August 22, 2014, 04:28:05 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 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 34
451
Lenses / Re: EF 50 f/1.4 II & EF 50 f/1.8 III [CR2]
« on: May 13, 2011, 11:34:20 AM »
Concerning price point, I would imagine this new 1.4 will need to be priced according to how much it can tangibly outperform the Sigma. The Sigma is a great lens on a crop body and is doing very well marketwise, and some even like it for full frame. So I'd think Canon will need to demonstrate a reason not to buy the Sigma, which will hopefully means better autofocus (though my Sigma is actually doing well in this regard) and better off center sharpness when used on FF. I think Canon will be successful, otherwise why even do the new version, and imagine that puts it about $599. I'll be shocked if it has IS though I'd be all for it since it shoots like an 80 on a crop body. Of course it'd have a completely different price point in that case.

452
EOS Bodies / Re: We cant rule out any more quakes
« on: May 13, 2011, 11:08:55 AM »
Small correction: the Richter Scale is a logarithmic scale (to the base 10).  Thus, a magnitude 9 quake is 10 times more severe than a magnitude 8, and 100 times more severe than a magnitude 7!

Well I reviewed the stuff I learned 25 years ago and it turns out we're both wrong, though you are more right than I was... First the Richter scale is not used much any more (at least I did remember that much) and certainly wasn't used to calculate the intensity of the mag 9 Japan event because Richter is problematic beyond mag 7. Second, the energy released is about 32x per magnitude digit, so 5 is 32x energy released than 4. But 5 is 100x in terms of the measured amplitude on the seismograph than a 4, meaning the needle moved 100 times further on the paper (or virtual equivalents). FWIW, amplitude is actually measured in 3d these days meaning up/down, east/west, north/south and of course they can all be significantly different for any given event. All of this gets folded into modern 'magnitude' numbers from USGS and similar organizations around the world. Now how all of this translates to "how it feels" I have no idea...does a 5 "feel" 32x or 100x or some other multiplier more than a 4? Interesting question that would probably generate as much debate as "which lens produces the better IQ". All I can say is hopefully it isn't shaking over there when they are doing final adjustments to the 5d3 I end up with! :)

453
Lenses / Re: EF 50 f/1.4 II & EF 50 f/1.8 III [CR2]
« on: May 12, 2011, 08:42:16 PM »
This is very good news if true. Not surprising given the success of the Sigma. I have a very recent copy of the Sigma and it has very little focus shift and hits focus most of the time and is a nice lens. But I would imagine the Canon 1.4 II would hit focus more often plus do much better on full frame. That would make me very interested in this lens since I plan on going full frame when 5d3 hits.

454
EOS Bodies / Re: We cant rule out any more quakes
« on: May 12, 2011, 02:41:59 PM »
The value of a college degree - any degree is that it generally shows that you are able to learn, that you are a hard worker, and that you can research and gather information to solve problems.

Very true. I think I read a stat where only 50% of college grads go on to work in the field of their major. And for me, it opened some lucrative doors over the years that would have been closed without it, so I'd definitely do it again even including the market bust.

455
EOS Bodies / Re: We cant rule out any more quakes
« on: May 12, 2011, 01:07:52 PM »
FWIW Japan sits atop a subduction zone and consequently will always have significant quake activity. Google "subduction zone" or "Pacific ring of fire" if you want to read up about how they work, it's pretty interesting stuff. The following link is a very nice and easy way to review seismic history of Japan since 1900 (be sure to play with the date sliders!) :

http://maptd.com/interactive-map-japans-seismic-history/

An interesting fact about the most recent quake in Japan is that land masses above subduction zones are known to rise and fall significantly in relationship to mean sea level (up to tens of feet) as pressures are built and released in the subduction zone below...and this has in fact occured as is seen in a few reports of previously developed coastal areas now experiencing tidal flooding. So even though the earth's crust is rock, it very much behaves as plastic (in fact geologists use a term "plastic deformation" when describing)

A second interesting fact is that the so called "warning quakes" and "aftershocks" for the mag 9 event both measured over 7 magnitude and didn't make the news as individual quake events while a 5.6 in Spain just made the headlines. Since Japan is atop a subduction zone a mag 7 in Japan is not that uncommon and so they build for it (as does Canon) and therefore the damage isn't much and not newsworthy. That is why we didn't hear anything about the 7.3  two days before (Mar 9).

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/significant/sig_2011.php

http://www.fnet.bosai.go.jp/waveform/view.php?plot=1day&code=KSN&comp=Z&tm=2011030900&LANG=en

Of course a 9 is a big deal anywhere since the magnitude scale is not linear but exponential, meaning a 7 is twice what a 6 is and 8 twice what a 7 is and so forth. LOL, I knew my geology degree would come in handy one day...I got mine right in time for the big oil bust of the '80's and the joke back then was if you had your PhD it stood for 'Pizza Hut Dude' since no jobs. 

456
Lenses / Re: Macro
« on: May 09, 2011, 12:07:53 PM »
Has somebody tried the combination of:
Canon EF 100mm macro + Kenko 2x (non L lens) ?

FWIW I tried the 100 L with Kenko 1.4x and it was not good IMO. Had a large degree of increasing softness from center to edges and it was much worse on the right. I also noticed on the Kenko documents in the box that it is only recommended for > 100mm and actually designed for longer telephoto.

457
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III & More
« on: May 06, 2011, 12:42:48 PM »
A camera is not a computer. It's primarily an optical device. Increasing processor speed, implementing software multithreading, making a smaller body, adding GPS or 3G capabilities doesn't produce better images.

Actually it is a computer, just not a very good one...leading folks to shoot RAW (fortunately this is an option) and using a good computer and good software to process the data into the nicest image possible. Digic5 should be better though, primarily thru increased processor speed so it can run higher quality code for NR and jpeg operations and still get a good framerate.

458
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III & More
« on: May 03, 2011, 10:03:33 AM »
In body jpg are useless to me...the noise reduction I'm referring to is everything from the sensor, through the signal amps, the AD conversion, and then signal processing(de-Bayer).

+1

459
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III & More
« on: May 02, 2011, 03:21:28 PM »
release the darn camera already !! >:(

LOL, my money is allocated and ready sprout wings as soon as they do release it!

460
EOS Bodies / Re: T3i macro video at 3x digi-crop?
« on: May 02, 2011, 01:03:08 PM »
I'm not really sure it would actually matter. The 70-200 can resolve more detail than the 18-135 yes, but it's only a 2mp image anyway. As long as both lenses resolve more tha 2mp does it matter?

I would think it matters because its a crop and the right question is can the 18-135 out resolve the 18 MP sensor. Why would cropping the center 2 MP for video be any different than cropping the center 2 MP of a still?  In my experience there is no comparison between cropping shots this amount thru a 100 L and a 24-105 L and to me the difference in results look very much like the differences in the videos.

461
EOS Bodies / Re: Digic 5 vs nikon lineUp
« on: May 02, 2011, 12:50:29 PM »
NR processing is performed in-camera on the data coming off the sensor, prior to the RAW image being written.

I thought the NR parameters were written to metadata (which is why we see different values in DPP depending on how the camera was set, since DPP takes parms from the meta)? Plus the 50d manual talks about how NR will not be displayed in prints or LCD when shooting only RAW...this only makes sense if the NR parms are written to metadata, no? (Maybe this is what you are saying and I'm misreading it?)

462
EOS Bodies / Re: T3i macro video at 3x digi-crop?
« on: May 01, 2011, 08:12:50 PM »
the 3x crop mode is decidedly soft compared to the standard video; it has less artifacts (no line-skipping-induced aliasing/moire), but if you see tests of 3x crop vs zooming with the lens, the 3x crop is comparatively soft:
http://vimeo.com/20964077

that's because, even if it is 2.7x instead of 3x, as pgabor says, it's too much: you need at least a 2.5K bayer pattern to create a sharp 2K image

still, if you need it, it's really useful; but it has limitations


Isn't the digi-crop (not the 'zoom' that goes beyond 2.7x or 3x or whatever the true number is) the same as cropping a still the same amount in post?

The first video example is thru a 100 L and it is in a different league than the second due to the lens, just like a 3x crop of a still shot thru a 100 L or some other hi-resolving lens is in a different league than any "short to short-tele" zoom.

Now I would agree that 3x on APS-C  has it's limitations for the reasons stated, but using a stellar lens will make all the difference and it becomes quite useable as seen in the first video. And that is the same as I see when cropping a 100 L 3x vs cropping a 24-104 L at 100mm the same way (which is a better zoom than used in the second video).

So I'd have to agree that I'd love to see it on a 5d3 because that body hopefully will have enough more pixels to make the 3x fantastic when cropped in similar proportion. It would greatly expand the toolbox on the video side.

463
EOS Bodies / Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« on: April 30, 2011, 02:27:34 PM »
The focus shift is an annoyance. Raw performance doesn't matter if systematic errors spoil the game. That puts both the 50/1,2L and the Sigma 50/1,4 rather low on my list.

The newer "smooth finish" Sigma 50 is apparently much better in this regard. I have not tried the old one but took a chance on the new one when I saw good reports on it...tested it and found it has very little shift at all. My 50 tested to look virtually identical to the focus charts for the Sigma 85 at photozone.de.

464
EOS Bodies / Re: T3i macro video at 3x digi-crop?
« on: April 30, 2011, 12:00:48 PM »
Perfect! Thanks for the link, I gotta  say I'm impressed with the 3x. From what I understand there is no loss in video resolution at 3x and from the looks of the video sample it appears the 3x may be very useful.

465
EOS Bodies / T3i macro video at 3x digi-crop?
« on: April 29, 2011, 04:48:11 PM »
Has anyone shot any "macro" videos with the T3i 3x digital crop with a 100mm (or so) macro lens? I'd be interested in seeing clips if anyone has done it, plus of course hearing your opinions.

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 34