Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 19, 2006, 6:11 PM   #31
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

ROFL

You're basing your assertions on those two images!???

Did it escape your attention that the Canon was using a 16-35mm lens and the Sigma a 50mm prime with 1.7x focal length multiplier => ~85mm?

So lets see a short telephoto is picking up more detail than an ultra-wide angle zoom and you conclude that more detail is visible because of the superior sensor.

OK, dude. Good luck with your future endeavours and enjoy your photography.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2006, 6:16 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Idan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 267
Default

even if you use the best prime lens on the best canon camera you won't see those details. Sorry I don't have the equipment to prove it, but lets hear some other users opinions.

BTW: you can look at all same images in every review steve did and see for yourself that no matter what lens you use and what camera body you use, even if ti cost like a car or two, the sensor does the most impact on photo quality.


What I can agree is when you shoot MACRO or a close subject you get more information and it is easier to guess the right color and have lots of details cause the subject is big, and their are many blocks that build the final image when you have a high resolution sensor, so even if a hair is build with one or two pixel you realy won't notice it anyway unless you are viewing your photo at 100% scale then you can see the same advantage of the foveon over bayer. but when you take photo of a tree or roof bricks or any view with lots of small details, you will see small parts like leaves etc. looked blured but on the foveon you will see the smallest leaf at the highest detailes possible with the resoltion given from the sensor, it is a one pixel sharpness, no filters and extensive computation and strange artifacts in your photo, NONE !!! just pure view of what you've seen even better then the human eye.

Idan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2006, 5:48 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

hi Idan,

Original question: "Do you think the Canon 17-40mm will perform well on 10MP camera like the Rebel XTi ?"

Answer: Yes.

To be honest you do seem a bit obsessive and biased about some features of cameras, lenses and their respective manufacturers. There was a similar poster on another topic / section of this website who was "pixel peeping" to do with ISO noise, and "camera X would blow away all other cameras", etc, etc.

Truth is (as others has said) if one applies good technique, great photos can be had from almost any lens / camera combination mentioned in this thread. There ARE many things to consider of course in buying photographic equipment. But please don't be so about it. Both cameras and manufacturers have many good aspects about them.

Your wide ranging statements do not contain scientific backing. As peri said, your comparison of the two above photos isn't good to base an opinion on. Far too many variables which you didn't mention or take into account. A comparison between these 2 photos from Steve's "sample photos" can not be used in the way you did.

Check out these two crops of photos from cameraA and cameraB on the link below this paragraph. I'm not saying my method is totally scientific (but I do think it's moreso than yours). I simply want to illustrate something...

http://www.albumconnect.com/albums/977872373

Once you've checked out the photos (crops at original 100% size also viewable by clicking on the thumbnails) tell us... which one seems to provide more detail? Which is the Canon, which is the Sigma?

I think you'll have to concede this "evidence" goes against what you were saying above... because camera B is actually the Canon, which has captured superior details than Sigma's (cameraA's).

Just to show.

I look forward to you actually purchasing some equipment and enjoying using it rather than pixel-peeping. Photography is a great hobby, pixel peeping isn't.

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2006, 2:04 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
Idan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 267
Default

I guess I should stop here, even tough I can continue :-), but again it's time to enjoy photography ! - I will buy the 17-40mm L lens for my Rebel Xti, and practice alot , I love photography , I love every segment that I can be creative and create things of my own, and share with others, thats the most fun part of it. Thanks for your delight answer.
Idan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2006, 2:07 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Idan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 267
Default

Can you tell me how can I deal with back light on the subject to get the right exposure of the subjrct without spot mettering ?
Idan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2006, 3:31 PM   #36
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 62
Default

Do you need to know by saturday?
Stranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 3:45 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

Idan wrote:
Quote:
Can you tell me how can I deal with back light on the subject to get the right exposure of the subjrct without spot mettering ?
Hi Idan,

I appreciate both your 2 last posts a lot! Thanks for the tone of these. It's good you love photography and the creativity it offers.

About your question (above). If I understand your question right (if the background is brighter than the subject, and how to get a correct exposure), here is my answer...

As I have the Canon 350D / XT, which also does NOT have spot metering, one effective way I've found is to use "partial metering" (which is as close to "spot" metering as this camera gets!) and then ALSO use exposure bracketing, say do 3 exposures, one at 0 (normal), then a half f-stop less and also a full f-stop less. (or you can try doing this in thirds too)

It will explain this in your manual I'm sure too.

Set your camera on "continuous drive mode" (to take photos one after the other while keeping the shutter button depressed). Otherwise in single shot / drive mode, you need to take 3 separate photos (depress shutter button 3 times).

Hope this is helpful.

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 11:31 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Idan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 267
Default

I've heard that someone suggest to zoom to zoom (if possible) on the subject and take the exposure and then zoom back and shoot, means I need to seperate the exposure and the shot in my camera so I can take the exposure using the exposure button (tell the camera not to take exposure with the shot button, it is possible) and then shoot.
Idan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 1:23 PM   #39
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Idan wrote:
Quote:
I've heard that someone suggest to zoom to zoom (if possible) on the subject and take the exposure and then zoom back and shoot...
This will only works on 'parafocal' zooms - Not all Canon zooms are built this way so just be careful with this technique... as zooming will change the active focus area on 'varifocal' zooms!

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2006, 6:25 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
Idan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 267
Default

what is parafocal zoom ? :?
Idan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:54 PM.