This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
p.11 #1So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
gdanmitchell wrote:
So, y'all actually imagine that you are going to make Mr. Form happy? After 10 pages of this?
Best policy: "Please step away from the toxic thread, sir." ;-)
But then he will just start another thread about bad or expensive Canon cameras. Like he have done a few times before
So, y'all actually imagine that you are going to make Mr. Form happy? After 10 pages of this?
Best policy: "Please step away from the toxic thread, sir." ;-)
But then he will just start another thread about bad or expensive Canon cameras. Like he have done a few times before
Jun 04, 2013 at 10:51 AM
p.11 #2So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Can we imagine what Ansel Adams would have complained?
My 8x10 is too heavy. My 8x10 doesn't focus as fast as it should. My 8x10 doesn't have enough dynamic range - I'm constantly burning and dodging in my darkroom. I wished I can shoot more than a couple dozen shots because these plates are a pain to carry around. Why do they make these cable release so short?
If you guys think he doesn't complain, oh believe me, he has plenty of time to complaining because of the long hikes using his mules.
Back in the darkroom, "Oh crap! A dozen of my photos are a little underexposed. Well, back to the hike.."
My 8x10 is too heavy. My 8x10 doesn't focus as fast as it should. My 8x10 doesn't have enough dynamic range - I'm constantly burning and dodging in my darkroom. I wished I can shoot more than a couple dozen shots because these plates are a pain to carry around. Why do they make these cable release so short?
If you guys think he doesn't complain, oh believe me, he has plenty of time to complaining because of the long hikes using his mules.
Back in the darkroom, "Oh crap! A dozen of my photos are a little underexposed. Well, back to the hike.."
Jun 04, 2013 at 11:32 AM
p.11 #3So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Gunzorro wrote:
Get used to the idea that some shadow areas don't have any significant content or detail.
One can't base their work on gear that doesn't exist.
The point is that such gear does exist and it's all over shelves that will give significant detail to those shadow areas. And if people keep saying oh who cares then well Canonland folks will soon be stuck as having the only gear on the shelf where it is true that shadows in high DR scenes don't ave much detail and do have banding. If everyone stopped defending it and getting on the posters who brought it up (many helpful posters who brought it up a lot years ago don't even bother posting at all from what I say, which is a shame, since even if you didn't care about DR or banding, they offered up lots of other info) then maybe Canon would stop milking old processes and all of these threads would alrady have been GONE
.
And yeah one can switch to Nikon, but many would rather not unless they eventually finally become 100% forced too since not everyone likes the Nikon UI, many prefer Canon lenses, Canon currently has FAR superior video, etc.
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it up and not stick with the old lines, well then.... YAY and it's more than all worth it (and if you truly can't stand such threads, don't click on 'em. That takes even less time than clicking on them. Seriously with the title he gave, what did you expect? It takes less time to not click the thread than to click and block him too and it also means that if someday he has some helpful info that you need you'll see it since it he won't be blocked.
Edited on Jun 04, 2013 at 12:18 PM · View previous versions
Get used to the idea that some shadow areas don't have any significant content or detail.
One can't base their work on gear that doesn't exist.
The point is that such gear does exist and it's all over shelves that will give significant detail to those shadow areas. And if people keep saying oh who cares then well Canonland folks will soon be stuck as having the only gear on the shelf where it is true that shadows in high DR scenes don't ave much detail and do have banding. If everyone stopped defending it and getting on the posters who brought it up (many helpful posters who brought it up a lot years ago don't even bother posting at all from what I say, which is a shame, since even if you didn't care about DR or banding, they offered up lots of other info) then maybe Canon would stop milking old processes and all of these threads would alrady have been GONE
.And yeah one can switch to Nikon, but many would rather not unless they eventually finally become 100% forced too since not everyone likes the Nikon UI, many prefer Canon lenses, Canon currently has FAR superior video, etc.
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it up and not stick with the old lines, well then.... YAY and it's more than all worth it (and if you truly can't stand such threads, don't click on 'em. That takes even less time than clicking on them
. Seriously with the title he gave, what did you expect? It takes less time to not click the thread than to click and block him too and it also means that if someday he has some helpful info that you need you'll see it since it he won't be blocked.Edited on Jun 04, 2013 at 12:18 PM · View previous versions
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:07 PM
p.11 #4So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
But then he will just start another thread about bad or expensive Canon cameras. Like he have done a few times before
Isn't that what the "Hide Me" button is for? Never had to use that before, though.
skibum5:
I don't think so, people will always find something to whine/complain/moan about online, whether the camera has insufficient soap-chewing capacity for their needs or whatever.
But then he will just start another thread about bad or expensive Canon cameras. Like he have done a few times before
Isn't that what the "Hide Me" button is for? Never had to use that before, though.
skibum5:
I don't think so, people will always find something to whine/complain/moan about online, whether the camera has insufficient soap-chewing capacity for their needs or whatever.
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:14 PM
p.11 #5So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
skibum5 wrote:
... many helpful posters who brought it up a lot years ago don't even bother posting at all from what I say, which is a shame, since even if you didn't care about DR or banding, they offered up lots of other info ...
Who? Are they gone from FM or what are you saying?
... many helpful posters who brought it up a lot years ago don't even bother posting at all from what I say, which is a shame, since even if you didn't care about DR or banding, they offered up lots of other info ...
Who? Are they gone from FM or what are you saying?
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:24 PM
p.11 #6So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
skibum5 wrote:
One can't base their work on gear that doesn't exist.The point is that such gear does exist and it's all over shelves that will give significant detail to those shadow areas. And if people keep saying oh who cares then well Canonland folks will soon be stuck as having the only gear on the shelf where it is true that shadows in high DR scenes don't ave much detail and do have banding. If everyone stopped defending it and getting on the posters who brought it up (many helpful posters who brought it up a lot years ago don't even bother posting at all from what I say, which...Show more →
The high MP and high DR gear doesn't exist that has Canon controls and color and uses Canon lenses. You can't take the Sony sensor and slap into Canon body, so for now, the type of gear desired by form and others does not exist.
Don't keep making it about "Nikon/Sony is the solution". That solution doesn't fly here in "Canonland", it's not what's desired except by the very, very few, and they are free to buy whatever gear they like.
Gunzorro wrote
Get used to the idea that some shadow areas don't have any significant content or detail.One can't base their work on gear that doesn't exist.
The high MP and high DR gear doesn't exist that has Canon controls and color and uses Canon lenses. You can't take the Sony sensor and slap into Canon body, so for now, the type of gear desired by form and others does not exist.
Don't keep making it about "Nikon/Sony is the solution". That solution doesn't fly here in "Canonland", it's not what's desired except by the very, very few, and they are free to buy whatever gear they like.
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:27 PM
p.11 #7So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
_SBS_ wrote:
Hmmmm....
Peter Figen's PP work outshines form's posted images, yet form is blind to that fact.
Any help offered form is declined, many times quite arrogantly.
Tried flash once and since it didn't work for him right away gave up on it and then puts up more roadblocks against using it. No, it couldn't be just he isn't doing it right. And anyway he doesn't like that look.
Self-taught. Everything should be easy...And when something actually is found to be a bit more difficult and may require more time, patience, and practice, instead of doing whats needed he runs away from it and ridicules...Show more →
Tried flash more than once, thanks. Actually I've been using flash often for the past 6-7 years of my photography experience, but I have been moving away from using it for certain things in the last few years. I don't like the look you mention, that's correct. I am self taught. Plenty of things are difficult in their own way, but I do a kind of photography where, as some have said, there are tradeoffs. A perfect solution does not yet exist.
I have one idea to use a wired eTTL held by one hand, or a manual flash setting zoomed as long as possible and set at a very low power...and use a straw-colored gel for color balance. But definitely not direct on-camera flash.
Hmmmm....
Peter Figen's PP work outshines form's posted images, yet form is blind to that fact.
Any help offered form is declined, many times quite arrogantly.
Tried flash once and since it didn't work for him right away gave up on it and then puts up more roadblocks against using it. No, it couldn't be just he isn't doing it right. And anyway he doesn't like that look.
Self-taught. Everything should be easy...And when something actually is found to be a bit more difficult and may require more time, patience, and practice, instead of doing whats needed he runs away from it and ridicules...Show more →
Tried flash more than once, thanks. Actually I've been using flash often for the past 6-7 years of my photography experience, but I have been moving away from using it for certain things in the last few years. I don't like the look you mention, that's correct. I am self taught. Plenty of things are difficult in their own way, but I do a kind of photography where, as some have said, there are tradeoffs. A perfect solution does not yet exist.
I have one idea to use a wired eTTL held by one hand, or a manual flash setting zoomed as long as possible and set at a very low power...and use a straw-colored gel for color balance. But definitely not direct on-camera flash.
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:34 PM
p.11 #8So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
IMHO it's absolutely staggering that modern Canon photography is so convenient and the results so fantastic, and the costs for these advances so modest. When one recalls the film days, it's hardly an exaggeration to say that never has so much been available to so many for so little
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:34 PM
p.11 #9So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
form wrote:
But definitely not direct on-camera flash.
I'm not sure whether you actually is looking for advise or help, but have you tried some of the flash light modifiers out there like this one?
http://fjwestcott.com/product/micro-apollo
But definitely not direct on-camera flash.
I'm not sure whether you actually is looking for advise or help, but have you tried some of the flash light modifiers out there like this one?
http://fjwestcott.com/product/micro-apollo
Jun 04, 2013 at 12:46 PM
p.11 #10So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
Best policy: "Please step away from the toxic thread, sir." ;-)But then he will just start another thread about bad or expensive Canon cameras. Like he have done a few times before
Refuse to engage that one, too.
Someone mentioned the hide button. I use it from time to time. I virtually never announce who I have hidden, though the "hidden" people might notice that there are no more replies to their posts from me - if they care, and they probably don't. ;-)
However, I most certainly have hidden this OP.
Edited on Jun 04, 2013 at 05:21 PM · View previous versions
gdanmitchell wrote
So, y'all actually imagine that you are going to make Mr. Form happy? After 10 pages of this?Best policy: "Please step away from the toxic thread, sir." ;-)
Refuse to engage that one, too.
Someone mentioned the hide button. I use it from time to time. I virtually never announce who I have hidden, though the "hidden" people might notice that there are no more replies to their posts from me - if they care, and they probably don't. ;-)
However, I most certainly have hidden this OP.
Edited on Jun 04, 2013 at 05:21 PM · View previous versions
Jun 04, 2013 at 01:14 PM
p.11 #11So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
skibum5 wrote:
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it up and not stick with the old lines, well then.... YAY and it's more than all worth it..
I have no idea what metrics are involved in how/when Canon spends its development resources but I would hope to hell it's not based on the ramblings of some disgruntled internet posters on photography forums.
When the new sensor is ready they will release it.
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it up and not stick with the old lines, well then.... YAY and it's more than all worth it..
I have no idea what metrics are involved in how/when Canon spends its development resources but I would hope to hell it's not based on the ramblings of some disgruntled internet posters on photography forums.
When the new sensor is ready they will release it.
Jun 04, 2013 at 01:21 PM
p.11 #12So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
ggreene wrote:
When the new sensor is ready they will release it.
Based on things I have heard before, I don't agree: When they have established enough market demand for x upgrade, they will release that upgrade. In fact others have stated (and it is very believable) that we are always receiving older technology from last year...or before.
But my point remains as from the beginning: Nikon sensors can handle the very situation I am having image quality troubles with. Therefore I really, really hope Canon's next 5d/etc...resolves this issue. Because it's been successfully done by someone else. Canon SHOULD do it. I am surprised they weren't "able to" this time around.
When the new sensor is ready they will release it.
Based on things I have heard before, I don't agree: When they have established enough market demand for x upgrade, they will release that upgrade. In fact others have stated (and it is very believable) that we are always receiving older technology from last year...or before.
But my point remains as from the beginning: Nikon sensors can handle the very situation I am having image quality troubles with. Therefore I really, really hope Canon's next 5d/etc...resolves this issue. Because it's been successfully done by someone else. Canon SHOULD do it. I am surprised they weren't "able to" this time around.
Jun 04, 2013 at 01:45 PM
p.11 #13So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
form wrote:
Based on things I have heard before, I don't agree: When they have established enough market demand for x upgrade, they will release that upgrade. In fact others have stated (and it is very believable) that we are always receiving older technology from last year...or before.
But my point remains as from the beginning: Nikon sensors can handle the very situation I am having image quality troubles with. Therefore I really, really hope Canon's next 5d/etc...resolves this issue. Because it's been successfully done by someone else. Canon SHOULD do it. I am surprised they weren't "able to" this time around.
Don't be surprised to find Canon not fully addressing this issue in the next DSLR releases.
Canon is busy working on technology the other companies don't provide.
But at some point, I'm sure Canon will address higher rez and higher DR. I wouldn't hold my breath or try to speculate when that might be.
ggreene wrote
When the new sensor is ready they will release it.But my point remains as from the beginning: Nikon sensors can handle the very situation I am having image quality troubles with. Therefore I really, really hope Canon's next 5d/etc...resolves this issue. Because it's been successfully done by someone else. Canon SHOULD do it. I am surprised they weren't "able to" this time around.
Don't be surprised to find Canon not fully addressing this issue in the next DSLR releases.
Canon is busy working on technology the other companies don't provide.
But at some point, I'm sure Canon will address higher rez and higher DR. I wouldn't hold my breath or try to speculate when that might be.
Jun 04, 2013 at 02:17 PM
p.11 #14So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Gunzorro wrote:
Don't be surprised to find Canon not fully addressing this issue in the next DSLR releases.
Canon is busy working on technology the other companies don't provide.
But at some point, I'm sure Canon will address higher rez and higher DR. I wouldn't hold my breath or try to speculate when that might be.
Exactly. Like it or not Canon's priorities seem to be elsewhere. If it was hurting their bottom line I think you would see a greater effort to compete on that front but how big is the low ISO DR market?
Don't be surprised to find Canon not fully addressing this issue in the next DSLR releases.
Canon is busy working on technology the other companies don't provide.
But at some point, I'm sure Canon will address higher rez and higher DR. I wouldn't hold my breath or try to speculate when that might be.
Exactly. Like it or not Canon's priorities seem to be elsewhere. If it was hurting their bottom line I think you would see a greater effort to compete on that front but how big is the low ISO DR market?
Jun 04, 2013 at 02:29 PM
p.11 #15So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
ggreene wrote:
Canon is busy working on technology the other companies don't provide.
But at some point, I'm sure Canon will address higher rez and higher DR. I wouldn't hold my breath or try to speculate when that might be.Exactly. Like it or not Canon's priorities seem to be elsewhere. If it was hurting their bottom line I think you would see a greater effort to compete on that front but how big is the low ISO DR market?
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.
Gunzorro wrote
Don't be surprised to find Canon not fully addressing this issue in the next DSLR releases.Canon is busy working on technology the other companies don't provide.
But at some point, I'm sure Canon will address higher rez and higher DR. I wouldn't hold my breath or try to speculate when that might be.
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.
Jun 04, 2013 at 02:35 PM
p.11 #16So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
snapsy wrote:
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.
Which bodes ill for the Nikon side as well as anyone interested in an upgrade path with good dynamic range...
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.
Which bodes ill for the Nikon side as well as anyone interested in an upgrade path with good dynamic range...
Jun 04, 2013 at 02:52 PM
p.11 #17So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
form wrote:
Which bodes ill for the Nikon side as well as anyone interested in an upgrade path with good dynamic range...
I'm sure you know this, but Nikon didn't solve the DR problem. They just buy sensors from Sony, who are the ones that solved the DR 'problem'. The fact that you think they SHOULD 'fix' the DR in Canon 5d series is for the most part irrelevant.
snapsy wrote
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.I'm sure you know this, but Nikon didn't solve the DR problem. They just buy sensors from Sony, who are the ones that solved the DR 'problem'. The fact that you think they SHOULD 'fix' the DR in Canon 5d series is for the most part irrelevant.
Jun 04, 2013 at 03:23 PM
p.11 #18So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
I understand it is Sony technology. Maybe Canon should buy their sensors....
Jun 04, 2013 at 03:27 PM
p.11 #19So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
gdanmitchell wrote:
Best policy: "Please step away from the toxic thread, sir." ;-)But then he will just start another thread about bad or expensive Canon cameras. Like he have done a few times beforeRefuse to engage that one, too.
Someone mentioned the hide button. I use it from time to time. I virtually never announce who I have hidden, though the "hidden" people might notice that there are no more replied to their posts from me - if they care, and they probably don't. ;-)
However, I most certainly have hidden this OP.
That is certainly the wiser attitude to have against such a person. But it is also very tempting to push him into a corner. What a pity indeed. I thought only in France I could find such a mourner (actually there were too many for our small country, we had to throw some of them to the other side of the atlantic ocean ! ).
Prenez soin de vous
Larate
Sven Jeppesen wrote
gdanmitchell wrote
So, y'all actually imagine that you are going to make Mr. Form happy? After 10 pages of this?Best policy: "Please step away from the toxic thread, sir." ;-)
Someone mentioned the hide button. I use it from time to time. I virtually never announce who I have hidden, though the "hidden" people might notice that there are no more replied to their posts from me - if they care, and they probably don't. ;-)
However, I most certainly have hidden this OP.
That is certainly the wiser attitude to have against such a person. But it is also very tempting to push him into a corner. What a pity indeed. I thought only in France I could find such a mourner (actually there were too many for our small country, we had to throw some of them to the other side of the atlantic ocean ! ).
Prenez soin de vous
Larate
Jun 04, 2013 at 03:43 PM
p.11 #20So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Obviously some do not take responsibility for the course of their actions.
I buy Canon bodies because I like & am committed to Canon lenses. I therefore choose to purchase -or not- a Canon body to use with my lenses.
If I purchase a Canon body that does not perform as I would like I have either made a poor decision or the camera does not perform as the manufacturer purports & in which case I can seek redress through consumer legal avenues. So you made a shit decision. Accept it or do something about it. No point moaning especially to those who are happy with their choice. My 5DIII is adequate for my needs. When it is not I will purchase what is. Not too hard really. There is a word that applies to 99% of camera gear purchases. Compromise.
With forums such as this, one is generally able to ask the RIGHT questions to aid in the decision making process.
I buy Canon bodies because I like & am committed to Canon lenses. I therefore choose to purchase -or not- a Canon body to use with my lenses.
If I purchase a Canon body that does not perform as I would like I have either made a poor decision or the camera does not perform as the manufacturer purports & in which case I can seek redress through consumer legal avenues. So you made a shit decision. Accept it or do something about it. No point moaning especially to those who are happy with their choice. My 5DIII is adequate for my needs. When it is not I will purchase what is. Not too hard really. There is a word that applies to 99% of camera gear purchases. Compromise.
With forums such as this, one is generally able to ask the RIGHT questions to aid in the decision making process.
Jun 04, 2013 at 04:23 PM