October 30, 2014, 10:36:47 AM

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 - Mt Spokane Photography

Pages: 1 ... 278 279 [280] 281 282 ... 579
The G1X was overpriced.  I bought the deal which included camera and 95000 MK II printer for $399 net(After rebate) from Adorama last fall.  Thats about the right price.  It does a excellent job at that price point, but not at $800.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 60D Stock Levels Getting Low?
« on: December 27, 2012, 11:30:41 AM »
Our local Costco stores each have large pallets full of 60D's.  That often, but not always signals that they are being closed out, and that Costco was able to buy out huge amounts of remaining stock at a good price.  If there were 250 of them at  just 1/2 of the 618 stores, that would be over 77,000 cameras.

Software & Accessories / Re: Flying and foreign hols
« on: December 27, 2012, 11:22:10 AM »
Mick, I'd recommend Lightroom or DXO. 
Lenovo makes some very tough laptops, Apple laptops are not ruggedized, but very popular.  A lot of users seem to be struggling with the new Apple OS when used with utilities from the camera makers right now.  I suspect that Apple will work out the bugs.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon 6D - Meike grip on ebay for under $40
« on: December 26, 2012, 07:17:44 PM »
Lots of people was happy with Meike 5Dmkiii grip.. I mean, solid product and performance.. many good reviews..

Not All!  Many early buyers got defective units.  It cost more to return them to China than they were worth.

I did some research on google, these problems was the first generation from the 5dmkiii grips..
the latest ones are great...
Isn't that what I said??    Great is a bit overstating it, IMHO, even the Canon Grips are just fair. 

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon 6D - Meike grip on ebay for under $40
« on: December 26, 2012, 11:48:30 AM »
Lots of people was happy with Meike 5Dmkiii grip.. I mean, solid product and performance.. many good reviews..

Not All!  Many early buyers got defective units.  It cost more to return them to China than they were worth.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D MKII Pricing Question
« on: December 26, 2012, 10:46:45 AM »
I'd look for 5D MK II prices to bounce up as the supply dwindles.  It is a really good buy right now, Don't expect a big drop.

Macro / Re: Which extension tubes to buy?
« on: December 25, 2012, 10:45:03 PM »
I've had all the brands, Canon, Kenko, and kept a cheap Rokinon set.  The Rokinon is not really heavy duty enough for a big lens like the 70-200 2.8l, but they work on my 100mmL just fine and gain a bit of magnification.  I kept them even though I almost never use them because they were free (came with a old camera), and they work.  Nowdays, the low end ones are cheaper construction than my old ones, so I'd get a Kenko set if bought new.
I can hand hold the 100L if I'm careful, but its really tripod territory when used on a macro lens for greater than 1:1 magnification.

Your theory that others have not used different patterns is contradicted by the facts.  Do a little research before making such claims.
There are many Bayer type patterns patented by Kodak.  The alternate patterns have not worked out to be popular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
Fujifilm is the new kid on the block to try alternate color filters, others who tried them did not find success.
There was the CYGM pattern used by Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Kodak in the late 1990's.
The CYGM filter is far less common than the Bayer filter. CCDs that use it include the 3 megapixel Sony ICX252AK and ICS252AKF (which sampled in October 1999[1]).
Cameras that use it include several Canon models of the 1999-2000 period, such as the Canon PowerShot S10,[2] the original Canon Digital IXUS (June 2000),[3] though subsequent IXUS models used the Bayer filter, and the Canon G1; the Kodak DCS 620x and DCS 720x DSLRs, and several Nikon Coolpix models.[4]
Sony introduced the Cybershot DSC-F828  with a RGBE pattern in 2004.
Fuji has at least two alternate patterns that they have patented, but how much is sales hype and how much is performance related is yet to be seen.  There will be advantages and disadvantages.

Maybe I was too sweeping in my generality, but note I asked why only Fuji is currently pushing a non-bayer pattern as "the next great thing" and the camera magazines seem willing to trumpet it as a new thing also.

The history of pixel designs you describe is all factually correct, but you name old/discontinued/minor/failed cameras, and also patents that have been filed, but not new products with fresh R&D dollars and fresh advertizing dollars behind it.  Other than Fuji (and Foveon in a radically different sense) at this particular moment. What I thought would make for an interesting discussion is whether Canon could take the idea of a simple non-bayer pixel pattern and eliminating the AA filter for a major camera sensor line, (not just for a special limited edition version of an existing camera where they leave the AA filter off).

Is there enough potential to a more complex/more "random" pixel pattern for Canon to make something of it?

I wasn't trying to be totally complete, thats impossible, because new patterns are indeed being worked on all the time.
 Sony has recently shown some..
They do all have one thing in common, they have all been flash in the pan failures, after the hype and smoke / mirrors have cleared, they quitely disappear as users find the downsides.
However, it certainly is good to see innovation, and someone may discover something thats better.
Canon is very conservative, and seldom sticks their neck out with new technology.  They apparently feel that they don't need to.  Thats not likely to change, they only introduce new technology when they feel that the up side outweighs the downsides.  Fuji markets to more of a niche group who will spend $$$ for the latest thing.  Its a valid business model, just not Canon's.

here's a bigger question... WHY even have these "bayer" filters - sensors made of an array that detect single colors that require "interpolation" (and thus a bunch-o-math that eats up cpu processing power)

imagine an array made of sensors that can detect "all" colors

problem solved!

(non-scientist here - but not afraid to ask "why not?!")
Invent one and wealth will be yours.  For now, sensors only detect luminance (brightness)  Thats why the Bayer type filter is used, it allows a color image to be constructed from a B&W image.

@Mt. Spokane:
Thanks.  I will look at both methods and see if I can work the extra steps for a couple of years without "cracking" and buying LR4 and maybe a new computer.

I have an old Core 2 Duo processor, and only 3 GB of RAM, but I upgraded both the video card and the OS within the last year.

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0 ghz
3 GB Ram
NVidia GeForce GTX 550Ti
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit

I could buy LR4, and then buy some memory and up this to 4 GB or maybe more for $200 or so IF it would be enough to make a difference.  What do you think?

I'd spend $100 on memory.  Check your emory type, many core 2 duo systems use cheap DDR3 memory.
16GB of DDR3 memory costs less than $100.  If you happen to be stuck with DDR2, you can buy 8GB for about $100.
Memory is cheap.

Software & Accessories / Re: card reader via bluetooth?
« on: December 24, 2012, 11:29:22 PM »
I'd be very cautious about buying something like this from Hong Kong.  It has no reviews, and likely no support, and who knows if there will be fixes to firmware or software glitches.

Almost every time a new camera is introduced, third party flashes have some issues.  The manufacturers update them if its a current product, but if its a old model, forget it.
Its kinda like your issue with the 6D and LR3, no updated for old products.
I'd get a Canon flash, they will likely work with new Canon models for many years.

Lightroom 4 was out almost a year ago.  Lightroom 3 is not going to be updated.
However, here are two ways to use your 6D with Lightroom 3.

Method A:
1.  Install the DPP disk that came with your camera.  Setup a separate folder for your 6D images, and use DPP to import them to that folder.   
2. Use the Batch  Process Button in DPP to export the images to a folder of your choice.  The images will be converted to tiff which will work fine in LR 3. (The CR2 file is basically a compressed tiff image with Canon metadata added) 
3. If you set LR 3 as the external editor in DPP, you can also invoke LR3 from within DPP to edit a image.
Method B:

1.  Download Adobe DNG.  http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5519
2. Create a separate folder and place your 6D images in it.
3. Run Adobe DNG on that folder, it will convert the CR2 files to DNG.
4. Edit the DNG files in LR 3.(Your CR2 files will not be changed or deleted)
Either way will work fine.  You will never need to upgrade LR3 if you wish to keep it.

Lenses / Re: New lenses for 46mp camera?
« on: December 24, 2012, 12:38:12 PM »
I've long read how most of the current lenses are more than capable of out resolving anything on the MP horizon, and I thought it very likely to be true, but when i look at DXO's "mpix" rating of lenses, i start to wonder.
BTW-I'm ISF certified, yet i have no idea what a quad-HD television is, but i don't disagree with Bob's point.

Their megapixel ratings don't make sense to me... are they meant to be wide open (I can't find any reference to them except briefly in a dpreview article). Anyhow, it just seems like MTF stuff. Like it will always be lower unless it's 100% all the way to extinction at the camera's highest resolution, and nothing really achieves that.

 DXO is coming up with this stuff to attract potential customers for their software.  They test lenses on a camera, and test results are only valid for the lens and camera combination.  The MTF of the system is the product of the MTF of the Lens, Sensor, firmware, demosaicing software, and likely a couple of other things in the image path. You can't get to a actual value by testing a lens on a camera.  There are real lens testing test beds, but only a few engineers, technicians and scientists know how to use it properly and evaluate the results.  Companies like Carl Zeiss and Panavision have the capability to actually test a lens, DXO does not.  Even Canon provides calculated MTF figures for a lens.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: 1Dx for $6489
« on: December 24, 2012, 12:27:38 PM »
So, say you knew someone who acquired this camera from an "unknown source" and they could offer it to you really cheap.........

I am not equating a legitimate business that sells for less than MAP but one could carry the argument to absurdity. Would people be p.o.'d because a stolen camera was cheaper than what they paid?

I think it is great that folks active on this forum post good deals.  That's how I picked up my 5diii during the EBay Adorama sale a few months ago. I understand disappointment if one paid more than a posted sale price now, but don't get the pages and pages of diatribe by people well after their camera is purchased.  :-\

Enjoy the Holiday season, everyone.  I, for one, want to thank each of you who have provided me with useful information and advice on these forums

Its merely a point that the poster left out, a camera sold by a unauthorized dealer may not have a warranty, Canon will tell you this if you ask them.  However, in real practice, they will likely service it if you register the purchase.  In the past, they have been good about this, but their MAP program is a sign that they may be getting tough like Nikon and Sony.
Some unsuspecting person may buy one, and be very disappointed if it has a bad sensor and a $3,000 repair bill only 3 months after he got it. 
Its certainly a risk, and a buyer needs to know of it.

Pages: 1 ... 278 279 [280] 281 282 ... 579