April 16, 2014, 07:59:18 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 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 96
196
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 04:29:39 PM »
Those who think that an image should be perfect from the camera have clearly never worked with film. Negative film was all about the developing and printing. Those on this thread who call post processing 'editing' and not photography are way off the mark. Post processing ( aka developing and printing) has ways been an integral part of photography.

"But transparencies were straight from the camera"! Not so in the professional world. When I was in my teens and used to assist some pretty well known London photographers even transparencies were 'post processed'. Test strips were developed from a shoot, and then the developing process (generally time) was adjusted depending upon what the initial test clips had shown. Colour was added by duping; that is re photographing the transparency with selective colour. 

Processing is as much photography as firing the shutter; always has been.

I think what Stella is meaning is that as a photographer you can become complacent about exposure when always shooting RAW. There was a staunch advocate of shooting RAW on CR about six months ago, who I think has now left, and he stated that a full stop difference in exposure was neither here nor there. That's a mistake in my opinion. Nailing the optimum exposure for a scene makes for better IQ in the image - thank goodness. I hope that will continue.

197
I half wonder if Canon would have the courage to use a lower mp in the up coming 7DII in order to increase high ISO performance and shooting speed. If the new camera does turn out to be a 'budget' pro action camera the high ISO performance would be useful for indoor sports.

I've owned both the 650D and 1100D alongside my FF bodies, and IMO the lower mp camera gave better overall 'IQ'. in fact the 1100D can produce alarmingly good IQ. I say 'alarming' because the 1100D cost about £250 and the FF £2500.

I see that the new 1200D uses the ubiquitous 18mp sensor. A pity IMO, but then I guess the vast majority of customers for that camera would disagree; the more mp the better.

So are we seeing Canon steering the customer towards 'high mp = consumer, low mp = pro' ?( Bearing in mind 'low' is still actually high resolution).If so the new 'pro' grade 7DII might be lower mp.
I kind of doubt it. One of the big reasons for the 7d is to get more pixels on target.... If the pixel size becomes that of a FF sensor (or larger), that advantage disappears and with it a significant portion of the buying public.

I shoot birds, usually in good light, and need all the pixels on target I can get. If the 7D2 had the same size pixels (8 megapixels) as the 5D3, there would be no debate as to getting A or B or possibly both... It would be 5D3 all the way.

I don't really agree because the crop sensors overwhelming advantage is its cheaper price rather than more pixels on target. The crop is disproportionately cheaper, most probably because the manufactures keep FF expensive. So for many it wouldn't be 5DIII all the way because they would not be able to afford one.

I'm not disputing the case for more pixels on target; it's just that that can be an additional benefit along with the cheaper system.

I wasn't referring to an 8 mp camera either, more in the region of 14-16, which in my opinion is high resolution anyway. You'd have to have around a 40 mp FF to match even that. My thinking was high ISO and speed, something where the new 7DII will have to excel over the likes of the 70D. BUt it's main 'advantage' is going to be the 'high end' ergonomics, which was my original point, but you will have to pay 50% more than the 70D for it.

I still maintain the 7DII will come in slightly under the RRP of the 6D, so it may well be more expensive than the 'budget' FF at inception.
I did say " one of the advantages" :)

Yes you did !  :)

In reality I'm sure the odds are stacked against the 7DII being a lower mp camera; Canon will probably use it to introduce a 22 mp one, or something like that. But I'm not sure it will be better for it.

198
I half wonder if Canon would have the courage to use a lower mp in the up coming 7DII in order to increase high ISO performance and shooting speed. If the new camera does turn out to be a 'budget' pro action camera the high ISO performance would be useful for indoor sports.

I've owned both the 650D and 1100D alongside my FF bodies, and IMO the lower mp camera gave better overall 'IQ'. in fact the 1100D can produce alarmingly good IQ. I say 'alarming' because the 1100D cost about £250 and the FF £2500.

I see that the new 1200D uses the ubiquitous 18mp sensor. A pity IMO, but then I guess the vast majority of customers for that camera would disagree; the more mp the better.

So are we seeing Canon steering the customer towards 'high mp = consumer, low mp = pro' ?( Bearing in mind 'low' is still actually high resolution).If so the new 'pro' grade 7DII might be lower mp.
I kind of doubt it. One of the big reasons for the 7d is to get more pixels on target.... If the pixel size becomes that of a FF sensor (or larger), that advantage disappears and with it a significant portion of the buying public.

I shoot birds, usually in good light, and need all the pixels on target I can get. If the 7D2 had the same size pixels (8 megapixels) as the 5D3, there would be no debate as to getting A or B or possibly both... It would be 5D3 all the way.

I don't really agree because the crop sensors overwhelming advantage is its cheaper price rather than more pixels on target. The crop is disproportionately cheaper, most probably because the manufactures keep FF expensive. So for many it wouldn't be 5DIII all the way because they would not be able to afford one.

I'm not disputing the case for more pixels on target; it's just that that can be an additional benefit along with the cheaper system.

I wasn't referring to an 8 mp camera either, more in the region of 14-16, which in my opinion is high resolution anyway. You'd have to have around a 40 mp FF to match even that. My thinking was high ISO and speed, something where the new 7DII will have to excel over the likes of the 70D. BUt it's main 'advantage' is going to be the 'high end' ergonomics, which was my original point, but you will have to pay 50% more than the 70D for it.

I still maintain the 7DII will come in slightly under the RRP of the 6D, so it may well be more expensive than the 'budget' FF at inception.

199
I half wonder if Canon would have the courage to use a lower mp in the up coming 7DII in order to increase high ISO performance and shooting speed. If the new camera does turn out to be a 'budget' pro action camera the high ISO performance would be useful for indoor sports.

I've owned both the 650D and 1100D alongside my FF bodies, and IMO the lower mp camera gave better overall 'IQ'. in fact the 1100D can produce alarmingly good IQ. I say 'alarming' because the 1100D cost about £250 and the FF £2500.

I see that the new 1200D uses the ubiquitous 18mp sensor. A pity IMO, but then I guess the vast majority of customers for that camera would disagree; the more mp the better.

So are we seeing Canon steering the customer towards 'high mp = consumer, low mp = pro' ?( Bearing in mind 'low' is still actually high resolution).If so the new 'pro' grade 7DII might be lower mp.

200
EOS Bodies / Re: Anything to report from the Olympics?
« on: February 21, 2014, 04:40:53 PM »
Strange ... Curling is normally used as The example of boring winter sports. But apparently not amongst photographers  ::)

Hmmm, the men's curling certainly brought the sport back down to earth from a spectator point of view  :(

201
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2014, 04:35:04 PM »
The 6D is of the same castrated philosophy of the newer xxD line, although in this case Canon have been quite clever in making the ergonomics of the 6D annoying enough to needle the user into upgrading to a 5D III, thus selling the consumer two expensive cameras rather than just one.

I'm not in the big budget platinum club so I never tried these, but I'd still disagree. I like the lower size/weight and absolutely love the "right hand only" control of my 60d and 6d, and you can customize much more than Canon intended with Magic Lantern. Mixing both concepts might not be a good idea, so flagship 7d will go with premium 5d3 - but given just looking at the usability the limited amount of af points (and usability) doesn't really necessitate a joystick.

I was being a little tongue-in-cheek with my 6D comment. I agree that the size, weight and fit in your hand is excellent. However I'm not just referring to the joystick; the flash compensation control on the 5D ( and up to 50D in the xxD line) works really well - couldn't be better for me. In comparison the 6D is just annoying.

I think it is clear Canon have created a demarkation of the xxD to allow for a top end model, in the same way we have xxD controls on the 6D. For this reason I'm pretty sure the new 7DII will have 'top end' control interface and be about 50% more expensive than the 70D. This would put it just below the 6D: to use current UK prices including VAT - 70D = £858, 6D = 1379. Add 50% to the current 70D price and voila ! - you have £1287. Job done for Canon.

Your point about 'not being in the big platinum club' is exactly my point. In the days of the 40 and 50D you didn't have to spend a small fortune to get those ergonomics. Now you do. It's not development, it's crippling.

I bet our friends in the States are laughing their socks of at our European prices  >:(

   

202
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2014, 02:19:02 PM »
Lord Lucan has been spotted with a  prototype ;)

Seriously, I find it hard to imagine what the spec. could possibly be that will position it significantly better than a 70D without making it as expensive as a 5D4oops 3?

Canon have manoeuvred the xxD line to allow a higher end model that will still sit under the FF 6D in retail price ( or eventual street price). The xxD has lost the 'full' EOS ergonomics which have now become high end ergonomics.

The 6D is of the same castrated philosophy of the newer xxD line, although in this case Canon have been quite clever in making the ergonomics of the 6D annoying enough to needle the user into upgrading to a 5D III, thus selling the consumer two expensive cameras rather than just one.

I predict the 7DII will gain the joystick et al, lose the pop up flash. It may introduce a new, not necessarily higher mp sensor, just as the original 7D did. I wonder if Canon would have the courage to go slightly less mp but much improved high ISO performance, speed etc. Either way I'm guessing it will be a fast action camera for pros on a budget.

203
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 21, 2014, 07:15:22 AM »
If that's not the case for you, I'd suggest the tools aren't the problem, but rather the tool user.

Nope, that's not the case. I think, perhaps, you've conflated some test methods with actual shooting, hopefully not merely for dramatic effect. ;)

out of the following Canon cameras i've owned & used
  • 3x 350
  • 4x 400
  • 2x 450
  • 2x 1000
  • 1x 40
  • 2x 60
  • 1x 7
  • 1x 5d2
  • 8x G series
  • 9x various PnS

.. only the 7D and 5D2 gave me low ISO problems with FPN.  Pity, I really liked the 7D otherwise, too.
So, those tools did not perform to my requirements, and off they went.
7D's metering was good, tho occasionally clipped highlites a bit much.
5D2's metering would, on occasion, just be wildly out, usually underexposing, not that it mattered most of the time.
No complaints about the other 22 "raw generators."
Can you get how that puts into perspective why I found my 7D, and especially the 5d2, "disappointing?"  A hint if you're missing it, they're also the 2 highest priced bodies of the bunch.

I know I and others should just ignore this post, but I'm going to reply because you may give the impression to someone reading it that the 5D digic 4 cameras are in some way inferior to the others, and this is just not the case.

It is true that if you lift zero data ( ie total black) from the 5D II there is more FPN than with the digic 2 and 5 camera. ( I don't have a digic 3 camera). I do I know this ? I have compared them after reading the

No, I can't be bothered. In normal photography it just doesn't have any relevance.

204
Dear Mr Surapon,

If you really can't resist purchasing another camera body I recommend the 6D because : a) it will add amazing high ISO ability to your existing fleet of camera bodies, and :b) it is the smallest and lightest FF DSLR, which as you like to wear all your gear at once will be the least likely addition to effect your stability.

Regarding your scenario I don't believe there is any visible difference in the sensors of equal generation, so as the 85 1.2 is such a unique lens I guess that would win if you're at open aperture. But it would on a 1100D too.

205
Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: February 19, 2014, 05:20:24 PM »
Inner harbour of Victoria, B.C. with houseboats to the side. Not the best picture but I'm away from home and don't have my usual editing software available. Thought I'd post it anyway.

Actually I quite like the light, colour and tones you've got in this picture - as it is. If it's joey straight from camera it shows how improved the latest couple of generations have been.

206
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 19, 2014, 03:02:12 PM »
Might be worth checking out some of the images produced on crop sensors in places like 500px. Here's a link for starters:

http://500px.com/search?q=Canon+550D

FF is disproportionately expensive, but if you can afford it and if you get more pleasure from it, why not ?


Man, don't you ever post a link like that again! Now how can I blame my camera for the lousy pics I take? :)


All the dslrs are incredibly competent machines, and have been for at least the last ten years, certainly in low ISOs at any rate. Sometimes if I want a reality check I'll look up something like 'Canon 10D' on 500px and proceed to embarrass myself.


207
Lenses / Re: Hard choice the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8
« on: February 19, 2014, 02:40:53 PM »
Whoever said the 85/1.8 is Canon's sharpest lens needs an IQ test…

So if the OP already has a 40 the 85 is the default choic

Maybe I'll swap the 40 for an upcoming 50 IS when it finally arrives :)

You'll have to get in the queue  ;) I'm really hoping the new 50 IS is stellar wide open, whether that be 1.8 or 2, I'm not bothered. The current 50 1.4 is , in my opinion, not useable at 1.4 whereas the 85 1.8 can be used fully open. The sharpness of the plane of focus is what off sets the bokeh.

For my self I wouldn't sell the 40. a) it's not worth much and b) it's a stellar little lens that goes in your pocket to complement a longer zoom.

208
Lenses / Re: Hard choice the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8
« on: February 19, 2014, 02:18:56 PM »
Whoever said the 85/1.8 is Canon's sharpest lens needs an IQ test…

I think you'll find it was DxO - or at least when they first started their lens 'ratings' the 85 1.8 was top of the tree, 'rated' higher than any other Canon lens. Then it all got quietly changed a couple of years ago.

My experience is that in many uses the 40 and 50mm focal lengths are pretty similar - unless you are very close to the subject, then as you are much closer with the 40 you can get an unwanted perspective. So if the OP already has a 40 the 85 is the default choice.

209
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 19, 2014, 06:46:56 AM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.


Might be worth checking out some of the images produced on crop sensors in places like 500px. Here's a link for starters:

http://500px.com/search?q=Canon+550D

FF is disproportionately expensive, but if you can afford it and if you get more pleasure from it, why not ?

210
1100D? Really?

OK, it's a small sample, but I'm not surprised the 1100D sneaked one in. 'Pro' doesn't mean you can afford all the 'best' gear; pros make their living by photography, not to spend their living on photography. And the 1100D can do pretty much all the others can do. Same reason high percentage of 5D IIs and D700s.

Also, dynamic range not required at 72 dpi ? Press photogs often need to get the images wired real quick, no time for pp so they need DR as much, or even more than the next guy. One thing you can be pretty sure of: these guys aren't lifting shadows by absurd levels in order to try and find FPN.

Not good figures for Nikon though.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 96