December 11, 2016, 01:22:53 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
51
Lenses / Re: Lens dilemma- 300mm f2.8 with tc or 500mm f4L MkI
« Last post by kaihp on December 10, 2016, 12:23:06 PM »
1986 - load film, take pictures. Send to the photo lab and get pictures back 2 days after you took them.
2016 - lad 64MB CF card, take 3,000 pictures in a day

Mike, I think I can tell right now, that if you can fit 3,000 images on a 64MB CF card, they probably aren't worth looking at, due to the poor resolution or high compression  :P ;D
52
Adobe Defense League in full swing.  :)

NO, we have PAID for our Adobe products. We don't have to LEAVE, we have every RIGHT to DEMAND proper and decent products and service from our software supplier Adobe. Unfortunately they seem neither able nor willing to get their act together with LR.

No, you paid for this month, you get service this month. If you want more than Adobe provide tough, go buy On1, Capture One, Afinity etc etc.

Pissy little one man band photographers have never been a key market for Adobe and I see no reason for that to change. All they do is whine and bitch about what they are 'owed', meanwhile the true creative company market, the ones that actually pay decent license fees can't get enough of the Adobe love and constant upgrades.

If photographers were truly important to Adobe they would show it, but look at where the development goes, there are Suite upgrades nearly every week............

You do work for Adobe.

Or you have especially bad indigestion.

Happy holidays, pissy cat.   ::)
53
The only thing I can think of at the centre of the image is the pixel density of the 50D enabling greater resolution (4.99 vs 6.4)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-DSLR-Digital-Camera-Review.aspx


Quote
his is not influenced by neither the qualities of the surface on which it projects the image
The start of the MTF setions says "The lens showed pretty good resolution figures during our full format test and it gets, of course, better on an APS-C format camera due to the sweet spot effect here." Which means to me that
they are testing that lens on that body so the resolution depends on the ability of the body to record detail.
54
EOS Bodies / Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap
« Last post by douglaurent on December 10, 2016, 12:09:19 PM »
This is not a forum for amateurs

Of course it is, where did you get the idea that CR is for pros only?

That's his opinion.  He's welcome to express his opinion even though, as usual, doing so makes him look foolish.

Amateurs: people who own basic DSLR's and kit lenses and are satisfied with what they have.  Between amateur and pro there are a lot more shades of enthusiasts etc, and for all of them the forum can be interesting of course.
55
EOS Bodies / Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap
« Last post by douglaurent on December 10, 2016, 12:06:35 PM »
I honestly don't care how Canon is doing, because they don't care about the budgets and workflows of the consumers either.  Especially for you, below I will copy my personal "best of full frame" camera and lens list again, regardless of brands or mounts.  ... An in my opinion Canon only delivers the best product in 14 of 40 categories:

Especially for me?  Lol.  Why would I give any credence to your worthless opinion?

Because you seem to spend 50x as much time in such forums as me and seem to need the attention.
56
Landscape / Re: Deep Sky Astrophotography
« Last post by Don Haines on December 10, 2016, 12:05:04 PM »
i just tried my first drizzle this mornin with old images of M51. Some pictures i took with 1000mm focale length,
my canon 500f4 and a teleconverter X2. I m pretty happy with the result.
40x180 sec f8 iso-800
49 dark
DSS with drizzle 3x


Nice!
57
EOS Bodies / Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap
« Last post by douglaurent on December 10, 2016, 12:04:17 PM »
If that roadmap would be true, it would be very disappointing and only contain 1 out of approx 50 cameras and lenses I have on a personal wish list and would buy (products which all wouldn't be unrealistic looking at the competition and the market in the year 2017):

<snip>

14-24/2.8 IS
16-35/2.8 IS
24-70/2.8 IS

<snip>


I'll settle for TS-E 11-800mm f/1.0 IS USM and TS-E 8-15mm f/0.7 IS USM fish eye, both with auto focus, 5 axis 6 stops IS, and the ability to tilt & shift on both axis.

So regarding these 3 zooms, you say I'm a complete idiot to expect Canon to release same spec'ed lenses 2-8 years later than the competion, because it's unmanagable to add stabilization?  That only shows how low the expectations regarding Canon seem to be.
58
Canon General / Re: What do you shoot with.
« Last post by Don Haines on December 10, 2016, 12:03:01 PM »
The idea was to see how representative the forum members are of the general camera buying public. The blue is the general public, the red is us. I think the results show that we do not accurately represent the general public, despite claims to the contrary by several forum members.
59
Animal Kingdom / Re: BIRD IN FLIGHT ONLY -- share your BIF photos here
« Last post by Click on December 10, 2016, 11:58:58 AM »
Beautiful shot, Eldar.   :)
60
Lenses / Different MTF of Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM on FF vs APS-C ..... Why?
« Last post by haggie on December 10, 2016, 11:56:29 AM »
The site of Photozone.de shows the resolution graphs (MTF) of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM for different focus settings (zoom settings), when mounted on a Canon 5D (FF-body).
The same site also shows the resolution graphs (MTF) of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM for different focus settings (zoom settings), when mounted on a Canon 50D (APS-C-body).

I am puzzled by the (huge) difference between these two setups.
And I cannot explain that difference, nor can I find (the theory of) the reason behind it.

With my limited knowledge of applied optics, my reasoning (thatclearly is faulty) was as follows.
1. A lens projects a sharp image on the sensor if mounted correctly on the camera body: that is implicit in the design of the camera body (its dimensions) and the lens (its optical properties in combination with its size). That is the same for both setups, so no reason for discrepancies here.
2. When, on a given focus setting, the lens performs with a certain number of lines/mm, this is not influenced by neither the qualities of the surface on which it projects the image, nor the size of the surface. The light falls on the lens and is projected on that surface.
3. I see that aberrations like an imperfect plane of the projected image affect the MTF. But comparing the same lens on FF vs APS-C, that would be visible in the results for the borders and corners. And the same, so I was thinking, goes for all other lens aberrations.
4. I do not see how a different size (either in millimeters or in number of pixels per millimeter) of the surface on which the image is projected, affects the number of lines/mm that the lens can discern. And therefore I cannot understand how a property of the camera body, i.e. FF vs APS-C, makes a difference.

But the difference is there, so much is clear.     ???
So the question remains:
Why is the size of the surface of influence on the MTF of the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM at the center of the image, as indicated by the different results for FF versus APS-C?

Can anybody explain the why (the theory) behind this difference in MTF?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10