no decent place to put an antenna"
"built in flash with Radio Trigger Function"

Does anyone else realize that the RT flash controller and WiFi use the same 2.4Ghz band?

3
Animal Kingdom / Re: Tamron 150-600mm bird pics
« on: Today at 06:27:45 PM »
The Egrets at the back of the site where I work. They won't let me get close so these are shot from about 200 meters away and are heavily cropped.... SIGH! You never have a long enough lens....

4
65 cross type AF points, center one being dual cross....
a pair of Digic 6 processors...
Lens Electronic MF (is this automatic AFMA?)

This beast has the potential for some pretty serious AF capability...

I still can't see having no touch screen or WiFi, but hey, it's all rumours. Don't believe a thing until it is officially released....

5
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: Today at 09:24:08 AM »
Canon has been innovative exactly 2 times in all of their history.

That's truly the most asinine, facile and just plain wrong-headed thing I think I've ever read on an internet forum.

Seriously - there should be a prize.
Exactly.... it's at least 3 times :)
Those thousands of patents came in a crackerjack box.....

6
Technical Support / Re: Another my Stupid question = Sensor Sizes
« on: August 21, 2014, 11:58:04 PM »
Scenario 1: Normalize for pixel size
We have a camera that we can swap sensors on. We mount a 100mm lens to that camera.
All of our sensors use the exact same technology and have the exact same 0.01mm by 0.01mm pixels.

FF sensor    - 36x24 mm,     3600x2400 (8.60Mp), 20.0 degree fov
APS-C sensor - 22.2x14.8 mm, 2220x1480 (3.29Mp), 12.3 degree fov
4/3 sensor   - 17.3x13.3 mm, 1730x1330 (2.30Mp),  9.6 degree fov
1/2.3 sensor - 5.76x4.29 mm,  576x429  (0.25Mp),  3.2 degree fov

In this case, each sensor will have the exact same resolving power. Each sensor will have the exact same IQ, the ISO performance and the noise performance will be identical. In this case, what sensor size buys you is the number of pixels and the field of view.

The crop value is what the focal length would have to be to get the same field of view from a FF camera.
FF - crop value is 1
APS-C - crop value is 20/12.3 or 1.62
4/3 - crop value is 20/9.6 or 2.08
1/2.3 - crop value is 20/3.2 or 6.25

to look at what the equivalent FF lens length would be for the same field of view...
APS-C, 100mm has the same field of view as 162mm on FF
4/3,   100mm has the same field of view as 208mm on FF
1/2.3, 100mm has the same field of view as 625mm on FF


Scenario 2: normalize for the field of view (20.0 degrees)
FF sensor    - 36x24 mm,     3600x2400 (8.60Mp), 100mm lens
APS-C sensor - 22.2x14.8 mm, 2220x1480 (3.29Mp), 61.7mm lens
4/3 sensor   - 17.3x13.3 mm, 1730x1330 (2.30Mp), 48.1mm lens
1/2.3 sensor - 5.76x4.29 mm,  576x429  (0.25Mp), 16.0mm lens

We now have the same field of view from the cameras. Each sensor will have the exact same IQ, the ISO performance and the noise performance will be identical.
In this case, what sensor size buys you is the number of pixels and over the same field of view, the FF camera has far greater resolving power.


Scenario 3: Normalize for the number of pixels.
In this case, the lens stays the same but the size of the pixels varies to keep a constant 8.6Mpixels on the sensor.

FF sensor    - 36x24 mm,     0.0100mm pixels, 20.0 degree fov
APS-C sensor - 22.2x14.8 mm, 0.0062mm pixels, 12.3 degree fov
4/3 sensor   - 17.3x13.3 mm, 0.0048mm pixels,  9.6 degree fov
1/2.3 sensor - 5.76x4.29 mm, 0.0016mm pixels,  3.2 degree fov

We now have smaller pixel sizes on the smaller sensors, and as they get smaller ISO performance drops and noise rises. In this case, the smaller sensors have greater resolving power than the larger sensors.

In summary:
Larger pixels give you better ISO performance and lower noise.
Smaller pixels give you more resolving power ON THE SAME LENS.
Sensor size affects the field of view.

The balance you select between the three is what determines the performance of your camera.




7
Technical Support / Re: Another my Stupid question = Sensor Sizes
« on: August 21, 2014, 02:43:46 PM »
It's not really the size of the sensor that counts, it's the size of the pixel.

That's precisely back to front, Don - pixel size doesn't matter one little bit in terms of a sensor's light-gathering abilities, in any practical sense. Sensor size is the whole story, at any given "state of the art".

Jon Rista must've explained this about a million times on here - and he's completely, demonstrably right. Simply put, a big window lets in more light than a small one, whether it's made up of one pane of glass, or many - a perfect sensor analogy in this context.
So let's use a hypothetical example... and both cameras use the exact same lens...

Example 1:
You use the exact same technology to manufacture a pair of sensors. One is a 10Mpixel APS-C sensor, and the other is a 25.6Mpixel FF sensor. The pixels on the two sensors are exactly alike. Both will have the same electrical characteristics and both will have the same optical characteristics. They will have the exact same noise, the exact same ISO performance, the exact same DR..... because they are exactly the same.

Obviously, the FF sensor takes in more light, but it is spread over a wider field of view and the light per pixel is the same.

Example 2:
You use the exact same technology to manufacture a pair of sensors. One is a 20Mpixel APS-C sensor, and the other is a 20Mpixel FF sensor. The pixels on the FF sensors are 2.56 times larger than the pixels on the APS-C sensor. In this case, the FF sensor receives 2.56 times the amount of light. It's performance will be about 1 1/3 stops better than the APS-C sensor. This is your typical scenario when comparing sensor sizes.... both are near the same pixel count and the added real estate lets you make the pixels larger on FF....

Example 3:
The Sony A7S. Larger pixels. ISO409,600. nuff said...

Either way, it is the pixel size that matters....

FF does not perform better because it is larger, it performs better because the pixels are larger. The larger sensor size allows you place a similar number of pixels of greater size. It is a subtle difference.

8
Landscape / Re: Rural Landscapes
« on: August 21, 2014, 11:54:37 AM »
a nice quiet rural wintertime scene, with a bonus in the top of the tree....

9
Portrait / Re: People at work
« on: August 20, 2014, 09:11:36 PM »
Serious question:  Have you had any bad experiences taking pictures of people working?  I imagine that some workers might object.
I have never had a problem photographing people.... you ask first :) If they say yes, go for it!, if they say no, just say thanks and move on....


10
Animal Kingdom / Re: Tamron 150-600mm bird pics
« on: August 19, 2014, 09:17:36 PM »
I have been on holiday in Canada for two weeks, walking with my Tamron 150-600mm and 5DIII. The birds are difficult to find - you suddenly come across small birds who will be around for a few seconds or minutes and then disappear. To get any photos you need a portable, reasonably long lens that you can swing into action in seconds. The birds are often hiding in bushes and you need IS for long exposures. My 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC III would have been the best solution, but the Tamron 150-600mm was more than good enough and more suitable for a holiday combining a family visit with the odd day for birding. Those knockers who have dismissed the Tamron in favour of a 400mm f/5.6L + 1.4xTC would have been completely stranded without IS - one of the exposures was as low as 1/50s and many in the 1/250 range. The 100-400mm would have been too short. The exifs are on the photos, which are all 100% crops, ie 1 pixel on the image = 1 pixel on the uncropped full frame. I was pleased with the haul. Most of the photos were in the Haoomonds Plains area of Halifax NS.
The first 4: Canada Warbler 1/50s, Cedar waxwing, Black-capped chickadee, Ovenbird.

Please post images of your own from the 150-600mm Tammy.
Nice images and congrats on the skills to capture so many of them. I have never been birding at Hammonds Plain, but have been through there hundreds of times... I will have to pay more attention to it when I head back in the fall.....

11
Animal Kingdom / Re: Tamron 150-600mm bird pics
« on: August 19, 2014, 09:10:39 PM »
Out in the canoe tonight...and of course I had the Tamron....I spotted several Great Blue Herons and was able to get within decent range...

12
Technical Support / Re: Another my Stupid question = Sensor Sizes
« on: August 19, 2014, 01:15:51 PM »
Dear Teachers and Friends.
Well, Yes, I can take a SoSo-or Good Photos, Because of I take the photos so long time. But for the High Tech of Digital Photography, I almost know nothing a bout this New Technology.
My Stupid Question are :
1)  Are the Size of the Sensor Matter ?---Or the MP. count are matter ?
Such As  the Tiny Sensor on Nokia Lumia 1020 = 41 MP, compare to Canon 1DX  FF = 18.1 MP, and Canon 5D MK II FF = 22.3 MP
2) If the Sensor are same Size and Same MP-----The  Camera company are matter or not that can claim , My Ca--- are Sharpper than your Ni--- ???
3) What Make the Same size of Sensor ( of this Company ) to be better than another Company Sensor ?
Thanks for your Answers, That will make me up to date of new Technology.
Have a great day, Sir/ Madam.
Surapon

It's not really the size of the sensor that counts, it's the size of the pixel.

Make the pixel larger and it gathers more light. With more light you get better low light performance and you get more flexibility with exposure times and apertures...

Make the pixel smaller and you get more resolving power, but at the expense of less light, worse low light performance, and less flexibility with exposure times and apertures.

In the end, it all comes down to striking a balance that the public will accept. For example, make a 2Mpixel APS-C sensor and you have 2 1/3 stops MORE low light performance than a 5D3...but is anyone going to buy it?

Obviously, the larger the sensor, the more pixels of your chosen size will fit.... but as sensors get larger, so does the size of the lens required to get the same field of view and the prices go up astronomically..

13
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 19, 2014, 08:06:34 AM »
The now 18 mp ubiquitous sensor first made its appearance in the 7D. Did this next appear in a xxD or a xxxD ? I'm not sure but my guess is that is was an xxD, perhaps the 60D.

In fact, it did appear next in the T2i/550D, but not until the following year, then in the 60D a few weeks later.  It's certainly in Canon's best interest to use a sensor in multie bodies across multiple lines. 

What's crazy and illogical is to take two separate facts (that the 7DII might have new sensor tech and that there hasn't been an xxxD update this year), and draw a causal link between them.  It's particularly crazy and illogical given the existence of a new 20 MP DPAF sensor that's been used in just one body to date.  Canon has made APS-C sensors used in only one body, but those have all been xxxD/xxxxD bodies, where the production volume means costs are recouped without needing to 'trickle down'.

Wrong. The 3MP APS-C sensor used in the Canon D30 was never used again.
Hey! That's what we need now...

An modern APS-C camera with 3Mpixels would have pixels three times larger than the pixels on a 5D3 and should beat it by a stop and a half for low light performance!  :)  a 2Mpixel (1920x1080) sensor would beats the 5D3 by 2 1/3 stops..... how do we get the rumour started that the 7D2 will be a 2Mpixel video optimized mirrorless wifi touchscreen monster with dual microphone jacks and integrated iPhone?

14
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 18, 2014, 07:23:25 PM »

Oh, who am I kidding!?  I'm going to get drunk and cry in my beer if the 7D2 doesn't rock!   :o
I've got $2500 set aside for the 7D2.... if it does not rock, that's a lot of beer!

15
Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 06:31:29 PM »
Just like the following picture proves that I have never been to Nova Scotia....

Oh, but I say it does Don! Just look at the dramatic difference in color balance. Obviously shot on a sound stage with gel covered lighting.

WHAT ARE YOU HIDING???  >:(
I work for the government. I rubbed out 13 tourists just for being in the way of my picture and nobody can find the bodies :) If you people keep trying to expose the moon landing hoax I shall be forced to make you "disappear" too.....

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 197