October 23, 2014, 06:19:29 AM

Author Topic: I don't understand  (Read 9140 times)

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: I don't understand
« Reply #45 on: October 25, 2013, 03:49:44 AM »
surapon posted
Yes that 42 inches X  65 Inches Poster , that wide as my  8 years old ,42 Inches HP. Designjet 800  Plotter that can print. No I still do not have enough Pixel 21.5 of my old Canon 5D MK II for looking good  poster, at the 5-8 feet away from the photo/ poster.

You need to look hard at Photoshop with the Genuine Fractals plug-in.  We routinely print 60X120 posters that
look fine from four feet away.  Starting with a 12 or 18mpix image and using the plug in is plenty!  Take a look
at the postershop rip for your machine and you'll find "it ain't the camera"!

Do you use "unsharp mask" before scaling the image up, and when you do, do you select the "genuine fractals" technique?  I have Perfect Resize 7, it does seem to work really well. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: I don't understand
« Reply #45 on: October 25, 2013, 03:49:44 AM »

dgatwood

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 756
  • 300D, 400D, 6D
    • View Profile
Re: I don't understand
« Reply #46 on: October 26, 2013, 02:01:06 PM »
Sony and anyone else are welcome to their 36mp sensor. Canon will continue to do that they are good at: producing cameras for photographers. Any more than  24 mp on a FF sensor and I would want a larger format to go with it.

I strongly disagree.  Right now, Canon's full-frame offerings are lagging nearly a decade behind their crop bodies in terms of absolute resolving power.  If you're shooting photos from far away, the reach of a crop body can't really be matched with a full-frame camera.  You end up with barely an 8 MP image by the time you crop a 5DMk3 image that far, and less than 8MP for the 6D.  Clearly, if 20 megapixels in a crop body produces usable pictures, then a full-frame camera with the same pixel density would also produce usable pictures.


Just out of interest, is there anything in the Sony sensor fabrication that makes it more feasible to have and use 36 mp on a FF sensor size compared with the Canon process ?

There shouldn't be anything impractical about it sensor-wise even with Canon's process.  A full-sized sensor has around 2.6 times the surface area of a Canon APS-C sensor.  Given that the 70D has a 20.2 megapixel sensor, there's no fundamental reason that Canon couldn't use exactly the same process to build a 52 megapixel full-frame sensor.

They might have to do some interesting work to actually read that many pixels out in a timely manner, and it would likely require a lot more CPU horsepower and faster flash cards in order to be usable.  They might even want to do something like writing photos in alternation between two flash cards just to get the speed up high enough, but as far as I can tell, at least sensor-wise, the only reason Canon isn't way past 36 MP already on their full-frame cameras is either that they've decided not to do so for some reason or that they haven't gotten around to building the larger chips yet.

Oh, and yield issues, potentially.  I don't know what Canon's yield looks like on the 70D sensor.  For all I know, one in two parts might fail QA, in which case something approaching 100% of full-frame parts would be DOA.  Mind you, I'd be shocked if the failure rate were anywhere approaching that, given that it is being sold in a relatively high-volume consumer camera, but you never know.

sjprg

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 24
  • 1DSIII
    • View Profile
Re: I don't understand
« Reply #47 on: October 26, 2013, 03:03:40 PM »
Canon's mindset is such that they just can't see the competition, just like the defunct American companies that were still charging $350 for parts that were now selling for $15.
Canon has milked the consumer for so long they have lost track of reality. The new lens prices are a reflection of that mindset. The EOS-M was a reality check when they dropped the price from $799 to under $300.
My RX100's build is not near the quality of my 1DSIII but the IQ is equal and my Nikon's D800E build and IQ kicks the 1DSIII out of the ballpark. Don't misread me, I still prefer Canon, BUT they need to get real.


surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2312
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: I don't understand
« Reply #49 on: October 26, 2013, 04:01:23 PM »
surapon posted
Yes that 42 inches X  65 Inches Poster , that wide as my  8 years old ,42 Inches HP. Designjet 800  Plotter that can print. No I still do not have enough Pixel 21.5 of my old Canon 5D MK II for looking good  poster, at the 5-8 feet away from the photo/ poster.

You need to look hard at Photoshop with the Genuine Fractals plug-in.  We routinely print 60X120 posters that
look fine from four feet away.  Starting with a 12 or 18mpix image and using the plug in is plenty!  Take a look
at the postershop rip for your machine and you'll find "it ain't the camera"!

Thanks you, Sir, Dear Teacher Mr. CarlTN
Yes, Sir, I will buy " the Genuine Fractals plug-in " for my Photoshop 5.5.
Yes, Sir, I need to Learn how to use Photoshop  , to get another level of the Good Effected of Post Processing.
Now, I just use a few tools for my Easy job, That I use/ Transfer Photos top my Autocadd drawings size 24 X 36 Inches.
Have a great Weekend, Sir.
Surapon


Do you use "unsharp mask" before scaling the image up, and when you do, do you select the "genuine fractals" technique?  I have Perfect Resize 7, it does seem to work really well.

No, Sir, I do not know " How "---But I will learn " Unsharp mask" very Soon.
Thanks you, Sir, My dear Teacher.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2013, 04:44:53 PM by surapon »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: I don't understand
« Reply #50 on: October 29, 2013, 04:35:16 AM »
Canon's mindset is such that they just can't see the competition, just like the defunct American companies that were still charging $350 for parts that were now selling for $15.
Canon has milked the consumer for so long they have lost track of reality. The new lens prices are a reflection of that mindset. The EOS-M was a reality check when they dropped the price from $799 to under $300.
My RX100's build is not near the quality of my 1DSIII but the IQ is equal and my Nikon's D800E build and IQ kicks the 1DSIII out of the ballpark. Don't misread me, I still prefer Canon, BUT they need to get real.

I fail to see how the D800E is a better "build" than the 1DS3.  Nikon's ergonomics suck, and the D800 is not a pro body with a pro grip...so why would you compare the build of these two anyway?  And then you say you still prefer Canon?  Why the heck would you?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: I don't understand
« Reply #50 on: October 29, 2013, 04:35:16 AM »