Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
V3
#11
Quote:
  • Why all those buttons?
Because there are so many parameters to control. Less buttons means less parameters means less control.

However, try the Canon DSLRs with touchscreen. They have touchscreen done "right", and you don't "need" the buttons anymore. 

Quote:
  • Cameras are beeping, but why can't I tell them what I want?
Speech recognition is an odd way to control things. Others can hear you. It is slow.

Quote:
  • Why do  I have to turn the camera from landscape to portrait instead of turning only the sensor?
Turning the camera is fast and intuitive (unless when on tripod)... Turning the sensor is yet another control button?

Quote:
  • Why is there no camera able doing the focus adjustment with their own LiveView?
Because cameras can't know the exact behavior of the lens motor and electronics. Cameras don't know step sizes.

Quote:
  • Do we still need tripod screws instead a quick mount, or maybe both?
  • Why is WLAN and wireless LiveView such a big deal these days?
Remote view finder is handy at times. Just like swivel LCD displays are handy at times. Having a remote trigger + live view just is a nice tool.

Quote:
  • Why is nobody doing a removable display?
Why would you want to remove the display?

Quote:
  • Why is no camera manufacturer able to do focus stacking for macro right in the cam?
Because AF is not that controllable (every lens behaves differently). I can see how one would design a dedicated lens for a certain body for that, though, where the photographer tells the camera the step distance between shots.

Quote:
  • How difficult is it to focus on two different distances and the camera calculates it's DoF (I know, DoF is more or less an illusion...)?
  • How about somebody manufactured a sensor for all the old and good analogue bodies?
Has been tried twice. Problem: one does not just need a sensor (doable), but also battery, memory, computer, controls (problematic). And nowadays, what would it add to the DSLR landscape?

Quote:
  • Or make the sensors interchangeable? I would like to have a Foveon in my Nikon  B) for landscape, or a high ISO type for lowlight. Of course, I can buy myself into coma with bodies, but the I expect them to walk for themselves and not being carried by my poor back...  :wacko:
One or two manufacturers actually are researching into that area.

#12
First, those were only my ideas about "cool stuff" and some of them are not really fresh and new. But still, not all of them are "impossible" and your explanations of why they didn't become real were not always "end of story". Although it's impossible to predict if any of them would bring tons of cash to the manufacturer.

 

Quote:Because there are so many parameters to control. Less buttons means less parameters means less control.

However, try the Canon DSLRs with touchscreen. They have touchscreen done "right", and you don't "need" the buttons anymore. 
The reason I didn't try it yet: I don't want to be tempted to change systems another time, but I see Canon doing innovations while Nikon is only chewing the grass of yesterday.

 

Quote:Speech recognition is an odd way to control things. Others can hear you. It is slow.
 

I don't want to do everything with voice control. And it should be possible to switch it off, but usually my mouth is close to the back of the cam, so it's not necessary to talk very loud. The camera should be able to learn my commands, i.e. "spot" for spot metering, "balance" for level indicators. But I don't want to imagine what a mess the Nikon programmers would leave in the menu...

 

Quote:Turning the camera is fast and intuitive (unless when on tripod)... Turning the sensor is yet another control button?
No, it would be a mechanical move with the advantage of keeping the camera in the same position on a tripod. A small version of a Mamiya RB/RZ 67 - but the mechanical problems or their solutions would increase the price enormously. And if one likes to turn the body , that remains possible. It would be better for tripod use, though.

 

Quote:Because cameras can't know the exact behavior of the lens motor and electronics. Cameras don't know step sizes.
Cameras put the distance to the object into metadata - so they do know something about steps… And what else than steps - very precise steps - are the Micro AF adjustments? Here I don't find your reasoning convincing. It is doable, I'm pretty certain.

 

Quote:Remote view finder is handy at times. Just like swivel LCD displays are handy at times. Having a remote trigger + live view just is a nice tool.
 

In some situations it's the only possibility to get the shot, But then, if I look carefully to the "quality" of Nikon's LiveView, I don't see the remote displays would do the job without massive improvements in LiveView - and then the questions is, why not using a mirrorless FF system for that?

 

Quote:Why would you want to remove the display?
 

Have you ever tried a CamRanger? Basically, the iPad/iPod is this "removable display" feature, just without the CamRanger device and having WLAN inbuilt. It doesn't need to have the huge range of the CamRanger, I would see it as innvation/improvement for my purposes if I could separate the display (which would have to be a touchscreen and it would need a battery or some other kind of energy source) from the sensor/lens/shutter/memory/battery combination

 

Quote:Because AF is not that controllable (every lens behaves differently). I can see how one would design a dedicated lens for a certain body for that, though, where the photographer tells the camera the step distance between shots.
If cam-manufacturers manage to make seamless panorama shots in cam and correct their (flawish) lens design in cam, focusstacking is no big deal - only trouble is, the user interface designers don't think enough "Apple".

 

Quote:Has been tried twice. Problem: one does not just need a sensor (doable), but also battery, memory, computer, controls (problematic). And nowadays, what would it add to the DSLR landscape?
Good point. It's doable with professional cams where the film-back can be changed, but the rest of the old designs may not be precise enough.

 

Quote:One or two manufacturers actually are researching into that area.
 

Question is, will it be cheaper to invest in a changeable sensor or get a body with foveon sensor and fixed lens just for landscape? I don't prefer dealing with different user-interfaces and menus, but there are not only contras... A second, independent body could save the phototrip if the main-body is malfunctioning.

#13
Quote:First, those were only my ideas about "cool stuff" and some of them are not really fresh and new. But still, not all of them are "impossible" and your explanations of why they didn't become real were not always "end of story". Although it's impossible to predict if any of them would bring tons of cash to the manufacturer.

 

Cameras put the distance to the object into metadata - so they do know something about steps… And what else than steps - very precise steps - are the Micro AF adjustments? Here I don't find your reasoning convincing. It is doable, I'm pretty certain.
No, the camera does not know anything about the steps. It only knows the "crude" distance reported by the lens. This distance is just derived from the position of the focus barrel. Add an extension tube and the distance reported starts to be nonsensical.

 

It is not the camera calculating the distance. MFA is not done on the lens either. It is just asking the user how far off the lens is from the AF sensor reading. So the user just dials in that the camera has to say "it is in focus" when the camera in fact sees it is for instance 7 steps of its AF sensor scale OOF still, so the lens under/overshoot of the focus plane will be nullified.

Quote:In some situations it's the only possibility to get the shot, But then, if I look carefully to the "quality" of Nikon's LiveView, I don't see the remote displays would do the job without massive improvements in LiveView - and then the questions is, why not using a mirrorless FF system for that?
My Canon EOS 6D has very good live view. High refresh rate, exposure simulation, full aperture and exposure time control, 100% magnification if needed. Why not just put it in my DSLR instead of me needing to get an extra mirrorless camera for it? Now I have good live view + good OVF + good PD AF with good AF tracking.... 

Quote:Have you ever tried a CamRanger? Basically, the iPad/iPod is this "removable display" feature, just without the CamRanger device and having WLAN inbuilt. It doesn't need to have the huge range of the CamRanger, I would see it as innvation/improvement for my purposes if I could separate the display (which would have to be a touchscreen and it would need a battery or some other kind of energy source) from the sensor/lens/shutter/memory/battery combination
My EOS 6D already does what camranger does, all by itself (all you need it to put Eos Remote app on your iOS/Android device). A removable display would need what my iPhone already has: its own battery, WiFi, its own computer and memory and powerful processor to deal with the steaming video. And on top of that a sturdy way to connect/disconnect it to the camera including electronic contacts. Does not sound like a great idea to me, much better idea to just use in my case my iPhone for it.

Quote:If cam-manufacturers manage to make seamless panorama shots in cam and correct their (flawish) lens design in cam, focusstacking is no big deal - only trouble is, the user interface designers don't think enough "Apple".
Panoramic shots do not need to control the lens motor. With STM-like motors, and the camera knowing the lens well, it should be possible. But then new lenses will need a camera firmware update, and 3rd party lenses always will be a problem. But like I said, it should be possible with dedicated lenses.
#14
Everything what can be done with the combination of software and LiveView camera can be done by the camera itself, like focusstacking. Helicon software is only taking closest and farest distance point of my choice and then calculates the interpolation and necessary steps for a given aperture. So, it' striving the lens' focus motor in small steps.


So, I remain convinced, an in-camera adjustment of PDAF with the help of CDAF is not impossible, especially, if the camera already knows how much "disfocus" is needed in PDAF. And since Sigma lenses allow different adjustments for different distances, I don't see an impossibility to store this information in-camera as well. It's just strange that cameras with LV abilities are unable to adjust their AF system. I'd see that as more progress than another higher pixel count which brings the mechanics of PDAF close to their limits.


CamRanger does this focusstacking, too, although in no elegant way. Plus driving a motorised tripod head for automatic panorama shots, if necessary, with HDR. So, CamRanger offers a bit more than EOS has inbuilt - but with this comes extra cost, cables, weight and time to set up this stuff. It has improved and was worse one year ago, but it still is an extra piece of equipment.


I'd be quite happy, if one Nikon could connect to my iPod/iPad like your EOS does.


When you're releasing the shutter in LiveView, is there a mirror movement involved? On Nikon, it is and it's timeconsuming. The rest of the LV features you're listing, Nikon offers, too. In a way...
#15
Quote:Everything what can be done with the combination of software and LiveView camera can be done by the camera itself, like focusstacking. Helicon software is only taking closest and farest distance point of my choice and then calculates the interpolation and necessary steps for a given aperture. So, it' striving the lens' focus motor in small steps.


So, I remain convinced, an in-camera adjustment of PDAF with the help of CDAF is not impossible, especially, if the camera already knows how much "disfocus" is needed in PDAF. And since Sigma lenses allow different adjustments for different distances, I don't see an impossibility to store this information in-camera as well. It's just strange that cameras with LV abilities are unable to adjust their AF system. I'd see that as more progress than another higher pixel count which brings the mechanics of PDAF close to their limits.
You seem to not understand that differences and the particulars in PD AF which can make it less accurate in certain combinations.

PD AF sensors at times get confused by spherical aberrations, which show the image in focus when to our eyes, it is not. Because the AF sensors do not see in RGB, basically. Another thing is that PD AF does not continuously checks if AF is really reached, since doing so would make with some lenses the procedure endlessly slow.

 

The camera does NOT know how much "steps" the lens is OOF. Only the user says this: If you defocus +7 PD sensor "steps", the resulting image seems in focus. This then does not say anything about the lens steps or about the why of the defocus of the lens. It does not tell the camera anything about lens motor control.

MFA anyway is a crude last minute resort, as at different focus distances, or depending if the lens focusses from back to front or front to back, or with different focal lengths with zoom lenses, the needed MFA can differ. 

Quote:CamRanger does this focusstacking, too, although in no elegant way. Plus driving a motorised tripod head for automatic panorama shots, if necessary, with HDR. So, CamRanger offers a bit more than EOS has inbuilt - but with this comes extra cost, cables, weight and time to set up this stuff. It has improved and was worse one year ago, but it still is an extra piece of equipment.


I'd be quite happy, if one Nikon could connect to my iPod/iPad like your EOS does.
Apparently, the new D3300 can connect to a device when you purchase the extra WiFi module. The D5300 has WiFi built in, and can also be used with an app (wireless remote utility, WMU) for remove liveview. Like the live view implementation on Nikons, the app is also more limited in operation than EOS remote (no ISO, aperture or exposure time control during remote live view). I do not know if WMU allows for 100% magnification.

Quote:When you're releasing the shutter in LiveView, is there a mirror movement involved? On Nikon, it is and it's timeconsuming. The rest of the LV features you're listing, Nikon offers, too. In a way...
Nikon does not offer full aperture control, nor exposure simulation. On my Canon the mirror does not need to move with live view. On the XX0D model range and 1X00D model range it does.
#16
Quote:Brightcolours, on 03 Apr 2014 - 13:19, said:

You seem to not understand that differences and the particulars in PD AF which can make it less accurate in certain combinations.


Well, you're doing the same thing over and over - "You seem to... blablablah". Unfortuantely your explanation has some flaws and that gives me enough doubts not to go deeper in that discussion. It can be done - not matter what you think.
Quote:Brightcolours, on 03 Apr 2014 - 13:19, said:

PD AF sensors at times get confused by spherical aberrations, which show the image in focus when to our eyes, it is not. Because the AF sensors do not see in RGB, basically. Another thing is that PD AF does not continuously checks if AF is really reached, since doing so would make with some lenses the procedure endlessly slow.


The camera does NOT know how much "steps" the lens is OOF.


What I miss in your statement is an explanation how the camera manages to override the position of the AF, but I like to keep it that way, because even if you were right for most existing cameras, there's no reason why it can't be done in the future - it was on my list of wishes for cool features, remember? And I don't give a nickel why it couldn't be done in the past. Your reasons are just not sufficient to convince me in this subject.
Quote:Brightcolours, on 03 Apr 2014 - 13:19, said:

Only the user says this: If you defocus +7 PD sensor "steps", the resulting image seems in focus. This then does not say anything about the lens steps or about the why of the defocus of the lens. It does not tell the camera anything about lens motor control.

MFA anyway is a crude last minute resort, as at different focus distances, or depending if the lens focusses from back to front or front to back, or with different focal lengths with zoom lenses, the needed MFA can differ.



Agreed. Micro AF adjustment is a pain and a waste of time, but the keeper rate increases. So what is wrong with wishing an onboard solution? Okay, maybe I just should wish better CD AF and a quick and useful LiveView.
Quote:Brightcolours, on 03 Apr 2014 - 13:19, said:

Apparently, the new D3300 can connect to a device when you purchase the extra WiFi module. The D5300 has WiFi built in, and can also be used with an app (wireless remote utility, WMU) for remove liveview. Like the live view implementation on Nikons, the app is also more limited in operation than EOS remote (no ISO, aperture or exposure time control during remote live view). I do not know if WMU allows for 100% magnification.
Nope, I have that unit, it's one more proof of not thinking to the end.

First, a separate unit: Easy to loose, a cat can swallow it.

LiveView? Yes. 100% magnification? Setting of ISO, shutter speed, aperture, White balance? No. Range? Within 10 metres. CamRanger up to 100 metres with eyesight between cam and device.

And that Nikon says D3300 has WiFi capabilities (after you buy the WT-U) is kind of lying - the camera itself hasn't that.


Back to the thread topic, the V3 does, without any additional device to plug into cam; and has a touchscreen. To put things in perspective: What you're used to use on Canon since, say, three years? is completely new for Nikon users. One of the reasons I welcome this V3.
Quote:Brightcolours, on 03 Apr 2014 - 13:19, said:

Nikon does not offer full aperture control, nor exposure simulation. On my Canon the mirror does not need to move with live view. On the XX0D model range and 1X00D model range it does.
Plain wrong for D800. But I understand that - it's (unnecessarily) difficult to set up and it took me a long while to figure out how it can be done.


Aperture is changing.

In M-Mode switch on the LV, camera symbol, then press the left bottom OK button. Auto-ISO has to be switched off. And I'm not sure if not some parameters in the hundreds of menu positions do need to be changed, too. But I can tell you, it's kind of working although it doesn't simulate the effect of long shutter times - if you refer to that when you say "exposure simulation", you're right.
#17
Quote:Well, you're doing the same thing over and over - "You seem to... blablablah". Unfortuantely your explanation has some flaws and that gives me enough doubts not to go deeper in that discussion. It can be done - not matter what you think.


What I miss in your statement is an explanation how the camera manages to override the position of the AF,
The AF position does not get overridden. The only one who can see "focus" is the camera, not the lens. So, if the lens sees that focus should be reached when it tells the lens to move half what it did last time, and the user notes things are NOT in focus, the user can tell the camera that this particular lens is not very precise or not calibrated well by adding an MFA value. The camera will take note of this. Now it can tell the lens instead: move half the distance you last moved minus whatever MFA value stands for.

 

By the way, there is a way to make PD AF much more precise, and that is to keep on checking and correcting. That will mean with some lenses that the AF will jitter like forever, but manufacturers could make that a user setting. It anyway will be not unlike a continuous focus setting, just with focus confirmation and focus priority.

 

Quote:but I like to keep it that way, because even if you were right for most existing cameras, there's no reason why it can't be done in the future - it was on my list of wishes for cool features, remember? And I don't give a nickel why it couldn't be done in the past. Your reasons are just not sufficient to convince me in this subject.



Agreed. Micro AF adjustment is a pain and a waste of time, but the keeper rate increases. So what is wrong with wishing an onboard solution? Okay, maybe I just should wish better CD AF and a quick and useful LiveView.Nope, I have that unit, it's one more proof of not thinking to the end.

First, a separate unit: Easy to loose, a cat can swallow it.

LiveView? Yes. 100% magnification? Setting of ISO, shutter speed, aperture, White balance? No. Range? Within 10 metres. CamRanger up to 100 metres with eyesight between cam and device.

And that Nikon says D3300 has WiFi capabilities (after you buy the WT-U) is kind of lying - the camera itself hasn't that.


Back to the thread topic, the V3 does, without any additional device to plug into cam; and has a touchscreen. To put things in perspective: What you're used to use on Canon since, say, three years? is completely new for Nikon users. One of the reasons I welcome this V3.Plain wrong for D800. But I understand that - it's (unnecessarily) difficult to set up and it took me a long while to figure out how it can be done.


Aperture is changing.

In M-Mode switch on the LV, camera symbol, then press the left bottom OK button. Auto-ISO has to be switched off. And I'm not sure if not some parameters in the hundreds of menu positions do need to be changed, too. But I can tell you, it's kind of working although it doesn't simulate the effect of long shutter times - if you refer to that when you say "exposure simulation", you're right.
 

Quote:Well, you're doing the same thing over and over - "You seem to... blablablah". Unfortuantely your explanation has some flaws and that gives me enough doubts not to go deeper in that discussion. It can be done - not matter what you think.


What I miss in your statement is an explanation how the camera manages to override the position of the AF, but I like to keep it that way, because even if you were right for most existing cameras, there's no reason why it can't be done in the future - it was on my list of wishes for cool features, remember? And I don't give a nickel why it couldn't be done in the past. Your reasons are just not sufficient to convince me in this subject.



Agreed. Micro AF adjustment is a pain and a waste of time, but the keeper rate increases. So what is wrong with wishing an onboard solution? Okay, maybe I just should wish better CD AF and a quick and useful LiveView.Nope, I have that unit, it's one more proof of not thinking to the end.

First, a separate unit: Easy to loose, a cat can swallow it.
As has as I know, the D3300 has en extra internal WiFi unit, which you install once. And as far as I know, the D5300 has one internally included?

Quote:LiveView? Yes. 100% magnification? Setting of ISO, shutter speed, aperture, White balance? No. Range? Within 10 metres. CamRanger up to 100 metres with eyesight between cam and device.

And that Nikon says D3300 has WiFi capabilities (after you buy the WT-U) is kind of lying - the camera itself hasn't that.


Back to the thread topic, the V3 does, without any additional device to plug into cam; and has a touchscreen. To put things in perspective: What you're used to use on Canon since, say, three years? is completely new for Nikon users. One of the reasons I welcome this V3.Plain wrong for D800. But I understand that - it's (unnecessarily) difficult to set up and it took me a long while to figure out how it can be done.


Aperture is changing.

In M-Mode switch on the LV, camera symbol, then press the left bottom OK button. Auto-ISO has to be switched off. And I'm not sure if not some parameters in the hundreds of menu positions do need to be changed, too. But I can tell you, it's kind of working although it doesn't simulate the effect of long shutter times - if you refer to that when you say "exposure simulation", you're right.
Exposure simulation shows you on screen what the resulting exposure will be like according to the exposure settings. As far as I know, the Nikon cameras show an image exposed right for the scene, no matter what the exposure settings are. So you don't get to see what the result will be.

There are more oddities to the Nikon live view implementations, by the way. Not all Nikons have the same drawbacks in live view, the D3/4 series seems to be a bit better?

#18
Quote:As has as I know, the D3300 has en extra internal WiFi unit, which you install once. And as far as I know, the D5300 has one internally included?
Correct. The WiFi unit for the D3300 (and D7100, P7800, D610 - there are two different units depending on the camera you want to use it with, another Niknonsense) is a very small piece of a Micro USB plug and a little box half the size of a regular USB plug. You can mount it like a GPS device - another inbuilt Canon feature, sigh.
Quote:Exposure simulation shows you on screen what the resulting exposure will be like according to the exposure settings. As far as I know, the Nikon cameras show an image exposed right for the scene, no matter what the exposure settings are. So you don't get to see what the result will be.
There are more oddities to the Nikon live view implementations, by the way. Not all Nikons have the same drawbacks in live view, the D3/4 series seems to be a bit better?
D800 does show you which exposure to be expected - when set up properly. Per default it appears like you described, but it can be changed to the behaviour your Canon already shows per default. I don't want to accuse the software programmers of Nikon, but they clearly force the user to read the manual. Twice.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)