September 17, 2014, 11:52:06 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 2 [3] 4 5 ... 245
31
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:58:30 PM »
Those digital zoom things on the rebels had simply dreadful false color artifacting/moire. Do it optically, why are we shooting Canon if not the big whites?

The 7D should be able to do it without line-skipping though. And it isn't fake digital zoom either. The sensors captures 20MP but 1080p is only 2MP so they are simply cropping and then downscaling less. It's all true extra reach gain. Also, I though the zoomed video on some of those actually had less aliasing and moire than their regular modes anyway.


32
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:08:36 PM »
I'm concerned that they have dropped the 70D's highly-useful 3x "digital zoom" mode for video.  It doesn't appear in the menu shown on the B&H preview.  That feature needs not only to be included, but improved.

Don't count on it. The t3i has digital zoom in video, but it is not in t4i and t5i. So Canon does remove features instead of adding them.

So bizarre, no 4k and no zoom either for video, when the 7D series is supposed to be the reach/wildlife cam and that;s when zoom modes would matter most of all.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:06:47 PM »
If I only user center-point for photographing birds, is this really worth the upgrade over the T2i I've been lugging around for several years?  I'm thinking of just getting a 6D or 5Diii, as I can get pretty close to my subjects, and I'm using a 400mm lens.  From the specs of the 7Dii it looks more like a 'side-grade' to the T2i than an actual upgrade, for the type of photography I do.  My main limiting factor right now is iso performance; anything above 400 on the T2i is pretty much useless, and I'm not getting the sense the 7Dii will be any better.   Anyone that shoots similar subject matter have any thoughts on this?

Oh my!  Even the current 7D would be better for your purposes.  This new one, with the 65 f/2.8 focus points will be miles better.  You will be able to actually compose a proper picture instead of shooting dead center and cropping.  AI Servo will be miles better than with your T4i.  And 10fps frame rate will shoot circles around what you currently do, giving you the ability to track and shoot, choosing the peak action in post.  You'll get images you can't imagine getting on a regular basis.

It's seriously not even a reasonable question unless you simply don't have the $.  In fact, for your purposes, I'll bet I'd almost rather have this 7D Mk II than a 5D Mk III.

If wildlife stills were the only goal I'd definitely rather have the 7D2 over the 5D3.

34
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:06:02 PM »
Anyway the speed and AF and all sounds like out of the park, awesome.

The sensor is what it is. It would be DOA for a 5D4, but it's probably OK for a 7D2 (although not ideal and I certainly feel for the one body shooters who'd use this as their main landscape cam too).

The video looks pretty punted though in terms of quality.

If you don't hit DR-limited scenes much and never shoot video it's a total home run. Grand slam even (assuming it lives up to the words).

If you were looking to it for video it's a D+.

If you wanted an action cam plus great all around aps-c sensor it's mixed, great on the one hand and stuck in 2007 on the other.

I'll preface this by saying I don't really shoot video but that said, I think it will hold it's own pretty well considering the smooth AF it appears to have from the Canon promo "Cello" and the "Making of Cello" I think will be a hit with the entry level video guys especially when coupled with the lens system Canon has.  Granted, it's not a nice as the 5d3 video, but that wasn't to be expected. Physics.  However, that short they made at 3200 ISO looked pretty darn good and the focus racking looked darn good to me.  Put that little camera with a Ninja and it's a good little set up I'm betting.

I haven't really seen the video quality of the 7d mark ii because the cello video on Canon's site doesn't allow me to change the resolution or even full screen it but if you're saying the video is worse than the 5D3 then that is pretty sad. The 5D3 is pretty S___ now for video. So if this new cam is worse, then oh wow am I laughing now.

Clearly worse than 5D3 WITH Magic Lantern RAW. With ML RAW the 5D3 produces very good 1080p video, the best of any regular line DSLR by anyone (well, maybe, I haven't seen the 4k A7S footage yet).

Not sure about how it will compared to native, SOOC 5D3 video. SOOC 5D3 video is kinda waxy and squishy. The one clip with the skiers from the 7D2 made it look maybe a bit worse than 5D3 but probably better than the 7D (it's hard to tell from that, not even sure what mode it was in, maybe 720p for all I know, etc. who knows maybe it's even better (other than the impossibility of beating FF SNR) than 5D3 SOOC. But no way it could ever beat 5D3 with Magic Lantern RAW.

Coming from a profesional broadcast television background I don't care about 4k or raw video.
If Canon made a DSLR that used the same MPEG2( 1080i 50Mbps 4:2:2)codec that you find in the C300 then it would make huge impact. Why? Because some broadcasters won't accept material shoot with a DSLR because of the codec. That is the sole reason why I have to use a rental camera this week.

If RAW was too unwieldy you could shoot 5D3 RAW and then put it into whatever format you desired, MPEG2 1080i 50Mbs 4:2:2 or whatever.

Anyway yeah if it simply output in cam video of C300 quality that would help a lot, since you'd get decent quality when you didn't want to mess with RAW.

It's not the codec that is crippling the in-cam Canon video though (5D3 got clean HDMI out and it was the same waxy mush) so the damage is done in an earlier stage.

Anyway if you don;t mind the mush (assuming they didn't fix that), the 7D2 has clean HDMI 1080 4:2:2 out so you could send that into a NINJA or whatnot.

If it had 4k you could simple downsample and re-compress to 1080i 4:2:2 MPEG2 and use that without even needing a NINJA (and get better quality too).

35
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:16:09 PM »
If I only user center-point for photographing birds, is this really worth the upgrade over the T2i I've been lugging around for several years?  I'm thinking of just getting a 6D or 5Diii, as I can get pretty close to my subjects, and I'm using a 400mm lens.  From the specs of the 7Dii it looks more like a 'side-grade' to the T2i than an actual upgrade, for the type of photography I do.  My main limiting factor right now is iso performance; anything above 400 on the T2i is pretty much useless, and I'm not getting the sense the 7Dii will be any better.   Anyone that shoots similar subject matter have any thoughts on this?

I'd imagine the focus accuracy for one shot or AI Servo tracking will be much better than on the T2i. The trigger delay should be much shorter. The fps are much higher. To many that could be a considerable upgrade for such shooting. Surely for sports. How much the high ISO will improved, remains to be seen. The t2i isn't bad at high iso to begin with though so don't expect miracles.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:04:36 PM »
Anyway the speed and AF and all sounds like out of the park, awesome.

The sensor is what it is. It would be DOA for a 5D4, but it's probably OK for a 7D2 (although not ideal and I certainly feel for the one body shooters who'd use this as their main landscape cam too).

The video looks pretty punted though in terms of quality.

If you don't hit DR-limited scenes much and never shoot video it's a total home run. Grand slam even (assuming it lives up to the words).

If you were looking to it for video it's a D+.

If you wanted an action cam plus great all around aps-c sensor it's mixed, great on the one hand and stuck in 2007 on the other.

I'll preface this by saying I don't really shoot video but that said, I think it will hold it's own pretty well considering the smooth AF it appears to have from the Canon promo "Cello" and the "Making of Cello" I think will be a hit with the entry level video guys especially when coupled with the lens system Canon has.  Granted, it's not a nice as the 5d3 video, but that wasn't to be expected. Physics.  However, that short they made at 3200 ISO looked pretty darn good and the focus racking looked darn good to me.  Put that little camera with a Ninja and it's a good little set up I'm betting.

I haven't really seen the video quality of the 7d mark ii because the cello video on Canon's site doesn't allow me to change the resolution or even full screen it but if you're saying the video is worse than the 5D3 then that is pretty sad. The 5D3 is pretty S___ now for video. So if this new cam is worse, then oh wow am I laughing now.

Clearly worse than 5D3 WITH Magic Lantern RAW. With ML RAW the 5D3 produces very good 1080p video, the best of any regular line DSLR by anyone (well, maybe, I haven't seen the 4k A7S footage yet).

Not sure about how it will compared to native, SOOC 5D3 video. SOOC 5D3 video is kinda waxy and squishy. The one clip with the skiers from the 7D2 made it look maybe a bit worse than 5D3 but probably better than the 7D (it's hard to tell from that, not even sure what mode it was in, maybe 720p for all I know, etc. who knows maybe it's even better (other than the impossibility of beating FF SNR) than 5D3 SOOC. But no way it could ever beat 5D3 with Magic Lantern RAW.


37
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:56:19 PM »
Thought I read/saw somewhere today that it was a newly designed microlens, photodiode, bayer... pretty much everything  apart from the fact that it uses the same pixel count as the 70D.  But with newly design pixels which have aided it's low light/high ISO performance.  I think that was the whole point of showing so much 3200 ISO in that promo video short "Cello"

It would gain a lot more SNR in video simply by not line-skipping and reading the entire sensor, if it does that, even if the sensor had the same tech as the 7D, it would automatically pick up around 2 stops I think (I forget exactly how much of the sensor the 7D skips). Just as with the 5D3 vs the 5D2, it's only modestly better in SNR for stills, but far, far better for SNR in video.

38
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:02:02 PM »
Anyway the speed and AF and all sounds like out of the park, awesome.

The sensor is what it is. It would be DOA for a 5D4, but it's probably OK for a 7D2 (although not ideal and I certainly feel for the one body shooters who'd use this as their main landscape cam too).

The video looks pretty punted though in terms of quality.

If you don't hit DR-limited scenes much and never shoot video it's a total home run. Grand slam even (assuming it lives up to the words).

If you were looking to it for video it's a D+.

If you wanted an action cam plus great all around aps-c sensor it's mixed, great on the one hand and stuck in 2007 on the other.

I'll preface this by saying I don't really shoot video but that said, I think it will hold it's own pretty well considering the smooth AF it appears to have from the Canon promo "Cello" and the "Making of Cello" I think will be a hit with the entry level video guys especially when coupled with the lens system Canon has.  Granted, it's not a nice as the 5d3 video, but that wasn't to be expected. Physics.  However, that short they made at 3200 ISO looked pretty darn good and the focus racking looked darn good to me.  Put that little camera with a Ninja and it's a good little set up I'm betting.

Yeah I updated my comment so the video part now says:
Quick impression from the press releases:

If you were looking to it for video it's a D+ if you care about all things plus video quality. If you don't care about the video quality so much at all, it's maybe B to A- depending upon unknown UI factors.

No 1080pRAW, no 4k, apparently the same old smeary, squishy 1080 Canon DSLR-style 1080p.

Vastly better video AF though and hopefully 2-2.5 stops better video SNR over the 7D (unless a few vague, hard to believe rumors about it still line skipping are true, not sure how that could be, it has so much power).

39
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 03:35:12 PM »
Quick impression from the press releases:

Anyway the speed and AF and all sounds like out of the park, awesome.

The sensor is what it is. It would be DOA for a 5D4, but it's probably OK for a 7D2 (although not ideal and I certainly feel for the one body shooters who'd use this as their main landscape cam too, it'll still do 100% fine for many of those shots, but will struggle for any higher DR scenes and the colro filter array has been made even yet more color-blind).

The video looks pretty punted though in terms of quality. The video AF might be useful though.

If you don't hit DR-limited scenes much and never shoot video it's a total home run. Grand slam even (assuming it lives up to the words).

If you were looking to it for video it's a D+ if you care about all things plus video quality. If you don't care about the video quality so much at all, it's maybe B to A- depending upon unknown UI factors. No 1080pRAW, no 4k, apparently the same old smeary, squishy 1080 Canon DSLR-style 1080p. Vstly better video AF though and hopefully 2 stops better video SNR over the 7D (unless a few vague, hard to believe rumors about it still line skipping are true, not sure how that could be, it has so much power).

If you wanted an action cam plus great all around aps-c sensor it's mixed, probably truly great on the one hand and stuck in 2007 and not quite so hot on the other (although the not so hot part only affecting a sub-set of possible images, I'm sure it will be more than fine for all the rest).

40
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II is not exciting enough
« on: September 15, 2014, 03:30:48 PM »
7d2 is pretty much as expected, AF and metering is skookum but no mention of any improvement in low ISO performance ...
Then I think you should read some of the issued statements again. Low ISO is clearly addressed.

Which statements?

I saw some talk about High ISO, but none about low so far.

41
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 02:39:35 PM »
The AF and metering specs sound pretty awesome, very good speed at 10fps too.
It should be quite the beast so long as you only shoot stills and stick to DR-limited scenes.
It does sound quite awesome in all those regards and those are all key points for 7D series.

It is a bit worrisome that the long delay was not due to waiting on a new sensor process though. Not critical maybe for the 7D2, but a clear shame it has the old 2007 low ISO sensor tech once again and it makes one start to get nervous now about the 5D4. And for those who can only afford one body and/or only want to carry one body, it is a shame, one body users will use this as their landscape camera too don't forget and now it is locked into old sensor tech for another 3-5 years it seems.

They totally punted on video though. It has the super video AF, but they remove the touch screen to control it!

“With more processing power than any other EOS camera available today.... ....And, recognizing that for some, creative expression may expand beyond still photography, we continue to support these creative passions by offering new and innovative Full HD video capabilities.”

And yet they cripple 4k out of it.

"Stunning Movie Capability"

And yet no 4k and no 1080P RAW so it's worse movie quality than 5D3+ML. And everybody and there brother is suddenly starting to release 4k cams, even Lumix P&S announced today has 4k. I guess they still feel Nikon is the only threat and since Nikon doesn't have 4k Canon won't bother, so much for being a leader and not a follower.

This also brings much worry about the 5D4. Will it also lack 4k and 1080pRAW (and thus actually be WORSE for video than the old 5D3?) or will it have a crippled 4k now? If they don't give it 4k and 1080pRAW why would anyone buy it for video over a 5D3?



42
PowerShot / Re: Official: Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 15, 2014, 02:29:23 PM »
Although the new Lumix actually seems to potentially be the best of them all. Although the weight is now nearing 2x the RX100II, although the size isn't too much larger. So it depends upon how you feel about the weight.

And man 4k too.

More and more I think canon dropped the ball on locking 4k out of the 7D2.

43
PowerShot / Re: Official: Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 15, 2014, 02:26:29 PM »
Same size as the RX100II, a Canon first for a P&S with a top sensor. Nice.

Weight 50% more than RX100II, not nice at all, but the lens is much faster at the long end which is very nice. So a pick your poison, faster lens or deal with a bit more weight. EDIT: weight is actually only 8% more than the RX100 (originally a with battery for one and without for the other comparison was done by accident)


Seems like there is now a viable RX100 alternative.

I wonder if the UI is a bit nicer than on the RX100 too?

44
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:03:23 AM »

Says you and one other guy.
What about all the posts from Romy, myself, Jrista, wildlife photographers, etc. etc. that don't all align with a 20% under the most ideal scenario and barely there if ever at all in the real world.

Well other than nobody ever actually quantifying >20%, let alone the farcical 60%, I have never seen your images and the Romy images you keep harping on about consist of this one post http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1280.msg258952#msg258952

If you do some searching you can find his 7D and 5D MkII comparison here http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/128151871 as everybody does he did the comparison in totally artificial conditions, especially considering he is a wild bird shooter, and how do you quantify >20% from that example?

Jrista's moon mages, after he was corrected on his methodology a large portion of his results were found faulty, and again, we are talking shooting conditions far from average, good mounts, Live View manual focus etc etc.

Show me your comparisons showing >20% crop camera advantage and I will find errors in your methodology too.

I tested these things in pursuit of the best wildlife camera;

The problem with the crop advantage argument back in the day was that the files fresh out of the 7D had to be tweaked, worked and processed to get that 20%. (I say 20% but it wasn't 20%, it didn't make it to that level)
So if you didn't want to PP every picture to is best, you didn't see the advantage. This was somewhat true with the 5D II and it was very true with the 1D series bodies.

A person with no PP skills saw little or no benefit from the 7D crop.

This was a subject that was kicked to death back in the day.

NOW, maybe with the 7D II it will have some decent processing power in body and we can have the debate again. Again I will buy one, test it against my 1D IV because that is what I am still using. If the 7D II is better I will switch. If not I will gift it to a relative and just laugh as everyone spouts the numbers out in the forum without ever testing one.

This image, created with an original 7D, has had minimal processing. A slight amount of NR slider and Sharpen slider in LR, a slight boost to clarity and vibrance...then a few minutes masking the the foreground out to apply heavy NR on the background. Other than that, it's basically as-is out of camera...critically sharp, high quality data:



This was shot with an EF 500mm f/4 L II lens on a tripod with a gimbal. I was sitting in a chair. Not a particularly unusual situation...I do pretty much the same thing out in the wild when photographing other birds and wildlife. Although my chair is usually a tree stump or log...or I'm simply standing. I found a subject, hit the focus button, grabbed a burst of 3-5 frames. Pick the best.

Not much to it. I rented the lens for a couple hundred bucks for a week. I honestly don't understand arguments about how difficult it is to make the most of your equipment. Honestly don't. If your a novice who's just getting started, sure...but if you are someone who actually seeks out better equipment to up your game...it's really not difficult.

+1
it's just not that hard to do

And it's ironic that it seems to be mostly those who rag on DRoners for being incompetent outside of the lab who seem to be the ones not able to get the most out of their equipment in the field even in a scenario where it should be pretty trivial to pull off, maybe not in every single case, but in a lot of cases. I mean if all you shoot is crows sitting in shadows while saving highlights at ISO6400 and up, it might be hard to see the reach advantage a lot, but.... or if you are using silly slow shutter speeds or don't bother to micr-focus adjust your lenses or something, but now these last two cases are just user error and extreme user error at that.

And I say this as someone who sold off my 7D and 5D2 for a 5D3, so it's not like I'm defending what I own. I own only the 5D3 at this point in time and I still say that the 7D gave me better reach, lab or real world and it is something I miss a bit, basically the only thing I miss about my 7D (although the fps was nice too, although only in some scenarios, in some it missed AF enough that the fps almost became the same as with the 5D3, in other cases the extra frames were a help, so that too a bit actually). If I had had the money at the time, I would've kept the 7D and I'd have used it for a lot of wildlife stuff since then.

I mean it's honestly trivial to use a 7D and a 5D3 and get hand-held snaps using AF where you clearly see quite noticeably more detail from the 7D shot when distance limited. And the 7D is probably the softest 18MP camera there is and yet it's still easy to make it pull more detail than a 5D2/5D3/1DX when distance limited.


45
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II- September 15th at midnight? Whose midnight?
« on: September 15, 2014, 12:37:35 AM »
Latest word is an unusual announcement time. Apparently it's 8AM EST Sept 15th and it won't be 23 minutes from now.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 245