September 03, 2014, 12:07:35 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 - Sporgon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 122
1
This really has me baffled.
85mm f1.8 @ f4, 1/1250. ISO 100
Shot on 5DII and 1100D. The crop camera down sampled to match 5D as that camera works out at about 8.5 mp when cropped and the 1100D is a 12 mp aps camera. Hand held, but had to resort to live view focusing as I couldn't believe the results.

100% crops from each camera.

Crop-A appears to have less dynamic range / poor shadow detail.

What can't you beleive about the results?

I remember being able to see the difference in resolution between an eight mp APS camera and a twelve mp, but in this instance when comparing 8.5 of the 5DII against the 12 of APS there is no appreciable difference.

Don't read too much into shadow detail etc, the cameras were not identically matched.

2
(People here seem to have missed the fact that I'm only complaining about the 5D III's low ISO performance and noise characteristics. The amount of misrepresentation of my position on this whole subject is staggering, but I guess that's how people react when someone tries to reveal any amount of truth about the REAL quality of Canon sensors at low ISO. Instead of acceptance, denial. Instead of discussion, it's outright hostility or a bunch of crude jokes. Canon sensors suck balls at low ISO, compared to the norm today...it's just the simple truth of the matter. It may not affect everyone's work, but it doesn't change the facts.)

You'd better e mail this guy and tell him how misguided he is then:

http://www.colinprior.co.uk/home/

Or better still ask for a little advice:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01yswqj

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Guessing Game- Canon or Nikon?
« on: September 02, 2014, 01:27:26 PM »
This seems a suitable thread for the next round of my travel quiz, today based on photos I took this afternoon.

Photo 1.
What is the guy doing?

Photo 2.
What deep question is he pursuing?

Photo 3. Where do these gate lead if he gets the wrong answer?

What camera am I using and where?

I think it's pretty clear to me:

Photo 1: Looking at two cameras
Photo 2: which do I choose, Canon or Nikon ?
Photo 3: Hell

Or, if the guy's a DRone it could be:

Photo 1: Looking at a picture he's shot on a 5DIII
Photo 2: Where's all that noise come from ?
Photo 3: Ridicule

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Guessing Game- Canon or Nikon?
« on: September 02, 2014, 11:58:27 AM »
Very funny comments, but really it would be impossible to tell the difference on images of this size, and after being squeezed into CR's page.

However I'm going to say I hope for the sake of a certain person who has recent became a DRone's sanity this was shot on Canon, 'cos if it wasn't he's going to be one miserable dude.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 02, 2014, 11:45:47 AM »
I bought a D800 after reading the hype.  It was a waste of money, I sold it and bought a 5D MK III.  The D800 appeals to armchair spec readers, but few that actually use one are happy.

Really?

And you interviewed how many D800 owners to come up with this conclusion???

If you prefer Canon over Nikon, great.  Lots of people do.  But to make a generalization like that is a bit much.

Is it really so hard to admit that some people like their Nikons just like some people like their Canons?

different tools for different things man.  In the wedding industry here, the d800 took a while to catch on.  Most nikon guys I knew were opting for a d3s or a d4 or a used d700.  The few that did snag a d800 did like it for the posed formal shots, but stayed away from making that the primary camera ---not because of IQ or capabilities but because of file size.  More of that crowd is snagging d810's now, because it is a better camera than the original model, and because it's a few years later - the d4s is pricey and their d700's are reaching the end of their cycles....so they are buying the d810 now because they don't have much choice.

In the D810 Nikon also added a small RAW option. I really cannot understand Nikon's thinking in not offering a smaller raw in the D800, especially when those upgrading would be moving from 12 to 36 mp.

6
Landscape / Re: Within Forests
« on: September 02, 2014, 05:12:59 AM »
A few of mine, all shot with 5DII & 24-105L. First one S E England, last two N W in Lake District

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 02, 2014, 03:12:24 AM »
I'll never buy a Sony camera so long as they use a lossy compressed file format. Maybe that's just more of the high standards crap...I dunno. But, there it is.

You'll never buy a camera that's relatively cheap ($1,300 for the A7), can use your lenses, and solves the problem which you have spent countless hours making...hundreds?...thousands?...of posts about because of a file format that maybe, on rare occasion, might result in an artifact, even though otherwise the camera completely eliminates the noise and artifacts you're so upset about???

I'm done...I'm out...no more SoNikonSuperMegaDR threads. I can't help these people. They need therapists, not sensors.

Better still get a used D800, they now have the depreciation curve of a falling brick. You can now get a used D800 in the UK for half the price of a D810, yet a used 5DIII is like rocking horse S___, unlike the bull S___ that jrista has spouted on this thread. I'm sure Alan at Dale Photographic would be quite happy to send this one out to him:

http://www.dalephotographic.co.uk/mall/departmentpage.cfm/DalePhotographicOnline/_142512/1/Used%2520Digital%2520Cameras

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 01, 2014, 05:11:42 PM »
I just happened on this picture whilst browsing through 500px.

Surely this is a mistake, it must have been shot on a Canon ?

http://500px.com/photo/81720131/sunset-at-shirley's-bay-by-eyekonik-images?from=popular&only=

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 01, 2014, 04:38:41 PM »
The 5D II was the most popular landscape DSLR on the planet until the D800 came along.

Just read what you've written again Jon, I think you're having a complete brain fade.

Those 5DII images were only ever printed at 10x8 - right ?

10
Glass has gotten better, film no longer exits.

Speak for yourself, I ran a roll of Kodak through my Pentax MX last week :) It is excellent DSLR detox

The wonderful Pentax MX, one of the finest mechanical manual film cameras IMO; a real jewel.

11
Very broadly speaking Canon users seem to be secure and content with their purchase decision, whereas Nikon users are insecure. This is probably because Nikon users are worried that they wake up in the morning to find that their new purchase has just been replaced by an undated model.

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 01, 2014, 06:25:22 AM »
I wonder why canon packed older cameras with some very useful features that are totally absent in modern cameras. Here I refer to the Canon EOS 1D released in 2001 vs modern professional canon cameras.

I refer strictly to:

1/16,000 shutter speed
X-sync speed 1/500

I would think its to do with it being APS, smaller, lighter shutter, less distance to travel etc. Not on modern pro APS now due to cost / usage considerations I would think.
The 1D was an APS-H body with an electronic shutter.

Quick bit of research; also used CCD rather than CMOS which allowed the use of an electronic shutter. So as CMOS replaced CDD those features were lost.

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 01, 2014, 03:41:39 AM »
I wonder why canon packed older cameras with some very useful features that are totally absent in modern cameras. Here I refer to the Canon EOS 1D released in 2001 vs modern professional canon cameras.

I refer strictly to:

1/16,000 shutter speed
X-sync speed 1/500

I would think its to do with it being APS, smaller, lighter shutter, less distance to travel etc. Not on modern pro APS now due to cost / usage considerations I would think.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: August 31, 2014, 01:49:16 PM »
I don't think anyone would say no to more DR.  As I've said previously, there are occasions I've found DR limiting...but in the vast majority of those, two more stops would not have been enough.

This is really another red herring. It doesn't matter if two more stops of DR isn't enough...it's still significant, and it simplifies whatever else you have to do to deal with any excess DR. In my recent landscape scenes, I was using five to six stops of GND filtration. That's a lot of filters to stack, and stacking that many filters affects IQ across the board (resin GND filters, even the really high end optical grade ones, affect resolving power and diminish IQ at every tonal level). With two more stops or so of DR, I could drop at least one filter. I might even be able to get away with a single three or four stop GND, eliminate the stacking all together.

In the cases where I could not use GND filtration (such as photographing a river within the trees, with only a V-shaped blown sky at the end), most of the time, I was about two, maybe two and a half stops short of being able to expose for the sky. Having two more stops of DR would have solved the very vast majority of that problem, more than enough to get away with the contrast I wanted with nice clean falloff into the shadows, while still preserving the sky. The 5D III, even though I wanted a contrasty image, does not have that clean falloff into the shadows...and the sky is STILL blown.

So, the whole notion that "it's still not enough" is a fallacy. It doesn't matter if it's not enough...it's still a LOT more dynamic range, and it results in cleaner data from the highlights right down into the deep, deep shadows. Canon data gets scratchier and muddier starting in the lower midtones, and gets ever more nasty the deeper you go. I like contrasty landscapes, and when downsampled to ~8x10 size or smaller for viewing on the web they look perfectly fine. But printed? The shadows are muddy, red-blotchy mush, even despite the contrast.

So tell me Jon, how do I get away using Canon gear ? Nearly all my pictures are shot either across or into the sun.

The only bit of kit I really need is a body and a 24-70 standard zoom. I could easily switch to Nikon in the blink of an eye, but there is no need, because there is not enough advantage to make it worthwhile.

12 stops is one hell of a range, and a two stop dodge or burn is a hell of a difference in exposure. When you move outside 12 stops Neuro is right, you need much more to make a significant difference to optimum processing techniques.


15
EOS Bodies / Re: Differences in color of lcd screens
« on: August 31, 2014, 11:47:10 AM »

At least Sporgon concluded his facts were a little off, with no sarcasm and no insults.


Well not quite; I just noticed this:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53860282

Actually when someone showed me a D810 they said it didn't have the auto brightness LCD so I'm more than a little embarrassed over my faux pas.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 122