bronxbombers4

bronxbombers4

Joined on Sep 6, 2012

Comments

Total: 304, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: And STILL not a peep about improved dynamic range!

well at least the new AF may be nice
but man they still just don't want to bother, still in hold back and milk mode

Measure the standard deviation in the masked area of the frame and plug the value into a DR formula.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2016 at 00:59 UTC
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: And STILL not a peep about improved dynamic range!

well at least the new AF may be nice
but man they still just don't want to bother, still in hold back and milk mode

anyone have an ISO RAW file taken with a lens f/2.8 or slower? can tell if they really fixed the low ISO DR in like 3 seconds, if so.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 05:58 UTC
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: And STILL not a peep about improved dynamic range!

well at least the new AF may be nice
but man they still just don't want to bother, still in hold back and milk mode

Although another site says:"and Canon’s new sensor has an important innovation. The A/D converter circuitry, which translates captured light values into digital data, has now been integrated with the sensor itself."

So what is the deal and why are they so on the down low about this? Because it still doesn't deliver half the performance of Sony and others? Because it does but they are so into face saving they can't dare admit they had been so behind in this for so long that they rather keep it almost secret rather than use it as a sales tool????

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 05:57 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (612 comments in total)
In reply to:

JRFlorendo: According to Digital Camera World; "The sensor gets a modest resoltuion upgrade, from 18 megapixels to 20, but the real work here has gone on behind the scenes, with the NEW ON-CHIP A/D converter design and Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology for faster, smoother live view autofocus."

http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2016/02/02/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-hands-on-review/

Hmm a bit off that they are practically keeping this secret. Maybe it still doesn't work nearly as well as Sony? Or they are too much into saving face to admit they were so far behind in this regard for so long???

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 05:56 UTC
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (95 comments in total)

And STILL not a peep about improved dynamic range!

well at least the new AF may be nice
but man they still just don't want to bother, still in hold back and milk mode

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 05:48 UTC as 5th comment | 4 replies
On article Key features explained: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II (95 comments in total)

Hard to believe they are still so stingy as to not allow focus peaking, zebra,s log gamma never mind 10 bits etc. for video in anything below Cxx! And all the talk says won't even allow 4k into the 5D4. Well, thank god for Sony and others.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2016 at 05:46 UTC as 6th comment
On article Readers' Showcase: Scott Matthews (45 comments in total)

fantastic set!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 11, 2016 at 23:09 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: The more important spec is that it has to conform to BT.2020 color representation. There are some cameras that do 10 bit right now. However, I am not aware of any cameras that can record according to BT.2020 color representation at the moment.

Actually shooting ML RAW on a Canon DSLR gets you files that could meet BT2020, only 1080p though.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 02:16 UTC

Nice. Hopefully it will get some 10bit support arriving outside of crazy priced stuff.
And BT2020 is great too since you'd get wide gamut color without having to shoot gigantic RAW files on some ML hacked Canon DSLR in 1080P only.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2016 at 02:13 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (786 comments in total)
In reply to:

capanikon: Omitting the rinky-dink pop-up flash makes the D500 a more attractive camera, IMO.
Those pop-up flashes are beyond dumb. They belong only on Canon Rebels and the like.

A shame to see Nikon follow the silly 'lead' of Canon this time.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 19:25 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (786 comments in total)
In reply to:

capanikon: Omitting the rinky-dink pop-up flash makes the D500 a more attractive camera, IMO.
Those pop-up flashes are beyond dumb. They belong only on Canon Rebels and the like.

Think you are some cool pro just because your camera lacks a pop-up flash is beyond dumb.

Sometimes you come upon something unexpected, maybe a tree frog at night as you are walking home and it's nice to have that pop-up then no? Or what if you just want a touch of fill for some snapshot with friends?

Or maybe you get a sudden call from the paper, when you are off duty, and happen to have your camera but no flash and then get a super opportunity, one that works out better with a little fill? Happened to me. In fact, it happened to some others, others who tossed their 1D to the ground and asked me to let them use my Canon xxD so they could get a BETTER shot!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 19:24 UTC

Plus shooting RAW+JPG clogs the buffer on many cameras so some will end up shooting JPG only and then will end up losing quality on perhaps amazing moments and sights in history and the world thanks to this absurd policy.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 02:04 UTC as 46th comment
In reply to:

happypoppeye: There is very little benefit shooting in RAW these days and its easier for a company to handle jpegs. Plus, jpegs are almost just as editable.

But restricting to in cam JOG actually will make many more pictures distorted compared to reality than a properly edited RAW! There are lots of types of lighting that don't translate well SOOC and will look far less like what the eye saw than if processed from RAW!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 02:02 UTC

And all the serious stuff like cloning things out can be done just as well with JPG as with RAW!
I don't get it.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 02:00 UTC as 47th comment

Doesn't make any sense.
And the way JPG engine process levels and such is often MUCH farther off from what the eye saw than you could get from messing around with that stuff in a RAW program. So they will actually get MORE images that look LESS like reality did to the eye now!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 01:59 UTC as 48th comment
On photo Daytime Escapade in the Switch Board challenge (9 comments in total)

wow

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2015 at 19:02 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Sony Alpha 7R II Review (2125 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: Hands up anyone who actually raises levels +4 to +6 and uses such an image for anything of value? Because they look like s---. Maybe it's time to let some whites blow out and some dark areas block up? They had to make that choice in the film days all the time.

"True. What good is it if it never comes to light in a REAL image?"

Only problem is does happen in real images. How do you think it became a discussion topic to begin with? Hint, it was people doing 'real' shooting.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2015 at 18:58 UTC
On article Sony Alpha 7R II Review (2125 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shiranai: I wonder why everybody just compares the shadow recovery.
How about a highlight recovery test?

Because digital sensors don't work like film. They are simply, as used, and ignoring those unusual dual-photsite ones from Fuji years ago, simple linear so there is no such thing as highlight recovery. It's just linear right to clipping and clipped it clipped. There can potentially be some difference if the color filters are very slanted though I suppose.

Basically DR is all about shadow noise though.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2015 at 18:51 UTC
On article Sony Alpha 7R II Review (2125 comments in total)
In reply to:

palie: interesting cam, but essentially misguided. the simple truth about these high mp cams is that they effectively cannot be handheld, which contradicts the fundamental purpose of this form factor. ming thein is the only reviewer to date who has had the guts and clarity to say this outright. and if you want to shoot landscapes on a tripod, with mirror lock and a cable release, use a mf format camera. mp, the same, colour depth etc no comparison. even 24 mp is too much - hand-held you get a much sharper result out of medium jpegs. so what's the best ff camera today for handheld use? ta-daaaa ... the nikon df ...

Why can't they be hand held? People hand hold 7D,7D2,50D all the time and make use of the full MP count and they are high density too.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2015 at 07:51 UTC
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (618 comments in total)

nice!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 22:23 UTC as 61st comment
Total: 304, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »