February 26, 2015, 07:46:44 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 4 ... 253
EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 10:49:26 PM »
And right now, based on revenue forecast due to overall market shrinkage, Canon are not showing any sign of investing in a different process. Which for many people, won't matter. For some it may do, and they will weigh it up as to move or stay. In that respect, the 5Ds does not change Canon's position, it just offers a bunch of people who are happy with the DR of the current sensors a higher res sensor in a similar package to the MK III. I think expectations for the IV and X II should align similarly. Iteration of, modest improvements, no step change. Which again, will be enough for many people...

Aye, a shrinking market would certainly put a damper on investments, however Canon already has a 180nm fab. From what we do know, it was used to manufactuer their P&S sensors in high volume. The P&S market has crashed already, and Canon couldn't possibly be at full capacity on that second fab. They are clearly still investing some money (a billion and change or so?) in R&D on the photography side of things. Most of that seems to be going to lens innovations, but some has gone to sensor innovations. Canon should be able to move some fabrication off their ancient 500nm fab and onto their 180nm fab without actually having to invest a billion or so into a new fab.

Sounds like a win-win to me, and to some others...the curiosity is that they simply haven't done it. I cannot fathom why...but from Canon's own mouth, they stated that they see a big reason for the shrinking DSLR market being lack of technological innovation. Again, seems like a win-win for them to utilize freed up capacity on their 180nm fab (which is a 300mm wafer fab that can apparently produce sensors on a copper wiring process, which is competitive with what Sony is doing) to improve their technology.

Fortunately (?) there may not be any significant change in Sonikon sensors in 2015 either, but there will be a 50MP body from both of them....

I'd call it unfortunate myself. :P The more pressure other companies can put on Canon from a technological-through-IQ standpoint, the better. It's not so bad for SoNikon though, as they are already ahead of the curve when it comes to eeking out as much IQ as possible from their current sensor technology. I think Sony is in a much better position to create a 50mp body that gives closer to medium format class IQ than Canon is.

I am very interested to see if Canon has increased FWC while lowering read noise, or whether the lower read noise is simply a consequence of smaller pixels, and paired with a similarly smaller FWC. It seems read noise varies more linearly (not exactly, but more closely) with pixel size, while FWC varies with area. If we divide the 6D read noise of 26.4 by the 7D read noise of 12.9, we get 2.05. As far as FWC goes, the ratio of pixel areas between the 6D and 7D II is 2.513 (sqr(6.5)/sqr(4.1)), the FWC of the 6D is 74256e- and the FWC of the 7D II is 29544. Divide the FWC of the 6D by the area ratio, and you get 29,544.22.

We still don't know if DPAF is 180nm or 500nm.... It costs a lot of money to keep 2 fabrication runs open when you only have enough demand for one... just from a financial point of view, they should be migrating their FF and APS-C sensors to the smaller and newer fabrication line. One would expect to see a flurry of new releases just before that happens.... like the 70D, 7D2, EOSM-3, and new rebels causing just about the entire APS-C line to be replaced (just the SL1 and T3's to go).... and then the same thing happening to the FF models.

Things look quite suspicious at the moment...

EOS-M / Re: Poll: Would you have bought the M3? (North America)
« on: February 09, 2015, 06:28:17 PM »
No. No DPAF.

Ditto. BIG mistake on Canon's part. I don't understand why they can't build a mirrorless camera that appeals to US customers. There are clearly those here who want one, the only reason they aren't buying Canon is because Canon's offerings pale in comparison to the competitors alternatives. All they have to do is build a competitive model with competitive features, and I'm sure millions of US customers would gobble them up. DPAF is one of Canon's most competitive features right now...and rather "essential" on a mirrorless camera. Mind boggling that they did not include it.
Video frame rate max's out at 30FPS on 1080p? Even my GoPro does 1080P at 120FPS.... and it also does 4K video....KNOCK! KNOCK!.... HELLO?... ANYONE HOME?

HEY CANON! Here is a tip for you.... people buying big DSLR's are primarily interested in still image quality. People buying tiny cameras are interested in convenience. You want to sell a lot of a small camera? Put a touchscreen and WiFi interface onto it that can let you log onto a hotspot, and put an app on it to let you connect to email or facebook. Then stand back and watch it sell....

EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 06:09:41 PM »
That would be the nice way to read it. However, it's almost unprecedented for marketing to hide a major new feature, which might be a key selling point, just to make old stuff seem better so....
I agree 100%.  Lower noise at base ISO would be a great selling point.  It would not take away from the unique features of Canon's other pro/prosumer cameras.  It seems a bit odd that people are getting worked up over a vague statement like "lower noise floor," which means nothing on its face.

There are several compelling reasons why people would still get a 7D2 instead of a 5Ds...
Better sealing!
Tougher build!
Higher frame rate!
Better high ISO performance!
Lower cost!

If you want an action camera, it is an easy decision to make.

On the other hand, if you want a landscape camera, it is just as easy of a decision in the other direction.

There is a market for both and the consumer, with more choice, comes out the winner.

Lenses / Re: 400 DO II continues to test out as superb
« on: February 09, 2015, 05:54:16 PM »
  I have the 300 II and was going to sell it and buy the 400 DO II. Especially when I saw the results here. I googled it and went to SLR gears site and just the oposite is stated. Looks like there copy of the 300 II was better at 2.8 than the DO II was at F/4.0. Not sure what to think. Maybe just a difference between models? Not sure.
  I am holding off until more real live tests come in. My 300 is biting sharp at F/4.0 with a 1.4. The only thing I see that will help me is AF without a T.C.. I also find 400mm to short for BIF most of the time.
  My two cents anyway.

Roger averaged the numbers from 4 300mm lenses with 4 different TC's versus averages from 2 400mm DO lenses.  Its not surprising that numbers from a individual pair of lenses would be different.
Three comments to make about this...
1. Roger runs a LOT of lenses through his test bench.... he probably has more experience doing these tests than anyone else.

2. The lenses Roger tests are standard production lenses, not cherry picked ones sent out for reviews.... and he tests them before and after use.. his numbers quickly become the numbers for USED RENTAL lenses.... a far more useful scenario for those of us who want to know what our equipment will be like after a few months (or years) of banging around in the real world.

3. He started off the 400DO tests by saying it was only for 2 lenses. Once he gets more in, he will retest and be able to give numbers for an average lens... once again, far more useful to us than the numbers for the best lens to ever make it off of the production line...

If I were you, I would wait for his updated review. Besides, right now there is a waiting list anyway... not like you will be picking it up and shooting with it tomorrow....

Lenses / Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:09:52 PM »
This constant clamour for T/S macro lenses displays a remarkable consistency for failing to grasp how tilt works and the intrinsic limitations of tilt lenses on cameras with deep mirror boxes.

Sure, the 90mm TS-E is a wonderful product lens and it is often paired with extension tubes to reduce minimum focus distance and increase magnification, a 25mm tube gives you a 0.6x magnification, but tilt use becomes limited at these distances because of mirrorbox shadowing and if you look at the classic 90 TS-E + tube images they are all done with the camera tilted too.

A 90 TS-E MkII with a closer focusing distance, yes; a T/S Macro (1:1) I think is highly unlikely.

EOS Bodies / Re: DR from 5Ds will be 2 stop better then 7D mk II
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:08:32 PM »
But remember, better at Low ISO, worse at higher.... You can't get something for nothing......

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D mark II corrupt files on SD card
« on: February 09, 2015, 12:04:57 PM »
Low level format the card in a PC. Run any diagnostics you can from the manufacturer, then low level format the card in the camera.....


Lenses / Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 08, 2015, 02:55:12 PM »
defractive optics macro lens?

Lenses / Re: Wide lens suggestion for APS-C
« on: February 08, 2015, 06:36:22 AM »
I'm waiting to see what the tokina is like. I want something reasonably fast and wide for night skies.

another day wandering around in the cold with the Tamron....

Very nice shots, Don. I especially like the owl.

The owl is hanging around the bird feeders. The small birds spill sunflower seeds onto the ground, squirrels come to eat the spilled seeds, and the owl gets the squirrels. I haven't been able to get a picture of the capture yet, but I hope to....

.....If you didn't have camera, would you still the pc?......
If I didn't have the camera I for sure would not have this PC, this PC having been purpose built to support cameras.
Most everything else I use this PC for could be done almost as well on a tablet, for sure on a far less elaborate machine.
So where does this PC fit then? Part of the camera's cost or an accessory? Or maybe cameras are PC accessories?
Just questions, food for thought. Sure not trying to challenge anyone nor get anyone's dander up.

If you bought a PC that was configured specially to use with a camera, I'd call it part of the cost.  Its probable that upgrading all of my PC's to use a SSD, and having larger hard drives, and extra memory would fall into extra expenses just for the cameras.  I probably bought a 6 disk NAS for the same reason, more space for raw images.  I'd still have a NAS, but a smaller one would work fine if I did not have a DSLR. Certainly expensive software that has no other use.
and software...
I am fairly sure that I bought Lightroom, Photoshop, and Autopano for photography....

another day wandering around in the cold with the Tamron....

The first lens I bought......

Canon General / Re: dpreview: Canon not listed in "Best product for 2014"
« on: February 06, 2015, 07:39:07 PM »
Actually, I'm sort of surprised.  The 7D was fairly popular wasn't it?  I would have thought the 7D2 would have made the list.  Maybe it was released too late to make it?

Definitely too close to the end of the year.... and when you consider that Canon built up stock of the camera before it was released and they sold out anyway, there does seem to be significant demand....

It's a very valid point of view about convenience.....

I am at work and want to show my boss damage to an antenna feed....

I take a picture on my phone, open an app, adjust the picture, open up mail, send the picture...


I drive back to my office, grab my DSLR, drive back to the antenna farm, take the picture, drive back to my office, download the picture, open up lightroom and adjust the picture, open up mail, send the picture, drive back to the antenna farm, and continue work.

Which one do you think is easier and more likely....

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 253