December 20, 2014, 01:58:40 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 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 239
211
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: clown* photographer
« on: October 25, 2014, 09:12:47 PM »
This is what I was expecting....

212
The answer is obvious for people who take their photography seriously, you need every camera made on you at all times.

Then, if the scene contains mainly books you can use the appropriate camera and lens, if the scene happens to contain a person, then again, you will have the right tool for the job. Those that take the 'art' particularly seriously can even base their camera use choice on the colours of the books, as clearly (apparently) Nikon's wipe the floor with Canon on yellow, orange, green, and blue, so Canon would be OK for red, pink and mauve spectral scenes.

Simple really.......
DARN!
I wanted a camera for taking pictures of red canoe against a green background....

213
Go back to the DPR compare tool, Select your cameras as 7D2, 6D, 5D3, and 1DX, and look at the images at low ISOs. Go to the spot on the test that has the pages of text and see how far down you can read with images from the various cameras... At ISO100 the 7D2 comes out the best and the 1DX the worst! As you move up in ISO, the 6D and 5D3 emerge as the best, but throughout, the 1Dx remains near the bottom, finally getting ahead of the 7D2 at around ISO3200. That aught to generate a lot of screaming and kicking!

(Remember, this is comparing new tech to old... it just makes me want to see what the next FF cameras can do :) you can not make any reasonable conclusions with this data. )

EDIT: If you look at a face, you get the exact opposite results... The 1DX the best through the range, 5D3 and 6D in the middle, and 7D2 at the bottom, but at low ISO they are all close.

I guess I should be happy I take pictures of people and not books!!   ;)
+1!

My conclusion is that no matter what the test, different people will get different things out of it and come to different conclusions. I just like how you can move from one part of the image to another part and get two different conclusions.

My opinion is that the 7D2 seems to be a good step forward and that all the FF people should be just as pleasantly surprised when the next FF model comes out. It seems like a fine camera and mine should arrive the day AFTER I shoot an event... I can't wait to try it out.

214
Go back to the DPR compare tool, Select your cameras as 7D2, 6D, 5D3, and 1DX, and look at the images at low ISOs. Go to the spot on the test that has the pages of text and see how far down you can read with images from the various cameras... At ISO100 the 7D2 comes out the best and the 1DX the worst! As you move up in ISO, the 6D and 5D3 emerge as the best, but throughout, the 1Dx remains near the bottom, finally getting ahead of the 7D2 at around ISO3200. That aught to generate a lot of screaming and kicking!

(Remember, this is comparing new tech to old... it just makes me want to see what the next FF cameras can do :) you can not make any reasonable conclusions with this data. )

EDIT: If you look at a face, you get the exact opposite results... The 1DX the best through the range, 5D3 and 6D in the middle, and 7D2 at the bottom, but at low ISO they are all close.


215
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon 6D discontinued?
« on: October 25, 2014, 12:59:47 PM »
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B009C8T05C/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1414255451&sr=8-1&pi=SX200_QL40

Is this a mistake by Amazon UK?  Both body only and kit options are marked as discontinued. Will there be a surprise at the New York show?
2 to 2,5 years seems a very short lifecycle.
I guess it is a mistake  :-\
Being as it happened right about the time that the 7D should be marked as discontinued... odds are it is a mistake and they meant to do the 7D instead....

216
Street & City / Re: Famous icons in your city
« on: October 25, 2014, 12:24:52 PM »
I had to go to downtown Ottawa last night. After the insanity of the last few days here it is good to know that these places will remain open to the public and not locked away in fear of what might happen.

The first picture is of the central block of the Canadian House of Parliament and the peace tower. The eternal flame is in the foreground. The second picture is of the war memorial beside the tomb of the unknown soldier.

Both shots were 5 second time exposures and great thanks are due to the people (complete strangers) who all tried to stand still for the picture.

217
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: clown* photographer
« on: October 24, 2014, 05:40:31 PM »
Maybe the guy with the ipad was just spending his pennies wisely.

Am I the only one that wants to see the pics he took with the ipad?

+1

Who do we know who can attempt to duplicate that guys efforts and post the pics?

Any volunteers?
I was thinking of going past the airport tomorrow and giving it a try

218
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark 2 Preorders "sound off"
« on: October 24, 2014, 08:22:42 AM »
Ah you lucky Nth Americans,so many places to buy from,cheap prices,[7DII will be AUS$2300-2500]no firm date for distribution,Victoria will get it first followed by New South Wales[that's Melbourne and Sydney to you Northeners]with poor old Queensland after the others are supplied,this is if other releases are anything to go by,oh for parity with US $.

It is $1800 in the U.S., $1900 in Canada.... but with the exchange rate, $1900 CAD is the equivalent of $1695 US or $1930 AUD. We are very lucky up here in "the great white north" You Americans shouldn't be rushing to NYC to get your new camera, come on up to Canada and try out your new camera taking pictures of Polar bears, beavers, and Mounties riding horses....

219
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 09:43:44 PM »
In the real world, with the cameras Canon makes now, FF wins the IQ contest in all but one scenario... and that scenario is when you are focal length limited, can't move any closer, have a GREAT lens, and good lighting. Under those conditions (happens a lot with small birds) the quality of your crop pixels is fairly close to your FF pixels, but you have more crop pixels on target so you end up with a better image from the crop camera.  Everywhere else, FF wins.

No, there's another one - when you're magnification (as in macro) limited.

Good point!

Only my and Pit123's crops in this thread don't actually illustrate that to be a crop camera 'advantage' either, certainly not one to base a buying decision on, price, AF fps maybe, but IQ advantage, not so much.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23224.msg453442#msg453442
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23224.msg453961#msg453961
To get that crop reach advantage, you need a GREAT lens. A lens like the 100-400 or the Tamron 150-600 is not sharp enough. My tests between a 5D2 and a 60D using those two lenses showed minimal differences in resolving power of distant objects between crop and FF. Using a 100L, crop definitely resolved distance objects better than FF, but it most certainly was not twice as good... maybe 20 or 30 percent better. (no scientific measurements taken, the percentage is a guess)

I am told, no personal experience, that the second generation "Big Whites" will act the same... but however you slice it, to get that crop reach advantage, you need some of the sharpest glass that Canon makes.

220
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 09:15:22 PM »
In the real world, with the cameras Canon makes now, FF wins the IQ contest in all but one scenario... and that scenario is when you are focal length limited, can't move any closer, have a GREAT lens, and good lighting. Under those conditions (happens a lot with small birds) the quality of your crop pixels is fairly close to your FF pixels, but you have more crop pixels on target so you end up with a better image from the crop camera.  Everywhere else, FF wins.

No, there's another one - when you're magnification (as in macro) limited.

Good point!

221
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 09:03:09 PM »
I don't agree with this "amount of light" argument. Consider a full frame sensor and an APS-C size sensor with pixels the same size as a full frame taking photos with the same lens at the same f-stop and the same distance from the subject. The signal to noise ratio for each pixel in the APS-C sensor will be the same as the S:N ratio as the corresponding pixels in an APS-C sized area of the ff.
True, but the 2.56x greater area of the FF sensor will gather more total light.  Comparing noise at the pixel level isn't the same as comparing noise at the image level.
You lost me on the image level noise, Neuro. It seems that an APS-C sized crop of the FF image and the APS-C image in this case would be identical. The number of photons hitting each pixel is the same and assuming the downstream operations are identical, what's the difference?
Yes, if a FF pixel and a crop pixel are the same physical size (and technology) the individual pixels will be identical in terms of signal and noise.

If both images were shot with the exact same lens, the same settings, and the same distance, the central 40 percent of the FF pixels would be exactly the same as the crop pixels.

In real life, with your equal size pixel scenario, we would try to frame the two pictures the same, so that means either a 1.6X longer lens on the FF camera, or walking closer until the image filled the screen the same. Either way you look at it, that gives you 2.56 times as many pixels of equal quality on the target, so when you "normalize" the FF picture for the same number of pixels as the crop image, you end up with better quality pixels on the FF image. You are choosing between more pixels of the same quality, or the same amount of pixels but of better quality. There is no way for crop to win in that scenario.

In the real world, with the cameras Canon makes now, FF wins the IQ contest in all but one scenario... and that scenario is when you are focal length limited, can't move any closer, have a GREAT lens, and good lighting. Under those conditions (happens a lot with small birds) the quality of your crop pixels is fairly close to your FF pixels, but you have more crop pixels on target so you end up with a better image from the crop camera.  Everywhere else, FF wins.

NOTE that I have left cost out of the factors.... cost will change the point where you become focal length limited, affect lens quality, and may even eliminate FF altogether. If you have $3000 and want to take pictures of distant chickadees, a 7D2 and a Tamron 150-600 is your best bet. If you have $25,000, a 1DX, a 600F4, and a 1.4X or 2X teleconverter will be the best.

222
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ISO 160 vs. 100
« on: October 23, 2014, 07:55:11 PM »
In my experience, the differences in noise for the full and +1/3rd (push) stops are not really enough to get worried about for current Canon generation cameras. I have noticed that the 2/3rd (-1/3rd or pull) stops are a bit noisier, however it's still usually not enough to worry about.


Older 18mp APS-C parts had more problems with noise, and the 2/3rd pull stops were pretty noisy. I don't know about older FF parts. So long as your using a current model, however, I simply don't worry about it. Canon read noise is high, and it's high no matter what (at lower ISOs)...a third stop change in high read noise isn't going to change things much. At higher ISOs, the shift with third stops is less significant, and so doesn't matter at all.

For both the 5D2 and the 60D you could easily detect the differences in noise with the "dark frame" test, but with actual photos there wasn't any noticeable difference between adjacent 1/3 stops...

223
2)  Her major gripe - no Audio tagging of images.  How many cameras do this?  1Dx, D3?  A nice feature but seriously

There are two very good reasons why there is no audio tagging.... (1) It isn't a phone, and (2) at 10FPS you can't keep up to the camera.

LOL.  Not disagreeing.  I think it is an "interesting featured" I know the 1Dx and some of the flagship Nikons can do this, but seriously, is there another sub $2K DSLR with similar features that includes this?


The fact that Canon and Nikon haven't included this feature in other cameras is what baffles me, especially with the 7D mk2 being touted as a sports/action camera.

Most current DSLRs have the ability to record video, which means they have a built in mic that can record audio.  The 7D mk2 along with the 5D mk3 also have mic inputs which to me means they have the hardware to include this feature, but Canon chose not to include it in the camera's firmware (something the people at Magic Lantern have been able to add in prior cameras).
I probably should have put smiley faces in the post.... it wasn't a serious comment.... particularly the part about audio tagging at 10FPS .....

224
2)  Her major gripe - no Audio tagging of images.  How many cameras do this?  1Dx, D3?  A nice feature but seriously

There are two very good reasons why there is no audio tagging.... (1) It isn't a phone, and (2) at 10FPS you can't keep up to the camera.

225
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: clown* photographer
« on: October 23, 2014, 10:26:50 AM »
And do you feel sufficiently superiour now?

Why do you care what other people use?  If he is happy with the Ipad, great.

that's it >:( I'm selling all my Canon gear and switching to Apple ;D

The best thing about Apple is that you get to upgrade two times a year.... I have been waiting 5 years for a 7D2... If you are suffering from GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), Canon sucks! No way can you get your weekly fix :(

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 239