Photo Tips Go Now
Glamour, Beauty, Nude, Models, Photographers

*    |  Register  


 
Go Back   Garage Glamour™ > Garage Glamour™ Main Forums > Tech Talk Forum
 

Tech Talk Forum Photography & Technical Related Only!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
It\'s Canon now, full frame forever.
Old 02-27-2005, 10:21 PM   #1 (permalink)
RBP
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 68.58.237.133
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

My new Canon finally arived and having full frame again is like an old friend is back home for keeps.

I have been eternally frustrated with the shortcomings of smaller-than-full-35mm-frame digital sensors. Having to get farther from the models and using shorter lenses has played havoc with me... particularly trying to get shallow DOF and bluring backgrounds. I was particularly hating it when I would have a need to shoot something on 35mm film with my F2 and have been dying for a good full frame digital body.

I did my first shoot today with the new Canon for a local resturant (I shoot pics of their new wait staff for the walls). I do these regularly and always set up the lights the same, put the models in the same spot, and shoot from the same spot with my elbow on the counter next to the register. There is really only one long coridor with a pleasing background in the resturant to shoot in and that's where I shoot.

The first one was shot last month with Nikon D1X (1.5 crop factor) with 135mm DC Nikor at f3.5 and 1/80th. The second one was shot today with a 70-200mm 2.8 at 200mm also at f3.5 on the Mk2 (no crop factor) and 1/160th. Both cameras were set to produce images of close to 2000x3000 pixels. The reproduction sizes are identical.

For both images the model is the same distance from the wall, and I am shooting from the same spot, give or take a foot or so.

I think the pictures speak for themselves. The difference in background blur is what it is all about.



Then the headshots. To me, the best headshots are the ones where the near eye and chin are in focus, a soft shadow for separation, and the neck is blurred.... it gives good definition between the plane of the face and the other elements... with a 3/4 profile shot, the far eye will be out of focus. I was never happy with it with a 1.5 crop factor camera. Now I can get this without having to use a 200mm f2 wide open:



Shot with 70-200 at 200mm at f3.5. I still need to do some custom white balancing and profiling, but to say I am happy is an understatement. Thank you Canon. You just kicked some Nikon butt.
 
 
Re: It\'s Canon now, full frame forever.
Old 02-28-2005, 12:52 AM   #2 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member GG#: 40487
Location: Aliso Viejo
Posts: 26
Comments: 0

GreggH is offline IP: 70.181.106.70
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I hope so for $8,000.
  View Public Profile Send a private message to GreggH Find More Posts by GreggH
 
Try something for me
Old 02-28-2005, 01:14 AM   #3 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member GG#: 40369
Location: Newport
Posts: 20
Comments: 0

trasvdb is offline IP: 69.234.136.80
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Would you try something for me? ....put the widest lens on that thing that you've got...18mm or less.. Then, go outside and shoot some bright, high-contrast shots of telephone wires tree branches etc.

I'm interested to see if the severe angle of light hitting the far edges of the sensor (from the rear element being so close to the sensor) causes purple fringing. There is a great debate about wideangle lenses on CCD and CMOS sensors causing purple fringing from the lens itself.....or as some swear...from the CCD.

It should be worse on a full size sensor, if it's true. Thanks



  View Public Profile Send a private message to trasvdb Visit trasvdb's homepage! Find More Posts by trasvdb
 
Re: It\'s Canon now, full frame forever.
Old 02-28-2005, 02:38 AM   #4 (permalink)
Free Member

 
Paul_Ferrara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Member GG#: 36731
Location: Columbus
Posts: 143
Comments: 0
My Mood:

Paul_Ferrara is offline IP: 24.208.134.222
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Congrats on the new camera. I've been shooting with the 1.6 multiplier for so long it doesn't bother me any longer.

Paul
  View Public Profile Send a private message to Paul_Ferrara Visit Paul_Ferrara's homepage! Find More Posts by Paul_Ferrara
 
There\'s another key improvement with larger sensors
Old 02-28-2005, 08:48 AM   #5 (permalink)
Marko
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 83.131.67.127
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

It's not only the lens selection/DOF issue. There's something far more critical.

Digital, being a video technology, suffers in comparison to film when it comes to tonal range and color fidelity. Especially where the highlights are concerned. Increasing the resolution of a camera on the same small sensor exacerbates this effect. Why? Take a small chip and put say 5 or 6 megapixels on it. You divide all the light photons that strike during exposure by 5 or 6 million. If you come out with a new chip that's say 8 megapixels, well then each pixel is going to get fewer photons striking it in the same exposure. Which means fewer light samples. Which means less accurate tonal and color info. Going more than 8 megapixels with less than at very least a full-frame 35mm sensor is madness.

This is the one saving grace of medium format backs. For all their shortcomings, and there are many, you're at least putting 16 or 22 megapixels on a considerably larger surface. This is primary reason why, for image quality, a 16 MP Imacon will still beat a 16mp Canon 1DsII.

Larger sensors are more expensive to manufacture. But they're a hell of a lot cheaper than film (sand vs silver) and highly profitable. If digital wants to be here to stay, they've gotta go bigger.
 
 
Congratulations
Old 02-28-2005, 10:51 AM   #6 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Member GG#: 37526
Location: Denver
Posts: 67
Comments: 0

tortuga337 is offline IP: 67.173.226.22
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Hey Robert:

Congrats on the new camera. Nice work too. I looked at your website; great stuff.

Joe Farace
www.joefarace.com

  View Public Profile Send a private message to tortuga337 Visit tortuga337's homepage! Find More Posts by tortuga337
 
Pixel density
Old 02-28-2005, 10:52 AM   #7 (permalink)
RBP
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 68.58.237.133
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

As you get increasing pixel density, you get that effect to a certain degree, but it can be minimized with the microlenses.

What is a larger effect is the fact that with some of todays digicams, the raw pixel density is beyond the resolving power of the lens. And not just consumer lenses ... some digicams out there need resolving power greater than 140 lpm!!

I'm not a mega-pixel junkie. I don't need more than 8mp for an image. (of course it is nice to have it in reserve on the off chance I will have a need for it ... the same for the low light high ISO quality of the 1DSMk2... I shot some and it is awsome -- IF I ever need it I can use it). I have some 30"x40" prints on Fuji Crystal Archive from my 6mp D1X that are just awsome. I'm not using the 16MP settings on the Canon anyway.
 
 
Re: Try something for me
Old 02-28-2005, 10:56 AM   #8 (permalink)
RBP
Guest
 
Member GG#:
Posts: n/a
Comments:

IP: 68.58.237.133
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Purple Fringing was horrible with the Kodaks.... which was the first reason I avoided them. I will be looking closely for it when I shoot more with the Canon. But for now, I have no Canon wide angles to test it out with.
 
 
Her Hooters are much brighter
Old 02-28-2005, 01:30 PM   #9 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer

 
stevenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Member GG#: 35783
Location: Garden Grove
Posts: 1,381
Comments: 7
My Mood:

stevenD is offline IP: 66.121.188.233
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I saw a huge difference from a 10D to a 1D MKII in the colors produced. You can see the same in comparing to your Nikon...

  View Public Profile Send a private message to stevenD Visit stevenD's homepage! Find More Posts by stevenD
 
Re: It\'s Canon now, full frame forever.
Old 02-28-2005, 07:06 PM   #10 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer

 
Olli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Member GG#: 39548
Location: Charleston
Posts: 188
Comments: 15

Olli is offline IP: 70.144.42.226
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Great work Robert.

I'll have to stick with my Nikon though, too many $$.

If you need an assistant for any location shooting this spring, give me a call. I'm local on James Island.

Olli
  View Public Profile Send a private message to Olli Visit Olli's homepage! Find More Posts by Olli
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon EOS 30D Digital SLR Camera & Canon....$550USD upsales Model Topics 1 07-07-2010 11:02 PM
Canon cameras full frame or cropped ? That_Look_Photo Tech Talk Forum 11 12-16-2008 08:13 AM
My 1st Full Frame Experience Photomart Tech Talk Forum 9 12-15-2008 06:27 PM
Nikon D200 and Sigma lenses. Driftwood Tech Talk Forum 9 01-05-2006 06:08 PM
Full Frame is not all that... hchen Tech Talk Forum 18 10-25-2005 12:33 AM

Sponsors


New To Site? Need Help? Photographer & Model Links
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:27 AM.

© 1999-2017 Garage Glamour™




Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93