September 23, 2014, 06:54:15 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 - LetTheRightLensIn

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 250
EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:56:36 PM »
I am a videographer and excited for the 7D. After proper reviews I'll probably buy one.

It's the first real upgrade for the Canon video shooter below the 5D level. Finally a s35 canon without aliasing and moire for 1800$. Lovely.

I own a GH4, it only exceeds the 5D III is resolution, the 7D mk II is identical to the 5D iii video, which means much better colours than the GH4, much better lowlight performance, better dynamic range and larger sensor aesthetic. I only use the gh4 for wide detailed shots, for everything else I absolutely hate that broadcast-video like image. If it produced an ultimately better image than the 5D, I would have used it for everything, no reason no to, it just doesn't. It's wonderful for details though.

Resolution is not the only aspect of image quality. Easy to forget it seems.

A7S video, granted not s35 format, will do way better than 7D2 for image quality, detail, SNR, DR, etc. (and you even have a 4k option with a Shogun).

Don't forget the 7D2 does have 2.56x smaller sensor than the 5D3 so I'm not so sure it will have identical SNR (Although it shoul dbe much better than the 7D). I'm pretty dubious it would look better than GH4 4k downscaled to 1080p.

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:53:17 PM »
Canon data is fine at higher ISO, where banding is minimized. It's particularly at the lower ISOs, up through 400, where the differences become clear. I do quite fine with bird and wildlife photography using my Canon equipment. I can still do fine for's just more work, having to be more meticulous when shooting and processing to clean up banding and do what's possible to reduce color and random noise to make shadows more usable. Those are just things I'd prefer not to have to do.

It seems like the 7D2 has removed all to nearly all low ISO banding though. (the basic read noise is still the same as ever though)

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:51:43 PM »
I feel as if (and this only my opinion which is worthless) the ones doing the crying are not the people who the 7DII is aimed for.

Meanwhile sports / wildlife photographers are quietly pre-ordering. If I was a sports photographer I'd be pretty excited to have the 7D II either as a back up or main camera. I have a feeling once some solid reviews come around and people get to feel how easy the camera is to work with (loved my 7D ergonomics) things will calm down.

I thought the 7D was an amazing camera but on paper when it was compared to say a 60D there didn't seem to be all that much different. Once you actually use the 7D you start to realize that it's a beast and is built to last. The IQ was it's Achilles heel but hopefully that issue will be addressed to a satisfactory level and what we'll get is a highly refined machine!

Not all the wildlife photographers are pre-ordering.
I've been using a 7D since October of 2009 for wildlife and I've been hoping for a sensor update from Canon for literally years. At the moment there are many opinions being expressed about the high ISO performance - some say its great, others that its not much better than the 70D, so I'll wait. The high ISO performance is the most important thing that was lacking with the 7D (followed closely by AF performance).
If its true that the ISO performance isn't much better than the 70D, I won't be buying a 7Dii at all. It really doesn't matter how well focused your photos are if they're still so noisy at 1600 ISO that you have to apply NR to the point you lose that sharpness.

Some early peaks at raws hint tht it might look better than the 7D at high ISO. It seems like it will have a solid 1/2 stop more DR and 1/2 stop better SNR plus something about the character of the high iso 'grain' is tentatively appearing to be nicer, maybe giving you another 1/3 stop effective feel better.

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:49:18 PM »
I'm also a little bummed the AF system is not comparable to the 61pt system in terms of point sensitivity. It seems most of the points are only f/5.6 sensitive, which means there won't be any AF performance bonus at f/4 or f/2.8 (outside of the central point(s), at least.) I think the AF system will perform well, but for those who have f/4 or f/2.8 prime teles, I honestly don't think it will perform as well as the 61pt system. The 1D X also provides increased AF drive power, so it will still focus faster (not even the 5D III focuses as fast as the 1D X.)

Hmm that is a bit unfortunate to hear about the points. Maybe having them all cross more than makes up for it?
I hope it's not another thing where on paper the AF sounds good (i.e. 7D) but in practice the AF sensor was clearly more like xxD quality than 1 series quality. But hmm are you reading and interpreting the meaning of that properly....

AF is THE thing that this has to sell itself on. Without the video or exmor sensor it's all about the reach (which it has), speed (10fps it has) and AF (which I hope it has).

I'm still betting that the AF will be great. I think Canon has to be smart enough to realize that if the reports come in after the first couple months that the AF doesn't work better than the 7D in practice and isn't at least as good in the field as the 5D3 that the sales will tank. If the AF proves excellent, as I still think it will, despite the lost video sales and maybe a few for those wanting it to have been as tops for all landscapes types as for action, I think it may sell very well. There is probably a lot of demand for a small, high reach, fast body with top AF. A real lot I bet. So it may be a hit.

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:44:30 PM »
For all people looking at video, it's a huge disappointment, because even if you don't need 4K now, you might need it in the coming 4 years. 

I personally would have bought 3x 7D2 if it was 4K as addition to my 1DC, now i have 3x GH4.

I've stopped looking to Canon to solve my video requirements. Why worry?  The Panasonic GH4 is just awesome. I'll probably get another one. The Panasonic glass is compact and classy. With the new Metabones MFT Speedbooster my Canon glass is an option for video usage too. Cool!

The worry is that it is inefficient. Now you need to drag a GH4 along with your 7D2 and don't forget the GH4+adapter isn't free. Or you drag along an A7S for video. So it's very inefficient in weight and bulk and cost. And then you need all different types of batteries and chargers and cards and so on.

Granted, at least there are options now and that is what counts even more and pretty soon I think it finally will start to burn Canon more and more.

I'd bet some people will run out of money after the GH4+adapter or A7S or A7S+Shogun and then not have money left to buy more Canon stuff. Not sure how that helps Canon. But obviously their marketing would rather other companies cannibalize their sales than dare internally threaten their 1DC or Cxx in any way (never mind that the Sony FS7 appears to blow that stuff away for less cost now).

And moreso, it makes you wonder just how badly they will punt on the 5D4 video now. I wouldn't be surprised if a 5D3 with ML ends up better for video than a 5D4! They need to give it basics like peaking,zebras,zoomed focus box,non-waxy 1080p, non-waxy 4k or nobody will buy it for video. And some will even skip it entirely and just keep what they have now to shoot and get some sony rig for video.

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:37:44 PM »
I feel as if (and this only my opinion which is worthless) the ones doing the crying are not the people who the 7DII is aimed for.

There is a lot of truth to that.

You have landscapers moaning about only 20Mpix and the usual DR nonsense.

That said, not everyone can afford two bodies and some who care about the things the 7D2 excels at surely would have loved to have it had an exmor-type sensor and excelled at all types of landscapes as well (and even for wildlife, there are times when more DR helps, due to say dappled lighting or heck even times when things change super fast and either you or the camera accidentally underexposes a low ISO shot, with exmor that doesn't matter half as much). And the DR stuff isn't nonsense. Not everyone will care so much, but people who do care, do have a legit reason to care.

But that also said, it is true the sensor is good enough to get by with for an action/reach/speed/AF oriented wildlife type camera.

Although it does send a bad a message as to if Canon ever plans on improve their sensors at low ISO.

Then you have videographers banging on about the lack of 4K.

Again, it is true that Canon has treated the 5 series the primary video quality advancement line and for the primarily stills wildlife guys it doesn't matter.

That said, some wildlife guys DO like to take videos and 4k surely makes wildlife type stuff look better.
Plus they left out zoomed modes, precisely the modes that would especially have made sense on a wildlife camera. And they left out focusing aids and zebras. And they even left out touch screen for easy control of target subject or changing when using DPAF. And the tilt screen which also helps for macro wildlife and even for things like team sports circle celebrations, etc.

And it also means they have more room to cripple the 5D4 video and there is a lot of talk now that even the 5D4 video will be a total disappointment. So of the complaining is just fears over the 5D4 and where Canon is headed and how much more can they keep holding back and crippling this or that.

And it's not only that they left 4k out of the 7D2, they didn't even give it a nce, natural, detailed 1080p, but the same old waxy look even though it has so much digic power.

Meanwhile sports / wildlife photographers are quietly pre-ordering. If I was a sports photographer I'd be pretty excited to have the 7D II either as a back up or main camera. I have a feeling once some solid reviews come around and people get to feel how easy the camera is to work with (loved my 7D ergonomics) things will calm down.

That is true too and as I said above, the 10fps, with that AF and that reach should make it, even despite the sensor, a stills wildlife or even sports photographers dream. It should be a total beast and that whole crowd will likely be over the moon and with good reason.

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 03:22:17 AM »
No, the 10fps, plus the AF, plus the reach should be pretty impressive (the metering too if it does have spot linked to AF point, so far I've heard yes and no on that).

EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 22, 2014, 03:09:29 AM »
lamenting Canon's supposed lack of DR and extolling the virtues of Exmor

See there you go again. Here you try to bring up doubt that Canon is behind in DR or that even if they are that it could ever mean anything. And yet when you finally get called out and backed into a corner as in your post later on, you are like "who me? fanboy? nobody here ever tries to admit that Exmor doesn't have more DR"

So which is it??? You try to have it both ways for everything. Mock and snipe and make fun of people, but always the guy who takes the high road.  Play down, hide, deny differences in anything Canon is behind in, aside from here or there when you post some high and mighty post about how nobody ever does such things and of course nobody claims that Canon is best at every last single thing and then you are right back to it again.

Maybe I've become a little bit of a jerk poster here and there at times more and more and go on about things and maybe some other too, but after years of BS and mocking and sniping, sorry for becoming a monster too and sorry for getting sick of some trying to purposefully astro-turf forums and mislead at times.

EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 22, 2014, 02:58:35 AM »

Frankly Neuro, Sporgon, DTaylor, Private and many others have been remarkably patient in responding and refuting your claims, as well as in presenting alternative views.

Frankly, at least one of the 'remarkably patient' and 'fair' bunch tried, seemingly behind the scenes in league with a moderator, on another website to silence anyone who dared to bring up any aspect that Canon was not best at while spouting out and out lie after lie and tried to get it arranged that anyone who said Canon wasn't the best at everything would get banned for two weeks.

And, frankly, some of the 'remarkably patient' bunch here toss around veiled or otherwise insults all the time and at least one posts stuff that he is too smart to know is true and more often posts stuff that is knowingly misleading and then turns around and mocks others all while acting like they are taking the high road.

Maybe some of us have become monsters here, but most of us were pushed and tweaked and mocked for a long while first. Granted it's better to resist, but I guess it's easy to become a monster yourself after having dealt with monsters for along time.

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 08:30:14 PM »
5D mk III = D800/D4, canon slightly better but same league

5D3 as is = a bit better than D800 overall (arguably, depends whether you favor lack of a bit of aliasing vs better detail), but well behind A7S native 1080p or 4k into Ninja Shogun and behind downscaled GH4, perhaps a bit behind some of the other Sonys and others too now

5D3 with ML and shooting in RAW = well better than the Nikons and most of the rest, somewhat better than A7S

7D mk II = D7100/5300/5200/3300/K3/A6000, Canon slightly better (except GH4 being only better in resolution) but same league

Nah GH4 downscaled to 1080p is way the heck better than 7D2's waxy, soggy footage. Some of the others have better video quality than it too. And if you compares to the FF A7S.... left in the dust.

Some of the others have better usability features too.

Although the 7D2 does have DPAF for the times that is useful though.

there are differences but very subtle and nothing embarrasing for any of the companies.

Not true at all. It's embarrassing how much more detailed and natural say A7S 1080p in cam footage looks than in cam 1080p from 7D2 and 5D3 never mind the rest of the Canon DSLRs (and we didn't did even get into adding a Ninja Shogun to the A7S!!!!).

And downscaled GH4 4k looks pretty solid and has way more detail than 7D2/5D3 (unless using 5D3 RAW). I'd say enough to embarrass the Canons.

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 08:24:17 PM »
Yes the lower-end market below the C100 is the one neglected by Canon not the higher-end one. Up until the FS7 release, Canon were the best in the high-end share, and still are really the FS7 isn't even out yet.

Canon is best in high end? That's the first I heard this. Arri Alexa totally dominates high end. Almost  Hollywood movies  and TV dramas are shot on Alexa.

Red, F5/F55 are also much better than C500.

Canon did better with low end independent filmmakers with C300/C100 combo.


He meant high-end as the non, major-Hollywood type players see it. You are correct from the point of view of the really big boys though.

As someone who has used (in post and on set), the Cx00, FX5, Red One, Red One MX, Alexa, Red Epic, Scarlet, etc. I can say with confidence...


Specs aren't everything. The Alexa is way ahead of the pack, yes. But the b cameras on Alexa sets are usually C100s, C300s, and dSLRs. Sony has great specs but the image isn't quite right and ergonomics are yucky and the F5 has not caught on that much outside high end corporate. Red is a mixed bag, the hardest to use well but it seems some people pull it off. Canon has poor specs but an excellent image and easy ergonomics for low end TV.

I would take the C500 over any Red camera other than the Dragon and over the Fx5 any day. Look at the cinematography oscar noms... All Alexa and film. B cameras are all Canon and go pro.

Yes, but note you say as a B cam. Not as an A cam for the biggest Hollywood productions.

Sure the low ISO DR is weak for this day and age (although banding is fixed which is very nice) and the video quality.... but just focus on the what the 7D series is most about and what matter most of all for it- a small body with speed, AF, reach and the 7D2, assuming the AF works as well as assumed, seems to hit out of the park and would certainly appear to be the best such option in existence. As far as speed AF it appears to be all out, close for metering (although lacking spot linked to AF point for some reason), and 10fps is very good speed and the UI is quick and great. Grand slam at it's core.

(the worrisome things about it are more worrisome for other lines, it still leaves (some good number of) us fearing the 5D4 may once again have a non-Exmor-level sensor and crippled video quality and usability)

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D or 7D MK II
« on: September 20, 2014, 06:01:53 PM »
Anyway this is probably getting too much into the finer points of video image quality, which I have a feeling might not be the top priority in this one particular case.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D or 7D MK II
« on: September 20, 2014, 06:00:45 PM »
If you're serious about video quality do not buy a 70D. The 7D is a much video better camera.

If you're serious about video quality, actually there's just one Canon choice: The 5d3 with pixel binning (= no moire) and Magic Lantern raw video. Who knows when this will arrive on the 7d2, if ever.
... plus the 7D-II has a headphone jack (much like the 5D-III) which is useful for monitoring while you record.

It also has clean 4:2:2 HDMI out with audio embedded.

The clean 4:2:2 HDMI isn't worth much since with Canon DSLRS the image quality damage occurs prior to the compression stage. I got a Ninja for my 5D3, but I could barely tell any difference whatsoever. Using ML RAW though the difference was beyond night and day.

I've seen the difference, and it's minor.  It's better in some ways, but worse in others, especially hot pixels and color artifacts.

In some cases I could swear it even gave you LESS dynamic range too. (talking clean HDMI recording, not ML RAW)

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D or 7D MK II
« on: September 20, 2014, 05:59:03 PM »
I get what you are saying though, but that 10FPS on a sunny day sounds very nice for a grandpa trying to get that perfect shot. :)

While I shoot hockey a lot (my kids play) I never use the burst mode, I'm always single shot.  Maybe it's because I play as well, dunno, but I can anticipate the shot and get what I want.

I have had to work on my technique to get those shots.  I learned that AI-servo really helps (that's an understatement), I use center point focus, spot metering, shutter priority and I tend to set the ISO, auto ISO hunts more than I like.

The real reason I don't do bursts is I hate having to go through all that crud and delete the non-keepers.  I tried burst and found that my keeper rate fell to about 1-10%, closer to 1%.  My keeper rate for single shot is 50-90%.  So I had a good reason to work on my technique.  If you don't made the post filtering then yeah, I've heard 8fps is as "slow" as you want to go.

Good luck with whatever you do, and don't worry too much, you've got an awesome body in the 5DIII.  I love mine.

I don't know which body and lens you are using, but your keeper rate in extreme low in burst mode. I did find out, and seen that many more action photographers, use centrum weighted measuring instead of spot measuring. I don't have then problems then that my auto-iso hunts that much.

I'm using the 200mm f2.0 prime (a very nice lens) and the 5DIII (which I also like).

When I'm shooting burst there are all the pictures before and after the shot I wanted that I toss.  I'm taking 10ish pictures to get one (and that doesn't always work).

I play hockey and I can anticipate what is going to happen, I know the shot is coming because I see the windup, I've gotten dozens and dozens of nice shots of goals being scored with the puck in midair.  All single shot.

If you don't play the game I suppose it would be harder (I sort of feel like being a player is "cheating" when I'm taking pictures, I know where the game is going.  I also coach several teams so that probably helps with reading the game).  Anyway, for me, single shot results in just as many (or close) keepers and a ton less post processing (which is really delete, delete, delete...).

This is all at the rec/high school/travel level, so it's not a money maker (though I've been offered jobs by the pros, LOL, $25/hour 1099 money, like that's going to pay for my equipment :)  I just do it so I've got pictures to look at when my kids move off to college and for the other parents/kids.  So I'm optimizing for the least hassle for me.

If I was getting paid to take NHL pictures then I might play with the burst mode, doing it for fun means I spend too much time deleting.

Nice combo by the way. Not only for sports inside but also for portrait.

I do understand what you mean now by keeper rate. It's keeper rate against the required shot you would like.

For sports it is such a tremendous advantage you can read the sport. In fact for all type of action photography. You are fully right that using continuous mode would give you a lot of photos, which you don't all want to keep. Best advice there for people is to use for a while NOT the continuous mode, but the single shot. Just to reduce the load of generated photos. Also in continuous mode, you need to trigger your camera only when it is needed. You need the correct face expression, the position of ball, or in your case the puck. And that's exactly what you are doing.

Sorry, but thought you needed some assistance for such a high rate "out of focus" which you din't say say but I presumed from your low keeper rate.

The dangers with not using burst though are:
1. AF will miss, with burst at least maybe you got once decent shot in focus out of the sequence
2. you might not handle the AF perfectly in all cases and then once again a burst might at least get one semi-decent shot
3. sometimes a hideous facial expression or arm pops up in some weird position or blocking something critical, you can known the sport as well as a pro and have played it at a high level, but it won't help in these cases, a fast burst might still get one great frame
4. sometimes you want more than one key frame
5. something things go into a wild melee
for some things, like ball on head or bat, you do have to time it yourself, even a 10fps is way to slow
and even for regular things, sometimes your own timing can pick the peak of the peak of a sequence out better than a burst (although once you get to 12fps the burst can often do it as well, plus with 8 or better 10-12 you sometimes want and can get a couple really key frames)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 250