Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 06 Feb 2012 (Monday) 22:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Not 36MP!!

 
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Feb 22, 2012 00:01 |  #241

mwsilver wrote in post #13941283 (external link)
I know about the FLAC files. I myself do not use them. I mostly listen to Redbook CD's and LP's. Yes LPs. When I listen to wireless streaming music from my computer to my main stereo only system I usually listen to AIFF files.The whole process of listening to high definition streaming data is still in a somewhat transitional phase. I can't imagine that there are not similar issues and concerns with digital image files.

There are issues with digital image files but they do not involve lossless compression which is, well, lossless. It seems like you avoid anything with the word compression in it - as if it were a dbx product or something :D. If you can tell any difference between uncompressed and codec'd file format X, the that file format is not lossless, period. If someone calls it lossless and you can prove you can detect a difference, they are wrong - or lying.


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mwsilver
Goldmember
4,056 posts
Gallery: 54 photos
Likes: 623
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Central New Jersey
     
Feb 22, 2012 08:15 |  #242

AJSJones wrote in post #13941447 (external link)
There are issues with digital image files but they do not involve lossless compression which is, well, lossless. It seems like you avoid anything with the word compression in it - as if it were a dbx product or something :D. If you can tell any difference between uncompressed and codec'd file format X, the that file format is not lossless, period. If someone calls it lossless and you can prove you can detect a difference, they are wrong - or lying.

Agreed


Mark
Canon 7D2, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM, Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, DXO PhotoLab Elite, ON1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mafoo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,503 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Dec 2011
     
Feb 22, 2012 09:12 |  #243

AJSJones wrote in post #13941447 (external link)
If you can tell any difference between uncompressed and codec'd file format X, the that file format is not lossless, period. If someone calls it lossless and you can prove you can detect a difference, they are wrong - or lying.

I know we are saying the same thing, but just to make sure it's 100% clear...

If I write an application, and I say it can turn a WAV into an AIFF, there is nothing that stops me from down sampling the hell out of it first.

A file format, and the actual file can be very different. Just because a file format allows for lossless compression, does not mean the tool that created the file chose to not lose any data.


-Jeremy
5D Mk II | SL1 | 24-105 f4.0L IS | 70-200 f2.8L IS | S35 1.4 | 40 2.8 Pancake | Samyang 14 2.8 | 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Feb 22, 2012 09:58 |  #244

mafoo wrote in post #13942877 (external link)
I know we are saying the same thing, but just to make sure it's 100% clear...

If I write an application, and I say it can turn a WAV into an AIFF, there is nothing that stops me from down sampling the hell out of it first.

A file format, and the actual file can be very different. Just because a file format allows for lossless compression, does not mean the tool that created the file chose to not lose any data.

Yup - if you can't reconstruct an identical copy of the original data, then the overall process used cannot be called lossless. I presume you can downsample a wav to a lower sampling rate and lower bit depth and lose information that way. That is therefore not lossless - it produces a smaller file so it is compressed compared to the original, but you can't reconstruct the highbit original.

Different raw converters can produce different results but this happens because they process the same reconstructed sensor data (they decompress the cr2 to the same, original data set) but then process them differently during demosaicing interpolating etc.


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GergReltub
Member
Avatar
48 posts
Joined May 2009
     
Feb 22, 2012 10:42 |  #245

I want a Canon that rivals the D800E. A 36 MP would be great.


Canon 5D Mark II, Canon 70-200 f4 L, Canon 24-105 f4 IS L, Canon 300 f4 IS L, Tamron SP AF Di 90mm MACRO, 2 580EX II strobes, PocketWizard MiniTT1 with 2 FlexTT5 receivers, Slik Pro 700 DX tripod w/ Really Right Stuff BH-55 Ballhead and Really Right Stuff Ultimate-Pro Omni-Pivot Package. Photoshop CS6, Lightroom 4, Photomatix Pro, Topaz Labs, IMac,
http://primefolio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jemanner
Senior Member
625 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Panaca, NV
     
Feb 22, 2012 10:44 |  #246

GergReltub wrote in post #13943519 (external link)
I want a Canon that rivals the D800E. A 36 MP would be great.

Agreed. My money would be on the table!


Jim

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rejay14
Goldmember
Avatar
1,064 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 593
Joined Mar 2009
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario
     
Feb 25, 2012 08:27 as a reply to  @ jemanner's post |  #247

If you are dropping $3,000 for a new body and almost as much for a mark ii lens, why wouldn't you just blow another hundred bucks on a 1TB hard drive and use your gear's full potential?


1DX Mark II, 5D Mark IV, 40D,Rebel XT :lol:, 70-200L 2.8 IS II, 100-400L IS II,24-105 II L, 100mmL 2.8 IS, 16-35L 2.8 II, 24-70 2.8L II, Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art, Sekonic 758DR, Pixma 9500 II, Pixma 9000 II, Think Tank Airport Accelerator v2.0, Canon 600EX-RT x 5, Profoto B1 x 4 with too many modifiers http:// …www.PrestigePhotoPro.c​om (external link) Portfolio (external link)
Concert Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mwsilver
Goldmember
4,056 posts
Gallery: 54 photos
Likes: 623
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Central New Jersey
     
Feb 25, 2012 09:14 |  #248

jemanner wrote in post #13943537 (external link)
Agreed. My money would be on the table!

While I have no argument in principle, everyone seem to assume that a higher MP sensor alone will be that superior. The current rumors for the 5D Mark III, which supposedly will be announced on Monday or Tuesday, are that it will have 22MP. Until the whole package, not just the sensor, is reviewed, who can say how the Mark III will compare to the D800. Regardless of the sensor density, the IQ of the final result will tell the tale


Mark
Canon 7D2, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM, Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, DXO PhotoLab Elite, ON1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wissigle
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Brooklyn
     
Mar 08, 2012 10:54 |  #249

I thought I'd just conclude this thread by saying that for once, amazingly, Canon is giving me exactly what I want in the 5DIII. It seems (on the basis of comments since 5DIII was annouced), that I'm in something of a minority about being 100% pleased with this offering. Thanks Canon, the samples coming through look very good, the ISO looks amazing, I'm very pleased.

Now, who wants to give me $3,500...

Wissigle wrote in post #13839012 (external link)
Please Canon, do not make the 5DIII 36MP. Please!!

And in other news, Nikon have jumped from 12MP in the D700 to 36MP in the D800! what happened to everything in between!

Wissigle wrote in post #13839242 (external link)
Fair points gentlemen, and I probably will not get a 5D at 36MP it that's what's released. Everyone is different and I guess I have very specific requirements. I want 18 to 24MP in full frame, very solid body (aka EOS 3), excellent low light, and a half decent AF system. High FPS not required. That's all!


Wissigle
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zincozinco
-Followers of Fidget-
Avatar
4,420 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Andalucía
     
Mar 08, 2012 12:06 |  #250

AM I the only one hoping that this camera can replace my Hassel in 85% of the work and also bring a whole new level of fast workflow to great files?? Im hoping so much that I traded in all my Canon gear to nikon. been with canon since 1996...


Living the life, overexposing...
Web (external link), Blog (external link) Name: Mike, Maik, Micke or just zinco.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ilumo
Goldmember
1,739 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 36
Joined Oct 2009
     
Mar 08, 2012 13:22 |  #251

zincozinco wrote in post #14050107 (external link)
AM I the only one hoping that this camera can replace my Hassel in 85% of the work and also bring a whole new level of fast workflow to great files?? Im hoping so much that I traded in all my Canon gear to nikon. been with canon since 1996...

what kind of hassel do you have?


Body: Sony a7R IV
Glass: 50mm f/1.8 | 35mm f/1.4L USM | 16-35 f/4.0 IS USML USM | 24-70 f/2.8L II USM | 24-105 f/4.0L IS USM | 70-200 f/2.8L II IS USM | 85mm f/1.4L IS USM | 100mm f/2.8L IS USM | 24mm f/1.4GM | 70-200mm f/2.8GM | Samyang 85mm f/1.4 | Voigtlander 10mm f/5.6
Accessories: 430 EX II, 600 EX, tripods, umbrellas, and other goodies.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Häakon
Member
32 posts
Joined Sep 2004
     
Mar 09, 2012 18:24 |  #252

GergReltub wrote in post #13943519 (external link)
I want a Canon that rivals the D800E. A 36 MP would be great.

Can't just keep cramming pixels into a full frame sensor... the next logical step is medium format Canon. Wonder when we'll start seeing those.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Mar 09, 2012 20:47 |  #253

36 MP is only slightly more dense than the 50D - then there came the 60D and 7D. 36 MP on FF is still just fine in terms of capability, lower density than we know can produce great IQ...


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ilumo
Goldmember
1,739 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 36
Joined Oct 2009
     
Mar 09, 2012 20:52 |  #254

AJSJones wrote in post #14059415 (external link)
36 MP is only slightly more dense than the 50D - then there came the 60D and 7D. 36 MP on FF is still just fine in terms of capability, lower density than we know can produce great IQ...

actually. we'll see about that. I don't think FULL FRAME glass has been stressed with this pixel density before. Crop cameras only stress the center of the lenses, which tend to be the best, but now the edges of the glass are also going to have to resolve those tiny pixels... we'll see how edge sharpness will react to these new MP monsters.


Body: Sony a7R IV
Glass: 50mm f/1.8 | 35mm f/1.4L USM | 16-35 f/4.0 IS USML USM | 24-70 f/2.8L II USM | 24-105 f/4.0L IS USM | 70-200 f/2.8L II IS USM | 85mm f/1.4L IS USM | 100mm f/2.8L IS USM | 24mm f/1.4GM | 70-200mm f/2.8GM | Samyang 85mm f/1.4 | Voigtlander 10mm f/5.6
Accessories: 430 EX II, 600 EX, tripods, umbrellas, and other goodies.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Mar 09, 2012 21:57 |  #255

The issue is not with the sensors but with the glass - the higher density sensors will reveal the limitations of the lenses more than lower density sensors, that's for sure. Thus, with the more dense sensors, you'll simply need better glass :D

Why do you think Canon has been improving their lenses recently? They want them out there so when the new 36MP camera finally shows up, they'll have some (of their own, as opposed to Zeiss and co) good lenses to test it and show it off with - and people will go oooooh anbd ahhhhh and want both the new camera and have to buy the new lenses to get full advantage :D:D:D


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

31,657 views & 0 likes for this thread
Not 36MP!!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is w_padre
549 guests, 257 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.