October 01, 2014, 12:15:55 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 - LetTheRightLensIn

Pages: 1 ... 126 127 [128] 129 130 ... 255
Lenses / Re: Teleconverter
« on: March 28, 2013, 07:55:15 PM »
I'm considering getting a 2.0 teleconverter for my 70-200 2.8. Other than going to 5.6 does it also reduce the iq?   Thanks I'm still learning here.

Yes, but it is usually worth it all the same if you need more reach. The 2x can get a bit dicey on some lenses where even if you do grab a trace more detail the other downsides might not be worth it.

2x on a 70-200 is pushing it past where I'd want to unless you are talking the 2.8 IS II. If you are not talking that version then I'd stick to the 1.4x TC. The 2x TC works better on the big white primes.

They do slow AF and make it a bit less precise.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 07:25:48 PM »
I shot all my primes wide open and got tack sharp images in many situations with my 7D. I can't complain at all, it's AF system fulfilled all my needs and did so elegantly. It's not as good as the mk3 but the 7D AF was plenty for my needs. I think the center point on the 7D is a double cross type just like the MK3. Not sure but I think I read it somewhere.

It is double cross too but there is a lot more to a point than whether it is single, double or double cross. 5D3 non-cross points sure lock a lot better and faster than the non-cross in the 5D2 and the center double on the 5D3 has ultra-precision mode when used with some lenses and that really makes a difference.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 05:46:58 PM »
It amazing how emotional people get with rumoured specs. Makes me laugh. Chill its a test camera and a rumour.

But what do you think the whole point of this forum is??? It's to go crazy and shoot bull over camera specs and rumors. You are laughing at the very playful fun and point of it all!  ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 05:45:32 PM »
this is like a 180-degree u-turn from the previous rumors about the 7D Mark II being a huge leap forward rather than an incremental step up

Yes ... because the previous so called rumors were in fact wishlists.
1DX for cheap, basically. That's what these rumors were - and people got fired up.
Yeah, keep dreaming for that 1DX-like camera for $2500. LOL

I'm so excited to finally hear a realistic rumor.
Remember: once the leaks start, we are getting close to announcement.

Well there is competition though, if the D400 is like a mini 1DX then it may be Canon is dreaming.... dreaming that they had fired their marketing department and put the engineers back in more control.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 05:41:18 PM »
These specs are good. The 19 point AF in the 7D had no complaints from me, Infact that's still more cross type points than a d4! Everything is good here now just has to be around 1599$.

Yeah but compare the precision of 7D center point to that in the 5D3, it's a totally different ball game. Have you ever shot at f/2.8 and gotten literally 100 shots in a row, under indoor lighting, in focus with a 7D?? And compare them for soccer. The 7D is barely better than a 50D for soccer. The single points are too small and the assists on it are too large. It does AF super well for surfing though, every last bit as good as the 5D3 for that.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 05:37:22 PM »
Hmmh, hopefully CR1 for a reason. With the talk from Canon about moving into new territory and much upped price and so on hmm. No mention of new process sensor even for this? Perhaps the same old 7D AF??? How can the premiere APS-C beast be saddled with 7D AF??

WOW, Canon still at least 2 years shy of the Nikon D800 sensor ...  :o
Confirms what I thought all along.

Geriatric ward really missed the boat big time.

How many years did Canon have a 'prosumer' 21 MP FF camera while Nikon's offering in that space had 12 MP?

And after 4.5 years  Canon has reduced the number of MP they had in that camera from 21 to 18, falling behind Nikon.

How many megapixels does the D4 have?

D4 is not the style of camera being referred to here, it is the 5D2/6D/D700/D600.

Ok, so which of the 5D2 or 6D has 18 mp then?

My mistake, it should have been 20 and not 18 but the point remains that it was a reduction in MP from the 21 of the 5D2.


The 6D has a 20.2mp sensor, however that is a NEW entrant (NOT a fallback design from anything else), and is in direct competition from the D600, another NEW entrant from Nikon. In this case, Canon's 6D is lacking, but it is not like Canon reduced the specs of any previously existing line. Stop falsifying S___!

The 5D III has a 22.3mp sensor. It is officially the successor to the 5D II, which had a 21.1mp sensor. The 5D III IS an improvement over its predecessor. Hell, it is a MONSTER improvement, in every single way, INCLUDING sensor IQ! It is not a direct competitor to the D800, which has deep roots in studio and landscape photography. The 5D III is the top all-around FF camera, with explicit design changes and significant improvements to cater to FF wedding photograpers, street photographers, and any other general-purpose or specialty photography that needs a moderately high frame rate & excellent high ISO performance, which covers most wildlife and bird photographers. There is no apples to apples comparison between a D800 and 5D III, they are apples and oranges. Again, stop falsifying S___!

You are the biggest fact twister in this joint. I don't know what your goal is, but stop cherry picking and cross-comparing non-aligned products to make it sound like your point has merit. You dislike Canon, that is clear. You don't need to lie and obfuscate to make that point...EVERYONE KNOWS.  :o  ::)

5D3 sensor is an improvement not a MONSTER improvement over the 5D2 sensor, it has less very high iso banding which can be quite nice at times and a touch over 1/2 stop better SNR

Software & Accessories / Re: Nik Software worth it?
« on: March 27, 2013, 07:53:13 PM »
Heya Gents,

so i just noticed the nik complete package is 129.- $ in total - shall i buy it?

I tried the b&w stuff and really liked it but is the whole bundle worth it?

im not a professional - i just like photography.


EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D, DIGIC 6 & 18mp Sensors
« on: March 27, 2013, 02:17:50 AM »
.... 8k displays actually exist.
What would you use that for? Your eye can't make the difference... For a PRO - OK where a lot process can be executed on a HUGE SCREEN - only possible application.

For a simple display - NO WAY!

Nonsense, heck people said the same thing about 1920x1080 for smaller than 40" and now we have it even for tablets! People claimed 1080p is useless for small sets, funny that even on a 24" monitor that a game without any AA at 1920x1200 on 24" looks like a jaggy mess, if the eye can't see it then how does it see a jaggy mess?

People print 300PPI from 21MP at 13x19" and you think 8K is silly?


You know how silly you are sounding?  I've shot with the 10d all the way to 7d and 5d's. all the prior cameras had even less DR than the 5d3. I've shot landscape, portraits, weddings, aviation, macro, etc. I know what I want and how to get it and I don't blame my gear. I know how to get what I want with what I have, and that used to not be much. I couldn't care less how much DR a camera has, as long as I can get what I want

goody for you, not everyone can get all the DR they need for all types of shots, if you never shoot that fine but don't pretend that is the case for everyone

Sigh..give it time. I don't know why people don't get that there isn't ONE company that has the best of everything in their product for that industry. Seriously, if you REALLY NEED the DR then just get Nikon bodies. You should already know this. It's not me being an asshole but research what you want before investing. Stop blaming Canon for not dedicating their R&D into something they never promised. If you look at any sporting event, you will see Canon dominating the floor, why? Because Canon produces the best High ISO and FPS DSLR out there. Take that into consideration when you ask for more DR; its not their main objective.

Seriously be realistic. Every manufacture has their benefits and weakness. If you obviously need the DR then again get the gear that is right for YOU. Canon will make higher DR cameras, but just cause it's not NOW doesn't mean they suck.

If you don't speak up about it ahead of time then it will be too late. If none of us talks about DR and then the 5D4 comes around has the same old 10-15 year old sensor tech it'll be kinda too late then no? Some of us would rather get the DR in a Canon system and rather not end up having to switch. Although if the next 5D4/7D2 gen is still lacking then as much as I don't want to I may finally do that. And yes they do need a good waking up from their user base before it's too late, you should've heard the Canon bigwig at the euro show a few years ago bragging about how they were infinitely far ahead of the competition and saw no need to do anything as the king can sit on the hill and do nothing and thrive. yeah....

Also again, the AFMA arguement needs to stop. It's not like its only 50% of Rebel users are beginners, its a massive amount which can be estimated to 80%. LEAVE IT BE. Know that the Rebel line is not targeting Advanced users. Yes I wouldn't mind if they did add it, but it doesn't make it a BAD camera because it doesn't have it.

It's a sad thing that a free features gets crippled out of various bodies by marketing.

To add to that, it's not FIXING anything BROKEN. Being within specs is a choice, a choice that benefits us the consumers. If you really wanted everything perfectly aligned to begin with then trust me, forum sites would be down for week with threads yelling at Canon for raising the price by an insane amount. So stop with this battle, learn to pick your fights, its not broken, its how its meant to be.

Yeah well if you body is a +1 and you lenses are all -1 to +1 maybe not, if you body is +8 and your lenses are -8 to +15 then it's kinda broken. And they crippled it out of the 40D and 60D too. And you say go send your stuff in, yeah that is fun and miss 2 weeks of shooting or more and, if they are too busy, maybe they say six weeks and you miss major expeditions and events?
Nobody is saying to toss 5D3 AF into the Rebel or to give it 10fps or silent shutter or anything. Just give them ALL, across the entire line, MFA so they can all work to the spec of each line (which is lower, even when perfectly calibrated for the lowest vs the highest) and give it at least one real feature better than the previous model instead of wasting all those resources re-badging an old model. If they don't want to get sales eaten by iphones and such why not have tossed the WIFI stuff into it?

"The difference in DR a lot more than one stop. You definitely do not get that holy cow crispness from 20MP at 47"."

Anybody that, like LetTheRightLensin, doesn't believe my image, email me, I'll send you the untouched original RAW and my 47" print file. Take a crop, print it, then tell me it isn't crisp.

I'm not saying it's unusable or a blurry mess but it doesn't have that crazy crispness you get if you print 19" or less from 20MP.

To the first, not really, if you know how to use your equipment and have a basic grasp of post processing as I demonstrate, very large high detail and quality prints are more than possible with the current sensors. More MP might be nice, but it isn't, generally, needed, and the disadvantages of always having more can vastly outweigh the advantages of having it, just ask any D800 owner about their computer processing times and storage requirements!
I have a pretty solid grasp of how to use my equipment, how to post process, I own a 44" printer, I shoot professionally and I also exhibit in galleries. I can tell you from years of experience that printing large depends on what you mean by "large" and how acceptable the results are depends on the subject matter. I've made 6-foot tall exhibition portraits from a single 5dII file. But I would not print a landscape photo (or a cityscape photo as is my case often) with lots of fine detail in it larger than 20x30 at most from a Canon camera (and often I find 16x24 unacceptable) because the fine detail falls apart. So it's not quite so simple.

To the second, it depends how you look at it. But no, I have the print and if the crop is 7" wide on your screen then it is the same size as the same detail on the print.

As for my methodology, I upscaled the original 21mp image to print at 240, anybody saying you need to print big prints at higher resolutions just isn't actually doing it. I then wanted to show an actual life sized (as close as different resolutions of monitors will allow) crop from that 31"x47" print. To do that I measured my screen and a 700px image in the forum, it is 7" wide on my 27" monitor, I then cropped a 7" section out of my print file and downsampled it to 700px. This means it is an accurate reproduction of my print life sized if you are displaying it at close to 7", if you have a calibrated screen all the better.
An image displayed on a monitor is not quite the same as an image printed on paper. In any case, if you upscaled your print to 240ppi, then a 7-inch crop should be 1680 pixels across.

But again, just because you can print a portait large and it looks good doesn't mean a landscape photographer shooting with the same camera can print a photo large and have it look good. So I'd advise against making blanket statements about others not knowing what they're doing just because they say they could use more resolution.

I agree, what is large? I would venture that you and I, regularly printing over 24", are in the extreme minority, from my experiences I would say 80% of photographers don't print at all, to them large is a 60" TV with the groundbreaking resolution of 2MP. Some might have spent a fortune and moved up to the latest and greatest 4K, 8MP, big whup!

I would also venture to say if you are a true landscape big print professional (I am not) then basing your captures on a single 135 format capture would be cavalier in the extreme. Even with a D800E.

There will always be a few people who push any metric of any camera design, I wasn't stating that nobody needed more MP, I was pointing out that the numbers we have can be used to very great effect and I don't believe many people need more the vast majority of the time, me included. I was also pointing out that if you don't need it regularly, the downside of dealing with it all the time becomes a big negative.

I believe part of Canon's marketing leadership is based on them knowing what they are doing, to do that they know a trick I was taught many years ago by my mentor, don't give people what they say they want, understand what they want and give them that. Most of the time, as the marketshare demonstrates, Canon do deliver what people actually want.

To me the 5D MkIII is probably the greatest mass market high end SLR ever made, it will probably be the most appropriate camera for most users, ever. I believe when it is replaced many of the features will be market driven crap people think they want but then rarely, if ever, use. Mixed in with those spurious distractions, sure a bit more DR will be nice, though none of the bleaters ever shows an optimally exposed real world image where the one stop lower Canon DR has ruined their image. Sure a few more MP would be good so I can crop 80% instead of only 50%, well use a 7D instead, that is what it is there for, if you want a 40+MP FF sensor so you can crop to "extend" your lens, you already have it, for a bargain price!

My tale is more a cautionary one, I am no King Canute, we will get more MP, we will get more DR, we will get WiFi and GPS etc etc, and nothing will stop that, the  DSLR market will continue for a time yet. I just think we should be careful what we ask for, if we shout too much then they might just give it to us. I just don't want to be bothered with 40+mb RAW files, every, single, shot.

As to my crop, it was 1680px wide, but if I had posted it at that it would have displayed nearly 17" wide, that is not what I wanted to do, I wanted the detail to be life sized in relation to a 47" print, to do that I downsampled my 1680 wide print file crop to 700px wide to display at the correct size in the forum. I don't understand why that is such a difficult or complicated idea for you, a big printer, to get their head around, it is obviously a failing on my part to be clear.

If, on your monitor, my crop is close to 7" wide you are looking at a life sized proof of a small section of a 47" print from a single 21MP capture. I could post the 1680 crop and then people could print it if anybody cares enough, but that would only be relevant when printed, it would not be relevant as a displayed image. Yes my crop has lower resolution than the print file but because of the vagaries of display and print pixel requirements you are pretty much seeing  what a 47" print looks like.

The difference in DR a lot more than one stop. You definitely do not get that holy cow crispness from 20MP at 47".

It'd be a shame if this was a 1 series body, I mean you don't really need the epic build quality and weather sealing in the studio and whilst it's nice for landscapers, i think the majority would prefer a lighter, smaller body. Although I'm sure a High mp 1 series body will fit some peoples needs.

I don't feel there is a full frame in the canon line up for me at the moment: 1dx out of budget. 5D mkiii, autofocus would be wasted on me. 6D, whilst a fine camera, doesn't quite cut it in areas I want. Just little things that add up like, lack of white balance button and thumb stick, not 5 series build quality and lack of cross points in the autofocus.

An ideal high mp camera for me would be:

New process 36 MP sensor
4/5 fps
7D autofocus
5D mkiii body and controls
7D metering

It'd sit well in the line up too:

6fps (MUST HAVE)
new process high DR 39MP
5D3 AF (MUST HAVE, 7D AF isn't that amazing)
5D3 body/UI
7D metering
top video (may need dual-digic to drive it fully off of 39MP and same for the 6fps)

Hint: Two different prototypes from Canon and a prototype from Nikon (maybe named D4X) is out for testing in the field.

The 7D Mark II is a big step away from a possible introduced 70D.

My advice: Wait until the 7D Mark II is releasend and then decide if you want go FF from APS-C. If you compare the 7D Mark II prototype with the 6D. Well ...

part of me almost wonders if I might not to go APS-C from FF  ;D

the need to buy one vs four extra HDs  ;D

Hard drives are dirt cheap these days...and shouldn't be a limiting factor really. Heck, I saw a freakin' 4TB external drive from newegg the other day on sale for $139, no tax, free shipping.

Yeah but it does add up all the same, plus backing them up takes FOREVER! And they start cluttering up space too.
If all-i delivered something noticeably better than sure, but as it is it seems like it just means buying 4x the HD for no particular reason (in a majority, but not all, cases). It will be interesting to see how things go in April when they put out the clean HDMI and we can see how ProRes recorders deal with it. Will that make it all worth the extra HDs and mess or not?

Pages: 1 ... 126 127 [128] 129 130 ... 255