March 04, 2015, 03:47:58 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 - skitron

Pages: 1 ... 30 31 [32] 33 34 35
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.

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).


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!

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.

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?)

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:

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.

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

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.

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.

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 3.4 Update
« on: April 29, 2011, 04:30:44 PM »
Capture One is also updated to 6.2 today.

EOS Bodies / Re: Question about RAW
« on: April 29, 2011, 04:25:00 PM »
I'll see if I can post some shots over the weekend. The biggest two things I noticed are the color renditions and sharpening/NR.

Colors are absolutely amazing. I'll post a pic of one of my guitars that has 24K gold plated hardware that I never could get to look right until Capture One. Also, skin and hair tones same thing.

Second is the sharpening and NR. DPP will "out sharpen/NR" it at first glance, but when looking at details in the bokeh, DPP is not doing well at all in comparison. Meanwhile Capture One nails it and the bokeh still looks great when sharpen/NR and DPP never gets there even with as similar as possible settings. Also, DPP loses more detail at similar NR levels. I'll post crops of the afforementioned guitar that show it.

I would also encourage you to download their 30 day demo and try for yourself! They have two versions (pro, light) and either can be installed using the single download. Plus the demo can be activated without uninstalling/reinstalling.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« on: April 27, 2011, 01:38:18 PM »
I have $ allocated if they release a 24-70 II IS!

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Firmware 1.2.5 Posted Again
« on: April 27, 2011, 01:33:59 PM »
#1 is the 'body adjustment' and #2 is the 'lens adjustment', but your suggestion would require the ability to set the C.Fn to 1+2, and you can only make one selection.

I could have sworn I did it on my 50d...I'll double check it tonight.

Lenses / Re: L-fever...
« on: April 27, 2011, 12:56:31 PM »
Regarding 100 macro vs 100 L macro, I've seen a number of reports that autofocus of the non-L when using as a short tele is not very good. That plus the IS made the L worth the extra bucks for me. It does stink however that 3rd party macro flashes apparently don't readily fit the L...still investigating options for that...

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Firmware 1.2.5 Posted Again
« on: April 27, 2011, 12:20:42 PM »
That does seem high but on the otherhand if it works why sweat it? Obviously Canon felt the range needed to be +-20 to cover "reasonably expected cases" and that is why they made the range the way they did. But I can understand wanting it to take less and sending it in to get it closer.

Anyway, very good news and glad you have a camera that can do this adjustment!

Also, consider the fact that you can adjust both the "body" and "individual lens". So in your case maybe do the "body" +7 then your kit lens would be -7 the other two would be +9 and +7.

Pages: 1 ... 30 31 [32] 33 34 35