January 30, 2015, 04:58:55 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 - Woody

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 45
2 questions:

i) Was that done with centre AF point on 7D2?

ii) Did you change the EVF setting on the EM10 so that the VF will gain in brightness? I understand the EM10 EVF can be set to simulate brightness of subjects to the human eye.

A more valid comparison would be to test them on the same Sony mirrorless body after assuring that none of the adapters used were defective.


But that would not have given DXOMark the chance to award another low score for a Canon product, would it?  :P

EOS Bodies / Re: Focus problems with the Canon 7DII?
« on: November 06, 2014, 10:06:51 PM »
I don't shoot sports, portraits, wildlife and landscapes.

Since you managed to achieve consistent AF using live view and have no need to photograph moving subjects or landscape, I suggest you move to a contrast based AF camera. The A6000 or XT1 or EM1 or GH4 beckons...  ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: Focus problems with the Canon 7DII?
« on: November 06, 2014, 10:00:22 PM »
I just want to clarify, I retook some photos using the single AF point, same results, 1-2 out of 3 photos were out of focus.

That is not good. Sigh

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - DXOMark Review
« on: November 06, 2014, 06:09:42 AM »
From Roger, the respected sensor reviewer of Clarkvision:

"A note on DXO numbers. It appears that DXO is not correcting Nikons truncating of the raw data, which artificially improves dynamic range by about a stop. Also Nikon filters the raw data, improving noise and dynamic range further. I believe, based on some experiments, that if the canon data were treated similarly, it would result it numbers at least as good.

Previous to the 7D2 and 6D, pattern noise was a real limitation in Canon cameras (the 1D4 and 1DX are also pretty good, but not a good as the 7D2 and 6D). That pattern noise produced poor shadow areas compared to what could be extracted from Nikon sensors, especially at some ISOs (like 200 and 400 on many canon cameras). But Nikon's raw files look "wormy" in the shadow areas from the in camera filtering of the raw data. The Canon 7D2 raw data looks much more random, as it should be." -

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - DXOMark Review
« on: November 05, 2014, 08:48:05 PM »
The D7100 isn't actually Sony Exmor. It is Toshiba. They do even better than most exmor at high ISO and the same for raw measured at low ISO but they sadly suffer from lots of banding at lower ISOs.

That is interesting.

According to DXOMark, the D3300, D5300 and D7100 sensors all have similar performances.

Does this mean that even though the D7100 has 13.7 eV of base ISO dynamic range, banding precludes heavy shadow lifting in D7100?

If this is true, Jrista is probably over the moon now. ;D

On the other hand, it's entirely possible that Sony facilities are used to fabricate the sensor but sensor design comes from Canon.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7Dii vs Nikon D750 Dynamic Range Test
« on: November 03, 2014, 12:48:32 AM »
Hmm...doesn't Canon's DPP 4.1 support "proper" processing of 7D II raws? We may not have official Lightroom support, or Capture One support, etc...but I think it would be a bit of a blunder if Canon released a camera and did not give their customers the ability to edit the RAW files...that doesn't sound like them...

I believe even DPP 4.0.1 supports 7D2.

The issue is that DPP can only be used to process Canon RAW files.

It probably makes more sense to use a common software e.g., Lightroom that can handle RAW files from different manufacturers. I believe this is what DPReview does.

Also, DPP output is different from Lightroom. I converted Imaging Resource 70D RAW using DPP and LR. Even with all NR sliders turned to zero, DPP has less noise than LR. Image details appear similar to me.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: X-Rite i1Display Pro $149 at B&H Photo
« on: November 02, 2014, 09:02:11 PM »

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Listed as Discontinued at Amazon UK
« on: October 28, 2014, 06:34:56 PM »
Deserves an answer. But no time now. Stay tuned...

I'm popping popcorn. This should be good. ;)


Obviously, someone is struggling...

Lenses / Re: Review: PowerShot G7 X via DXOMark
« on: October 26, 2014, 11:13:29 PM »
While DXOMark scores are still considered as rubbish, the base ISO DR data for G7X is interesting. 12.7 eV is wider than that in all of Canon sensors, including their top end 1DX.

Hmmm....  :P

What is the file size of web and print mode in DPR? I compared 7d,7dII, 100d, 70d,  700d and d7100. All are same. I only notice difference when I added 6d to the comparison which is better than all of them at the same ISO.

Similar observation here. All the APS-C outputs look similar although A6000 appears to be the worst.

6D is definitely 1 stop better than the various APS-C cameras.

The differences between full frame and APS-C sensors used to be small. Now they are approaching tiny.

The differences between sensors of different brands but of roughly the same size used to be tiny, now they are approaching miniscule...

If your goal in life is to lift shadows by five stops and shoot dark rooms that have the exposure set for an open window, then another brand might be your better option.

As for my own personal situation, as a 5DIII owner, I'm intrigued by the 7D, but a better investment of my resources would be in either the new Tamron or Sigma  600 zooms.

Well said. I honestly don't see significant differences between the various APS-C sensors.

If the 7D2 is 200g lighter, I will have pre-ordered a copy.


He left Nikon APS-C for Sony:

It's about reduced size/weight and video capabilities, both offered by Sony A6000.

Clearly, Bob has no need for:
- lightweight f/4 telephoto lens
- >= 100 mm macro lens
- accessories such as dedicated wireless remote (prefer not to use phone)
- reliable AF tracking

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D MkII RAW sample images
« on: October 15, 2014, 11:19:12 PM »
Look at the shaded side of the pushed bar. Poor color rendition, it's got that red-weighted color blotching and mottling, and the noise levels are very high. And those are downsampled as well. For a downsampled image, that's not very good.

All that is at ISO 3200. Are we sure the D7100 or A6000 won't show similar issues at ISO 3200?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 45