Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: bleirer
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 300 next>>
Mar 8, 2021 16:47:26   #
Sure it is a problem, but the effect is gradual and different if you are viewing at 100% vs. Printing an 8x10. I like this calculator because you get to see both options. All you can do is keep it in mind when setting the aperture and know that at some point more depth of field is fighting against softening due to diffraction.

https://www.photopills.com/calculators/diffraction
Go to
Mar 8, 2021 13:07:55   #
You should check your camera menu to see if your R6 can use the dual pixel raw system. I know the R5 and the 5D mark 4 does, but my RP doesn't. It would be in the camera menu under the camera icon, look for a dual pixel raw setting with enable or disable as the choices. What this does in Canon DPP4 software is to let you adjust focus to a degree after the shot is taken. You can adjust sharpness a little or change bokeh a little, etc. Be worth checking out. In DPP4 the menu is tools/start dual pixel raw optimizer. This is different from lens fine tune that you find on a mirrored camera.
Go to
Mar 8, 2021 10:22:07   #
I wonder about that myself and think about two other top cameras that are coming down in price, especially used, because newer mirrorless ones are in the mix. The Nikon d850 and the Canon 5d mark 4 would be my picks. Since I have canon lenses the decision is easy, but a high resolution camera will show off all the flaws of lenses you thought were good.
Go to
Mar 8, 2021 09:53:51   #
If the aperture and focus is controlled electronically like all of my lenses, you have to shoot wide open, or set the camera to the desired aperture, maybe hold down dof preview, and remove the lens while the camera is still on to lock in the aperture. Then you are focusing dark though. Extension tubes on good lenses can give good results, and they pass the electronics from the camera to the lens. For a rough idea of magnification divide the extension tube length by the lens focal length. So 25mm extension on a 50mm lens could give about .5x magnification. You get very narrow dof.
Go to
Mar 7, 2021 14:36:27   #
RPaul3rd wrote:
Good suggestion however their support chat features AI bots who steer you to their who steer you to articles on their website. I've tried but haven't found the right article yet.


I always eventually get to a real person at Adobe then eventually get up the food chain to the right person. If you keep insisting they will take over your computer by remote and fix the issue for you. You can also get chat support from your antivirus company if that is determined to be the interference. I got good help from McAfee recently where they fixed something by taking over remotely.
Go to
Mar 7, 2021 11:24:12   #
This is the latest Adobe list. No Sony A1 that I see. They haven't updated since December so they are due.

https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html
Go to
Mar 6, 2021 12:08:28   #
The megabytes and the megapixels are two different things. If you export in best quality jpeg it compresses the megabytes but does not change the megapixels. So you will still have the same pixel resolution to print with. You can see this in action if you look at export as in Photoshop, you can set the jpeg for any pixel resolution and the panel to the left will show you the resulting file size in megabytes.
Go to
Mar 5, 2021 10:25:50   #
User ID wrote:
But that was now and this is then.

You should’ve registered it with the copyright office. No royalties for you :-(


I thought it before he did....
Go to
Mar 4, 2021 15:52:48   #
Desert Gecko wrote:
Sure. I'll play, and without any personal attack on Tony Northrup. But I will say he often misses the mark with his videos and he seems to care more about views than presenting useful, objective information (those are observations of Tony as a professional, not personal attacks).

The main problem with his "testing" of full-frame vs. crop lenses is lack of standardization. He compares images on a crop sensor with images on a full-frame sensor, making any objective comparison of lens image quality absolutely impossible. Both sensors have roughly 24 million pixels, but one sensor is much larger, so its pixels are much larger. While newer technology has made pixel size less a factor than it once was, smaller pixels have an inherently lower s/n ratio and produce a lower-quality image.

Had Tony put on his thinking cap, he'd have used the same camera but in crop mode for his tests. This is so obvious that I can't help but think Tony did this intentionally to support his mistaken notion. He is the type of guy to deceive us if he thinks it'll make him a buck. Now that was personal, but otherwise how'd I do?
Sure. I'll play, and without any personal attack o... (show quote)


I don't think using the same camera in crop mode would have been evidence pro or con in this case. A crop camera often has the photosites squeezed into a smaller area, so a smaller pixel pitch I guess is the term, where a full frame camera in crop mode would not change the pixel pitch at all.

I don't know if it makes a lot of difference, but it makes sense that in general you would need the lens to resolve finer details the the tighter the pixels were jammed next to each other. I do think the ef100-400 mentioned is well up to the task, though.
Go to
Mar 4, 2021 14:16:19   #
amfoto1 wrote:
Yo Tom,

The best answer to that "photographer" would have been "I'm using this lens because no one makes a 'crop-only' EF-S 100-400mm lens". In fact, most telephotos are FF capable. There are very few that are "crop only". No crop only lens I can think of for Canon longer than 250mm.

And there is ABSOLUTELY no truth to that BS about not using FF lenses on crop cameras.

In fact, there can be some ADVANTAGES to using FF lenses on crop cameras. Most lenses are sharpest in the center and gradually become less sharp as you move toward the corners of the image. So a crop sensor camera will potentially only be using the BEST part of a FF lens, cropping away the weakest parts of the images the lens makes.

Also, with telephotos in particular, a crop sensor camera will act like a "free teleconverter". What I mean by that is the crop of your 80D is like putting a 1.6X teleconverter on your 100-400mm, which will behave as if it were a 160-640mm on a full frame camera.... except there's no loss of light the way there would be with an actual teleconverter. (They don't exist, but if they did a 1.6X teleconverter would "cost" approx. 1.5 stops of light lost.) While some combinations of lens and TC work very well, teleconverters also might cause some compromise of image quality and autofocus performance, which you can avoid by instead using the lens on a crop camera.

In fact, speaking of teleconverters, that's another consideration. Say you wanted to use one on your 100-400mm.... No problem. Canon makes some great 1.4X TCs (I use version II and it's very good, but their III is even better). However, until very recently no one has made a teleconverter that can be used with an EF-S lens. Partly the reason for this is that there are almost no EF-S lenses it makes sense to use with a teleconverter.... Maybe the EF-S 55-250mm or the EF-S 18-135mm. Today Kenko's "HD" teleconverters are usable with both EF and EF-S lenses. Though I still see little reason to ever do so and wouldn't expect particularly good results using those lenses with teleconverters. The image attached below was shot with Canon EF 1.4X II on EF 100-400mm II lens on APS-C format 7D Mark II camera (the most enlarged version of that image may appear over-sharpened on a computer monitor... this image was sized and sharpened for printing, so is higher resolution than usual displayed online).

Where "crop only" lenses are most needed are at the wide angle end of things. When DSLRs were first being introduced, nearly all of them were "croppers" (arguably, the first "mainstream" full frame camera for the masses was the Canon 5D introduced in 2005), but the lenses we had for use on our APS-C cameras were all carried over from film SLRs. Aside from fisheye lenses with heavy distortions and a few very expensive 14mm and 15mm primes, the typical wide angle from the film ("full frame") era was 20, 18 or 17mm at the widest. Those simply weren't very wide on APS-C cameras.

Lens makers saw that need and soon filled it with non-fisheye "crop only" lenses that went as wide as 12, 11 or even 10mm. The earliest of those weren't all that great, but became much better in subsequent versions. Canon's EF-S 10-22mm is superb, though it was pretty pricey. That's changed, too, though. Crop lenses also can be smaller, lighter and less expensive... In fact, Canon themselves really turned things upside down when they introduced their EF-S 10-18mm IS STM for under $300. That lens is not only one of the lightest and smallest ultrawides, it also was the first of that zoom type to have image stabilization. A bit plasticky, but capable of making excellent images, it's price might have been the most revolutionary thing about it. This forced other lens makers to reduce their prices and/or develop competitive products Nikon soon intro'd their own AF-P 10-20mm with VR for around $300 (though for some reason Nikon continues to offer the two most wildly overpriced ultrawides: AF-S 10-24mm for $900 and AF-S 12-24mm for $1100!). Sigma's 10-20mm f/3.5 now sells for $500 to $440 in Canon & Nikon mounts... But isn't discounted in Sony mount, where there's no competition and it sells for $650.

One of the coolest things about your 80D is that it can use BOTH Canon EF (full frame) and EF-S (crop only) lenses equally well. You can fit it with any of the 130 million Canon EF/EF-S lenses ever made the last 30+ years and can choose among the almost 90 different EF and EF-S lenses Canon currently has in production. The only other manufacturer with similar lens choices is Nikon. There are also a lot of very good third party lenses made to fit your Canon (and for Nikon F-mount cameras).

P.S. Full frame cameras require full frame lenses. Canon EF-S lenses can't even be fitted to Canon FF cameras. So, the guy who questioned you using that lens on your camera actually has it exactly backwards. However, yes, some crop lenses can be fitted to some FF cameras and the cameras can be set to crop the image or it can be cropped in post-processing.... but doing that usually ends up with far less resolution than your 80D offers. To crop in that manner, the FF camera needs to have 50MP or more resolution.
Yo Tom, br br The best answer to that "phot... (show quote)


On the full frame Canon R series cameras EF-S lenses do work, but switch the camera to lower resolution crop mode.
Go to
Mar 4, 2021 10:32:43   #
There was an interesting topic here recently on dynamic range in which Bill Claff of photonstophotos.net participated. One of my takeaways from his comments was that you have to normalize for image size and viewing distance before you can really compare two systems. This holds true for dynamic range, depth of field, sharpness, noise, you name it. This makes it very hard to make blanket judgements across systems. But it does seem as a general rule that after normalizing if the sensor area is a little smaller then the lens must resolve a little better in the exposed part of the image circle to get equivalent results. Little being the keyword here. Still I'm sure the EF100-400ii is plenty up to the task, and there aren't any ef-s alternatives anyway.
Go to
Mar 4, 2021 00:21:05   #
.
Go to
Mar 3, 2021 18:47:08   #
I recently got a used 10 stop Hoya at keh.com for a nice price. Looked new to me, no complaints on performance.
Go to
Mar 3, 2021 18:15:27   #
Longshadow wrote:
Other than analytical logic? Not yet.
Not worth the trouble for me.
Believe what you want.


I neither believe not disbelieve, just wondered what the facts were. To me it makes no sense that a lens would change its stripes just because the sensor got smaller. But that is not what he argued. He said lenses designed for crop bodies could perform better on a crop body than one designed for a full frame body on a crop body. Not saying I buy that either but he did offer some supporting examples.
Go to
Mar 3, 2021 17:52:02   #
SS319 wrote:
IF ISO, Shutter speed and aperture number are three sides of a triangle, isn't you question akin to "Why so high a shutter speed?" or "Why such a small aperture?

I would propose the answer to all three would be: "Well, because."

Shutter speed controls motion
Aperture controls Depth of Field
ISO controls feel


What is feel and how does ISO control it?
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 300 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.