April 18, 2014, 05:22:52 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 ... 143 144 [145] 146 147 ... 200
EOS Bodies / Re: How about an app store for EOS cameras?
« on: April 10, 2012, 10:51:10 PM »
Now that cameras are dedicated imaging computers, why not have an app store where you can download certified apps for your camera that are written by 3rd parties?

That would make it possible for people to write their own zebra stripes app or develop their own apps to deliver better bracketing support ... - make it possible for the camera to support more features without Canon having to do all of the research, development and testing.

canon is too old school for that, but I hear rumors that Samsung is planning to do more or less just that, maybe they can shake things up enough below the DSLR level to wake up the big DSLR players into the new school way of acting

EOS Bodies / Re: 5d mark iii availability?
« on: April 10, 2012, 10:49:48 PM »
About to give up on my search for the new Canon 5D Mark III. Unless anyone out there can suggest of where to get one. Thanks in advance for your help.

local shops, of course tax is a big deal at this price level

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS C100 & C500 Coming? [CR1]
« on: April 10, 2012, 10:48:15 PM »
The only thing perplexing about this is how they could make a lower end c300?  What could they take out that would give it any chance of competing in the market?  5d3 resolved detail with XLR inputs?


that would seem to just be a way to really insure the 5D3 stays crippled and the 5D4 becomes a non-starter all while accomplishing not much with their C500, or so it would seem

EOS Bodies / Re: New Cinema EOS Above the C300?
« on: April 10, 2012, 03:12:42 PM »
35K eh.... good luck Canon. The price point on the C300 was ridiculos compared to functionality, can't help wonder why it should be any better on any new camera.

Look at Sony (FS700 for 8K)... and let's see what Panasonic throws out there in 4-5 days.

Wouldn't they be better off adding zebra stripes, focus peaking and a truly crisp 1920x1080 2x2 sampled 1.6x crop video mode to the 5D3 and then getting raves about that and having the 5D3 fly off shelves like mad to video people again rather than try to release the sorts of many $$$$$$$$$ video cams that are already out there and where it will be hard to actually stand out?


I disagree with much of the advice given here. The most direct path to your goals, it seems to me, would be the 5D Mk III plus a simple adapter for your Nikon glass.

By that same token, why wouldnt he just get a 5DII with that same adaptor, save $1500, and use that $1500 to complete his lens collection. An 85mm Nikon prime and probably something else on the wide end and he'd be better off than a 5dIII (which is more of a stills update than a video update) and no extra lenses.

Because he values low light performance and noted the D800 does poorly here. So does the Mk II, compared to the Mk III.

Is nobody actually reading what the OP says he wants and needs?

yeah 5D3 is a lot cleaner in terms of SNR than 5D2/D800

i still think from samples I've seen that it has a very video-looking sort of noise, they seem to bake in too much NR even with NR off or Low, rather than giving a nice tight noise pattern, they could easily fix that in firmware (unless maybe it's the codec that is blurring shadow tight dot noise into video-looking smears?)


The largest contributor to the "cinematic feel" is a large sensor. The FS 100 has the same sensor-size as film. 3 years ago, you had to go to a DSLR to get large sensor, shallow DOF video. This is no longer the case. 

There are a bunch of good comparisons out there. Watch the demo videos and get a feel for what might work for you. Who knows, maybe Canon will blow you mind with their new cinema DSLR. Hopefully that will be announced soon.

The same sensor size as some film, but the FF sensor gives the director that much more control, and over a stop more light gathering and DOF range. I think of my FF dSLR as being a tiny VistaVision camera. ;)

one difference is that vistavision delivered slightly more detail  ;)

between 5d3 and d800, take the 5D3 but i'd wait to see what the new sony dslr do or look into one of the upcoming 4-5 thousand dollar video cams instead perhaps, nikon didn't do the greatest with d800 video and canon seems to have crippled their 5d3 a bit as their current marketing department is so want to do

if you  are not doing anything where details matter or where you need to shoot distant subjects then the 5D3 is fine enough though

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Gizmodo D800 and 5D Mark III Comparison
« on: April 09, 2012, 02:45:52 AM »
Man, in the low light footage, the D800 looks pathetic ISO1600+. How can it look so good at still and so bad at video?

How? Because the 5D3 samples the entire sensor for video and stills while the D800 samples the entire sensor for stills but samples only 1/3rd of the sensor for video (tosses it 2 out of every three photons it collects when it does video by only reading one out of every three lines across the sensor).

So D800 has 1.5-2 stops worse SNR at any ISO than the 5D3 (for video). And only maybe 2/3rd of a stop better ISO at 100 (vs closer to 3 for stills) and already worse DR than the 5D3 by ISO800, if not earlier, and 1.5-2 stops worse DR for video ISO1600+.

The reading 1 in 3 lines also means it has much worse color moire and a bit worse aliasing. The do grab greater than 1920x1080 video and carefully downsample to 1920x1080 and don't apply a strong AA filter in processing beforehand so it grabs a bit more details than the 5D3 (but it's still no detail champ) and it also grabs some false details too.

They need to add zebra stripigin, focus peaking and a true 1920x1080 crips 2x2 samples 1.6x crop mode to the 5D3 video if they don't want to blow it all (C300-level will be hard to compete and they won't be any sort of champions there, the 5D3-level was there claim to fame, so cripplng it to help their cinema line is really, really dumb IMO).

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon 5D Mark III - Resolution Review
« on: April 09, 2012, 02:40:10 AM »
It appears that the D800 is line skipping, only using one row out of three. This would explain its noise performance compared to the Mk III. It also appears that the Mk III is binning, using the entire sensor.


Yup and thus the D800 has much worse color moire, a bit worse aliasing, a slightly sharper image, 1.5-2 stops worse SNR across the entire ISO range and 1.5-2 stops worse dynamic range ISO1600 and up, worse DR at ISO800, probably similar DR at ISO400 and maybe around 2/3 stop better DR at ISO100 than the 5D3.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon 5D Mark III - Resolution Review
« on: April 09, 2012, 02:37:52 AM »
With the advent of large sensor interchangeable lens video-specific cameras that are affordable (fs-100, fs-700, etc.) I think the days of DSLR video are more or less coming to an end anyway. It will fall back to being what it was intended for: a convenience facility for photojournalists that primarily shoot stills and don't want to carry two cameras. I shoot both stills and video roughly equally and would like to be able to have my 5d3 as a B-cam and even an A-cam for narrow DOF shots, but Canon has, sadly, crippled the resolution.  :'(

The D800 is of no interest to me; my next stills camera move will probably be to medium format. Medium format video would be truly awesome.

Canon is going to try to wring some money out of people (via the overpriced C300) as they ramp up their cinema division, something they can only do because of the runaway success of the 5d2 and the subsequent vestment of all that EF glass. But with the fs-700 easily adaptable to EF or any other glass, and the Zeiss CP primes having interchangeable mounts, those margins will not be sustainable for Canon. I think they have made a big mistake here with the 5d3 resolution: they could have sustained that branding and that franchise, undercutting Sony and Panasonic, but they've had internal interference with their own opportunity. Positioning a 1080p cam against RED's 4K cam for a similar TCO was a blunder they shouldn't be protecting.

The 5d3 does beat the D800 in video, soundly. But who cares? Nikon is a non-player in video, even though it had the first DSLR video, and Canon has far bigger threats on its horizon.

We will check back after NAB.


EOS Bodies / Re: Will the D1-x really be superior to the new 5DIII?
« on: April 09, 2012, 02:32:58 AM »
I suppose the conclusion is that if you make a habit of missing an exposure by 3-4 stops, the D800 is a better machine than the 5DIII. I have no problem conceding Nikon's superiority in that regard, but in all my years of shooting, I have never once missed an exposure by 3-4 stops.

Oh come on now, you know better than to be one of the ones tossing around the "missed exposure" nonsense which is a total red herring. If a scene has say 14 stops that you want to capture and your camera can capture 8 stops it doesn't matter what you do with the exposure it won't work out. While it's nice to be able to rescue a bad miss now and then, things happen, the real story has nothing at all to do with bad exposures and I think you know enough about shooting and cameras to know that.

EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX sample RAW images
« on: April 09, 2012, 02:28:30 AM »
are there any ISO100 RAWs?

it would be interesting to see if they manage better low ISO DR on the 1DX and saved the good stuff for this sensor or whether they are simply stuck or not willing to pony up for new fab/patents/etc. (apparently they may have had an in house patent but marketing tossed it aside without even showing it to their DSLR engineers.... odd)

Interesting stuff on DPR where they figured out how D800 video works. They read all pixels in a scanline, but only read every third scanline. They then downsample it from a bit over 1920x1080 down to 1920x1080. That explains why compared to 5D3 video:

D800 video is a bit sharper (not by much once 5D3 is sharpened in post)

D800 video has considerably worse SNR (5D3 appears to 3x3 bin the entire sensor while Nikon appears to skip 2/3rds of the lines and thus tosses away 2/3rds of the collected photons, it collects even a bit less light than an APS-C sensor of the same technology would collect) and yet the same is not true for stills (where both make use of the full sensor). The D800 tosses away 1.8 stops of SNR and dynamic range for video compared to what it can do for stills apparently (but having a large base ISO DR advantage the ISO100 video on the D800 still has better DR than the 5D3, I'd guess they are even for DR by ISO400 for video and by ISO800 it should already have worse DR than 5D3 video and by ISO1600+ it should have a lot worse DR than the 5D3 video probably like 2 stops worse). The worse SNR should hold across all ISOs.

So D800 video probably has something along the lines of 1.5 to 2 stops worse SNR across the ISO range and ranging from perhaps something like 2/3rd of a stop better DR at ISO 100 to even at ISO400, worse at ISO800 and probably 1.5-2 stops worse from ISO1250 or so and up.

Most importantly D800 video has more aliasing and a lot more color moire.

I think you have to give the video win to the 5D3, a little less sharp and maybe 2/3 stop less DR at ISO100 (but likely already even by ISO400) but none of the moire mess, little of the aliasing and 1.5-2 stops better SNR across the board and at ISO800 and up it has better DR, especially ISO1600+.

(that said they still BADLY need to update 5D3 firmware to add zebra stripes, video focus peaking and a 1.6x crop 2x2 sampled video mode with top clarity and better reach, then they will get the videographers singing its praises and they will fly off the shelf to movie guys)

5D3 also has better liveview sensor output since for some odd reason nikon uses some sort of video feed o the D800 liveview instead of scaled mode like on D7000 so their liview 100% look on the D800 has every other line skipped, apparently it makes it tricky to use to focus unless you try to look at vertical details only.

So it seems that 5D3 gets the win for video and liveview quality.

Just my opinion, but something doesn't seem right regarding DXO:

1. They give the D800 a very high "all time record" score (that they knew would have the internet buzzing)
2. THEN....THE DON'T REVIEW/SCORE THE CANON 5D3(it's been two weeks since the d800 review) EVEN THOUGH BOTH CAMERAS WERE RELEASED AT THE SAME TIME.  How long does it take to do a review? 

I find this interesting because they're partly responsible for creating a situation where the D800 is in extremely high demand and is getting very positive "word of mouth"....while the 5d3 plays second fiddle.   It's almost as if they've INTENTIONALLY delayed their 5d3 review. 
At this point, even if they come out and give the 5d3 a very good score, they've already sold a bunch of D800's for Nikon(and therefore a bunch of lenses), and given them a clear boost during the very important initial launch period for both cameras.

makes me wonder.....

On another forum, someone claimed that Canon France delayed getting them a release copy of the 5D3. Who knows. (and the thing is the 5D3 probably will test worse, so, if anything, they may be helping Canon  ;) )

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 5D Mk III review
« on: April 07, 2012, 02:22:32 AM »

The usable dynamic range of a Canon 5D MK3 RAW file at ISO 100 is up to 2 stops larger than of a 5D MK2 file. That is a big difference. In practice we found that the correct exposure in bright sunlight with the 5D MK3 was much easier than with the Canon 5D MK2. On both sides of the histogram, we always had 'space' left, which is the way it should be!

Two stops better at 100 ISO than the 5D Mk II - that's frickin' good.

That would be absolutely awesome, however, nobody else has seen that. Nobody else has measured that. And nobody else has measured the 13 stops for the 5D2/5D3 they got either, that's even higher than the engineer DR measurements and you can't get any higher than engineering DR. Conclusion is that they have no idea what they doing.

And if they always had space left on either side of the histogram then they were not shooting scenes with very high dynamic range for their real world shot tests, which also points the fact that they don't know what they are doing when it comes to talking about DR.

Praise it away for having apparently awesome AF, a solid fps now, no aliasing/moire, nicer looking high iso noise, outlined histogram, faster trigger, shorter mirror blackout, etc. but no need to push links posting nonsense about things so it can 'be' the best at everything, especially one of the aspects where it actually is most behind.

I don't know if I would exactly say that the AntiAliasing is that much better , I have an example of my 5D3 aliasing disapointment on my forum at M2AF.com - and I can post them here if anyone really wants to see them - the AA filter is a problem for me , I have several images with issues I consider severe - especially in terms of my images being printable at full resolution , I went back and did some tests on my 5D2 , and my 1D2 just to see what those camera do , and the problem is nowhere close to as bad. Hopefully firmware will be able to fix this - I am a bit concerned. Other than that , love this CAMERA !!!!!!

I meant it's much better for video. I don't know what the difference for stills is.

Pages: 1 ... 143 144 [145] 146 147 ... 200