April 17, 2014, 12:55:15 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 - heptagon

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
61
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: October 13, 2012, 07:43:39 AM »
Those of you who defend DxO scores, why do you have Canon gear?
Because Canon offers the better package. It's not all about the sensor. It's the combination of the sensor, AF, ergonomics, processor and lenses. Similar to cars, where one company offers the better engine, but another company offers the better car. The best engine won't do the job if the car "sucks" ;)
You wouldn't go offroad with a racecar or wear slick tires in the mud.

Every job needs the right tool.

62
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2012, 12:20:10 PM »
Maybe as you say, because they really don't have anything now that can match Nikon when it comes to sensors (or, more hopefully, they have something in the wings, but want Nikon to think they are still stuck in the past).


If you know or remember Paul Pope from DPReview, this well-informed guy has this to say:

"Not the best they could do by any means but rather the best they were permitted to do by the bean counters concerned with wafer yield in their sensor manufacturing...

But don't be too concerned the best Canon CAN do is still to come ..."
- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40792377

"I believe Canon's latest sensor technology is going to be showcased later this year. The video camera gives us a hint of what's to come I'm told."
- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40800902

"I don't believe its a 5 series camera .... more like a 1DXs type of thing.
I think it shoots video at a bit more then 1080p as well ...."
- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40792357

So, we can expect the high megapixel sensor to appear in a 1D body. And if the engineers manage to convince the bean counters they have the yield under control, we may very well see the latest sensor technology from Canon in it.


You give us new (d)hope!

63
EOS Bodies / Re: 46mp sensor useless for landscape?
« on: October 09, 2012, 04:05:25 PM »
So, just take look at the center resolution of the image.

Ok, now that I'm on my computer instead of my phone, I did.  The Sony image looks sharper. 

Of course, if I oversharpened the 5DII image as the Sony in-camera settings seem to be doing, it would be sharper still, but it would probably have the purple jaggies just like you see in this crop of the Sony image...

This is clearly not enough sensor resolution.

64
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]
« on: October 09, 2012, 04:03:22 PM »
Has Canon really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like about the new sensors yet?

my head exploded trying to comprehend this question.

It wasn't a question! It was an answer! The meaning of life! Wow!

You know, man, once you have seen light from the eternal flame it shines from your eyes burning through your brains. It's true. Our bodies emit photons and we can capture them. We are the children of the sun, just not as bright and shiny. The pros use avalanche photodiodes to count every last one in nitrogen cooled chambers isolated from the electromagnetic vibrations of the quirly world.

65
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 650D Results on DxOMark
« on: October 09, 2012, 01:49:42 AM »
... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
...but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

Dominating and killing them how, exactly?  By losing dSLR market share to Canon for several years?  By consistently selling fewer dSLRs and lenses than Canon, year after year, for the past several years?

Canon sells cameras, not sensors, and they sell more of them than Nikon.

Where do you actually pull these numbers from?

66
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]
« on: October 08, 2012, 06:29:54 PM »
Has Canon really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like about the new sensors yet?

Well, I think Canon really has been far even as didn't decide not to use even go want not to do look still more like about the new sensor.

Well if they don't have it do, why are they stop making rumors and not release any worthwile information about what is to has been released yesterday by Nikon?

67
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 650D Results on DxOMark
« on: October 08, 2012, 05:03:05 PM »
Well someone needs to wake up Canon before they be gone.

68
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]
« on: October 08, 2012, 04:51:16 PM »
"development announcement" = 1 1/2 years
Until the real announcement and from there something in between 1-3 years until it starts shipping. You will eventually hold it in your hands in about 5 years.

69
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]
« on: October 08, 2012, 03:11:18 PM »
Has Canon really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like about the new sensors yet?

70
EOS Bodies / Re: 46mp sensor useless for landscape?
« on: October 08, 2012, 03:07:48 PM »
Since you went and invoked Nyquist, :P I will ask - what is the physical phenomenon that we are sampling, and what property(ies) of that phenomenon provide the limits from which we determine the minimal frequency to adequately capture all information present, and the optimal oversampling frequency?
Now you got me thinking and crunching some quick numerics. The sinc function is bipolar while the optical intensity is only unipolar which is a basic difference. Usually functions are not bandwidth limited unlike ideal low pass functions like the sinc. Therefore if you want to caputre ALL information you need infinitely fine sampling.

However if we fourier transform the 1D-function of an airy disc and compare the energy content per frequency to the sinc-function with a same resolution (according to the Raileigh criterion) we need about double the sampling frequency to catch almost all energy. Therefore if we sample twice as fine as the resolution according to the Rayleigh criterion, we should be fine. This sampling rate is about 15% finer than for MTF50%. (At least for a series of points, i don't know if it also holds for lines.)

So using the MTF50% megapixel values as a measure sounds good. A problem, however, is that the pixels have area and are not ideal sampling points. Therefore we must compensate for that by making the pixel areas much smaller than the resolution. In order to not throw away so much light we will have to increase the resolution to a multiple the MTF50% values in order to get close to 90% of the signal energy available in the optical resolution.

71
EOS Bodies / Re: 46mp sensor useless for landscape?
« on: October 07, 2012, 04:18:50 PM »
Ok, I think this is too technical for me. So 46 MP is same as 36 MP for landscap?

No, 46 MP is higher resolution than 36 MP, for any application.

This is not ultimately true. According to the Nyquist theorem you get the whole information about a bandwidth limited signal if your samples are spaced close enough. Making more samples provides you with no new information. While the airy function is no sinc function, it is rather similar. So there is supposed to be a pixel spacing below which the quality gains become marginal. However i suspect this isn't the 50% contrast assumed in the calculations and if you consider the effects of the bayer pattern there should be a lot more pixels than we have today.

72
Software & Accessories / Re: Head for Manfrotto 055xprob
« on: October 06, 2012, 06:19:39 AM »
There's no perfect solution for all. Use a good gearhead for macro and landscape and another head for the rest. Else you will be unhappy in both situations.

73
EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 04, 2012, 02:54:12 AM »
I would rather have a good 1 point AF sensor than 9 bad ones. I would rather than 22 good mega pixels than 36 bad ones. I would rather have good menu system than sensor specs. I would rather have integrated WIFI and GPS units than not. I would rather have the EF lens support than not. I would rather have good customer support than not. I would rather have my Canon than not!

Actually I'd rather have a dozen good AF sensors instead of 9 mediocre ones and 36 million good pixels instead of 22 million mediocre ones. Where do i get that? Oh right, Nikon has it.

74
I've always thought the smartest thing for Canon to do would be to have official plug-ins for that sort of thing. Maybe provide your camera serial number, pay $25 and get a file that's either flashed into the camera or loaded to a special folder on your cards via DPP.

Even better an app store, it wouldn't be too hard for them to vet code to only use official APIs like Apple do so there's no chance of damage to the camera and have rules on how much CPU they can use etc. Bit of extra cash for Canon, a bit of extra cash for thousands of developers and the ability to get just about any feature you could dream of for end-users.

As for warranty / support just have a quick and official way to disable the plug-ins so they can quickly work out if problems are with the base firmware / camera or some sort of add-on.

The 6D has WiFi internet access. I'm waiting for the Canon App Store.

75
Instead of the 7D or the extender you might consider the 550D/T2i which has the same sensor. You get a slower framerate, no sealing, only center AF but essentially the same image quality. For occasional wildlife this might just be enough. And you have 2 cameras at hand. The 5D iii below 100mm and the crop camera above 112mm equivalent.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10