Messages

121

EOS Bodies / Re: BUY 5d MkII now or WAIT for 5d MkIII????

« on: June 22, 2011, 12:58:35 AM »

Playing with it last night made me wonder why I waited.  I have a 7d and thought it was good enough until I looked at the files from the Mii.

That's the point. You can speak about AF system, DR, S/N etc... but try to compare, visually on a big monitor, 7D and 5DMkII files and any doubt will disappear. I have a 5DMkII and a 7D, but my strong decision is to sell the second and go FF with both my bodies. The only reason tha holds me to buy a second 5DMkII is not to put money on a second body that is going to be replaced, so just a psycocommercial reason. But to have to 5DMkII perfectly identical should be a great kit...

122

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM

« on: June 15, 2011, 05:47:21 AM »

As I stated many times previously, the 100-400 is my favorite lens. Paradoxically, for my photographical field, it has a wide range of applications. It couldn't be the most updated lens, it couldn't perform the most outstanding lab test, but it allows you shooting from beautiful macro images (due to a wonderful bokeh and allowing you to stay relatively far from the subject) to portrait and, obviously, nature and sport. Great also for architectural details. And f/ values are ok for me since I guess that the main use for such a focal wouldn't be indoor shooting...
I use it with  a 5D2 and with a 7D. As I stated in other posts, I'm not enthusiastic about 7D performance, giving me nothing more than 5D2 cropped image quality...
And it is really sturdy. I was close to the Bejing Olympic Stadium, very excited  by H&deM architecture, not realizing that my backpack flap was open. Two kilos of alloy and glass were launched three meters away... No lens was broken and Canon service had to change just the helicoid and cosmetical parts (i'm very anal about that).

P.S.: my sincere congratulations for all the images published above!

123

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS Bodies - The ultimate duo & why

« on: June 13, 2011, 01:18:03 AM »

To my eyes your example shows a clear superiority of the 5D on the 7D, no matter what the parameter makes it better. It is interesting that it was exactly Moon photography the reason to purchase a 7D. But after some tests  I realized that I had not found the right solution and that's why I bought a Meade LX200 ...

124

Lenses / Re: 24-70L or 100-400L ??

« on: June 12, 2011, 05:58:33 AM »

Considering the lenses that you already have, I strongly suggest you the 100-400L. This is the lens that I use more travelling, something like a standard lens. Coupled with a FF it's able to cover a huge range of situations, less radical than it seems. And it is also lovable for small details and some occasional macro, due to an excellent bokeh. It couldn't have the most updated IS, but it is still possible shooting without a tripod at maximum extension in good light condition. The above is partially less true coupled with an APS-C sensor. In that case it becomes a little more radical lens, as with my 7D, but since you are planning to go for a FF in the future, it is a great choice. Although it isn't completely weatherproof, it is solid as a rock and the pump action is very fast to actuate. I'm afraid, furthermore, that a future replacement of the 100-400 will be fantastic but also hugely expensive...

125

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS Bodies - The ultimate duo & why

« on: June 12, 2011, 02:35:36 AM »

I wonder if your simple example isn't mixing a metaphor (or in this case, mixing theory with practical reality).  I understand the theory of 'adding pixels' with photon signal being additive while noise combines in quadrature, so the four pixels have twice the S/N over that spatial resolution.  But doesn't that assume invariant illumination across the original pixel or the four 'added' pixels?  In your example, the photons from that one chess square are spread over the area of four pixels (which is why the effective aperture with a 2x TC is 2 stops narrower).  We're not creating a real superpixel, merely spreading out the light with diminished signal at each pixel, while each pixel still has the same read noise.  So although the theory predicts double the S/N, that assumes 4 times as many photons input and twice the noise - and in your example, there aren't four times as many photons to go around.  Or am I missing something?

If I understand correctly the meaning of the debate - I'm not native English speakers, as you might guess - I believe that no one has yet introduced the basic concept of amount of information. In the example of the checkboard, getting sixteen pixels instead of four per square provides four times the information (I'm proportionally increasing  the number of pixels in the example to be clearer). If at the four corners of a single checkboard square there are four grains of rice, getting sixteen pixels they will be visible, with four will see only a white spot. S/N and DR are important for image quality, but in my opinion the amount of information recorded comes before any other parameter. Forgive me for my poor English and if I'm off topic ...

126

EOS Bodies / Re: BUY 5d MkII now or WAIT for 5d MkIII????

« on: June 11, 2011, 03:04:57 PM »

I'm ecstatic about my 5DII. Since I'm quite deluded by my backup 7D, I've decided to sell it and buy a second 5D. The expected 5DIII is spoiling my decision too, but in my situation, I think that waiting should be the right choice...

127

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS Bodies - The ultimate duo & why

« on: June 10, 2011, 10:28:33 AM »

I fully agree with Warstreet on everything except on one point. You can appreciate the quality of detail on a monitor, it is sufficient to consider the two tests in a particular small enough for the monitor's pixels are sufficient to show all the pixels recorded by the sensor ...

128

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS Bodies - The ultimate duo & why

« on: June 10, 2011, 01:41:29 AM »

I fear that we are, and I for one, getting lost in a sea of numbers. My superficial and naive idea was that the ratio of the total pixels of the 5DII and 7D (21/18) was lower than that of the respective FOV (1:1.6), allowing me to get a virtual 640 mm with a comparable quality. But, as a matter of fact, the real problem is that the area of ​​FF is 2.6 times higher than APS-C and that the single pixel has a size approximately double (5DII 24 400 pixels/mm to 7D 53,900 mm pixels/mm), and a phisically small pixel isn't any good for image quality. Beyond the numbers, all the tests I made ​​on the two cameras, and with the same microadjusted lenses (100-400 and 100 macro IS II), confirmed less details and more noise for the 7D in the real scene.

129

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS Bodies - The ultimate duo & why

« on: June 09, 2011, 03:33:58 PM »

Based on some previous empirical testing, comparing the same test scene shot with a 7D and 5DII, with the images from the latter cropped to the 1.6x FOV (resulting in an 8 MP image from the 5DII), the outcome boiled down to the 7D delivering images that were a bit sharper but a bit noisier than the 5DII. 

That's exactly the point. The 7D has a lot more noise than the 5DII. I shoot just raw and processing by LR3 the 7D always needs NR, also at low ISO, where the 5DII, in good light condition is virtually noise free.

Thus, I think the 7D and 5DII complement each other very well.  Yes, you can shoot action/wildlife with a 5DII, and portraits and landscapes with a 7D, but neither use is a strong point of those bodies.  I'm a firm believer in using the right tool for the job at hand.

I agree with you. But, for my taste and my own style, a picture letting me to discover the finest detail, at every enlargement, is the right starting point. And since I always prefer to focusing  only by the center point, the better AF of th e7D is quite useless. I have concluded that I'm a FF guy...

130

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS Bodies - The ultimate duo & why

« on: June 09, 2011, 11:05:55 AM »

I added a 7D to my 5D MkII, since the 5D MkII can't fully support an extender for my 100-400 IS L. The idea was that the APS-C 1.6 factor would extend the maximum focal lenght to a virtual 640. On the paper the Mpx ratio (0.85) should outperform the FL factor (0.65) that I could obtain just by cropping. By the way, in the real world things go in a different way. The pixel quality of the 5D MkII is in an other league, and the best you can obtain by the 7D+100-400 is very similar to the same image cropped on the 5D MkII...
So, according to me the best duo is a pair of 5D MkII (or to have the patience to wait for a MkIII)...
I found the 7D an overestimated camera...

131

EOS Bodies / Re: Very few EOS 1 bodies sold - wonder why!!

« on: June 03, 2011, 02:24:20 AM »

The market always rewards the top of range. That doesn't mean biggest numbers, but biggest profits. As anybody knows, it's easier to sell one Aston Martin than thirty Ford Focus, since always there will be a rich man for wich the expenditure for any item is marginal relative to his wealth, while for the average customer/user every expenditure is affected by personal and general situations. Furthemore, for many pros, the tools of their job are a status symbol very important to the eyes of their customers. By the way, electronic world is quite different from the mechanical one. When you bought in the past an Hasselblad, you could be sure that the next fundamental step will be made after ten-twenty years, now you can see doubling resolution in two years and, although everybody is ready to snobbishly affirm on a forum that this is not important for him, everybody knows how is important to have two (good) pixels instead of one... So if your investment is not marginal compared to the profit you get from it, or the expenditure is not marginal relatively your wealth, spending more the double of a 5D MkII on a 1Ds is not so easy if you think that in two-three years its features will be definitely surpassed by the new one. Old 1D features can be very good, but a 10Mp image can't compete with a 20Mp one, specially in top class, where Canon or Nikon don't trick with numbers...

132

EOS Bodies / Re: 36x36 mm cmos sensor

« on: June 02, 2011, 01:38:45 AM »

I think that some Panasonic models like the GH2 do the thing you describe to some extend.
It is called "multi-aspect sensor" but the sensor's total surface area is never used to capture a single image.

My backup Leica D-Lux 4 let me choose among 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9. I don't know how that choice is made possible (mechanically or electronically), but, to be honest for me that is not one of the little camera's main features...
 

133

EOS Bodies / Re: I feel I've been tortured by all the rumors about 5d mark III.

« on: June 01, 2011, 02:25:45 AM »

Actually I'm not saying I'm not using AF... I use AF but in central spot way, selecting just the central point, aiming to the subject I choose, fixing AF on it, and then composing again the imaging. Easier to do than to write, it tooks a small fraction of a second...

134

EOS Bodies / Re: Should I Send My 7D for Repair

« on: May 30, 2011, 01:44:51 AM »

It doesn't seem a noise problem, but just an out-of-focus one, as scalesusa suggested. And two hours later, light should be changed a lot, changing the N/R. LOW light=more noise, also at the same ISO value. As suggested before me, test them on a tripod, being sure that  the cameras are focusing exactly the same point with the same low ISO and light. A good microadjustment can fix the problem if it is just an AF problem with that lens. It is simpler than people usually write or think...

135

EOS Bodies / Re: I feel I've been tortured by all the rumors about 5d mark III.

« on: May 30, 2011, 01:34:47 AM »

If you have - there isn't really any alternatives to buy. And it is still a superb camera just with shoddy autofocus points!

Great advice... I know many pro that leave at home the 1Ds and go around with the fiver. I solved the AF problem going always center spot+RAW+LR... This would be old fashion but in this way I'm always sure that I'm focusing exactly what I want...

P.S. Hello to you all!. This is my first post on the forum. I'm Aldo from Italy and I'm follow the forum since a long time.