December 17, 2014, 05:10:51 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
« Last post by meywd on Today at 03:02:17 PM »

Dead Sea by meywd84, on Flickr
62
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« Last post by dak723 on Today at 03:01:12 PM »
There are many articles about the AA filter out there, so it's use is no mystery.  It is there to reduce moire, but it's drawbacks are less detail, sharpness and lower resolution.  That is why the newer high MP cameras have no filter.  Put the AA filter back on, and you lose the advantages of the higher MP count.  Pretty simple really.
63
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« Last post by Cosmicbug on Today at 02:57:29 PM »
I see no point in the 'Do we need so many megapixels?' debate.
It is the future , along with more FPS, faster AF, improved video and new features yet to be invented.
It all has to start somewhere, however meaningless it may seem today ( i bet most of us can remember the early high end DSLRs and their lack of performance compared to the best film cameras.)
I say, 'Bring  it on Canon' . I am a Canon system user and whatever they produce will be good ( even if their DR is somewhat lacking with respect to competitors) and I will find use for it.  :)
64
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« Last post by pdirestajr on Today at 02:53:00 PM »
When does diffraction kick in on a 50mp 35mm sensor?! How would this be good for landscapes or studio shots where you stop down? Wouldn't scaling up a lower mp shot probably look the same?

Diffraction is always present.  So I don't know what "kicks in" means.

These would be about 4 micron pixels.  Here's a chart for how diffraction affects MTF.



I meant "kick-in" like when does diffraction softening become so much that we hit the point of diminishing returns? There has to be a point where just cramming more pixels on a sensor is not going to help right?

I would love a higher res 35mm digital camera from Canon as I shoot small products (like makeup), and need to blow them up to poster sizes, so I'm all for it.

I'm not a tech guy, so I'm truly asking.
65
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: I'm getting impatient for the new 5D 4.
« Last post by Maui5150 on Today at 02:51:41 PM »
5DIII has way better focusing system than the 5DII. You will get better pictures with the III right away.

Not necessarily.  Yes, the focusing system is more advanced on the 5D MK III, but like Tony Northrup showed, if you don't know how to really use the AF system, you can get poor results.

There is also a $2K or close to it difference between a 5D MK II and a 5D MK III

The OP has not told us what they are shooting, but if they do not need advanced tracking, then the AF on the 5D MK II may be fine as well as for the price of a 5D MK III the OP could get a 5D MK II and a 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, or pretty close to it. 

And again, if their heart is for the 5D MK IV you will save far more money on the depreciation of a 5D MK II in the next 6 months than you will on 5D MK III.

Heck, if they do the right amount of hunting and show some patience they could possibly even MAKE money on the resale of a 5D MK II after they have 5 months of use which is a lot harder to do with a 5D MK III with the potential announcement of a 5D MK IV
66
Lenses / Re: Buying Advice: What First Lens for a Full Frame?
« Last post by martti on Today at 02:46:31 PM »
The 17-40 is an OK walkaround lens for the crop body.  It would be better complimented with a short tele, 85mm or 100mm than the 35mm. The 17-40mm is good value.
67
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« Last post by bholliman on Today at 02:46:18 PM »

I know video is much more important these days, so STM is a nice get, but as a strictly stills shooter this trend is alarming.  The has-to-happen-eventually EF 50mm f/wehavenoidea IS that will replace the 50 f/1.4 USM had better retain USM focusing or I'll have to buy that Sigma's blasted pickle jar as my next 50.  Focusing speed is a big deal!

+1  I don't plan on ever buying an STM lens, but I certainly hope Canon doesn't expand STM application beyond entry level consumer lenses.  I'm really hoping for a EF 50mm >f/2 IS USM this year.  Surely, Canon will see the fallacy of making the next 50 a USM lens.
68
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 02:45:09 PM »
What ahsanford said. I would LOVE to see a high-resolution, high-dynamic-range FF body for landscape shooting. I don't care about video, high stills frame rate, fancy autofocus. Right now I am very happy with my 6D, but would like the additional DR and resolution offered by the Nikon D810 sensor. Some of the MF MA film era legacy (literally) lenses I use would have to be upgraded, no doubt, but I am in the process of doing so anyway. AIS Nikkor 50 f/1.2 and 55 f/3.5 1:2 macro and 105 f/2.5 would become Sigma Art 50 and maybe the Canon 100 2.8L IS macro (I have and really like the 180 f/3.5L macro, but it is heavy on a long hike with a bag of other lenses).

Canon landscapers almost exclusively have an 'out' to get a D8_0 sensor without waiting or converting.  Since you don't need AF and can use Liveview, you can get an a7R, adapt your Canon glass to it with a fairly inexpensive adaptor ring and go to town.

No need to convert.  No need to wait.  Just $2200 will get you the IQ you want as a temporizing 'fix' until Canon delivers the sensor you need.  I've not done this myself, and I'm not calling it a perfect solution by any stretch, but others have tried this successfully.

- A
69
Day 2 - overcast - the following image was taken with these settings at 9:45 a.m.:

Settings (Tv):  ISO 320, Shutter 1/200th, Aperture 8.0, Focal Distance=560, Spot Metering, EV +2/3, IS 3, infinity setting, expansion mode focusing and recomposed image

Image taken about 20 feet away (approximately 7 meters). 

Gear:  Canon 5D Mark III, Canon TC 1.4 III, Canon 100-400 IS II USM L. - Faithful Mode (not Standard).  Shot in RAW and converted to JPG 1024 pixels Processed in Lightroom.  No saturation or other adjustments other than  sharpness increase from 25 to 70 and clarity change to +5.  This was done only due to RAW conversion to JPG which softens the image.  Actual RAW image was not necessary.

New observation: lens creep if less than 400mm.  Gear was hanging over shoulder facing ground.  Set the camera zoom about 1/2 way (200mm) and noticed that gravity has some affect on the lens creep.  Approximately 50-80mm slippage.  Not a big deal but not sure if this is normal for this lens or version 1.  Interested in others comments on this aspect.

More impressive than previous day.  Had I used my 400mm prime 5.6L image not possible at 1/200th and ISO increase would have been much higher as I typically shoot that lens at 1/800 or 1/1000 depending on footing.  Perhaps as much as 1000 or higher.

Rev
(ocbirds.com)
70
unfortunately we do not have the full-sized image from the starting post. So it cannot be proven or demonstrated evidently, how much better the chosen Sony camera was to capture taht picture rather than any Canon DSLR. I remain convinced, that the picture from that Sony sensor tzurnes out quite noticeably "better" - especially in shadow noise + texture & detail, than it would have from a current Canon sensor.

And I knmow for sure, the Canon pic woult d have at best 60% of the megapixels in it.  ;D
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10