How feasible would it be for Canon to produce a Video Lens for their DSLR bodies that shoot HD video? Its seems they could make one where the focusing is done by the lens so it operates like a camcorder and also implement a motorized zoom in the lens with a wide / telephoto button for zooming right on the lens itself.
ohyeah wrote:
Just checked and it shows a status of shipped, supposed to be here on Monday. Hopefully there's some sort of detailed repair slip with the camera as nothing was listed on Canon's web site. I'll definitely test it that day, and try to post an update here. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it will be good news.
Wow, they shipped it to the wrong address. I checked and I gave them the correct address. I sure hope their shipping accuracy doesn't reflect on their repair accuracy. I had to call FedEx and give them the correct address, so I will get it tomorrow. What a PITA. I really hope they fixed the problem, and not roll their eyes and send it back with some lame excuse like the dealership does when I take my car in for service!!
Got my 7D back, has exact same focus issue. the single and spot AF are fine, switch to zone and it's WAY off, not even close. And yeah, got the typical found focus, adjusted, blah blah blah....
Good news is the Spot AF is now dead on at 0 MA, as opposed to -8 before I sent it in (for both the 70-200 and 100-400). Now if Canon can just get that same accuracy in all focus modes....
ohyeah wrote:
Good news is the Spot AF is now dead on at 0 MA, as opposed to -8 before I sent it in (for both the 70-200 and 100-400). Now if Canon can just get that same accuracy in all focus modes....
How much did they charge you when you sent your lenses in with it?
Don't know if this has been posted. A video that's making all of the economics nerd blogs. Says it was filmed entirely with 7D. It pits the great economists Keynes and Hayek in a rap to solve the boom/bust cycle. Photography and Economics in one package, two of my favorite things. http://econstories.tv/home.html
Just saw this and it is pretty funny. What's not funny is that this was shot on a 7D...pretty amazing if you ask me. Thanks for the post python.
I was thinking about how lenses can be out resolved by the sensor, and was wondering at what point it's worse than a 'lesser' camera where that isn't the case? For example, does a 1d2 printed at 12x18 look better than a 12x18 print from a 7D that is suffering negative effects on IQ because the lens is out resolved? For imaginary test purposes, assume they used the same lens. I would imagine there's a point in print size where the negative effects of an out resolved sensor are noticeable, am I thinking about this correctly?
corndog wrote:
I was thinking about how lenses can be out resolved by the sensor, and was wondering at what point it's worse than a 'lesser' camera where that isn't the case? For example, does a 1d2 printed at 12x18 look better than a 12x18 print from a 7D that is suffering negative effects on IQ because the lens is out resolved? For imaginary test purposes, assume they used the same lens. I would imagine there's a point in print size where the negative effects of an out resolved sensor are noticeable,
corndog wrote:
I was thinking about how lenses can be out resolved by the sensor, and was wondering at what point it's worse than a 'lesser' camera where that isn't the case? For example, does a 1d2 printed at 12x18 look better than a 12x18 print from a 7D that is suffering negative effects on IQ because the lens is out resolved? For imaginary test purposes, assume they used the same lens. I would imagine there's a point in print size where the negative effects of an out resolved sensor are noticeable, am I thinking about this correctly?
No
Think about it like you would defraction. All things being equal a 24mp sensor at f/16 will never look worse than an 8mp sensor at f/16, it can at worst only look the same or better.
Same thing for a lenses resolving ability. If the lens can resolve 50 line pair per mm, then that's it. But an 8mp camera may only resolve 40lp/mm while the 24mp camera might be able to resolve 60lp/mm. However the lens will limit it to 50lp/mm, even then the 24mp camera isn't going to look worse than the 8mp camera. That 24mp camera will never go below 40lp/mm before the 8mp camera does (say if we were shooting both at f/22 on that same lens)
You could think of it like this, the higher resolution sensor is showing lens faults that were previously masked by a lack of resolution before.
I'm sure there's math or something that explains all this All of these numbers are made up for the sake of example.
I think I got it, thanks for the explanation. It sounds like, in an odd way, out resolving is almost a good thing. Ultimately I understand that it's not, but at least it means you've made the most of your lens!
Should images still be viewed at 100% while editing? Sharpening these noisy files at 100% is challenging.
I've done some testing with my wife's 7D and I am pretty surprised about the results now that I found a workflow that works for my. Photo's are processed with CS4; ACR 5.6 and only used minor NR in ACR and a tiny bit in PS; afterwards some selective sharpening with 'smart sharpen'. I've put a picture gallery on my website with samples of 1200 pxls. Foxes in cloudy weather in the snow are not the easiest target for any camera ...
corndog wrote:
I think I got it, thanks for the explanation. It sounds like, in an odd way, out resolving is almost a good thing. Ultimately I understand that it's not, but at least it means you've made the most of your lens!
Yep.
Should images still be viewed at 100% while editing? Sharpening these noisy files at 100% is challenging.
Definitely still check detail and sharpness at 100%. The resampling algorithms used by photoshop to display images at lower resolution are extremely crude, as you can check by comparing an image viewed at 50% to an image downsampled by bicubic viewed at 100%; odd ratios like 66% are even worse.
You may want to use a larger radius for sharpening than in the past, if your lenses aren't up to taking full advantage of the sensor resolution, and the image data at the pixel level is substantially high frequency noise rather than high frequency detail. You may also want to do a light noise reduction only of high frequencies before applying NR.
I've done some testing with my wife's 7D and I am pretty surprised about the results now that I found a workflow that works for my. Photo's are processed with CS4; ACR 5.6 and only used minor NR in ACR and a tiny bit in PS; afterwards some selective sharpening with 'smart sharpen'. I've put a picture gallery on my website with samples of 1200 pxls. Foxes in cloudy weather in the snow are not the easiest target for any camera ...
