U-Type said:

I guess it's cause the macro has built in extension tubes for achieving 1:1 magnification? Thus the bellows factor causes it to be registered as a f5.6?

Click to expand...

Loren E said:

jrista said:

Loren E said:

You said "The Dual pixel does not hinder AF performance" and then said "Let me repeat it, Dual Pixel does not hinder the ISO"....did my confusion arise because you meant to say ISO performance instead of AF performance in your first post?

And hasn't the Nikon D7100 been tested to be close to 2 stops better at high ISO than the 7d? I didn't do any side by side comparisons but definitely felt like my level of satisfaction with ISO 6400 on the D7100 was similar to that felt with ISO 1600 on the 7D...at least in terms of where I felt I wanted to cap my high ISO usage for the respective bodies....maybe to be fair 1600 on the 7D is more like 4000 on the D7100 than 6400.

Click to expand...

There is perceptually better and actually better. There is most definitely a psychological component to thinking that the D7100 is "two stops" better at high ISO. From a technical standpoint, it probably isn't possible to actually get truly two stops better, since stops are a power of two, and ISO performance is dependent upon Q.E. and pixel area. The 7D has larger pixels (4.16µm vs. 3.91µm), which is it's benefit, where as the D7100 has more Q.E. (but certainly not enough to literally be two stops better.) The D7100 has 11% better Q.E. than the 7D (52% vs. 41%). In terms of pixel area, the 7D pixels are 13% larger. Technologically, the D7100 has a better sensor with a better architecture, which also probably gives it an edge when it comes to high ISO (primarily, it has a higher SNR, which means that at every ISO, it has a larger usable signal). Overall, from a literal, physical, technical standpoint, the difference between these two sensors is fairly small, and while the D7100, thanks to its excellent SNR, does better, it isn't anywhere close to two stops (i.e. the 7D at ISO 6400 has a saturation point of 536 vs. the D7100 at ISO 6400 which has a saturation point of 541...almost negligible.)

To truly have a full two stops better noise performance, where the amount of noise at ISO 6400 is the same as the amount of noise at ISO 1600, you either need to reduce megapixel count by a factor of two (pixels that are four times greater area...i.e. a pixel pitch of 7.82µm)...or you need to increase quantum efficiency by two orders of magnitude. The 7D has a Q.E. of 41%. Twice the efficiency is 82%. Twice that is 164%. Well, it's impossible to gather more photons than exist, so you can't have more than 100% Q.E. (and achieving that usually requires rather bulky cooling equipment that would render such a camera immobile.)

From a perceptual standpoint...softer detail appears to suffer more from noise. The 7D has an AA filter, where as the D7100 does not. The D7100 is going to have much sharper detail due to having more acutance. THIS is its true strong point when it comes to ISO performance, and probably the key reason why it "feels" as though it has less noise. Detail is sharper with the D7100, so noise doesn't appear to be as prevalent, even though it is roughly the same as the 7D. There is a tradeoff for this...more aliasing and moire. General aliasing can be delt with to a degree with downsampling, moire can be very difficult to deal with (there are some tools, however most simply reduce color moire and mitigate monochrome moire, but none can actually eliminate it.)

If you don't shoot subjects that have repeating patterns or clean edges that might result in aliasing, then the D7100 is certainly an amazing camera, and its sharper detail will certainly result in perceptually less noise.

The 70D is still using the same general sensor design and architecture as the 7D, so it is doubtful much of its weaknesses have been resolved. I get the feeling that the 70D is sharper, which will go a long way to mitigating how noisy it "feels". It has a larger signal, however again thanks to Canon's read-noisy archaic sensor+ADC architecture, it still isn't as good as the D7100 (26726e- vs. 29236e- FWC.) The 70D also still uses an AA filter, which is going to soften detail around nyquist...and while that eliminates (or greatly reduces) aliasing, the lower acutance will still make it "feel" as though it is noisier...dual pixel architecture or not.

Click to expand...

Really informative post, very interesting about the affect of an AA filter on noise perception. I wonder if Canon will begin going the Nikon route and moving AA filters.

Click to expand...

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Don Haines said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Canon prides themselves on making sensors in house, and that is unlikely to change. They are expanding production. Its cheaper that way. Producing a large DSLR sensor is different from producing the tiny computer chips that Intel makes.

Canon also produces the equipment to manufacture sensors and computer chips, so they can custom make their own equipment, they just have not yet decided to go to a new process, but it is said to be imminent.

Canon is making money while others are losing mostly because they are conservative and only make changes when there is a handsome payback. They are in the process of switching to 100% robotic camera assembly, so we can be certain that they believe that there will be a big payback. A new sensor packaging design has already been developed and is used in the SL1. Its probably robotic friendly and soon all Canon cameras will use it.

Click to expand...

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that Canon had already gone to newer and finer technology for it's p/s sensors.... To me, that indicates that the move is already underway.

Does anyone know what technology is used in the fabrication of the 70D sensor? I would have guessed that the radical change to dual-pixel would have been the logical time to change processes.....

Click to expand...

So far all I hear is Rumors, they might in fact have changed already, but someone like chipworks usually catches it. Since they did not put out a article on it, I expect it is the same technology, but no one is saying.

Click to expand...

Marsu42 said:

BPLOL said:

The 6D has a delay that you can notice when using full button presses to take the shot. And that's compared to my XTi. I don't know if that is what you are experiencing. More info: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52069474

Click to expand...

Thanks for the notification, I didn't realize this before which means that I focus/recompose for 99,9% of my shots.

I'd like to add that the "superimposed display" is a bit futile on the 6d anyway as most people will use the center point only, meaning the is no need to see which af point(s) have locked on, and in tracking it doesn't indicate the points anyway. So for most of us it's sufficient to see when the camera has af lock by the green dot in the vf.

Click to expand...

AmbientLight said:

Wouldn't a driver gets fined excessively for wearing such a cap, because it keeps the driver occupied with lots of things other than driving?
In many countries people do get into real trouble for actions like eating pizza, being on the phone, using SMS, writing e-mails, checking a calendar and drinking all at the same time as someone is driving.

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

dgatwood said:

You'll notice I said "for a given focal length". To be completely precise, I should have said, "for a given focal length, maximum aperture, and minimum focusing distance". You can't really compare apples to oranges.

That said, making the lens smaller and lighter is just one possible option, obtained by using a similar number of elements and a similar design. Alternatively, instead of making the lens smaller and lighter, you could instead choose to provide a larger maximum aperture, add macro capabilities, or correct for CA and other artifacts more completely (which is arguably more critical when you're dealing with the higher pixel density on crop bodies). Either way, there's still a benefit over the full-frame glass.

Click to expand...

but your not,comparing similar lenses, toss the 25-105, or you can't say that because the 24-105 is way better at 60mm than the 17-55 considering it won't go there.

and for the 17-55 vs the 17-40, that's f2.8vsf4, I would naturally expect the f2.8 to be better.

lets talk apples to apples, but really there is non.

my point is that there is nothing wrong with using,L glass on a crop

Perhaps...but the point seems rather moot for the original discussion concerning EF-S primes, since there's only one. Also, I wasn't questioning that an EF-S lens could be smaller and lighter than the same focal length/aperture in an EF lens, but rather your figure of 'two-thirds' the size.

WPJ said:

Any L lens will perform just as good is not better on a crop as you won't get as much of the soft corners people always complain about.

Click to expand...

I disagree. First, you have to take the sensor into account - you'll get better IQ out of the combination of L-lens and FF sensor than that lens on APS-C, even considering the soft corners of an UWA zoom. Second, an L-lens on crop won't necessarily outperform an EF-S lens - for example, the EF-S 17-55mm is better than both the 17-40L and 24-105L on the same crop body.

Click to expand...

Canon Rumors said:

<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/11/this-is-the-way-a-white-camera-should-be-done/\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/11/this-is-the-way-a-white-camera-should-be-done/\">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Canon P Imperial Edition


</strong>Canon Rumors reader Bernard sent me a few photos of his custom Canon P rangefinder. He had it redone in Tokyo with the help of <a href=\"http://www.japancamerahunter.com/\" target=\"_blank\">The Japan Camera Hunter</a>.</p>
<p>The camera is fully customized with a new paint job and striking red grip. I personally think this is a nicer rangefinder than the one that <a href=\"http://www.macrumors.com/2013/11/24/one-of-a-kind-products-designed-by-jony-ive-and-designer-marc-newson-sold-off-at-red-auction/\" target=\"_blank\">just went for $1.8mil</a> </p>
<p>What do you think of Bernard’s P?</p>
<div id=\"attachment_14824\" style=\"width: 585px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/canonP1.jpg\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-14824\" alt=\"Canon P Custom | Click for Larger\" src=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/canonP1-575x383.jpg\" width=\"575\" height=\"383\" /></a><p class=\"wp-caption-text\">Canon P Custom | Click for Larger</p></div>
<div id=\"attachment_14825\" style=\"width: 585px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/canonP2.jpg\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-14825\" alt=\"Canon P Custom | Click for Larger\" src=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/canonP2-575x383.jpg\" width=\"575\" height=\"383\" /></a><p class=\"wp-caption-text\">Canon P Custom | Click for Larger</p></div>
<div id=\"attachment_14826\" style=\"width: 585px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/DSF5125.jpg\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-14826\" alt=\"Canon P Custom | Click for Larger\" src=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/DSF5125-575x383.jpg\" width=\"575\" height=\"383\" /></a><p class=\"wp-caption-text\">Canon P Custom | Click for Larger</p></div>
<p>What if this was a digital P?</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p> </p>

Click to expand...

CarlTN said:

Are you saying there's no difference between HDMI 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4? 1.3 has been around since 2005 or 2006.

From what I can tell, the only way to watch 4k video content in the home, is via Sony's pre-loaded, dedicated hard drive, on their 4k sets. Sharp and Samsung have something similar, but Sony owns the rights to a lot of movies, so their drive comes with like 20 movies on it. Whether or not the majority of those movies was remastered at the 4k resolution, rather than just upsampled to it, I can't say. Whether or not I would want to watch any of those 20 movies more than twice, I can say...the answer is NO.

Either way, I can agree that unless there starts being a lot of 4k content, then TV's with that resolution will not sell well.

Click to expand...

surapon said:

Dear Sir, Mr. Drizzt321
Just from my Idea , Low Tech one----I use 5D MK II and Canon EF 100 mm. F/ 2.8 L Hybrid IS, Macro USM with Tripods, Self Timer, and Shoot these my 35 years old/ Damaged Drawings, Size : 24 Inches X 36 Inches, at distant 7-8 Feet( AV. Mode At F = 8.0, ISO = 100), on Shaded Area ( No directed Sun Light)---":SET IS. off" And It work for me in every times.
Just another Idea.
Surapon

Click to expand...

Jim O said:

AAPhotog said:

You're talking to someone who has no biological children, yet deals with many women and takes care of their children as his own.

Click to expand...

Many? Wow, what a magnanimous guy you are!

How many times have you held them while they puked at three in the morning? How many have you held while they cried after some boyfriend or girlfriend broke their heart? How many have you taught to throw a curveball and been out there beyond dark doing it? How many have you driven five hours each way to get when they're sick at college? How many have you spent your hard earned cash on for cars (and insurance) and college tuition and scouting and dance and gymnastics and team sports and trips abroad? How many times have you changed an infant and brought him or her to his or her mother to breast feed? How many two year olds have you held while they had a temp of 105º and were having a spinal tap (and were you also crying?)? How many of your sons and daughters have you had "the talk" with? How many have you taken to get birth control? How many soccer and baseball and lacrosse games have you attended when it's cold (and/or raining) outside? How many dance recitals have you been to and sat through two hours of crap waiting for your daughter's five minute performance? How many late nights have you waited until the last one came in before you finally got some rest? How many times have you bitten your tongue and NOT said "I told you so" even though it might feel so satisfying to do just that at the moment? These are but a few of my parenting experiences.

You and Mr. Walnut can speak in platitudes about what you believe parenting to be. In parenting "love" is spelled "T-I-M-E". It's being there. You teach them by modeling the behaviors you wish for them to emulate. That's how they learn. Talking the talk means zilch. It's all about walking the walk. And then you hope that they've taken in at least some of it, and that their mistakes will not be huge and that they will indeed learn something so as not to repeat them.

As I said, you have no standing to talk about parenting, your "takes care of their children as his own" notwithstanding. You have ZERO clue how you would take care of your own. You do not and can not understand that. The more you say it, the more ludicrous it sounds.

Anyway, my turkey is stuffed and in the roaster and my home made gravy is simmering. I'm going to enjoy Thanksgiving with my children, two of whom came from different states not because they had to be here but because they wanted to be here and enjoy the meal that Dad has been making since my oldest was about two. Terrible parenting, I know.

Click to expand...