|
And a 200-400mm F4L IS 1.4x for a little extra reach
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Definitely seems like an upgrade from the underwhelming aps-c advances of the past 2-3 years, and I'm actually surprised at how cheap it is (I was guessing $1400 to start). Of course we'll have to wait to see how the sensor actually performs. It will be interesting to see how the sensor performs. Apparently it's a 40mp sensor with almost every pixel masked one way or the other for their new phase-detect AF system. I find it a little bit odd that their APSC technology strategy seems to revolve so strongly around video.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Chitin posted:Not at all, it's one of the major ways they can differentiate themselves from Nikon. Since the 5DmkII video revolution there are a lot of shooters locked into the Canon system, it makes total sense to keep them happy. That's clearly what they're doing in terms of differentiation, I guess I was just a little surprised that they've put four years of R&D into what looks like video autofocus technologies for their consumer level systems (isn't manual focus basically a must for anything serious? or is that just because it's always sucked in the past? I dont know video.). Seems like they're trying to bring back the camcorder for home movies rather than keep existing pro/semipro DSLR videographers happy. However, since they've got a 40mp APSC sensor behind this system and a rumored high resolution FF system in the works, I bet this is actually just one application of a new generation of small-pixel-based sensor technologies that'll roll out across the board soon. Canon must have put a lot of effort into small-pixel performance, and probably have some novel analog or digital processing wizardry to go with it. What will a RAW look like from this system? How far does averaging the values of two half-size pixels go towards reducing random noise? I guess it could be cool. Or just a bunch of crap to make sure they really run their last fluke success into the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 19:09
|
|
|
Yeah I just now saw the promo video they shot with it... if it works that well it's going to be pretty bad rear end for casual video. Youtubes full of running bokeh babies.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
I guess every pixel simply set up such that one diode sees half the light from the microlens and the other diode sees the other half. Stolen from dpreview: quote:
I doubt that the kind of moire you describe will be a problem - they'll be combining the information from each diode, not throwing one away.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
Fact. Its a little long at first on a crop sensor, but its sick nasty once you get used to it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I haven't been keeping up with gear and I'm just now getting all the 70D news. I'm pretty stoked. It almost seems too good to be true for $1200. The biggest thing for me is that we're finally getting a crop sensor that's actually significantly better than my 6 year old 50D's. I don't mind crop at all but it was really getting to the point where if I wanted a good high ISO sensor, I'd have to dump all my crop lenses and go FF for $2-3k plus probably another $2k to upgrade my crop lenses. I'm just hoping it'll be clean at 3200 and pretty good at 6400. *Might* be better high-ISO. Just because it can do 12800 standard doesn't necessarily mean it'll be any good, and we don't know what compromises their dual-pixel system has introduced. The only thing they've shown off is the new video focus, and they're still gimping the camera by using the 4 year old AF system from the 7D, but without dual processors, CF card slot, or dual SD slots. They're pretty obviously carving out a niche for the 7D Mk II.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:I wouldn't call the 7D's AF a limitation, especially considering that the rebel lines are so far behind. In fact I'd call it a wise business decision on Canon's part to spend a little more time and effort into making a great (for the time) AF system for your flagship APS-C body which will then filter down to the entry level cameras eventually. I don't see how SL1 sized bodies with better sensors, dual pixel AF and the 7D's 19 pt system in the future would be a bad thing. For sure, but especially compared to, say, the D7100's brand-new 30+ point system, using a 4-year old system is definitely a case of catalog design to hit a pricepoint and market niche. Just because it stomps systems that haven't been updated since 2007 doesn't mean it's not a compromise. And that doesn't mean it's a bad compromise, or that those older systems aren't perfectly usable. I think Haggins is right that the 'worth it' factor comes down to low light performance, and I'd also add dynamic range.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
Didn't know that about the Nikon, that's a good point. After what Canon did with the 6D I'm honestly surprised they upgraded the AF system at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
Problem solved
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
BeanTaco posted:make a 22mm pancake for my 7D you pack of jerks. Is it weird that I want to buy a $550 5D for my $150 40mm pancake?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
So what you're saying is I should buy a $9 EOS 650 from KEH and shoot a bunch of Tri-X, right?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
It doesn't work at small apertures for the same reason split-prism doesn't work at small apertures. You end up with your focus pixels seeing darkness because they're trying to collect light from portions of the lens that are blacked out by the narrow aperture. This is from wikipedia's autofocus article:  quote:Illustration of autofocus using phase detection. In each figure, the purple circle represents the object to be focused on, the red and green lines represent light rays passing through apertures at the opposite sides of the lens, the yellow rectangle represents sensor arrays (one for each aperture), and the graph represents the intensity profile as seen by each sensor array. Figures 1 to 4 represent conditions where the lens is focused (1) too near, (2) correctly, (3) too far and (4) way too far. It can be seen from the graphs that the phase difference between the two profiles can be used to determine not just in which direction, but how much to move the lens to achieve optimal focus. Note: The figures are not to scale, and colours are used purely for clarity and do not represent any particular wavelength. Now, if you stop down or use a slower lens, light from the lens will hit a smaller and smaller portion of the black line in that image until the orange and green apertures are no longer illuminated and the phase detect sensor doesn't see anything. So you'll have your autofocus systems tuned for an aperture range that you know most lenses will be able to achieve, such as F4-F5.6. There are also systems like the one in the 40D that have sensors that collect light from even farther out on lenses faster than F2.8, but which don't work with slower lenses because, as with an F5.6 sensitive system with an F8 lens + teleconverter combo, there isn't any light reaching those sensors.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
$250 in EX condition on KEH.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
For general walking around and vacations you're going to want something wider than the 40mm. It's great for what it is (compact, super sharp, cheap) but on crop it becomes limiting as a general-use walkaround lens. If you really want to go prime, you have the money, and you don't *need* something so tiny, get the Sigma 30mm. The 100mm 2.8 is definitely awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Tricerapowerbottom posted:Yeah! Lets hear about it, I've spent most of my time on Amazon, as far as learning what's out there and frequently used. If you know of any specialty stuff that's really off the charts, I'm all ears. Never used either but the TS-E 17mm f/4L and TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II are supposed to be pretty peerless.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
It certainly does on old-rear end canon bodies. Its a lot nicer & more versatile on something that doesn't suck over 1600 iso. Its also a lot more reasonable to hike with than the 2.8.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:The 6D is actually pretty the bomb as far as high-iso goes Yeah that's what I used it with. It was a rental to shoot a wedding last summer and going back to my 40D afterwards was depressing.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 20:47
|
|