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 News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
Thread started 06 Jun 2014 (Friday) 16:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7D2/staying crop in the future.

 
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Jun 26, 2014 09:40 |  #76

I still reckon some people would buy a FF sensor nailed to a block of wood in preference to a 7D.

It's got to be better. It's FF.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Imagemaster
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jun 26, 2014 10:03 |  #77

Shadowblade wrote in post #16995531 (external link)
Picture an animal running perpendicular to the axis of the lens, from right to left or left to right. As it runs, it bobs its head up and down constantly. You're shooting wide open, either due to lighting conditions or for a blurred background, so accurate focus is vital - a large group of focus points aimed vaguely at the animal won't do it. You want focus to be on the eye of the animal, not on its ear or on its left leg. Trouble is, it's the head of the animal that's bobbing up and down, not the whole animal. Depending on whether the head's up or down, the animal's eye is either towards the top left of your final desired composition, or towards the bottom left. For instance, this (external link) vs this (external link).

The eye of the animal is in two very different positions relative to the rest of the animal, and shifts between those two positions several times a second. If you shoot using a crop body and track using the top right AF point, you'll have a poor composition when the head is down. If you use the bottom right AF point, you'll have a poor composition when the head is up. You can't possibly switch between the two points fast enough for a running animal. But, if you shoot full frame and frame more loosely (i.e. with the same focal length, which now subtends a greater angle of view due to the greater sensor size) you can track the eye of the animal using the centre point as it moves up and down, then still have plenty of room to crop around it for an ideal composition regardless of what position the animal's head is in at that point in time.

Or, for another example, an animal running towards you, zigzagging like this (external link) and this (external link). In one instance, the animal's head is to the left of its body, in the other, to its right. When shooting crop and framed tightly, which AF point are you going to use? Or you can use full-frame, track it with one AF point, then crop around it for a final image that's still the same size as the crop image or larger.

If you're going to crop the full-frame for a tighter composition anyway, the glass will be the same regardless of whether you're shooting crop or full-frame. Usually, it will be a 500mm, 800mm or 200-400 1.4x lens, so it's not like you'll find a significantly better lens elsewhere.

Too funny. Most people, including you, are not capable of keeping one focus point on the eye of an animal running with its head bobbing up and down.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jun 26, 2014 10:26 |  #78

Imagemaster wrote in post #16995636 (external link)
Too funny. Most people, including you, are not capable of keeping one focus point on the eye of an animal running with its head bobbing up and down.

You're missing the point entirely.

Anyone can keep one focus point on the eye of an animal with its head bobbing up and down.

What's physically impossible is to keep a focus point on the animal's eye while the framing of the rest of the animal stays the same. That is, if an animal is running towards you in a zigzag, for instance, to keep the animal's body in the tightly-cropped frame even as the head moves from one side of the frame to the other several times a second.

Picture this (external link) and this (external link). In one image, the animal's head is to the left of its body. In the other, the animal's head is to the right. Picture those two shots, but more tightly framed. In one image, the head would be on the right of the frame and the body on the left, while, in the other image, it would be reversed. A running animal, rapidly changing tack, would shift from one to the other constantly. An animal running in a straight line across the frame, bobbing its head up and down, would behave in much the same manner, only up and down rather than left to right.

If you tracked the animal's head with an AF point on the right, you'd have a good composition while the head is pointing in the right direction. As soon as it changes direction, you'd still be tracking the head with the AF point on the right, while the animal's body would no longer be in the frame at all. With a fast-moving animal, it's not like you can change the AF point from right to left to right to left to right again several times a second, nor could the AF system keep up even if you could physically make those changes.

Frame more loosely, with a full-frame sensor, and you can track the animal's eye with one focus point (say, the centre one in this case) while the body shifts from one side to the other, then crop around it to end up with an image that's still larger than what you'd get from a crop sensor. Frame loosely and crop with a crop sensor, however, and you'd end up with a very small image.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jun 26, 2014 10:43 |  #79

hollis_f wrote in post #16995594 (external link)
I still reckon some people would buy a FF sensor nailed to a block of wood in preference to a 7D.

It's got to be better. It's FF.

I own a 7D... somewhere. It was only ever used for wildlife photography, since the 5D2 couldn't track wildlife and the 1D3 didn't have enough resolution. Even the 1Ds3 doesn't have enough resolution once you've cropped the image around a moving target.

It's been gathering dust since the D800 came along and allowed me to track with a single point, then crop around the animal (regardless of where the animal's body is in relation to its head) and still end up with a 15-20MP image.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,371 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6065
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jun 26, 2014 10:45 |  #80

Shadowblade wrote in post #16995675 (external link)
Frame more loosely, with a full-frame sensor, and you can track the animal's eye with one focus point (say, the centre one in this case) while the body shifts from one side to the other, then crop around it to end up with an image that's still larger than what you'd get from a crop sensor. Frame loosely and crop with a crop sensor, however, and you'd end up with a very small image.

So we are talking about a long subject material that zig zags across the frame, which is a pretty specific case, vs just general wildlife or sports that doesn't have this issue, and crop reach in many cases are more desirable if you are focal length challenged.

Also, with your discussion point, you have to consider sensor density. A crop from a loosely composed 5D shot is going to have less resolution than an 18mpx crop, so again, this is not so much a format discussion as it is a pixel on target discussion, then. If the 7D2 comes out with more than 22Mpx (the highest density FF currently), then your cropping argument falls apart a bit. Finally too, if your FF doesn't have great AF performance, you would be better with a crop that does. Again AF performance comes into play, along with sensor density, and not necessarily dependent on the size of the physical sensor.

DOF control is the item in the discussion that does make sense, but that would be because you used a longer focal length on the FF to get the same framing as a lower focal length on a crop (the obvious reason why FF has thinner DOF over crop), and if you are near the limits of your glass with a FF, the crop again may be a better choice.

Now let's consider very specific bodies. Would a 5D3 be better than a 7D in cases of sports and wildlife? Yes but because:
- it has cleaner IQ
- it has better AF
- it is sharper
- wider range of DOF control with the same framing, if that really comes into play with what you shoot

Something like the 7D would be better because:
- it has more fps
- it has a larger raw buffer
- it provides longer equivalent reach due to the crop factor when you are focal length challenged

I guess I would just end my part of this discussion by saying "take a look at your options, and decide not only on format of sensor, but what all the other aspects of the camera gives you, like resolution should you crop anything, AF performance, IQ, fps, buffer capacity, etc", if you shoot sports and wildlife.

There is no clear cut winner, and the burden of obtaining good results will be laid upon the photographer's experience, their collection of glass, and their ability to set the camera up, use it to its best ability for the hard stuff, and finally their post processing skills. This is really what separates the results IMO between one person and another, more than format of camera.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jun 26, 2014 11:06 |  #81

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16995706 (external link)
So we are talking about a long subject material that zig zags across the frame, which is a pretty specific case, vs just general wildlife or sports that doesn't have this issue,

No, I was just using that as an example.

An animal running across the frame, bobbing its head up and down, is a very common situation when shooting wildlife. The axes are reversed, but the problem is the same - the animal bobs its head up and down as it runs, which means that the animal's body is either above or below the level of its head. If it's running left, selecting the top left focus point will give you a well-composed shot when the animal's head is up, but, when the animal's head is down, the body will be out of the top of the frame. Select the bottom left focus point and you'd get a well-composed shot when the animal's head is down, but would lose the body out the bottom edge of the frame when the animal's head is up. Use the far left point and you're left with a badly-composed shot either way, with the animal's body either too far up or too far down in the frame, unless the head is mid-way between the upper and lower positions.

The solution then is to frame more loosely, and crop. But, if you want a large file at the end, you can only do this with a full-frame sensor.

and crop reach in many cases are more desirable if you are focal length challenged.

Crop sensors don't have any 'added reach'. Sensors with higher pixel density do - they get more pixels on target. This is why the 1Ds3 had more reach than the 1D3, despite the latter being a 1.3x crop.

Also, with your discussion point, you have to consider sensor density. A crop from a loosely composed 5D shot is going to have less resolution than an 18mpx crop, so again, this is not so much a format discussion as it is a pixel on target discussion, then.

That's why I never considered the 5D3 in the argument.

The D800's 36MP sensor has the same density as a 15MP 1.5x crop sensor. Often, when you crop from a full-frame image, you won't need to crop all the way to 1.5x crop - a lot of the time, 1.3 or 1.4x will do it. So you end up with a 15MP to 20MP final image.

If the 7D2 comes out with more than 22Mpx (the highest density FF currently), then your cropping argument falls apart a bit.

Which is why I'd want the highest-resolution full-frame available. 36MP at the moment, but it's been 36MP for a few years now. 54MP would be nice as a next step, for the same density as a 24MP 1.5x crop sensor.

Of course, resolution isn't the only thing, despite its importance. Total sensor area used is equally important. Frame a full-frame image loosely, then crop, and you'd still end up with the equivalent of a 1.3x-1.5x crop sensor. Frame a crop sensor loosely to allow for head movement, then crop, and you'd end up with a tiny effective sensor area.

Finally too, if your FF doesn't have great AF performance, you would be better with a crop that does. Again AF performance comes into play, along with sensor density, and not necessarily dependent on the size of the physical sensor.

Obviously.

I'm talking about a full-frame camera with good AF vs a crop camera with good AF, not the 7D vs the 5D2.

DOF control is the item in the discussion that does make sense, but that would be because you used a longer focal length on the FF to get the same framing as a lower focal length on a crop

Nope, I'd use a similar focal length to what I'd use on a crop, and just frame more loosely to allow for subject movement. Maybe not exactly the same, but not 1.5-1.6x longer either - if 400mm would give me a tight crop on APS-C but 500mm would still give me a loose crop with plenty of area of play on full frame, I'd go for the 500mm, but, even if I used the same 400mm, the image quality would be no worse than if I had used the 400mm on crop, and the composition and tracking much simpler.

If the animal isn't moving and I'm free to zoom right in and carefully compose, that's another matter entirely.

and if you are near the limits of your glass with a FF, the crop again may be a better choice.

Only if the crop sensor has a significantly higher pixel density than the full-frame (a slightly higher density doesn't do it, since the crop will have a stronger AA filter) and if I wouldn't have to frame loosely and crop anyway due to subject movement.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,371 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6065
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jun 26, 2014 11:08 |  #82

whiteflyer wrote in post #16986660 (external link)
As I've said in another tread the new DPP 4 is full frame only, Canon have proven you don't need crops anymore for frame rates ( APS-H dropped from 1D IV on 1DX ) I believe canon will move to full frame only for ALL new cameras.

It has been said for a decade, and yet here we are... 10 years ago somebody looked at something that Canon produced and only saw FF stuff on it, and said the same thing. Don't make assumptions, you know what they say about that. ;)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 400
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jun 26, 2014 11:14 |  #83

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16995745 (external link)
It has been said for a decade, and yet here we are... 10 years ago somebody looked at something that Canon produced and only saw FF stuff on it, and said the same thing. Don't make assumptions, you know what they say about that. ;)

All new pro cameras, at least.

Consumer cameras are all about low price. Pro-level cameras need to deliver the goods.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,371 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6065
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jun 26, 2014 11:22 |  #84

Shadowblade wrote in post #16995753 (external link)
All new pro cameras, at least.

Consumer cameras are all about low price. Pro-level cameras need to deliver the goods.

Yeah, and I am a bit bummed about the 1.3 thing. I actually find that 1.3 was just about the perfect compromise to all my concerns. IQ was great, ISO performance was great, AF, etc. and I got some of that crop reach I need from time to time. Oh well, only time will tell where Canon heads with sensor formats and tech. If Canon can create a 36-46Mpx FF with better ISO, great AF, etc, then I personally won't lament the loss of 1.3 or 1.6 if that indeed goes away, I would have what I want, but would have more workflow to deal with.

I guess this is why the 1D4 has basically plateaued in value. I paid $3300 for mine back in 2011 with 5K clicks, and they are still not too far from that 3 years later in the same condition, about 10% less maybe.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
howiewu
Senior Member
Avatar
629 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2011
     
Jun 26, 2014 11:26 |  #85

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16995762 (external link)
Yeah, and I am a bit bummed about the 1.3 thing. I actually find that 1.3 was just about the perfect compromise to all my concerns. IQ was great, ISO performance was great, AF, etc. and I got some of that crop reach I need from time to time. Oh well, only time will tell where Canon heads with sensor formats and tech. If Canon can create a 36-46Mpx FF with better ISO, great AF, etc, then I personally won't lament the loss of 1.3 or 1.6 if that indeed goes away, I would have what I want, but would have more workflow to deal with.

I guess this is why the 1D4 has basically plateaued in value. I paid $3300 for mine back in 2011 with 5K clicks, and they are still not too far from that 3 years later in the same condition, about 10% less maybe.

No, 46mp FF is not good enough. We want 24mp 1.6x, which is equavelent to 60mp FF.


5DII, 70D
17-40mm f/4 USM L, 24-70mm f/4 IS USM L, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM L, 24mm f/3.5 TS-E L, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 100mm f/2.8 IS USM L, 300mm f/2.8 IS USM II L, 430 EX II, 270 EX II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC
Home Page: http://www.travelerath​ome.com (external link), Blog: http://travelerathome.​wordpress.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Imagemaster
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jun 26, 2014 11:45 |  #86

Shadowblade wrote in post #16995675 (external link)
You're missing the point entirely.

Anyone can keep one focus point on the eye of an animal with its head bobbing up and down.

No, it is you that is missing the point. Take ten shots of a cheetah running parallel to you using centre-point focus only. Now show me all ten shots in DPP with the focus point locked on the eye in every shot. I don't care if you use FF or a crop body, anyone can't do it.

Maybe in your dreams you can do it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
50,387 posts
Gallery: 162 photos
Likes: 7074
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 26, 2014 14:24 |  #87

Can I put the D800 / A7R sensor in my 5DIII please? Or my 1D4. I'm flexible :)

I still like the idea of the massively dense FF sensor with a "crop mode" like Noink used in the ( D3? can't recall)
Drop to a crop resolution to boost frame rate if needed.



“Humans need fantasy to be human. To be the place where the falling angel meets the rising ape.”

GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pyrojim
Goldmember
1,882 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Jun 26, 2014 14:29 |  #88

Imagemaster wrote in post #16995802 (external link)
No, it is you that is missing the point. Take ten shots of a cheetah running parallel to you using centre-point focus only. Now show me all ten shots in DPP with the focus point locked on the eye in every shot. I don't care if you use FF or a crop body, anyone can't do it.

Maybe in your dreams you can do it.

There are uncountably infinite many ways for a cheetah to run parallel at you, as the cheetah is assumed to move in a straight line(unless you look tasty?) and you are a point on the plane.


So I am not too sure what you mean by "parallel to you" As no matter what, at some point, the thing is running AT you.

Perhaps you mean, you are looking in one direction and the cheetah is out in front of you, running perpendicular to the direction you are looking?


PhaseOne H25
Camera agnostic

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Imagemaster
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jun 26, 2014 17:40 |  #89

pyrojim wrote in post #16996063 (external link)
There are uncountably infinite many ways for a cheetah to run parallel at you, as the cheetah is assumed to move in a straight line(unless you look tasty?) and you are a point on the plane.


So I am not too sure what you mean by "parallel to you" As no matter what, at some point, the thing is running AT you.

Perhaps you mean, you are looking in one direction and the cheetah is out in front of you, running perpendicular to the direction you are looking?

How about the cheetah is running either left to right, or right to left?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Imagemaster
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jun 26, 2014 17:47 |  #90

hollis_f wrote in post #16995594 (external link)
I still reckon some people would buy a FF sensor nailed to a block of wood in preference to a 7D.

It's got to be better. It's FF.

Good one.

Anyone with half a brain knows that full-frame is the best for everyone.




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

19,351 views & 0 likes for this thread
7D2/staying crop in the future.
FORUMS News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
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 orangetang
1839 guests, 329 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.