AvTvM said:More is not needed.
In your opinion of course ;-)
I and many others want more...
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:More is not needed.
sigh said:ahsanford said:lw said:Apparently, these are the kits - http://nokiS___a-camera.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eos-m5.html
EOS M5 body
EOS M5 15-45mm kit
EOS M5 18-150mm kit
Hey, CR guy, why is Nokish ita getting the Canon Watch treatment? I thought they were reputable...
- A
I suspect those four letters may have been caught by the profanity filter.
Haydn1971 said:AvTvM said:More is not needed.
In your opinion of course ;-)
I and many others want more...
Maximilian said:And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.LDS said:Tugela said:Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.
No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. ...
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.
So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.
LDS said:Tugela said:Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.
No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. Then there are other elements in a camera that can generate heat. Of course if you have to read and process data continuously, all them will generate heat which needs to be dissipated.
A-PeeR said:ashmadux said:I tested the hell out of them(3), against my trusty M1+Phottix all metal grip.
I put them directly against in other in a host of ultra-normal, non stressful shooting situation with the same lens. The M1 handles all of the same situations like cake. The M3 failed every single comparison. Getting ANY sharp images from the M3 just wasn't happening. Sadder is that even on a tripod, images where 'sharp-ish' at best.
It drove me apeshat bonkers.
Then after an incredibly difficult, HUGE amount of research, I found out that the image problems came from a combo of things:
I
-body isnt heavy enough
-hard shutter slap induces movement
-24mp sensor is much more sensitive to ANY movement, so much higher shutter speeds are needed to get sharp images.
I was under the impression that the M3 (all Canon cameras with live view for that matter) has EFCS. If that's the case, is shutter shock the culprit?
neuroanatomist said:Maximilian said:And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.LDS said:Tugela said:Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.
No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. ...
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.
So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.
In the past, Tugela has not shown himself to be particularly knowlegdable from a technical standpoint (despite attempts to sound technically erudite). For example, his prior statement that any Canon camera with Digic 7 would have 4K video capture...but then the PowerShot G7 X Mark II came out with Digic 7 and no 4K.
As for the sensor itself generating heat during video capture, well, there's a reason my scientific cameras have Peltier cooling on the back side of the sensor, and it's not because of heat from the processor.
neuroanatomist said:neuroanatomist said:Maximilian said:LDS said:Tugela said:Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.
No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. ...
Forever 1080 60P, thats CANON
And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.
So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.
In the past, Tugela has not shown himself to be particularly knowlegdable from a technical standpoint (despite attempts to sound technically erudite). For example, his prior statement that any Canon camera with Digic 7 would have 4K video capture...but then the PowerShot G7 X Mark II came out with Digic 7 and no 4K.
As for the sensor itself generating heat during video capture, well, there's a reason my scientific cameras have Peltier cooling on the back side of the sensor, and it's not because of heat from the processor.
Seems we can add the EOS M5 to the list of cameras with Digic 7. Tugela, does the EOS M5 shoot 4K video?
AvTvM said:No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D
Luds34 said:AvTvM said:No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D
Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.
AvTvM said:the cortrsponding fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. but iq wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.
canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.
rrcphoto said:Luds34 said:AvTvM said:No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D
Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.
Not really. the 11-22 and 22 2.0 can be purchased new for under $500 combined. they are both excellent optically , and small.
the corresponding Fuji lenses are optically on par or slightly better, and far larger, heavier and far far more expensive.
rrcphoto said:a 15/3.5 and a 35/1.8 would certainly be nice additions.
Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?AvTvM said:the corresponding Fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. IQ wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.
Canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo Fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.
pokerz said:Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?
Which Canon DSLR/ Mirrorless has said function? ;DAvTvM said:pokerz said:Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?
because any reasonable digital camera has one or more very decent physical controls to vary aperture size. those control elements are called back wherl and front wheel and/or touch LCD plus proper firmware. control can be clicked in full, half or 1/3 stops or smooth action ... as user prefers and sets it.
Luds34 said:rrcphoto said:Luds34 said:AvTvM said:No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D
Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.
Not really. the 11-22 and 22 2.0 can be purchased new for under $500 combined. they are both excellent optically , and small.
the corresponding Fuji lenses are optically on par or slightly better, and far larger, heavier and far far more expensive.
Gentlemen,
I was referring to the "no Fuji X-lens can optically touch..." statement. That is just plain false. A majority of the Fuji XF lenses are optically outstanding! They are well known for excellent micro contrast.
While the Fuji system is really starting to come into it's own as a complete, well rounded system, that wasn't always the case. Focus was slooooow on static objects, forget about motion. There were other quirks with most bodies. However, the one thing they had going from day one, has been the IQ in the images. And a large part of that has been their optically top-notch glass.
Cheers!
pokerz said:Which Canon DSLR/ Mirrorless has said function? ;DAvTvM said:pokerz said:Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?
because any reasonable digital camera has one or more very decent physical controls to vary aperture size. those control elements are called back wherl and front wheel and/or touch LCD plus proper firmware. control can be clicked in full, half or 1/3 stops or smooth action ... as user prefers and sets it.