September 20, 2014, 08:20:20 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 - Sporgon

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 126
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:54:56 PM »
While some people are complaining as you describe, other continue saying "How could they put the same sensor? >:( ", which is kind of pathetic. However, lets forget those people and focus on the possibilities of the all-new 7D MKII sensor!!  ;D

Indeed.  But let us not forget the all new 18 MP APS-C sensor in the T4i/650D (all new because of Hybrid CMOS AF) or the all new 18 MP APS-C sensor in the SL1/100D (all new because of Hybrid CMOS AF II).

 :-X

Good point. But given that there is no new technology advertised (that I can see, that is), is it fair to assume the "newness" will come from the actual sensor? I sure hope so. :-\

Perhaps.  Canon had a patent publish recently on improved DPAF for use in AI Servo AF, and now the 7DII has DPAF in AI Servo AF.  I'm not sure if that required a hardware tweak to the sensor, but if so, that could be what's 'all new'.

According to Dave Perry of Canon UK in the YouTube video link posted in this thread, the 'all new sensor, different to the 70D ' is............micro lenses.

Here's the link again for anyone interested.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey7FzU7OqH4

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 08:37:06 AM »
Just had a quick read through the DPR of the camera; it looks like one hell of a beast for the money. So it has come in under the RRP of the 6D as I thought it would, and this suggests to me that Canon are pretty confident in their FF premium on price.

Also interesting that DPR refer to the Dual pixel technology as effectively 40 mp........I seem to recall someone here on CR vehemently disputing this.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 14, 2014, 03:08:37 PM »
Canon's priority is DR at the top of the histogram (where it performs very well), and that suits me just fine.
You completely misunderstand dynamic range.

Is this what they call "field day" in English :-> ?

'Having a field day', yes, except everyone with the exception of jrista would have interpreted Keith Reeder's statement as 'photographic latitude at the top end of the dynamic range', and he is absolutely right. Look at his examples:

I still find it laughable though that in the end, it really really, really, does seem like people are all too happy for Canon to not get their DR up to where the competition is

Which assumes, of course, that - unlike an old, out-of-date, underpowered PC - this supposed lack of DR actually stops us from getting the results we want.

Which it doesn't...

Canon's priority is DR at the top of the histogram (where it performs very well), and that suits me just fine.

Let me know when a Nikony sensor can do better than this from this, and you might have a point...

If you want to maximise the latitude from the Canon sensor you must establish how far you can push the 'over exposure', and it is often quite a long way.

If you go back to dilbert's example, in much of the picture the sensor was recording virtually no information. Try and lift this and surprise surprise, you are going to get a poor result.

19
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 14, 2014, 12:57:20 PM »
Canon will do what it believes is in the best interests of its shareholders in the mid to long term, coincidentally they very often know better than us what we actually need.

Having moved to Canon after many years with Nikon I think there is a great deal of truth this statement

20
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 14, 2014, 04:28:48 AM »
..Let's think for a second: who will buy the D610 if they can pay a few hundred more for a D750?
I am more envious of the 20/1.8. I wish Canon made something like that...


As for the 20/1.8... I'm salivating just thinking about it.
I use an old AIS MF 20/2.8 and an AI 20/3.5 and they're both very good, the 3.5 being very compact and light.
it there's slightly better corner sharpness with lower CA in this new lens, it will be very welcome

I'll be interested to see if this lens is anything other than a blurry mess at 1.8, and how deep an aperture it takes to sharpen up the mid frame.

I'm unclear on the real application of these very fast ultra wides. I can appreciate that at f2.8 they have much less vignetting than a f2.8 lens yet they are inevitably worse across the frame in resolution.

An ultra wide that is very good at 2.8 would be interesting because of the high dof produced by that focal length at that aperture.

I'll be interested to see if Nikon have been able to do this but I doubt it.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 11:47:00 AM »
I hope for the sake of those potential 7DII users the rear wheel doesn't feel like the 6D. I see it now has some four way function set inside it, it looks very much like the 6D outer wheel, but hopefully it won't feel like it to use.

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:42:58 AM »
I did bracket it. At +1 EV the highlights are unrecoverable.

Usually you can recover ~1ev from the raw files, so imho your bracketing spacing is too small and only will create problems when assembling more shots than necessary.

The snow is *really* bright and the shadows in the tree quite dark.

To be on topic concerning the 7d2: Rejoice, in such scenes, no sensor dynamic range upgrade will be enough. Snow is very tough, a good choice is to bracket with a very large spacing (like 3ev) and then do not hdr tone mapping, but exposure fusion in postprocessing as the scene consists of very dark and very bright. To minimize wasted exposures, do exposure correction to get the correct brackets.

Where higher dynamic range of 14-15ev does help a lot though is in standard bright daylight to get shadow detail w/o blowing the sky. You can use Magic Lantern's raw histogram to show you exactly how much dr the scene has.

This is the point. You have to know when to let white be white.

Let's say that had been shot in exactly the same way on a D800. Probably about 85% of the scene is in heavy shadow opposed to the tiny amount of direct sun reflecting snow. Dilbert does exactly the same thing and lifts the majority of the scene. It's Exmor so he retains more detail and less noise. He's happy.

However, the majority of his picture will have been produced from under severely exposed data. When compared with someone using a superior technique / process, his image will be inferior even if that someone is using old tech such as  20D, or D70 or whatever.


23
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 03:32:40 AM »
You have under exposed for this scene. Pic 0 histogram shows this, pic 2 shows that you have too much highlight detail after bringing in down 100.

Did you bracket for such a scene of difficult EV range ? If you had a 2/3 or 1 stop over exp you would be able to work the data much better.

At least you are trying with examples. Don't be frightened to go a little to the right, learn to judge when the LCD 'blinkies' are just joking. If you are working from the rear LCD picture set your picture style to 'neutral' and contrast '0' when shooting a scene like this so you will have a better visual of what the raw will able to cope with. Don't be afraid to bracket.

24
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 04:57:56 PM »
I don't know a single pro photog who uses a crop camera. They all bailed on the 7D pretty quick and never went back.

Exactly.

Whether Canon intends it or not, the 7D2 will be bought by enthusiasts/consumers - not pros.
Same as the D750.

From that perspective, it makes sense to compare the two and ponder who got it more right - Nikon or Canon.

You Guys, really !

You know which camera many real 'pros' want ? The cheapest they can get their hands on that will do the job.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 04:41:14 PM »
Better data is better data.

This is the crux of the argument. Most of the time there is no difference in the quality of data between the two systems. The difference only manifests itself in specific and quite extreme circumstances.

dtaylor's example is a good demonstration of an extreme EV range + dark coloured subjects in the under exposed area that still isn't extreme enough to cause much of a problem even for an old 7D, yet your reply is to basically say it's not under exposed enough.

If you love under exposure get a camera with an Exmor sensor.

26
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 04:05:41 PM »

Do you have real world, optimally produced and processed shots with RAW files and production notes yet?

Let me summarize your stance for everyone to understand.

So, you don't accept that Exmor sensors are superior than Canon sensors based on:
  • you don't accept formal test results from DxO and the likes
  • you dismiss any real-world example that is given to you
  • you think that it's fair to compare differently processed files

In short, if we ignore the formal tests and the real-works samples - and then process files differently - we can show that Exmor is no better than Canon.
That's where you stand, basically.

And to top it all, you are doing all this spin-doctoring on Canon's behalf totally for free.

Wow. I haven't seen such devotion and dedication to a brand.
They have a special name for guys like you - Canon bitches fanboys, right ?

Strewth.

So all the thousands highly regarded professionals using Canon gear are missing a trick are they ?

Here's a link to a good pal of mine who shoots with 1Ds III and 5DIII, and he must be regarded as one of the most successful photographers of modern times, now contracted to work solely for one of the worlds largest automobile companies.

http://www.davidburgess.eu

If what you say is right do you honestly believe that people like this would still be using Canon.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: FF Canons are falling behind.
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:31:57 PM »
The irony is if someone really wanted the 'retro' film slr experience a 6D with 's' screen and some nice Zeiss manual focus primes would fit the bill much better.

Not really, at least not if someone wanted to be seen looking ubercoolretrohip while taking pictures.   :o

I've only got to pick a camera up to give it the retro look  ;)

28
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:25:41 PM »
This thread is hilarious. It's better than Duracell rabbit, because it's going and going ang going and going... (repeat ad libitum/nauseam) :D

Just another great day on Canonrumers.   ;D

You guys are a hoot!

One thing is for sure, that "typing at the speed of thought" thing isn't working out too well. There is a lot more typing than thought going on.


 ;D;D;D

Honestly, I'm cancelling my Sky TV subscription; I just don't need it for entertainment anymore.


29
In the UK the RRP of the new D750 is £1799. That also happens to be the RRP of the D610, although that camera actually sells now for about £1299. So it rather begs the question "what's going to happen once the D750 becomes discounted"?

You know how when you're at a party someone unfastens a balloon and let's it go............

30
EOS Bodies / Re: FF Canons are falling behind.
« on: September 12, 2014, 02:05:29 PM »
and the Df with no Canon competitor.

Yep, it's unique.

The irony is if someone really wanted the 'retro' film slr experience a 6D with 's' screen and some nice Zeiss manual focus primes would fit the bill much better.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 126