November 28, 2014, 07:45:37 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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 137
91
EOS Bodies / Re: AA Filter: Still Relevant, Marketing Ploy, or Obsolete?
« on: October 12, 2014, 04:27:39 PM »
The general consensus from those that own identical camera bodies apart from inclusion or exclusion of AA filter (ie Nikon D800/e and Pentax K5II/s ) is that after suitable sharpening there is no real perceivable difference. Having seen some files from some AA-less sensors personally I think Canon are doing the right thing keeping it.

92
I saw this.... and for some strange reason it made me think of this thread...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhDG_WBIQgc

Ah, Don ! If only DRones were knocked down so easily. I wonder how long it was before the drone was back up and flying. If it was a CR DRone it'be about one minute  :(

93
Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 11, 2014, 04:30:03 PM »
A few Autumn leave shots from a trip to Brandelhow Park on the West shoreline of Derwent Water, English Lake District.
Shot on my original 5D, all 24-105L. All hand held at 800 ISO, which the 5D mki seemed to be really good at.
Dang.......
I was there the first two weeks in September, early enough to still have good weather (which we did have),
but too early for any decent colour.

Lovely shots.
Cheers Brian

Thanks Brian and dpc. It is beautiful up there.

@pgsdeepak; really like the portrait one with rock in front of the waterfall. I find it's difficult to get good portrait orientation landscape shots but this one works well.

94
How often are you shooting a scene with more luminance range then Canon can handle...but not more then Exmor can handle...with close up foliage...and with wind so heavy that HDR or blending is impossible? Seriously, how many shots per year are we talking here?

A 3ev difference is in my experience often just the range you need to prevent clipped sky while retaining good shadow resolution. And the nature moves a lot, esp. if you look at 100% crop. If you doubt it, get out more :-> ... then you'll see it doesn't take heavy storms to make leaves and grass move noticeably. Are you watching closely ("The Prestige")?



There isn't a 3EV difference in practice, whatever DxO says. Remember that photographically 11 to 12 EV is a lot anyway, and, as I've said many times before, to hit this amount of EV range you have to begin including the light source itself in your exposure. There is then a slim window to make use of the 'extra' 1 stop or whatever, but the light source is normally much more than a 13, 14 or 15 EV range can cope with.

Remember there are many people on CR who have used and/or owned a camera body that uses Exmor. I don't see any of them changing.

The examples of pushing four or five stops is just academic. In all my 'landscape' type shots I'm only ever pulling about 1.5 stop, pushing 1.5 - max.

95

Yeah, keep blaming the gear, buddy. I've shot with heavy long lenses without tripod collars more times than I can count. A sturdy tripod, a cable release, and locking up the mirror works wonders.

Ain't that the truth, I have forgotten my 300 f2.8 IS collar before and used that perfectly well with the camera mounted on the tripod, I virtually never use the collar on my 70-200 f2.8 IS, just use the L-Plate on the body.

It seems the DRoners would benefit from using two L-plates, not just one. Preferably one on the back and one on the front to warn other photographers to give them a bit of room.

96
Let's just be clear; no one here is anti dynamic range per se. It is a fundamental part of photography, and a genuine lack of it in the medium is limiting.

There are plenty who are 'anti-DRones though, myself included. Someone who states on this forum that they personally find Canons DR limiting compared to Exmor is not a DRone, until that is, the drone on and on about it, whereupon they may well qualify to join the DRone club.

But a real DRone, as has been pointed out by fragilesi above, is someone who makes the most asinine and ridiculous assertions as to their perceived limitations of Canon's IQ, to the extent that one assumes that whenever they look at a technically brilliant image shot on a Canon they think " imagine what the noise would be if those shadows were lifted four stops". Or they look at a well executed HDR shot on a camera using Exmor and think " wow, if only I had a Sony I could take images like that".

Unfortunately the recently self appointed King of the DRones has made some of the most inflammatory statements that I've seen on CR, bringing the forum down to the worst level of Internet 'expert discussion'. Cut out those sort of statements and everyone will get along a lot better.

97
Lenses / Re: 24-70 swap
« on: October 08, 2014, 03:17:09 PM »
I had 5 version 1 lenses, none were really good.  The AF issue is likely due to some 5 cent internal plastic guides that crack, or break.  You can replace them yourself.  Thher are also internal lens adjustments that seem to need tweaking over the life of the lens which goes out of adjustment due to bumps.
 
The 24-70mm f/4 is not likely going to be a improvement, its about the same as the 24-105mmL.
 
I'd recommend having your lens tuned up.  It might cost you $300, but you should see a big improvement.  The one weak area is the curvature of field, at wide apertures, the edges will be oof, or if you focus at the edges, the center will be soft.  This is a lens design issue and can't be fixed.  Its only apparent to those who obsess over IQ.

I have both the 24-70/4 and the 24-105 and the former is significantly better across the range and much better in the corners. Early copies that were reviewed do not seem to have been assembled that accurately; it has an unusually large amount of adjustable elements apparently.

Apart from critical IQ the advantage of the 24-70/4 is its small size and excellent IS.  Disadvantage is lack of 2.8 and 75-105 range of the 24-105.

On a personal level I'm using the 24-105 more because I use the longer end extensively.

98


First, it's definitely an Exmor. Sony calls it an Exmor in their marketing materials:

http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/vq5f/index.html

There are a couple different types of Exmor. There are two versions of the full frame, as well as the BSI Exmor R and RS. I believe the A7s uses a dual-CDS design, one which amplifies at the pixel, performs analog-CDS, then does the CP-ADC and digital-CDS. I don't know why they use the dual CDS approach, according to Sony's original paper on Exmor a number of years ago, they went to digital CDS because analog CDS was a source of banding noise. Anyway...the sensor in the A7s is indeed an Exmor.

Sure, the A7s does have some higher read noise (relative to other Exmor sensors) at base ISO. Isn't it's base ISO at 80? I thought that at ISO 100, it's RN dropped to around 6e-. Also, even though it's base ISO RN is higher, it's still got considerably more DR than any Canon sensor there. I think Sony had to make some tradeoffs at low ISO to achieve the incredible high ISO DR, which seems to take a larger and larger lead over competitors the higher you push ISO.

So what you are saying is: All Exmors are equal but some are more equal than others ?

99
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: October 08, 2014, 07:56:52 AM »
I would say the Canon nay Sayers are about two generation behind, judging by some of their comments.

100
Lenses / Re: recommendation: canon 24mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.2 for wedding?
« on: October 08, 2014, 07:22:23 AM »

My dilemma is, the 24mm is only slightly wider than my excellent 35

Eh ? Are you on crop ?

24 is a lot wider than 35.

101
Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 08, 2014, 06:36:09 AM »
A few Autumn leave shots from a trip to Brandelhow Park on the West shoreline of Derwent Water, English Lake District.
Shot on my original 5D, all 24-105L. All hand held at 800 ISO, which the 5D mki seemed to be really good at.

Great ones! I really like the light and colours in the 2nd one with the gate.

Thanks Domino ! When I shot that picture I was convinced that I had taken it on the 50/1.4, and for quite a while used to refer to it has how good the 50/1.4 is. Then when I actually looked at the info on it I couldn't believe that it was 28mm on the 24-105, so after that I kinda realized that I couldn't really tell the difference !

102
Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 08, 2014, 05:45:59 AM »
A few Autumn leave shots from a trip to Brandelhow Park on the West shoreline of Derwent Water, English Lake District.
Shot on my original 5D, all 24-105L. All hand held at 800 ISO, which the 5D mki seemed to be really good at.

103
After 25 pages this thread is starting to provide some useful information. How disappointing. :)

Can we go back to lifting shadows by five stops and arguing over banding?

With the 6D, the banding issues are basically gone. 5DIII shooters just use the wrong tool for the job and should get add a 6D to their kit.  ;)

Don't you believe it, some of the acclaimed band masters here could manage it.

Back up a second. So even if you shoot RAW the histogram in camera is only displaying the color space you've chosen? So does that mean I should set my camera's color space to Adobe RGB just so I get a more accurate histogram?

When you shoot RAW, the camera generates a small JPG preview image that's embedded in the RAW file container.  That image is what you see during the on-camera review, and it's what's used to generate the histogram and highlight warning (blinkies).  All in-camera settings are applied (color space, ALO, picture style, HTP, etc.).

If you don't mind somewhat funky images for on-camera review, you can use UniWB to get a histogram that better approximates the RAW data.

Another interesting point to add to PBD's sRGB / Adobe RGB histogram info.

If I'm not wanting an OOC jpeg and just shooting for the raw file I set either neutral or faithful in Picture Styles, with contrast set to zero. This seems to give a reasonable impression of the raw data. Haven't tried UniWB but will do to see if that is better.

104
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 06, 2014, 12:30:36 PM »
Looks like you must use the Sigma dock to calibrate these very fast lenses reliably - which is why I don't use them personally.

105
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 05, 2014, 05:16:57 PM »
New sensor and light proof lens caps - to show off the new sensor when you shoot with the lens cap on.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 137