January 30, 2015, 12:04:41 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 ... 279
16
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 04:14:41 PM »
Definitely on the gimmick list is in-camera hdr as this is done better in real post with dedicated software.
By that logic, in-camera JPG conversion is also a 'gimmick'.  ;)

No, because you cannot "easily substitute" the reduction in card space and jpeg makes sense if you need sooc pictures asap.

Is selecting sRAW from the menu really all that difficult?   In-camera HDR then makes sense if you need SOOC HDR pictures ASAP.   ;)

although sRAW doesn't help the buffer too much, but jpg does so it's not quite a replacement, plus sRAW has a lot less detail than a full res JPG (even as waxy as the Canon jpg engine is)

17
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 04:11:59 PM »
In thinking about it, if I had $5K to spend I would do so on an high end lens like the Zeiss Otus 85mm rather than upgrading my 5DIII.  My reasoning is that such a lens makes every one of my cameras instantly better. There is no doubt of this. That even includes my IDs II (that I use for time lapse sequences and landscape) and my 650D.  It makes my videos better too.  If I were to buy a 5DIV or  or whatever they call it in the future or a IDx when the price drops, then that lens would make those cameras better too.  Cameras will come and go on a fairly short 3-4 year life cycle because Canon and other manufacturers have to make a profit.  But a high quality lens has a much, much longer life cycle.

Personally I'd suggest putting money first to a great ultra hi-res monitor, UHD at a min or better 5k for 16MP. Great color and uniformity with instant, 'free', 8-16MP 'prints' is pretty nice. Honestly, how many of the thousands of images people take ever get printed? It's too time consuming and costly and people don't have space to store 20,000 large prints.

But so often you see 15k in lenses, 8k in bodies and $150 for display. I'm not sure that really makes sense.

18
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f4 IS vs. 24-105 IS
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:59:02 AM »
24-70 f/4 IS is better

I tried the 24-105L a few different times and never got one more than a week. They just seemed very pricey (this was before the current $600-650 price range) for the IQ and they performed worse than any other L I'd ever tried.

I paid particular attention to near 24mm performance, stopped down, on FF and it just was ugly as the edges and it would be prone to put too much CA on branches against tough sky conditions, etc.

The 24-70 f/4 IS was another story entirely. It actually delivered a nice edge to edge 24mm on FF for critical landscape work. It was also better at the edges at 70mm for landscapes.

Plus it's smaller.

It's not quite as impressive as the 24-70 II (although the best 24-70 f/4 IS I tried actually has better 70mm landscape edges than all 24-70 II I tried), but for finely detailed, edge to edge, FF landscape work I'd say it's quite a good deal better than the 24-105.

Oh and the 24-70 f/4 IS does have a lot less distortion at 24mm (the least of any 24-something type zoom) and it fights longitudinal CA pretty well, getting close to the 24-70 II (this is the type that makes purple in front and green behind the focal plane, not side to side lateral).

My second 24-70 f/4 IS had crisper mid-frame to edges than the first so copy variation can hit you with this lens, it seems to vary in mid-frame to edge sharpness. The 24-70 II tends to vary by which way the focal plane is tilted and little bit as to whether f/2.8 is merely very, very good or beyond, beyond belief good.

For how I used them and per money etc. the 24-105L was also disappointing but the 24-70 f/4 IS was pretty good.

19
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:36:43 AM »
You obviously dont speak for the majority. The current 36MP Sony sensor also in the Nikon D800 is 14ev and in cinematography / video 14ev is still not enough. Plenty of situations in landscape where more DR would be useful particularly in strong sun situations with deep shade.

I have more than 300,000 images under management in Lightroom.  I went looking for high-DR situations shot at base ISO.  I was not able to find a single image where my Canon sensors didn't have sufficient DR AND 1-2 more stops would have made the difference.  I found one situation shot at base ISO where 15-20 more stops would have done it, but not 1-2, and that was the only situation I found where I couldn't get enough DR at base ISO.

On the other hand, I have thousands of high-ISO shots where DR was severely constrained.

I looked through shots from a single trip and found a lot scenarios where 2-3 would help. All it takes is something as simple as shooting into a dappled forest!

20
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:35:43 AM »
Quote from: Marsu42
As for poor dynamic range: For the a lot of people in the targeted audience (landscape and studio) ~11.5ev is fine, you only need higher dr if you cannot bracket and/or shoot movement. Otherwise higher dr is nice to have, but not essential - or there wouldn't be any Canon shooters left even now.

You obviously dont speak for the majority. The current 36MP Sony sensor also in the Nikon D800 is 14ev and in cinematography / video 14ev is still not enough. Plenty of situations in landscape where more DR would be useful particularly in strong sun situations with deep shade.

Nope.  He speaks or the MAJORITY.  Hence why Canon leads the market.
[/quote]

Marketing leading and best tech or providing most exactly what people want are very often not so tightly correlated as you imply, not at all. And in this case there are tons of side variables that completely toss the correlation.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:30:39 AM »
I just talked to a landscape photog having to switch from his broken 5d2 to something else. He's now buying a d800 because for him, only the resolution counts - he was happy enough with the dr of mf film cameras. If Canon would offer 50mp for a comparable price, he'd been sold.


most of the landscape guys who added a Sony+adapter or moved to Nikon that I've talked to counted the DR much more important than the MP count increase (although some certainly appreciated the MP count increase too)


22
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 26, 2015, 12:28:40 AM »
What do you mean by "really good DR"?  At ISO 6400 the 1Dx has 1.4 stops MORE DR than the D810, as an example.  Do you mean low ISO?  I guess I've never found myself DR limited with low ISO's where light is sufficient but rather, find myself DR limited in low light, exactly where Canon excels.

at low ISO of course since that is where Canon is behind otherwise I wouldn't even be bringing it up

and the ISO6400+ shots have too much noise to be truly fine quality and the DR of even the best is still far too low to really do it anyway so to me the DR matters more at low ISO where it often falls 2-3 stops shy of what would really help

the best of the high ISO DR Nikons are right there with Canon for high ISO DR (and better than say the 5D3 high ISO DR) too and still have better low ISO DR than any Canon (althogh not as good as the Exmor Nikons)


23
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 04:13:37 PM »
I just hope it's not just the 7D2 sensor scaled to FF as it sounds like. I'd rather have the same MP as the 5D3 and a lot more DR and even more fps and topq uality 4k video than some 7D2 scaled up 50MP sensor and low fps and poor video and poor DR.

Why's that? Canon has made clear that a high res sensor isn't designed for high sensitivity or high fps, can't have your cake and eat it!

First, I wasn't talking about high sensitivity, but more DR. But it's not like the D800/D810 and such are terrible when it comes to sensitivity, far from it.

And as for DR, who says you can't have both high DR and high MP? Why not? The D810 gives great DR and it has a lot more MP than the 5D3. More MP shouldn't make more DR tougher to get, if anything, provided you can fit the circuits in place still for column ADC and all it should help the DR a trace.

As for fps, yeah you can't expect 50MP to be as easily driven as lower MP (although you can be smart like Nikon and gives APS_H and APS-C modes with full reach and more fps.... and semi-have your cake and eat it too) and I was just saying if it came down to it I'd rather they focus on DR first and if I was forced to chose between 23MP and high DR and high fps or 50MP and low DR and low fps I'd take the former. Ideally I'd go for semi-high MP, high DR and decent fps (like not less than 6, but doesn't have to be more than 6; and it could be only for copped modes if he bump from semi-high MP to very high MP). I would'nt mind 50MP at 4fps and then 6-8fps for cropped mode and with high DR. I might like that best of all actually.

Quote
If it's the 7d2 design upscaled that's fine *if* the price is ok, much better than a "dream camera" for €6000+. If it's essentially the crop sensor on a larger die, all "reach advantage" reasons of crop become obsolete. If you've won the lottery and want the best possible iq, you'd better look at mf digital sensors outside Canon.

Maybe fine for some, but certainly not for me. I'd take the 36MP and high DR any day over 50MP and low DR from Canon. I'd even take 23MP and high DR over 50MP and low DR if I was forced.

Quote
As for poor dynamic range: For the a lot of people in the targeted audience (landscape and studio) ~11.5ev is fine, you only need higher dr if you cannot bracket and/or shoot movement. Otherwise higher dr is nice to have, but not essential - or there wouldn't be any Canon shooters left even now.

It is exactly the targeted audience for a high MP camera that probably MOST cares about high DR.

But now you are trying to have it both ways, oh the 7D2 doesn't really target landscape etc. so who needs high DR. And now oh the high MP doesn't really target a need for high DR either.


All I can say it that I, personally, absolutely will not buy the 50MP Canon unless it has really good DR (unless it offers truly top notch 4k video for a really low price and then I could maybe get that and then add a cheap used SOny for the DR, although by this time Sony might have an A7R II that also does 4k in which case I still wouldn't get this Canon and would just keep using 5D3 plus the Sony or move to Nikon if they make some D820 with nice 4k). I'll just add some sort of something Sony puts out or maybe start the switch to Nikon.

24
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 04:07:09 PM »
Thanks bluemoon,

I've seen the effect in the items previously mentioned but then I saw the comment that it doesn't occur in nature and so I went back to look at my waxwing shots and found this sample.  I believe I've had similar and worse on some other waxwing shots and didn't like it and wondered where it came from.  Never noticed it on other birds.  Curious bird me is I guess.

Jack

here is a clear case on a robin (and a lens used with a TC no less):
(click it or whatever you need to do to see it 1:1)
http://sunsetbayphotography4.zenfolio.com/img/s4/v63/p1143969646.jpg

25
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 04:03:28 PM »
...
But concerning clean shadows: Your wish is granted instantly, because the 1dx/6d sensors are a *big* leap from the 5d2. I recently shot with a 5d2 from a friend of mine and was stunned how much banding it produced after postprocessing operations that I do with the 6d raw files all the time.

The 5D3 was released after the 1DX so just because a camera is a "later release" from Canon means nothing. The problem was the 5D3's sensor is more like they took the 5D2 sensor and just put it back in the oven to reheat. Will  Canon do that again? Wait and see.

The MkIII is not too bad, really. I find it gives me about one more stop than the MkII and much,much less banding. Mind I shoot in MRAW/SRAW1 with both bodies so this includes the downsampling effect (~10.5 megapixels effectively). Yes, ~10 megapixels really is enough for my purposes.

MRAW/SRAW are not true raw and you lose more than just resolution, if you can, it's better to shoot RAW and downconvert to 10MP later if you must

26
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 03:57:02 PM »
Thanks all for filter explanation. I understand the concept of an anti-aliasing filter now. Still a bit puzzled about the low pass filter. Several have said the low pass filter is an anti-aliasing filter - but if it passes low frequencies and not high ones, how does that help -

Because it has filtered out all the frequencies that are greater than the frequency at which the sensor can properly capture without error. Here it has sort of smeared them around to produce a lower frequency averaged mush. (but putting it that way makes it sound bad, but it's good)

27
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 03:45:59 PM »
So I guess my question would be why would there be two versions what are the advantages of each I confuse easily Thank you
If the objects in focus in the image NOT have straight lines, and has NO repetitive geometric shapes, the AA filter is not required.

That's not true (unless you go to the extreme case where the image is nothing but 100% solid colors and very smooth gradients with no real details), although it does make it tougher for the eye to instantly notice the bad effects if the image doesn't have what you mention.


28
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 03:43:48 PM »
Will this be the first time Canon comes with two versions? I so doubt this….

Not at all, they've done such a thing even going way back. Look at the 20D/20Da for one (the latter with the sensor filter altered to allow for much better IR performance).

29
EOS Bodies / Re: 50mp Cameras Coming in March [CR1]
« on: January 25, 2015, 03:41:50 PM »
I just hope it's not just the 7D2 sensor scaled to FF as it sounds like.

I'd rather have the same MP as the 5D3 and a lot more DR and even more fps and topq uality 4k video than some 7D2 scaled up 50MP sensor and low fps and poor video and poor DR.

30
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Discontinued
« on: January 22, 2015, 02:03:09 PM »
When Sigma introduced this lens I figured it would need to be optically excellent to differentiate itself from the very good and inexpensive Canon L options (24-70/4 and older 24-105/4).  According to the reviews, it was only slightly better then the 24-105L and similar optically to the 24-70/4L. 

Actually worse than the 24-70 f/4 IS if you are thinking stopped down 24mm-35mm landscapes or stopped down 70mm landscapes. The 24-70 f/4 IS definitely delivers better there.

Also, the sigma was HUGE for f/4! I mean it's not only far larger and heavier than the 24-105L it is even larger and heavier than the 24-70 f/2.8 II! And almost insanelly larger and heavier than the ultra light and compact 24-70 f/4 IS.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 279