Great picture. Did you take the bike racing shots too?
Yes, I have the one with IS but I got mine six months before the latest one came out wouldn't you know! Still no complaints and living in Florida I get pretty good light most days. The optics are truly amazing. I have even found I can do pseudo macro of plants and insects ... which is a distinct advantage in some cases lol ... by standing at minimum distance I can focus at 400mm and cropping in post (a 50 MP would be cool for this). The images still beat my non L, genuine Macro lenses for sharpness in most cases.
Thanks. I have taken a fair number of bike racing shots, but I'm not sure which ones you're seeing. The guy I bought my 1D3 from is a pro cycling shooter from CA though, so if you're searching for other shots on this camera....
Thanks. I have taken a fair number of bike racing shots, but I'm not sure which ones you're seeing. The guy I bought my 1D3 from is a pro cycling shooter from CA though, so if you're searching for other shots on this camera....
I backed up to the main page of the URL you posted and saw some. Not used to smugmug so i could have simply been looking at stuff you liked. I asked as, I co-produced and edited a few seasons of bike racing for ESPN and ESPN2 and the shots brought back memories. I'd kill to try your 1D3, that must surely rock.
I backed up to the main page of the URL you posted and saw some. Not used to smugmug so i could have simply been looking at stuff you liked. I asked as, I co-produced and edited a few seasons of bike racing for ESPN and ESPN2 and the shots brought back memories. I'd kill to try your 1D3, that must surely rock.
Yeah, those would be my shots. I saw USAPCC and gave it my best shot, but only had my Rebel back then.
The 1D3 is the deal of the century right now, as it's still got this incredible battery and 1D handling, along with all the speed and pro features, and you can land one for $750. That is an absolutely incredible value. I still want a 1D4, but the price gap is too great when all I'm really getting is resolution. I've already sold big prints without issue with just 10MP. Some cropping freedom will be appreciated when I decide to spend the money. Photography is just a side-gig for me, and I'm generally really frugal anyway, so it may be a while.
Really cool that you get the ESPN experience. I have a friend who has done a lot of editing for ESPN, among other networks/shows. Do you know an editor with the last name "Hall?"
Well, those who are jumping ship for dynamic range have already done so. For weddings and events, photographers bring lighting, so DR doesn't matter that much.
Churches really like it when you set up a bunch of strobes and other lighting sources...
That said, I use a camera with really limited DR because I wanted 15 fps bursts with C-AF and a deep buffer. Probably I would be happier with a GH4 and shoot 4K instead but I have nikon glass and am not inclined to start over.
Everything is a trade off in photography. If there was a perfect camera with perfect lenses all the manufactures would go out of business.
Sure... because in every scenario you just wait until the subject is in a perfect position and time given whatever gear/lens you're using so you never have to crop anything out.
Of course I’m not speaking about increasing the number of opportunities for a picture. I’m obviously talking about proper construction of a photograph when you’re in a situation that would afford it.
I agree with you, but was trying to not let semantics get in the way. Yes, the lenses weren't "designed for"; but I'd also suggest that lens are designed with higher pixel counts in mind. Surely Canon has a product development roadmap for their camera bodies that informs their lens designers of what future sensor resolutions are coming and that then contributes to the design goals for the lens.
"Designed for" and "designed with it in mind" is splitting hairs as far as I'm concerned. Only the marketing department would really care.
Actually I recall reading somewhere that Canon marketing had stated their L series was designed for modern higher res sensors but my google-fu has failed me...
Well, those who are jumping ship for dynamic range have already done so. For weddings and events, photographers bring lighting, so DR doesn't matter that much.
Churches really like it when you set up a bunch of strobes and other lighting sources...
That said, I use a camera with really limited DR because I wanted 15 fps bursts with C-AF and a deep buffer. Probably I would be happier with a GH4 and shoot 4K instead but I have nikon glass and am not inclined to start over.
Everything is a trade off in photography. If there was a perfect camera with perfect lenses all the manufactures would go out of business.
Yeah, church is not the place for photography or video full stop. The only acceptable photography for a wedding, in my opinion, is post-service when everyone has left, and shooting from the porch, if there is one, or outside the main body of the church for the exit of the Bride and Bridegroom.
"the low-pass filter on the 5DS R to help photographers get the sharpest image possible."
This is strange, really strange.
As far as I know the main purpose of the low pass filter is to eliminates the moire effect but it will reduce the sharpness of the image.
Exactly the opposite of what this article states.
So, I looked up on Canon's website, and . . . the 5DS R has the option to cancel the built-in low pass filter, thus creating sharper images.
Most of us familiar with cancellation of antialiasing feature presumed a typo and overlooked it, but it was indeed a misstatement.
The 5DS R to my understanding always cancels the antialias low pass filter, it is not a user option. I don't know how the cancellation works, but I do know they didn't remove the low pass filter as that would have changed the optics, requiring a different design for that part of the camera to maintain optical quality. They can manufacture the same body for both models with much less expense by using cancellation. If cancellation were a user option, they'd only have one camera to sell-- I suspect it technically not possible to be a user option.
I have to say I prefer a dedicated video camera for video and a dedicated DSLR for stills. For me the issue is outside of a studio environment I simply can't shoot video from an LCD and I sure as hell can't hold a DSLR using the LCD and shoot video. I did buy a great add on for a Canon body that helps a great deal [Kamerar VF-4+ Plus Universal LCD View Finder] but it still isn't quite the same.
I agree about hand holding a DSLR.
I've mitigated that somewhat without extra expense by attaching my existing monopod, extending it about 3 feet or so and attaching one or both of my SuperClamps to the bottom of the monopod as counterweights (all stuff I already have) and even putting some weighty object in the SuperClamp. It really helps stabilize the "rig".
But focus-pull, arm fatigue and the small LCD are still omnipresent. I may try CamRanger for other reasons of previewing shots on my iPad, but I wonder if I could use it with my iPhone. Maybe attach it somehow (Gorilla-Pod?), add some gaffer tape as a makeshift hood and see if that helps see better.
Yeah, those would be my shots. I saw USAPCC and gave it my best shot, but only had my Rebel back then.
The 1D3 is the deal of the century right now, as it's still got this incredible battery and 1D handling, along with all the speed and pro features, and you can land one for $750. That is an absolutely incredible value. I still want a 1D4, but the price gap is too great when all I'm really getting is resolution. I've already sold big prints without issue with just 10MP. Some cropping freedom will be appreciated when I decide to spend the money. Photography is just a side-gig for me, and I'm generally really frugal anyway, so it may be a while.
Really cool that you get the ESPN experience. I have a friend who has done a lot of editing for ESPN, among other networks/shows. Do you know an editor with the last name "Hall?"
No sorry don't know him. In fact we (my fellow coproducer, he got to go the the races I didn't) were independently contracted and I actually did all the editing here in Sarasota. Box fulls if Betacam SP tapes were shipped here after every race and I had only days to digitize, edit and turn around two, one hour shows. It was pretty hectic and digital editing was in its infancy.
I've mitigated that somewhat without extra expense by attaching my existing monopod, extending it about 3 feet or so and attaching one or both of my SuperClamps to the bottom of the monopod as counterweights (all stuff I already have) and even putting some weighty object in the SuperClamp. It really helps stabilize the "rig".
But focus-pull, arm fatigue and the small LCD are still omnipresent. I may try CamRanger for other reasons of previewing shots on my iPad, but I wonder if I could use it with my iPhone. Maybe attach it somehow (Gorilla-Pod?), add some gaffer tape as a makeshift hood and see if that helps see better.
Any thoughts?
The attachment for the LCD back helps a great deal as it enables both a very large viewing screen with a rubber eye piece and added stability as you can pull the gear to your face as a third anchor point. As to focus issues I got a 70D to test out the dual pixel system but as yet haven't gotten around to trying it for video, I've been too busy playing with my Canon 100-400L. That isn't something fancy using in video mode, hand held! OMG I can't imagine the neck strain!
Kind of ironic seeing this announcement just two articles above "Apple to again stay out of megapixel race with 8MP camera in 'iPhone 6s'".
We laugh at phone and point-shoot camera makers that boast super high megapixels on small sensors. How is this any different?
Well, primarily because it's on a very large sensor. 50Mpixel on a full frame sensor delivers about 4.4um pixels, about the same as a 20MPixel APS size sensor, and a bit larger than a micro four-thirds sensor at 16Mpixel. Neither of those last two seems at all "funny".
What's funny? How about the 1.5um pixel size of the iPhones, or the 1um or smaller pixel size of some of the other smartphones around. They're so small (keep in mind, it's area that matters, so you're really concerned with the square of the pixel size) you can't have an aperture control, since the tiny lens is usually at or sometimes even beyond the diffraction limit for that sensor. This isn't unique to smartphones, either, the typical 1/2.3" sensor P&S camera makes absolutely no sense with more than maybe 12-13Mpixels and an f/2.0 lens, or 9-10Mpixels with the more typical f/3.5 lens.
I find the newly announced Olympus E-M5 II of far more interest. There are not too many people who print larger than 1.8M x 1.2m, which you can comfortably do from a 16 MP M4/3 sensor so 50.6.mp is a lot of overkill for most people.
I have an E-M5II, and it's a fantastic camera. I'll still bust out the Canon EOS 6D for low-light work from a tripod. But the combination of the high quality 16Mpixel sensor and the 8-exposure high resolution mode (still life only) is a great solution for delivering very high quality as an option in a smaller sensor camera. Olympus is thinking of more new things per model than most companies are doing across the product line. Another excellent feature is the Live Bulb/Live Time modes... the best way of shooting super long exposures. Surprised no one came up with that before.
And also the IBIS on this camera... while you certainly want a good sensor for low-light, that's not the only answer. Perfectly exposed shots with blur are still useless shots. This is as effective, if not more, than my old Glidecam 2000 on a heavier camcorder (they don't work as well on light cameras, it's all based around intertia). Kind of uncanny how well it works, and for any lens, too.
Don't take my professional word for it, take a minute and Google this and you will see Canon state this regarding their L lenses (which I have a lot of).
So yes, a 50mm 1.2 L (which I own) will not fully resolve 50MP and will get an update. It's a fact and I am surprised we are even having this discussion.
Sony has been designing the FE lenses with this in mind as well.
I've come across a few posters claiming similar things, yet have not read one iota of official, professional, tested opinions from more established reviewers and/or manufacturers.
Please clarify what it means to have an SLR lens be "designed" for higher MP sensors? It's light traveling through a glass lens. It's all analog. The only thing I can "imagine" maybe is the glass lenses themselves being of some sort of higher quality... but when I read from people that there are lenses that are designed for higher MP, I just shake my head...
What you're saying is my Canon 50mm f/1.2 prime lens is "not designed for high MP sensors"?? Really?
Comments
Great picture. Did you take the bike racing shots too?
Yes, I have the one with IS but I got mine six months before the latest one came out wouldn't you know! Still no complaints and living in Florida I get pretty good light most days. The optics are truly amazing. I have even found I can do pseudo macro of plants and insects ... which is a distinct advantage in some cases lol ... by standing at minimum distance I can focus at 400mm and cropping in post (a 50 MP would be cool for this). The images still beat my non L, genuine Macro lenses for sharpness in most cases.
Thanks. I have taken a fair number of bike racing shots, but I'm not sure which ones you're seeing. The guy I bought my 1D3 from is a pro cycling shooter from CA though, so if you're searching for other shots on this camera....
I backed up to the main page of the URL you posted and saw some. Not used to smugmug so i could have simply been looking at stuff you liked. I asked as, I co-produced and edited a few seasons of bike racing for ESPN and ESPN2 and the shots brought back memories. I'd kill to try your 1D3, that must surely rock.
I backed up to the main page of the URL you posted and saw some. Not used to smugmug so i could have simply been looking at stuff you liked. I asked as, I co-produced and edited a few seasons of bike racing for ESPN and ESPN2 and the shots brought back memories. I'd kill to try your 1D3, that must surely rock.
Yeah, those would be my shots. I saw USAPCC and gave it my best shot, but only had my Rebel back then.
The 1D3 is the deal of the century right now, as it's still got this incredible battery and 1D handling, along with all the speed and pro features, and you can land one for $750. That is an absolutely incredible value. I still want a 1D4, but the price gap is too great when all I'm really getting is resolution. I've already sold big prints without issue with just 10MP. Some cropping freedom will be appreciated when I decide to spend the money. Photography is just a side-gig for me, and I'm generally really frugal anyway, so it may be a while.
Really cool that you get the ESPN experience. I have a friend who has done a lot of editing for ESPN, among other networks/shows. Do you know an editor with the last name "Hall?"
Well, those who are jumping ship for dynamic range have already done so. For weddings and events, photographers bring lighting, so DR doesn't matter that much.
Churches really like it when you set up a bunch of strobes and other lighting sources...
That said, I use a camera with really limited DR because I wanted 15 fps bursts with C-AF and a deep buffer. Probably I would be happier with a GH4 and shoot 4K instead but I have nikon glass and am not inclined to start over.
Everything is a trade off in photography. If there was a perfect camera with perfect lenses all the manufactures would go out of business.
Sure... because in every scenario you just wait until the subject is in a perfect position and time given whatever gear/lens you're using so you never have to crop anything out.
Of course I’m not speaking about increasing the number of opportunities for a picture. I’m obviously talking about proper construction of a photograph when you’re in a situation that would afford it.
I agree with you, but was trying to not let semantics get in the way. Yes, the lenses weren't "designed for"; but I'd also suggest that lens are designed with higher pixel counts in mind. Surely Canon has a product development roadmap for their camera bodies that informs their lens designers of what future sensor resolutions are coming and that then contributes to the design goals for the lens.
"Designed for" and "designed with it in mind" is splitting hairs as far as I'm concerned. Only the marketing department would really care.
Actually I recall reading somewhere that Canon marketing had stated their L series was designed for modern higher res sensors but my google-fu has failed me...
Well, those who are jumping ship for dynamic range have already done so. For weddings and events, photographers bring lighting, so DR doesn't matter that much.
Churches really like it when you set up a bunch of strobes and other lighting sources...
That said, I use a camera with really limited DR because I wanted 15 fps bursts with C-AF and a deep buffer. Probably I would be happier with a GH4 and shoot 4K instead but I have nikon glass and am not inclined to start over.
Everything is a trade off in photography. If there was a perfect camera with perfect lenses all the manufactures would go out of business.
Yeah, church is not the place for photography or video full stop. The only acceptable photography for a wedding, in my opinion, is post-service when everyone has left, and shooting from the porch, if there is one, or outside the main body of the church for the exit of the Bride and Bridegroom.
Most of us familiar with cancellation of antialiasing feature presumed a typo and overlooked it, but it was indeed a misstatement.
The 5DS R to my understanding always cancels the antialias low pass filter, it is not a user option. I don't know how the cancellation works, but I do know they didn't remove the low pass filter as that would have changed the optics, requiring a different design for that part of the camera to maintain optical quality. They can manufacture the same body for both models with much less expense by using cancellation. If cancellation were a user option, they'd only have one camera to sell-- I suspect it technically not possible to be a user option.
I agree about hand holding a DSLR.
I've mitigated that somewhat without extra expense by attaching my existing monopod, extending it about 3 feet or so and attaching one or both of my SuperClamps to the bottom of the monopod as counterweights (all stuff I already have) and even putting some weighty object in the SuperClamp. It really helps stabilize the "rig".
But focus-pull, arm fatigue and the small LCD are still omnipresent. I may try CamRanger for other reasons of previewing shots on my iPad, but I wonder if I could use it with my iPhone. Maybe attach it somehow (Gorilla-Pod?), add some gaffer tape as a makeshift hood and see if that helps see better.
Any thoughts?
No sorry don't know him. In fact we (my fellow coproducer, he got to go the the races I didn't) were independently contracted and I actually did all the editing here in Sarasota. Box fulls if Betacam SP tapes were shipped here after every race and I had only days to digitize, edit and turn around two, one hour shows. It was pretty hectic and digital editing was in its infancy.
The attachment for the LCD back helps a great deal as it enables both a very large viewing screen with a rubber eye piece and added stability as you can pull the gear to your face as a third anchor point. As to focus issues I got a 70D to test out the dual pixel system but as yet haven't gotten around to trying it for video, I've been too busy playing with my Canon 100-400L. That isn't something fancy using in video mode, hand held! OMG I can't imagine the neck strain!
http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00D3551NU/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
You could also try one of the many hot shoe phone holders. Jolby even makes a grip-tight holder that can be fit to a hot shoe tripod adapter.
http://joby.com/smartphones/griptight-mount
plus one of these:
http://www.amazon.com/SouthbayCamera-Adjustable-Swivel-Standard-Adapter/dp/B00GOF7T4K
Kind of ironic seeing this announcement just two articles above "Apple to again stay out of megapixel race with 8MP camera in 'iPhone 6s'".
We laugh at phone and point-shoot camera makers that boast super high megapixels on small sensors. How is this any different?
Well, primarily because it's on a very large sensor. 50Mpixel on a full frame sensor delivers about 4.4um pixels, about the same as a 20MPixel APS size sensor, and a bit larger than a micro four-thirds sensor at 16Mpixel. Neither of those last two seems at all "funny".
What's funny? How about the 1.5um pixel size of the iPhones, or the 1um or smaller pixel size of some of the other smartphones around. They're so small (keep in mind, it's area that matters, so you're really concerned with the square of the pixel size) you can't have an aperture control, since the tiny lens is usually at or sometimes even beyond the diffraction limit for that sensor. This isn't unique to smartphones, either, the typical 1/2.3" sensor P&S camera makes absolutely no sense with more than maybe 12-13Mpixels and an f/2.0 lens, or 9-10Mpixels with the more typical f/3.5 lens.
I find the newly announced Olympus E-M5 II of far more interest. There are not too many people who print larger than 1.8M x 1.2m, which you can comfortably do from a 16 MP M4/3 sensor so 50.6.mp is a lot of overkill for most people.
I have an E-M5II, and it's a fantastic camera. I'll still bust out the Canon EOS 6D for low-light work from a tripod. But the combination of the high quality 16Mpixel sensor and the 8-exposure high resolution mode (still life only) is a great solution for delivering very high quality as an option in a smaller sensor camera. Olympus is thinking of more new things per model than most companies are doing across the product line. Another excellent feature is the Live Bulb/Live Time modes... the best way of shooting super long exposures. Surprised no one came up with that before.
And also the IBIS on this camera... while you certainly want a good sensor for low-light, that's not the only answer. Perfectly exposed shots with blur are still useless shots. This is as effective, if not more, than my old Glidecam 2000 on a heavier camcorder (they don't work as well on light cameras, it's all based around intertia). Kind of uncanny how well it works, and for any lens, too.
I have an E-M1. The 5-axis IBIS really is a game-changer. Olympus really do seem to be the most innovative camera manufacturer.
Don't take my professional word for it, take a minute and Google this and you will see Canon state this regarding their L lenses (which I have a lot of).
So yes, a 50mm 1.2 L (which I own) will not fully resolve 50MP and will get an update. It's a fact and I am surprised we are even having this discussion.
Sony has been designing the FE lenses with this in mind as well.