dSLR thread

[ddrueding]

Sorry Handruin, I didn't know about this place when you were out. A friend just showed it to me tonight. Sweet.

 

[ddrueding]

Why? Does PS even use 8GB in Windows?

Sure does. Stitching 32-bit Radiance images into a 76MP image burned through all 8GB and then started attacking my Raptors. It was undoubtedly disk-limited.

 

[LunarMist]

You may never have enough RAM. I don't understand exactly what programs you are using, but I sometimes get 80-120GB+ of temp files when stitching in 16-bit mode. Do I spend a huge sum on a system with 128GB of RAM? Of course not. I use a reasonably fast disk/array and let the stitching take place at its own pace. I don't stare at the screen, either. Ideally a good workflow allows you to work on other projects and stitch in the background.

 

[ddrueding]

Yup, I really need to work on queuing things for the night and then going to bed. I don't have the workflow sorted that well yet. And Photomatix choked on the 75MP image (even in "preview mode"). I'll look into working around that when I wake up.

Oh, I really like this one.



Or check it out full size.

 

[Stereodude]

Yup, I really need to work on queuing things for the night and then going to bed. I don't have the workflow sorted that well yet. And Photomatix choked on the 75MP image (even in "preview mode"). I'll look into working around that when I wake up.

Oh, I really like this one.



Or check it out full size.

Your shadows called. They miss you.

 

[LunarMist]

In the small image at least, it looks like something went rather wrong in the processing. (I don't have the bandwidth this morning to load the entire image.) Contrast is very low and there are no blacks. Did you overly apply shadows/highlights or some other tool that messes with the toe? Did you set black levels based on the junk in the foreground?

 

[ddrueding]

Your shadows called. They miss you.

I got your shadows right here




Full Size

 

[LunarMist]

Sure does. Stitching 32-bit Radiance images into a 76MP image burned through all 8GB and then started attacking my Raptors. It was undoubtedly disk-limited.

I'd be happy to access 8GB, but that requires CS4, a Mac or Vista, no?

 

[ddrueding]

In the small image at least, it looks like something went rather wrong in the processing. (I don't have the bandwidth this morning to load the entire image.) Contrast is very low and there are no blacks. Did you overly apply shadows/highlights or some other tool that messes with the toe? Did you set black levels based on the junk in the foreground?

That one was very, very overprocessed in Photomatix, I kind of like the effect. The second one is more subtle.

 

[ddrueding]

I'd be happy to access 8GB, but that requires CS4, a Mac or Vista, no?

I'm running CS3 on Vista x64, so...maybe?

 

[LunarMist]

CS3 is a 32-bit application. How can it address that RAM?

 

[ddrueding]

CS3 is a 32-bit application. How can it address that RAM?

No idea, but it did. I always have task manager running on one of my other screens to see what is using what. I wasn't watching the processes screen, but when I closed Photoshop, it dropped back to 1.2GB used (some other stuff I had open).

 

[Handruin]

Sorry Handruin, I didn't know about this place when you were out. A friend just showed it to me tonight. Sweet.

I guess that means I'll have to come back some time to check it out. I saw way more than I expected on my first trip out, so I'm not at all disappointing. I was lucky to have the time that I did, I I thank you again for spending a good portion of a day with me taking me on tour.

 

[udaman]

Rob Galbraith's Aug 1, 2008 3pg update to focus problems/analysis of current firmware update for Canon 1DmkIII & 1DsMkIII. Shoot, Canon had better come out with a substantial 5D update(rumored very low noise ISO6400, for example) & 1Dmk4 that work better, focus well..soooon, or Nikon's gonna kick their arses by year's end. Everyone knows Nikon's ergonomics are better, so Canon's got to deliver something better to keep people using their lenses.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-8740-9068-9357


Ken Rockwell *cough* reviews *cough* the 1DsMkIII vs D3, etc

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/1ds-mk-iii-5d-d3.htm

 

[Handruin]

Just in case you didn't read the entire article:

Q. It's clear that EOS-1D Mark III and EOS-1Ds Mark III autofocus isn't meeting your expectations. Why are you still shooting with these cameras?

Quality and Cropability The EOS-1D Mark III produces the best overall file of any digital SLR we've ever used. A CR2 coming from this camera contains a level of detail, dynamic range, tonality and quality from each of its 10.01 million image pixels that is hard for any other camera to match on a per-pixel basis. The Nikon D3, for example, produces a better NEF at really high ISO settings (plus very good quality generally), but at lower ISOs it can't quite deliver the fineness of detail from each pixel that the EOS-1D Mark III does.

As a result, the EOS-1D Mark III delivers impressive printed enlargements for a sensor of this resolution, and great cropability too. Click on the thumbnail at right to see an example of how you can pull out a usable photo from this ISO 800 file. The enlarged view is only about 1/6 of the frame. Canon has made the most of every image pixel in this camera.

Both of Canon's current 1-series models now deliver acceptably stable and accurate autofocus of subjects that are stationary or whose distance to the camera is changing fairly slowly. With the lenses we own, from wide angle to supertelephoto, we have no significant complaints about the EOS-1D Mark III with firmware v1.2.3 and EOS-1Ds Mark III with firmware v1.1.2 when photographing things that are static or moving slowly. Are these camera reliable for shooting things that mostly hold still? In our experience, yes.

 

[LunarMist]

Not that I was expecting too much, but the D300 is somewhat disappointing.

 

[mubs]

Pray tell me why.

 

[Gilbo]

Here's an interesting tidbit I just found out:


For Micro Four Thirds, Panasonic and Olympus are dropping the 100% telecentric lens requirement. I guess because of the shorter flange distance.

So far as I know this hasn't been mentioned in any of the press coverage. The link I have is to a paid member's site unfortunately, but it's very specific that the requirement is being dropped. I guess advancements in micro-lens technology made this requirement less necessary.

This should allow for smaller wide angle lenses. Four Thirds has always offered much smaller telephotos, but, because of the telecentric requirement, the wide angles didn't receive as much benefit. This is a serious adjustment, and I'm surprised it's received so little attention in the photographic media...

 

[ddrueding]

I didn't even know what telecentric meant before. When you say 100% telecentric, do you mean double telecentric? That was really a requirement?

 

[Gilbo]

I didn't even know what telecentric meant before. When you say 100% telecentric, do you mean double telecentric? That was really a requirement?

No, I meant that every lens for the mount had to be a telecentric design. Not even extreme wide angles were excepted.

To get an idea of the significance of this, look at the small, compact, fast wide angle primes made for range finders. Those designs are not telecentric lens designs, nor is it possible to build wide angles at anywhere approaching that size with a telecentric design. Remove that restriction however, and you'll start to see even smaller/faster lenses for the 4/3 mount (at least in the wide to normal range; it doesn't help on the telephoto end).


For example consider how close the Olympus 7-14mm is in size to the Nikon 14-24mm (the latter is 1 cm wider, and 1 cm longer)...

Then consider that the latter is full-frame, & f/2.8 while the former is 4/3 and f/4.0! If you remove the telecentric requirement you open up a tremendous potential on the wide end for compact designs (not that the Nikon 14-24mm is a compact design; the comparison just illustrates how much restraint the telecentric requirement had Olympus' ability to design wides)... One benefit of the telecentric design is that the performance of that wide is absolutely, frickin' fantastic. If you don't care about size or weight, it does let you build extremely high-performance wides.

 

[ddrueding]

Thanks for the info, Gilbo. Are there any lenses in the Canon world that are telecentric? Something I might know or have?

 

[Gilbo]

Most telephotos are telecentric designs, it's the simplest/best way to build them. It's why nearly every prime in the 75-150mm range is so sharp.

The problems with size and weight show up when you try build wides or even normals in that manner. There are other designs which are superior in those cases (but I don't know them off-hand). Telecentricity isn't suited to wide angles (at least if a compact design is what you're going for).


I don't know if some retrofocus lenses are telecentric as well, but a retrofocus design wouldn't be needed on Micro Four Thirds. I mention it because it's the only other wide angle lens design I can remember of-hand. It's design is specifically done to allow focusing of wides on cameras with mirror compartments, and it's why SLR wides are so friggin big, when range finders can have way smaller ones. Simpler wides can be built if you can move the sensor plane closer to the back of the lens (as Micro Four Thirds can) so I think retrofocus designs will also be avoided for compact wides in this new format.

I think the Zeiss Sonnar design can be used in normals and wides if you don't need a mirror box. I don't know if that's still a good design for building compact normals and wides.

Regardless, we are going to see some neat stuff in terms of glass for this mount. Without a mirror box, and the telecentric requirement, there's room for a whole lot of lens designs that used to be impossible.

 

[ddrueding]

I've been reading a lot about telecentric lenses this morning (no work, sucks). And I don't understand how one would be able to view something larger than the diameter of the lens. It strikes me that if all the light entering the lens is normal to the lens, and if objects do not get larger or smaller when closer or further to/from the lens, that the area photographed will always be exactly the same diameter as the lens.

This can't be right, can it?

 

[ddrueding]

I think I am right, because this lens says "field of view: 10"" and it couldn't otherwise.

 

[e_dawg]

Regarding 4/3 lenses and telecentricity, it is a bit of a myth that they are required to be 100% telecentric, as most 4/3 lenses are not, in fact, telecentric. They are near-telecentric, though. (perhaps you meant 100% near-telecentric?) There is a maximum suggested deviation for light rays from the optical axis, though, but it's something like 6-7 degrees from parallel to the optical axis, whereas most lenses designed for the APS-C sensors are within something like 10-12 degrees from parallel.

Olympus and Leica have high standards when it comes to optics, and they wanted to adhere to the guiding principle of telecentricity when designing 4/3 system lenses. The 4/3 system does have a number of lenses that I believe exceed the maximum recommend deviation, including the: ZD 25/2.8 pancake, Sigma 24/1.8, and Sigma 30/1.4 off the top of my head.

The m4/3 standard will relax the maximum recommended deviation, but they already started doing that before m4/3 with the 25/2.8 pancake, and were considered likely to continue doing so in the name of producing smaller lenses that made good on the promise of the size advantage of 4/3. That would have meant coming out with more small / pancake style wide angle primes. Now that m4/3 is coming soon, I don't know if they will continue to make miniaturization of 4/3 lenses a priority or not, as they likely want to allocate as much of their resources as they can to developing and expanding the m4/3 system.

 

[udaman]

Why I want/could use ≥ISO102.4k

TV light. Shooting in the light of the television yields an almost over-exposed shot at ISO 25,600. 1/13 second, f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. (And yes, those are two broken arms.)


If I was using a PC 24mm/3.5 lens, handheld, would need ISO102,400 just to get a 1/26th exposure. This is were sensor image stabilization would be helpful, neither Nikon or Canon have that, which means you're SOL when using a PC handheld in dim light (never mind about how most photogs would use a tripod or flash...I'm not most people, I always want more )

The Nikon D700 is too big and heavy, give me an Oly FF dSLR of the same size and weight of the classic OM-1/2 series, sensor stabilization, ISO 102k ++, dynamic range of say EV14- then I'll be happy

Nikon might be kickin some Canon 5D arse with the D700, but while the initial release price is $300 less than the 5D of ~3yrs ago, it's still way too expensive. Got to bring the price down to <$1k.

Nikon D700 Overview/full review



http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D700/D700A.HTM

I also appreciate the Nikon D700's viewfinder blackout speed, which seems quite a bit faster than the Canon 5D's rather sluggish performance. The duration of shutter sound is also a lot shorter on the D700, attracting less attention than the 5D's long, slow mirror slap and winding sound.

The vid on 8fps mirror flap noise, might sound better/less obtrusive than the much slower 5D 'gear' whurrl, but the D700 @8fps kind of reminds me of an Uzi clip being emptied, lol.

 

[udaman]

Canon pre-photokinkia rumors

gotta luv those eletronista peeps.

OLED LCD display...so it has both kinds, transmissive and emissive screen technology, lol.

Digic III??? a 5D upgrade with less res than the XSi? Hmm, only if they are going for high ISO.

ISO6400 seems a typical conservative Canon upgrade..considering the dumbed down ISO1600 XSi
http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/08/15/canon.50d.5d.markii.spec/

But now there's this supposedly Canon China 'leaked' page on the new 50D, both links removed now.

http://www.photographybay.com/2008/08/21/canon-50d-info-leaked-real-specs/

• 15.1 megapixel CMOS sensor
• DIGIC 4
• AF Fine Tuning
• ISO 100-12800
• 920,000 points VGA 3.0-inch LCD monitor

Such a 50D would be a logical competitor to the Nikon D300. Have to wait and see if any of these specs turn out into a production model. So would the 40D stay in the line up, with the 50D being priced closer to the D300?

And what of the rumored (pictures too) Nikon D90, coming in a suggested price around that of the 40D.

Should be an interesting month coming up . Can dd get a Canon 5D & lenses as part of the employee comp pkg?

 

[ddrueding]

Has anyone here played with MS' Photosynth yet? Looks really cool. (Sorry, no macs allowed )

This is my favorite so far.

 

[ddrueding]

I'm getting more noise than I expected in long exposures @ ISO400. I was doing long exposure HDR stuff and the noise got really bad.

This is three shots:

ISO400
f8
4, 15, and 30 seconds

Combining the images did help with the noise, as did Noise Ninja, but it is still clearly visible in the upper-left even reduced significantly.



Any thoughts?

 

[Handruin]

Why not use ISO 100? Also, did you check the menu system for enabling long exposure noise reduction? I believe what it does is that the camera keeps the shutter closed but takes the information from the sensor for the same amount of time as the original exposure you shot. Then it subtracts the difference of the two.

 

[ddrueding]

Why not use ISO 100? Also, did you check the menu system for enabling long exposure noise reduction? I believe what it does is that the camera keeps the shutter closed but takes the information from the sensor for the same amount of time as the original exposure you shot. Then it subtracts the difference of the two.

Exposure times were already nearing 30s, and I didn't trust the wind or my tripod to keep everything under control. Thinking back, long exposure noise reduction was working when I started, but stopped about halfway through the night.

That looks to be it, the noise is much better on this one (one of the first)

 

[ddrueding]

Those leaked EOS D50 specs on Canon's Chinese site? Real.

http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/canon-makes-eos.html

 

[udaman]

No rumored AMOLED screen, but most of the other rumors turned out to be true...who's got one on order ?

ISO12800 a 1st for Canon, bout time! Digic IV?

Now WTF is the damned 5D MkII?
Canon EOS 50D & 18-200mm hands-on previews
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08082606canon50dpreviewed.asp

Wonder how the D90 will do against the 40D, and how long will the 40D remain in production?

If rumored specs for the D90 are true, and it's priced the same as the 40D, the D90 will kick some royal arse all over the 40D by comparison.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/08/25/d90.pictures.specs/

If this rumor is true, it's a 1st for a dSLR:

The camera can capture video and includes a speaker for sound output during video playback.

Now, where's my $1k or less FF sensor dSLR???

 

[ddrueding]

Don't want video or a stupid speaker. I want a lighter camera.

Seconded on the 5D II.

 

[Stereodude]

I will be very, very, very unhappy if there isn't a 5D MkII coming out along side the 50D.

 

[udaman]

from imaging-resource:

The Canon EOS 50D digital SLR will cost $1,399 body-only when it ships this October. A kit version including a 28 - 135mm zoom lens will also be available, priced at $1,599. The Canon 50D will accept virtually all EOS 40D accessories, including the battery grip, remote control, optional focusing screens, and battery. The existing Canon 40D model will remain in the line through the end of 2008, with a price drop to $1099 body-only.

Who's going to buy a 40D now, if the 50D is only $300 more? Not enough differentation btw a Rebel 450D and 50D to make the 40D viable now, IMHO. Sales of the 40D will tank.

 

[udaman]

Yes indeed @$999.99 the D90 will spank the new lower priced 40D, though the movie mode is pretty limiting (expect with in a year, all dSLR's at the lower end will have an improvement on this feature...now about those rumors of a 5D MkII with movie mode ). Though Nikon's PC's probably won't work as well with this body (eh, as well as the D300, but you really need a FF sensor for PC/TS lenses).

While a step down in performance from the 50D which is only $300 more, the D90 is a lighter and smaller body...this I like.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D90/D90A.HTM

Not sure why they chose 24fps and mono sound??? limit of 5min to recordings, outdated AVI recording format? h264 is where it's at. Maybe Panasonic with their pro level camcorders, or even Sony; will have fuller featured movie modes on their dSLR's next year.

Will be interesting to see if the higher res 50D can give ISO12800 or even 6400 with same or lower noise than the D300. All in all, the new 50D seems like a bargain compared to the D300 (which is now street priced @$1600 from reputable dealers). With those $200 rebates (probably have to wait until next year for those) Canon usually gives on these, almost makes it to the $1k level, which is kind of amazing considering the 50D is almost a low cost, "lite" version of the 1D MkII, @1/3rd the price.

2-3 years from now...almost an eternity, the 5D MkIII with full 2k res movie mode, full AF, 25.6K ISO, etc will be announced for ~$1,300... I predict!

 

[udaman]

Doesn't look as sharp as I would expect, but I think one Hairy Aussie might appreciate this supposed full res Subby shot ...using a 50D (EF 600 lens, ISO1600) as posted on Canon rumors.com:



http://www.flickr.com/photos/29246563@N04/2791967217/sizes/o/

http://canonrumors.com/index.php?d=26&m=08&y=08&category=6

 

[udaman]

Friggin Canon USA lawyer, she probably used to work for Apple legal . good thing Nikon has yet to employ such a-hole lawyers, at least nikonrumors.com has yet to be hit with the same idiocy.

www.canonrumours.com has been given a cease and desist order from Canon USA.
http://canonrumors.com/comments.php?y=08&m=08&entry=entry080827-181809


So does this mean the real 5D mkII is imminent ? Will it really have true 2k res HD movie capture? Full AF, aperture control (unlike the Nikon D90)?


http://canonrumors.com/index.php?d=27&m=08&y=08&category=3

5D Mark II

This comes from a dude that seems to be right a lot lately.

* 21.1 MP 1.0x
* DIGIC IV
* ISO 100-6400 L:50 & H:12800
* 5 FPS
* 3.2" High Resolution Screen (LCD)
* 19 point AF
* HDMI Out
* Liveview
* HD Movie Mode
* Viewfinder: 100% Coverage
* Full weather sealing
* EF Lenses only

I will scour until I find a leak.... it's coming.

From Northlight

This was overheard from Canon staff...

"The 50D sensor and image processing are a major step forward in what has been a multi-year strategy for Canon to take sensor technology to the limits of physics, simultaneously achieving higher ISOs, lower noise and higher dynamic range. Note Chuck Westall’s announcement that the 50D sensor has 1 to 1 and a half stops better noise than the 40D sensor despite the smaller pixels. Several core strategies have been pursued simultaneously for this:

* Reducing the micro lens gap to capture all the light hitting the sensor. This has been highlighted in the 40D, 1D III and 1Ds III sensors and the new 50D sensor now achieves effective 100% coverage. Only very minor improvements are expected from this point on (e.g. shaping the lenses towards the corners of the frame to capture angled light.

* Reducing the noise level of each pixel. Canon have made changes over several generations of sensors to achieve this, bringing the amplifiers closer to each pixel, changing micro-circuit configuration and lowering voltages so the sensor runs colder. Again the design of the 50D is a big step forward here from the 40D and 1D III etc. Canon have one more big jump lined up, with low voltage cold running CMOS designs to gain at least an additional stop in lower noise at higher ISOs or long exposures.

* Better digital noise reduction. These are the changes in DIGIC noise processing. First with the Chroma Noise reduction in DIGIC III and now with more advanced multi-level noise reduction options in DIGIC IV. Canon believe they have made most of the gains possible via processing algorithms but do still have some areas to develop. The next focus will be faster noise reduction processing so that it does not come at an impact on frame burst rates (look to the 1D3 replacement for example)

* Pixel binning for high ISOs. A new technology enabled by the complexity and processing power of DIGIC IV where they can bin 2, 4 or 8 pixels together at the raw level and average out the noise between them. This is seen by Canon as a key technology in balancing very high resolution sensors (in the 50mp range) with low noise at very high ISOs. Right now they are not pushing this too much with the 50D so as to not create confusion in the market (they see more potential for the technology as sensors get larger and in the pro-market).

* Increased image resolution – This is a newer strategy (most evident on the 450D where they have changed the anti-aliasing filter (thinner and closer etc) so as to achieve a crisper image per pixel without loosing the benefits of anti-aliasing filter on diagonal edges etc.. The 50D has the same technology. One further option for the future is for Canon to drop the anti aliasing physical filter and do it in a future DIGIC generation where there can be smarter allocation of colour values than the blurring achieved by a light based filter.

* Increased raw bit depth for improved dynamic range. Here Canon have made the jump to 14 bit and will move to 16 bit in their future sensor technology generations. Canon see the main usage of extra bit depth as providing the dynamic range to translate the sensor image into a printable or viewable image with a higher dynamic range. In other words mapping the 14 or 16 bits into an 8 bit viewable or printable image that mimics the dynamic range in the scene.

* Dynamic range preservation options – Canon are putting a lot of focus into how to provide the photographer with the best options for preserving the dynamic range of the original image in both a RAW file and the 8 bit JPEG. The highlight tone preservation option on the 40D, 1D III etc was the first step. The new 'automatic brightness' options in the 50D are another, where they try and optimise the brightness of various parts of the image to reduce the dullness from shadows. Canon are planning much more in this area, down to the equivalent of varying the ISO level across the different parts of the sensor when the image is taken (easier in live view mode of course).

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_5d2_3d_7d.html

However the official party line (at least in Hong Kong) is to say:

• "We have just annouced a 50D, which is the 40D's sucessor, we have one more SLR coming this year, which is being highly anticipated but not yet as high grade as 1D series, please stay tuned for further annoucement "

 

[ddrueding]

I'm almost ready! Announce the sucker now so they will be available when I want to buy (late December).