July 23, 2014, 06:28:08 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 - skitron

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 34
436
EOS Bodies / Re: New Video Camera Information? [CR1]
« on: September 22, 2011, 01:11:57 PM »
I sure hope they do a digital crop anti-shake in this cam. Given the sensor it seems they should be able to and maintain full res. Between that and an IS lens maybe it can perform anti-shake on par with a CX550 (which uses both) which is to say truly amazing.

437
EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon unveils V1 and J1 Mirrorless Cameras
« on: September 21, 2011, 11:04:46 AM »
The video OS looks abysmal judging from Nikon's own clips...looks like NEX wins that battle hands down. Plus NEX has APS-C and option for 'real' lens. Hopefully Canon ignores the Nikon formula and goes squarely after Sony.

438
Canon General / Re: Abandoned at the Alter, Again
« on: September 15, 2011, 02:12:06 PM »
...but let's all try to get a grip and realize that our pictures are not going to magically get better with this new technology...

I agree. Between stellar glass and stellar RAW processing on the desktop a decent body should be able to get a lot of mileage. Only substantial gains in low light/noise performance interest me much (as long as I remain rationale and don't fall into GAS).

439
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Sends out a Mirrorless Camera Survey
« on: September 15, 2011, 01:49:44 PM »
I'm curious what the 3rd page would have said if the user said they were interested in mirrorless cameras.

a) I already bought a NEX3
b) I already bought a NEX5
c) I already bought a NEX5N
d) I already bought a NEX7

 :D

In all seriousness though, I'd love to see a Canon equivalent so I don't have to make one of the choices above. But to be honest I'm probably going to do a NEX5N very soon.

440
EOS Bodies / Re: New EF Mount Video Camera in October? [CR1]
« on: September 02, 2011, 12:53:16 PM »
I really hope this rumor is true and that Canon did it right to compete with the Sony VG-20. This means EF mount, superb low light, in cam anti-shake (software based), quality codec, manual controls, full time autofocus, good microphones with option for fully controllable outboard mics and no line skipping. I'll wait for October to see what Canon offers in hopes it can use my existing glass and it can take a competent still.

441
Canon General / Re: So... Sony just dropped their Juggernaut!
« on: August 24, 2011, 04:40:37 PM »
The video and the video autofocus on the a77 look pretty good to me. The stills didn't impress me and the 5D2 looked much better in comparison (but then it should have been compared to a 7D or 60D to be fair). But I'd take a hard look at a77 as a video DSLR based on those clips if Canon fails to bring comparable performance. Sadly, I'm guessing in the video autofocus dept, Canon is probably not going to even come close. Sony claims they had to do the translucent mirror technology to make it work and there are no rumors of Canon doing that. I'll wait to see what 5D3 offers, but I suspect it will be not much different than 5D2 in terms of video autofocus. I sincerely hope I'm wrong about this.

Gotta hand it to Sony for tackling what is "the biggest fly in the ointment" for the average DSLR video shooter (as opposed to indie shooter) in getting a good autofocus system. Sony also tackled "the biggest fly in the ointment" for the average camcorder shooter in creating what is imo hands down the best IS system for a camcorder on the market in the CX550. I've had that camcorder a year now and still utterly amazed I can get 10X zoom handheld that is pretty close to tripod and 1X walk-around that looks not that much different than dolly. Obviously not the same as tripod and dolly but simply amazing just how close you can get.

442
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III, 1D Mark V & 1Ds Mark IV Tidbits
« on: August 05, 2011, 01:32:09 PM »
...a FF 35mm with 40 mp it is a non sense, only good for tourists

Why is that as long as they manage to control noise?
noise  seems to be all your life,  and IQ  at native ISO you have heard about it ?  a 1Ds is a pro camera not for tourists

Noise is the primary thing that needs to be controlled (at the sensor level) to achieve high native ISO...thus IQ...

443
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III, 1D Mark V & 1Ds Mark IV Tidbits
« on: August 05, 2011, 01:01:16 PM »
...a FF 35mm with 40 mp it is a non sense, only good for tourists

Why is that as long as they manage to control noise?

444
EOS Bodies / Re: Micro Focus Adjustment on 60D
« on: August 05, 2011, 12:53:30 PM »
So why wouldn't they utilize it in their warranty program since it is less time consuming to 'fix' things this way? Not saying it's true because I have no evidence, just saying it is logical therefore entirely possible.

They wouldn't utilize it because then the user could easily 'unfix' the issue by turning off AFMA or by resetting the settings on the camera (which would not erase the adjustment, but would set the C.Fn back to the default 'no adjustment' setting). 

People who've sent cameras and/or lenses in for adjustment have reported service reports stating, "Electrical adjustments were carried out on the AF assembly...," and for lenses, "The auto focus did not operate properly. Electrical adjustments were carried out on the circuit board..."  That's not AFMA.

That assumes any service menu functioned identically to the user menu...which if such a thing existed I would assume it would not.  It's easy enough to code to only flash the addresses you want upon reset and leave others alone so it has no technical barrier. And it is only logical to do this vs disassembly of lens and body simply for a lack of access to afma.

As for the service reports, I wouldn't be surprised if that language is used even on stuff they check out and is fine.  ;) Again, no proof of this with Canon, just speculation based on how I've seen other places work where I do have proof.

I suppose if we had a single 60d and two copies of whatever lens with one off -8 afma units and the other off +8 and sent everything in we would have all the info we needed to definitively confirm or dismiss my speculations upon return of same.  :)

445
EOS Bodies / Re: Micro Focus Adjustment on 60D
« on: August 05, 2011, 11:32:56 AM »
If they applied MA in the camera to make it match the lens, it wouldn't AF accurately if you bought a new lens.

That is not known, another lens may be fine, it may be off the same as the first lens, it may be off the opposite of the first lens. Taking care of all of these anomalies is the entire point of micro adjust, no? So why wouldn't they utilize it in their warranty program since it is less time consuming to 'fix' things this way? Not saying it's true because I have no evidence, just saying it is logical therefore entirely possible.

Of course you could argue if they were going to do it via a hidden service menu to save time and expense, it takes even less time and expense to simply push it to the user and let him adjust his own lens, to which I would agree 100%.  ;)

446
EOS Bodies / Re: Micro Focus Adjustment on 60D
« on: August 04, 2011, 09:41:43 PM »
Sad part is I bet its still in the 60d but its hidden. I just don't see them not having it for when people send their new body/lens in for warranty because its off a few clicks.  I'm guessing they have a hidden service menu like most other electronic gizmos with menus have. I'm sure it would make the warranty program cheaper for them.

447
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
« on: July 07, 2011, 12:22:58 PM »
The 100L's center resolution is very good, but there are some lenses that outresolve the 100L, and many lenses that outresolve the 100L at the edges.  At f/5.6-f/8, even the cheap nifty-fifty (50mm f/1.8 II) outresolves the 100L across the whole frame.

Not saying I disagree, but where are you finding data for this? If there is a site that has it for various lenses I'd like to get a link for reference.  :)

448
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 50D Firmware 1.0.8
« on: July 02, 2011, 04:18:17 PM »
FWIW, I fell for doing the update and now my Sigma 50 autofocus is abysmal. It was working fine before but is now completely useless. And of course there is no way to roll back the firmware update...

[EDIT] I found a copy of the v1.0.7 firmware and was in fact able to roll back to it and the autofocus on the Sigma 50 seems to be fixed. I'll retest v1.0.8 and post later with results of a more definitive test...

449
EOS Bodies / Re: A grateful end to the DSLR video "revolution"
« on: June 16, 2011, 02:03:57 PM »
The "modern" way seems to require tools that are jack-of-all-trades rather than be the best they can be at one thing.

But this isn't the philosophy behind a video capable DSLR. The philosophy is "Since we have liveview for our DSLR still shot cameras, we can add value to our products by simply capturing that liveview output and allow users to video thru their current investment in glass." The whole thing is a byproduct of liveview for stills, which was designed in an effort to improve stills. It just so happens that the byproduct turned out to be very good.

As for me (enthusiast, not pro), I'll be buying both videocams and still cams for the forseeable future because they are still way too different. I'm not giving up the anti-shake of the CX550 nor the stills IQ of a 50d and will only want to improve on both. But I'm very pleased with the idea of being able to do both functions with either device (well at least when I get a 5d3  :) ) so I can choose which function is "primary" for the day without giving up the other entirely or resorting to toting both devices. Bottom line is I'm all for improving the stills on a videocam and the video on a still cam and this doesn't mean I want a "jack of all trades". It only means I find value in the secondary function when it is good quality.

450
Lenses / Re: Canon 135mm on full frame
« on: May 13, 2011, 11:52:15 AM »
I think the technique is still used, but instead of a dial on the lens, people just use photoshop.


It's just gaussian blur right? Are there any real differences in IQ between lens and (good) software?

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 34