March 02, 2015, 10:32:28 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 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 253
181
Lenses / Re: Lens 'resolving power' vs sensors.
« on: December 26, 2014, 12:23:55 PM »
I realize that I'm replying to an old post that's part of an old thread with recent activity due to the high mp alleged confirmation by Canon.

I wanted to address one thing in particular though.  I question the assumption that recent lenses and mk ii lenses are being refreshed for higher mp sensors, including current aps-c 18mp crop sensors.

I was wondering earlier how the current EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II USM would perform on a higher mp camera, so I tried looking up its resolving power in lp/mm and ran across a review I hadn't read before, by DxOMark stating that for that particular lens its predecessor, the original EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM (mk I) had more resolving power.  Then in the comments, they stated that it was sharper on aps-c  bodies than it is on ff bodies (which I didn't understand).  I've not read any other review that made such claims.

Then I decided to look into the new 100-400mm zoom mk II and read that more or less it has about the same resolving power as its predecessor, and the true improvement is in the stabilization upgrade/update.  Was it already resolving well enough before?  I've never used one, so I don't know.

Any thoughts on this.  I am aware that many here are not fans of DxOMark and their results, but the 100-400 II still has me scratching my head.


Well, your relying on DXO. :P Guess that's enough said.  ;D


One thing I will say is, older Canon lenses often resolved very well in the center, and very poorly in the corners. For film, where huge enlargements were not as common (most of the time, it was smaller enlargements or contact prints, so maybe 8x10 tops on average), poorer corners were probably not as much of a problem. Newer Canon lenses and the Mark III TCs have all been addressing corner performance. Some of Canon's newer lenses did not improve center or midframe resolution much...but improved corner resolution a ton. Some lenses, like many of the new Great White Mark II generation, improved resolving power across the board.


For the best lens resolution tests around, check out Roger Cicala's LensRentals blog. He regularly tests new lenses, using an optical test bench (so he's testing LENSES, not camera systems), and his comparisons tend to be more accurate and generic than most. None of this "limited by the sensor" crap that skews and convolutes results. :P
Also Roger tests multiple copies of lenses and his lenses are normal retail lenses. I am always suspicious of lens tests where the manufacturer sends the tester 1 copy of the lens.... odds are that the 1 lens is cherry picked and is not representative of a typical lens....

182
Christmas shortbread....

183
Canon General / Re: Merry Christmas and A Happy Holiday Season to All
« on: December 25, 2014, 12:24:57 PM »
And a Merry Christmas to you.....

184
EOS Bodies / Re: More 7DII focus problems
« on: December 24, 2014, 05:34:15 PM »
Am I hearing it correct that 6D has better focusing ability than the 7D2?

The 6D manual has 10 pages for the AF system...
The 7D2 has 111 pages for the AF system.....

The 6D:
11 points
   Center: cross-type at f/5.6; vertical line-sensitive at f/2.8.
   Upper and lower AF points: vertical line-sensitive AF at f/5.6.
   Other AF points: Horizontal line-sensitive AF at f/5.6
   Center AF Point: EV -3 to 18
   Other AF points: EV +0.5 to 18
AF Point Selection
  (1) Automatic selection
  (2) Manual selection


The 7D2:
65-points
    all cross-type AF
    center AF point is a dual cross-type AF point at f/2.8
    EV 0-20
AF Point Selection
    (1) Single-point Spot AF (Manual selection)
    (2) Single-point AF (Manual selection)
    (3) AF point expansion (Manual selection, 4 points: Up, down, left, and right)
    (4) AF point expansion (Manual selection, surrounding 8 points)
    (5) Zone AF (Manual zone selection)
    (6) Large Zone AF (Manual zone selection)
    (7) Auto Selection 65-point AF


my vote is the 7D2....

FF bodies have generally had more accurate AF (in terms of inches or mm accuracy) than crop bodies.  They need it, because the depth of field on a FF can be a lot less. As I recall, AF accuracy is specified based on 1/3rd the depth of field up to f/2.8. 
 
The number of pages in a manual does not affect AF accuracy, there are no settings for it, its built into the size and spacing of the elements on the AF sensor.
 
The 7D MK II has a sophisticated AF system, and is much better at tracking subjects, has fast AF speed, and much better when focusing at off center points, but when comparing accuracy on the center point, I'd expect to see the 6D win because in in or cm, 1/3 the depth of field is a much smaller number on FF.
 
From TDP   http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx
 
"Precision, invisibility, and other intangibles
As mentioned above with the precision discussion, there's a modified type of AF point called a 'high-precision' point, which focuses within 1/3 of the depth of focus of the lens at max aperture, vs. the normal precision spec of within 1 depth of focus. Usually, the high precision point is the center point, and it operates in high-precision mode with an f/2.8 lens on most bodies, or an f/4 lens on 1-series bodies. The 1D X is an exception in two ways - it has five high-precision points in a central vertical column, instead of just one, and they require f/2.8 unlike previous 1-series bodies. "
Although the center point of the 7D2 is a dual cross point, not a single cross like the 6D

185
EOS Bodies / Re: More 7DII focus problems
« on: December 24, 2014, 09:27:45 AM »
Am I hearing it correct that 6D has better focusing ability than the 7D2?

The 6D manual has 10 pages for the AF system...
The 7D2 has 111 pages for the AF system.....

The 6D:
11 points
   Center: cross-type at f/5.6; vertical line-sensitive at f/2.8.
   Upper and lower AF points: vertical line-sensitive AF at f/5.6.
   Other AF points: Horizontal line-sensitive AF at f/5.6
   Center AF Point: EV -3 to 18
   Other AF points: EV +0.5 to 18
AF Point Selection
  (1) Automatic selection
  (2) Manual selection


The 7D2:
65-points
    all cross-type AF
    center AF point is a dual cross-type AF point at f/2.8
    EV 0-20
AF Point Selection
    (1) Single-point Spot AF (Manual selection)
    (2) Single-point AF (Manual selection)
    (3) AF point expansion (Manual selection, 4 points: Up, down, left, and right)
    (4) AF point expansion (Manual selection, surrounding 8 points)
    (5) Zone AF (Manual zone selection)
    (6) Large Zone AF (Manual zone selection)
    (7) Auto Selection 65-point AF


my vote is the 7D2....

186
Lenses / Re: Any ideas on getting good focus when shooting thru glass pane?
« on: December 23, 2014, 07:15:19 PM »
Definitely black cloth or dark curtain behind you...... It's ( I think) the reflections in the glass that are killing you....

I do this fairly often at home. I have a thick navy blue curtain for the window.... I make sure it is behind me to reduce reflections back into the room. I also have three of those two foot square linked foam mats that I put against the window to help obscure the view of me....

My other solution is a pop-up hunting blind that I can put in the yard near the feeders..... Gets me a lot closer and no glass to worry about.....but it is cold in the winter.....

187
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: December 23, 2014, 03:38:02 PM »


Quote

Since you are such an experienced photographer and the M and the T2i according to you have much better autofocus system, stick to what works.

Maybe just stick with your T2i, M, and 6D.  Just a guess but if you rented the 5DMIII or the 1DX I am sure the Af would fail for you as well.


You are correct - when Af is critical, say, at fashion week, the t2i is my lead until it bets a bigger brother.

When i rent the 5d3 ill let you know, to see if your un-educated guess was true or fail.

Cheers
People!
Before this gets any more personal, have you considered that he has had LOTS of experience with the T2i.....perhaps enough that he can push the T2i to its limits...couple that with a lack of time on a 7D2, and I have no problems with the claim that he got better pictures with it.
When I got my 7D2, it took worse pictures than my 60D... Same problem..... But if one does not have the time to set the camera up and get comfortable with it, you don't get better.

This is no reflection on the persons skill, it is a reflection of the time they had to play with it. Let's resist the urge to attack each other and be civil instead.

188
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: High ISO heaven!
« on: December 23, 2014, 10:13:49 AM »
Ok...  i know the 5DIII (and 6D/1Dx) are high ISO monsters...  but to get not only usable, but what i think is fantastic IQ from uber high ISO was somewhat unexpected.

I came across this leopard on a temple in the middle of the jungle in India, it was already getting dark, but still fired off a few shots at iso 12,800.  I did not expect anything amazing from them, it was more of a record shot, but when i got to my computer it was amazing.  some light post and this was the result!

5DIII + 500LII
iso 12,800
1/125
f/4

Nail the exposure and you can get fantastic images at high ISO!
Beautiful. Technically, a job well done... Artistically, WOW!

189
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: December 23, 2014, 10:09:46 AM »
Just as with the original 7d, the "advanced" Af produced an awful lot of oof images- for newbs and advanced users alike.
100 percent agreement. I'd even bet that the same held true for most 5D3 and 1DX owners. We are not just talking about changing the number of AF points here, we are introducing zones, tracking, acceleration, and more. This is an AF system that is 20 times as complex as that found in lesser cameras.... of course it will be harder to learn... and of course there will be a learning curve.

There is nothing advanced about setting the camera in manual point select, focusing, and clicking the shutter. NOTHING. Any default af setting should be able to accurately focus on the set point, or even when set to automatic point selection. Its not that difficult at all. Whats' difficult is when that most basic of camera functions doesnt work well. And just to clarify, Im talking about still subjects/persons/landscapes.
You could just leave it in single point mode, but then why did you buy the camera???? It is a good starting point and a confidence builder, but if someone bought the camera for it's advanced AF capabilities, they had better expect to take the time and effort to learn how to use it properly.

We are talking the difference between a family sedan and a race car. If you have only driven a family sedan and then get into a race car, you don't expect to keep with the field at an Indy race... You start off driving slow and easy.... you learn new skills, you learn how it handles, you get experience, and you get better and better. To expect anything else is irrational.... It is the same with a camera.

What can be advanced is setting up focal (not everyone has the space) or other afma software. Its a pain in the arse, and wastes valuable time.

Calibrating your equipment is NEVER a waste of time. Trying to take a sharp picture with a lens that needs a 10 point AFMA adjustment is a lesson in futility.


190
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: December 22, 2014, 05:07:28 PM »
Barred owl under difficult conditions... in the woods, heavy overcast and light mist, and just after sunrise, not much light to play with.
7D2 and Tamron 150-600 at ISO1600, F6.3, 600mm, and 1/320 second handheld. I was very surprised that the shot came out as well as it did. Resting the camera against a tree really helps to stabilize it.....

191
Abstract / Re: Season Greetings!
« on: December 22, 2014, 02:01:43 PM »
BAH! Humbug!
Is she single? The Local Lion is still a bachelor and she seem to have a proper arrogant and aristocratic attitude  :P

She is old and cranky...

192
Abstract / Re: Season Greetings!
« on: December 22, 2014, 01:53:10 PM »
BAH! Humbug!

193
Post Processing / Re: DNG vs. original RAW in the long term
« on: December 22, 2014, 01:51:16 PM »
Hi everyone,

I have a question regarding options for long-term archiving of RAW files.

What are the advantages and disadvantages?

I am asking, because Canon might change its RAW format and optimise it for upcoming new cameras, and sooner or later RAW converters may drop support for old RAW files (considered outdated). I don't think, this will happen any time soon, though. DNG seems to be comparable to PDF/A, which is now the preferred format for electronic archiving of documents.

In another thread it was recommended to always keep the original RAW files, because RAW converters improve over time, and converting old RAW files with new converters would potentially give significantly better results than what was possible a few years ago. The question is, how long will old RAW files be supported in new converters.

But the same questions is valid for DNG, too. If I would convert all my RAW files to DNG, now, will this be a truly lossless conversion? Or could it be, that DNG conversion improves over time, too? And: How much does conversion from Canon RAW to DNG depend on the converter? Will Adobe products give different results, than, say, the DNG converter that comes with open source packages, such as Digikam/Showfoto?

I have no experience with all of this, but I am planning to archive my images, soon, and I just reading about backup and archiving strategies, formats and so on. Therefore I am very interested in your advice. Thanks in advance!

gargamel


P.S.: Of course, I have written http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=3113.0, before posting.
Save your files and save a current copy of DPP that supports them.... that way, even if support is dropped in a future release, you still have a version that will work.

194
EOS Bodies / Re: More 7DII focus problems
« on: December 22, 2014, 01:37:04 PM »
Think like a rocket scientist -- the rocket will not be very beneficial to a mission aimed at an enemy plane if it suddenly swerves because a bird crosses it's path, and shoots down a pelican.

Or, say I'm trying to shoot that pelican flying by, and a surface to air missile passes through the scene – if I've configured the tracking sensitivity and speed options appropriately, the camera will ignore the missile and remain locked on the pelican so I can continue taking pictures.  Of course, with SAMs flying around, ducking for cover or running away might be better choices than taking pictures.  ;)
did someone mention DUCKing for cover?

195
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: December 22, 2014, 10:06:05 AM »
the incredible display of ego around the comment about his picture being the best a Canon sports shooter could expect from it . . .   Just a quick look around other reviews should have told him that others are not having the same difficulties he had and should have made him think again before hitting that publish button.

I think you've touched on the key here: so many photographers hold up their own personal experience (anecdotes) as examples of what can be done and what can't, what should be done and what should not, and forget that their personal experience may not match the experiences of others.  While personal taste is appropriate for the artistic component of photography, it's more an exercise in engineering to decide how to use the equipment to collect the most and best data from each click of the shutter.

I guess this is the difference with the scientific community.... peer review....  Do your tests, compare them with others, and if there is a discrepancy, try to figure out why...

Thanks Don, Orangutan, the Internet is a wonderful tool and I've always enjoyed the fact I can read so many reviews but I think being reliant on them or not putting them into the right context is a danger in itself and this is a great case in point.
Exactly!

When I got my 7D2 I rushed out to take pictures.... and they sucked! I saw other people taking great pictures and asked myself why. Then I read and re-read the AF manual and "magically" my pictures improved. I played and practiced with the camera, and they got better. I AFMAd the lenses and my pictures got better.

Rather than saying "this camera is a piece of crap", I said "what am I doing wrong" and learned how to use it. For many, there is a need for instant gratification and a reluctance to invest the time to learn..... and it is those people who blast a product not because it is bad, but because of their own shortcomings.

There is a saying about how a skilled carpenter with crude tools can produce finer work than a klutz with the finest tools.... I think it holds for photography too.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 253