Dr_Jon

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Jul 2, 2011

Comments

Total: 2105, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Tape5: Remembering my own excitement when I first saw a one megabyte drive, I am waiting for an injectable exabyte data bank that can be accessed by thoughts before I get excited again.

Not sure about that, but I used 10MB removable disks like the RL02 that were big enough to feed the whole department if they'd been pizzas...
http://www.nf6x.net/2014/03/data-general-nova-3-and-dec-pdp-11v03-l/img_0852/
(Plus working on Image Processing in a Research Lab at the time, so not like there was much data to worry about... err... that would be on Tape then...)

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: If you don't mind about dual pixel technology just buy a 6D

Wouldn't argue with that being right for you...
(I didn't upgrade my 5D2 to a 5D3 as the sensor didn't seem enough of an improvement. Lots of others did.)

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 07:39 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: I'm very interested in a comparision between the 6DM2 and the old 5DM3... I guess the new 6DM2 is a little bit better but I don't know how muche the 6DM2 improved on BaseISO against the 5DM3.

Okay,
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%206D%20Mark%20II

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoUniverse: I've had Synology NAS device (5 drives) for more than 6-7 years. and it's running with no problem 24/7.

Best NAS device in market hands down.

The thing about even quite powerful mid-range NAS is they can be really quiet and for 24/7 use have very low power consumption (30W active, 15W disks not being accessed).

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:53 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Up to 40TB of storage if you don't care that your files can suddenly be lost to a single drive failure. If you do care, it's considerably less. With such large drives it is recommended to have at least two redundant disks in the array, because a rebuild caused by a single disk failure has a non negligible chance of uncovering problems with other drives.

For a while up to April this year a single-drive failure in a Qnap RAID5 system would lose you data, so a backup is always a good idea. (Plus kudos to "panther fan" for mentioning file deletion as a big issue for needing backups.)
I wonder if that affected Synology too? (For the terminally techy the issue was "skip_copy" which isn't Qnap-specific.)

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:30 UTC

For home use I'd suggest checking the noise level, as two small fans can be noisier than one large one. Also power consumption if it's on 24/7, size of the external power brick and performance.

Plus remember RAID5 doesn't mean you have a backup, you just have some fault-tolerance, you still need to back it up (which for 30TB should be interesting, which is 4x10TB in RAID5).

BTW If you're buying 10TB drives you'll probably have a larger NAS budget (in the UK a set of 4 would be about £1300).

Also use approved drives for the NAS, not just what it cheap (the manufacturer should have a list, if not get ones designed for RAID like WD Red, etc.)

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:24 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

composed: Does anyone here use a NAS to serve up your photos?

I have tried them numerous times over the years and found them WAY to slow to be useful in my workflow.

Cheap NAS tend to be slow and often have a slow connection to a PC, so usually not a good idea for high-bandwidth tasks. Interestingly medium-priced NAS are now working well in excess of 1Gb Ethernet speeds, but you need a way to get that to your computer.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:20 UTC

Linking full-res pictures would have been interesting?
BTW what do you think was the best old 80-200-ish focal range old lens?

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:15 UTC as 32nd comment

...but if you could run a Facebook app on your low-end DSLR? (People shouldn't object if their main DSLR/Mirrorless camera cost over $400/£300 as they aren't the user-base.)

Sensor size and the resultant noise is Physics, so that's not defeatable without having several sensors (when parallax is a nightmare) or a thick phone.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:10 UTC as 63rd comment
In reply to:

Keith57: Who on earth still uses any MS stuff for personal use? I hate using their non-intuitive crapware for work. Couldn't bear to use it at home as well.

BTW in case anyone thinks I'm anti-Apple I spent some time considering the options and went for the new iPad Pro over the Surface Pro and others. Partly due to iOS11. Partly as I'm already keeping 4 Win10 systems up to date. Partly due to the weight (the new i5 Surface Pro being fanless was attractive, but the price gets scary as you add stuff to the spec). Plus partly all iOS Apps are touch-friendly, way too much of the Windows stuff I run isn't. (Although you can run Win95 programs on Win10; I won't be able to run some Apps I bought last year on iOS 11 - due to removal of 32-bit support.)
Oh and I shoot 360 spherical panos too...

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 09:07 UTC
In reply to:

Robin Ducker: I think a lot of respondents have missed the point. Why, why, why is Cannon releasing a camera with a sensor that is outperformed by APS-C?
Because they are cynical. They want to sell 5D4's.
They don't care about the user of the 6D2, they are only interested in dropping the quality of the camera to a price point that makes it look (for the unwary) like an upgrade bargain. Once the user has invested in FF lenses and ancillaries and become frustrated at the cameras weaknesses, they will sell them a 5D

I was just saying I think you need to combine the shot noise in the light with the read noise to get a Real-World view. This only applies with different size sensors.
For example if a 20MP FF sensor got 100 electrons in a pixel (at some very low exposure level, the pixel would probably hold of the order of 80,000, or more, electrons max) then the shot noise is an average of 10 electrons or 10%.
A m43 20MP sensor pixel (1/4 the area) at the same illumination level would get 25 electrons and on average 5 would be shot noise, or 20%.
You can merge 1 electron of read noise with the 5 (which would still give 5-ish as noise doesn't just add) and still have about 20% noise. You could add 6 electrons read noise (6x as much) to the 10 and have 12-ish and so less noise (12%).
My point is with shot noise included you have to go a very long way into the shadows for a smaller sensor's DR to give you a boost.
Not saying better DR isn't handy, although even a 5D2 could do 2 stops of shadow lifting.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 08:57 UTC
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: So many Canon users were looking forward to the 6D II. But they ended up with this. What was Canon thinking? They had such a great chance to release something really great but messed up big time

The D750 was launched three years ago (next month), when the 6D2 is a few months older it won't be competing with it on price. Also the D750 has perhaps the most recalls in camera history? (Tho if you don't want a bunch of the 6D2 features it's not a bad camera. It's in the odd position of being the FF camera Nikon most wanted to sell you, as it made them the most money, but you probably should have bought a D810. Then it cost Nikon a fortune in recalls...)

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: I know what I say doesn't apply to all photographers, and not even most. However, this is a very important aspect to a significant minority of photographers, and this is not addressed in the article.

Yes it is true that a larger sensor "usually" means better low light performance. However, if you are a nature photographer primarily using long lenses or shooting macro, it is not as simple as that. With say bird photography cropping is often the norm, no matter what lenses you can afford. If you have the same lens on an APS-C and FF body, and you are cropping, then the advantage of FF is often lost. If you have to crop to APS-C dimensions or less, and this is not uncommon for those using FF, you are effectively using a crop sensor, and there is absolutely no advantage to FF.

To some extent the same can be true of macro and close up photography. To get the same frame filling power you will need higher magnification, need to be closer and there will be a concomitant loss of light.

BTW a 5Dsr has 5424 pixels across its APS crop area vs 6000 for the 80D (so the 5Dsr is 90.4% of the pixel resolution) and the 5Dsr has no anti-aliasing filter (which Roger at lensrentals showed could add up to 10% in resolution in the 5Dsr's case) so with good glass I don't think people will notice any difference. The frame-rate is an issue, however the 5Dsr has a significantly better AF system than the 80D.

To avoid doubt serious sports/BIF people want a higher frame rate than the 5Dsr and possibly the 80D too. However the extra tracking ability is a big plus.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 16:32 UTC
In reply to:

JhvaElohimMeth: If you don't mind about dual pixel technology just buy a 6D

Or WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC, GPS, better AF, tilty screen... Tough call.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:58 UTC
In reply to:

yousaf: With Modern smartphone and apps like Geo photo, builtin GPS on camera is no more a desirable feature. it only consumes your camera battery. You can adjust the app for better smartphone battery life.

Syncing GPX data up with photos later is a pain, plus eats phone battery. Also you need to be careful to sync clocks. Also assumes you got the App running first and in the right mode.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:46 UTC
In reply to:

JamesVo: Regardless what brand of DSLR you use, the key to whether changing your APS-C body for the nearest equivalent full frame is a good idea, is lenses.

If you are heavily invested in EFS / DX / DC etc. glass then you'll quickly find that even if they can be mounted on the full frame body (Canon's EF-S lenses can't) they mostly don't cover the full frame sensor and must all be replaced. The equivalent full frame lenses are often bigger, heavier and pricier.

If you already use some full frame lenses on your crop sensor DSLR, their field of view is much wider on full frame and their roles will change. Again, you might end up needing a new lens or two to cover the gaps that emerge. For example if your inexpensive 50mm f1.8 did great duty as a portrait lens on APS-C, you'll now be wanting an 85mm lens which is bigger and costs more.

I'm really surprised that the article devoted even less 'print' to this critical issue than I have in the two paragraphs above.

Although unlike camera bodies lenses can have pretty good resale value. I usually tell APS users who "might" upgrade to FF at some random point in the future they are probably better buying a crop lens that does exactly what they want than a bigger/heavier FF lens for some possible future advantage. Then sell/trade-in the crop lenses in the future (the FF lens will probably have been replaced by a better one by then).

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:44 UTC
In reply to:

Viriato: Nicely put. I do have an 80D and already crossed my mind the upgrade for the 6D MKII. We may not all need a bigger sensor/Pro camera. However, the lower ISO possibilities opens to us, crop sensor users, a new world off photography ;p

Interesting point, unless you meant higher ISO. Although a min ISO of 50 vs 100 isn't quite so significant as if the 80D only got down to 200.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:41 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: It's strange that, after a five year period, Canon would come out with such a half-hearted upgrade. I wonder if this camera is just a placeholder, while they complete a significantly better FF camera in the same price range.

Canon launch prices are always high, they'll sell for what price they think they can sell their production quantities at. Comparing prices for new cameras with much older cameras is never valid from the point of view of the feature set the manufacturer put in the camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:38 UTC
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: So many Canon users were looking forward to the 6D II. But they ended up with this. What was Canon thinking? They had such a great chance to release something really great but messed up big time

A lot of people seem to feel Canon should have produced a camera with a step-up from the 5D4 features at half the price... hmmm...
If you buy the model designed to be cheap for people with less money to spend they probably didn't throw all the expensive stuff at it (although WiFi, Bluetooth, GPS, DPAF so 52MP sensor, adjustable angle LCD etc. weren't free).
If you want the "Lux" spec you probably shouldn't be looking at the "Base" model.
Since its reason for existing is low cost there isn't an argument about it having more features, as then more cost and it isn't this model. I think a better discussion is whether they should have left stuff out (DPAF, wireless, GPS, tilty screen) in favour of a higher-DR sensor. I think most actual purchasers would have found that not to be the case.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:35 UTC
In reply to:

blackcoffee17: Who would have thought that after even the cheap Rebels got the new sensor design with the improved DR, the 6D2 will stay with the old design and the lowest DR.

I assume it was about making a cheap FF DSLR, which is what the 6D2 is intended to be. So they spent the money on a 52MP sensor using DPAF and went with the older fab. I suspect it will do really well. Almost all users will be okay with 2.5 stops of shadow lifting. Forum dwellers excluded of course.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 09:27 UTC
Total: 2105, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »