Macro ability/sensor size?

Since the macro capability is so terrible on my G1X, and the IQ is quite good, it must be that sensor size affects a camera's macro mode. It was better on the G10. If the better compact cameras are going with larger sensors now, are we going to lose good macro mode on these (better) cameras?

Jeffrey wrote:
Since the macro capability is so terrible on my G1X, and the IQ is quite good, it must be that sensor size affects a camera's macro mode.
I think macro ability has to do with the lenses. With a built-in lens on a non-dslr, good macro ability means trading off on image quality at other focal lengths, especially for a zoom lens.

Similar Messages

T3i sensor size vs. full frame and how does that effect lens measurements?

I am new to both photography and the T3i camera. I have been reading Jeff Revell's book "Canon EOS Rebel T3i / 600D: From Snapshots to Great Shots". In chapter two he talks about "Lenses and Focal Lengths". In discussing wide-angle lenses he says
"As for which lenses would be considered wide angle, anything 35mm or smaller could be considered as wide."
Latter he discusses normal lenses and says
"The normal lens for full-frame and 35mm cameras is the 50mm lens, but for the T3i it is more in the neighborhood of a 35mm lens."
I understand that there is a 1 / 1.6 ratio between the T3i and a Full Frame camera. In the first quote does the 35mm refer to the T3i measurement or a full frame measurement?
Is there a standard nomenclature to indicate if you are specifying a "full frame" value verses the T3i value? If so, what is it?
When I look at one of my lenses, say the 18-55mm lens, is this the T3i measurement or the standard full frame?
Thanks in advance for your assistance.
--Jesse
P.S. I could not find a publisher’s forum for this book or I would have asked the question there.

Jesse-T3i wrote:
"As for which lenses would be considered wide angle, anything 35mm or smaller could be considered as wide."
In the first quote does the 35mm refer to the T3i measurement or a full frame measurement?
Is there a standard nomenclature to indicate if you are specifying a "full frame" value verses the T3i value? If so, what is it?
When I look at one of my lenses, say the 18-55mm lens, is this the T3i measurement or the standard full frame?
The fast answers are:
When he mentions the 35mm as the basis for determining what's "wide" he is referring to the APS-C crop-frame size sensor.
There is no nomenclature to indicate if you are "full frame" vs. "crop frame" on a lens because all lenses are reported in true focal lengths. There is a nomenclature to indicate if the lens was designed to only project an image circle onto the sensor which is large enough for "crop frame" ... which is what the "EF-S" lens is. If the lens is for "full frame" (which also works on all crop-frame) then it will have the designation "EF" for most lenses, but Canon also has a few specialty lenses such as the "TS-E" (tilt shift) and "MP-E" (macro photo) lenses which also provide full-frame sensor coverage. Incidentally... this is just Canon's way of tagging a lens... Nikon uses the terms "FX" and "DX" (for full frame and crop frame respectively). Everyone has their own tag. Just remember that focal lengths reported are true (well... there's a TINY bit of round-off allowed) and ignore the sensor size.
Here's the background which may help you understand why this is.
The "normal" focal length is based on the human eye, and to understand it, it's easier to think in terms of "angle of view" rather than "focal length."
If you sit and stare straight ahead without moving your eyes or head to "look around", there is an area of vision that the average person can see (and it does vary), but the "angle of view" for that area is about 40 degrees (horizontally). Of course our vision doesn't present our brain with a nice little rectangular image... it fades and is irregular, but it's generally accepted that the angle of view covers about 40 degrees.
The LENS that provides 40 degree angle of view coverage on a "full frame" camera turns out to be a 50mm lens. Images taken with such a lens will seem neither stretched out nor compressed... they'll seem "normal" to your brain. Also, if you can see an object without having to look around to take in the view, then your camera can "see" it with that lens.
A "full frame" camera is one which has a sensor size which is approximately the same as a single frame of 35mm film. The dimensions are roughly 36mm x 24mm.
There are many different crop frame sizes, but for DSLR cameras, the most popular (by far) is the APS-C size. This means the sensor is roughly the same size as a single frame for the "Advanced Photo System - Classic" film. You can think of this as being roughly 21mm x 14mm (although it varies by a just a few millimeters -- on your camera it's really 22.3 x 14.9mm).
If you were to use a movie projector and movie screen and you projected an image so that it fit perfectly on a 12' x 8' screen and called that "full frame", then a "crop frame" would be derived by shriking the movie screen down to about 8' wide by about 5-1/3' tall but (and here's the key) without doing ANYTHING to the movie projector. Essentially that means you're projecting an image intended to fit ona 12x8' screen... but the real screen is smaller. What happens to the part of the image that doesn't fit on the screen? It just spills off the sides and is lost. That is EXACTLY what happens inside a crop-frame camera.
Canon EOS "EF" lenses are designed to project an image large enough to fill a full-frame sensor ... so when used on a crop-frame camera some of that image just spills off the sides. This means that if your lens was providing a 40 degree angle of view (measured horizontally) then the crop-frame is only capturing the 26 degrees in the middle of it. If you want a 40 degree angle of view again... you'll need to change lenses.
And this is where your author suggests a 35mm lens is "normal" for a camera with an APS-C body. The math actually works out in the neighborhood of a 31mm lens, but nobody actually makes a 31mm lens... and a 35mm focal length (commonly available) is pretty close. Also 28mm lenses are commonly available and are ALSO pretty close. It's my personal opinion that 28mm is probably a bit more normal than 35mm, but that's because as an avid amateur astronomer, I am fairly used to looking through Plossl design eyepieces which provide a 50 degree apparent angle of view and my eye actually can see the edges of the frame, but if I go a bit wider... I can no longer see the edges of the field without "looking around" (regardless... 40 degrees seems to be the established norm and THAT is the value that everything is based on.)
For purposes of buying lenses, the focal lengths are NOT converted or adjusted in any way. For example, Canon makes "EF-S" lenses designed specifically to work with their crop-frame bodies. So when the kit lens that comes with the camera says it is a zoom with an 18-55mm focal length range... it really is 18-55mm regardless of sensor size. (Canon isn't multiplying or dividing focal lengths and putting a different value on the box just because it's intended for a crop-sensor camera.)
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Tim
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Lens profiles for different bodies, but same sensor size?

I downloaded LR 4.1 RC today. Some of my lenses are not profiled in LR so I then downloaded Lens Profile Downloader Preview 3 to see if there are any profiles available for download. For some lenses I found profiles, but they were not done on the same body that I have (same sensor size though). Can I use profiles for lenses if they are for a camera body that is different than mine, but still the same sensor size? My understanding is that wiht a lens profile LR will automatically correct distortion, vignetting, and CA. Will that work if my body is different than the body used to profile the lens? Thank you.

You can find this statement:
Regarding lens vs camera+lens combinations. Generally, Adobe only supplies 1 profile per lens. Differences between cameras (e.g., crop factors) are automatically taken into account when applying the profile
from Eric Chan (ACR Developer) in this thread.
Beat

C6-01 main camera sensor size?

Hi all,
Don't know if this is on the right place, but here we go...
I've been googling for the C6-01 main camera sensor size and I didn't found the answser anywhere. That spec is not published on Nokia site, where one can only know that the sensor resolution is 2448 x 3264 pixels (8 Mpixels) and that the lenses are F2.8. But in terms of photography, it's useless to know that without knowing the size of the camera sensor.
I've found somewhere that the N8 main camera sensor is 1/1.83", which makes it a better sensor then the sensor of most average compact digital cameras, which have a 1/2.3" sensor. But that's the N8...
Cheers.

Thanks Puigchild, but I already knew that.
What is missing is the information of the size of the camera CCD sensor. When it comes to digital cameras, that's a very important info, since the bigger the sensor, the better is the camera. Bigger sensors allow more light to hit the sensor, which is obviously a good thing.
Most compact digital cameras (the so called 'point-and-shoot') have 1/2.3" sensors. Some new advanced compact cameras have 1/1.7", 1/1.8" sensors.
What I'm trying to figure out is why Nokia has never revealed the size of its smarphone's camera sensors. Nokia phones are known for their good camera phones. Revealing the sensor size would therefore be a good marketing strategy. For instance, as I said before, I read somewhere that N8 has a 1/1.83" sensor, and that's why its camera is better than most poin-and-shoot.
Regards,

Increase sensor size

Hi Team,
Please increase Camera sensor size to 1 or 1.1. So that we can beat NOKIA 1020 or future mobiles.

Perhaps with future Xperias, just keep in mind that bigger size sensor will increase the thickness of the phone and/or around the camera module
"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." Kurt Cobain (1967-1994)

Focal length and CMOS sensor size

Hi everybody.
My question is probably different from the norm but I still guess this is probably the good place to ask.
I'm currently working with a few creative webcam's and matlab in a project and I need to know the camera's focal length and the size of the CMOS sensor, however I can't seem to find that information in the documentation that came with the webcams.
The size of the sensor is constant but the focal length of the camera changes if i rotate the focus ring right?
Is there a way to estimate the focal length of the camera without knowing the size of the sensor? and what if the size of the CMOS sensor is known, can I consider directly the pin hole camera model and simply use pitagoras theorum to obtain the focal length of the camera? or would that be a very rough approximation?
Sorry for all the question and the bad english (its not my native language)
Thanks in advance.
asdfgh1

Kinect doesn't provide any type of object recognition library. You will have to create your own or find a third party library.
Carmine Sirignano - MSFT

Lightroom import crops image size on import?

Can anyone more knowledgable than I explain this - and better yet tell me how
to stop it!
Canon 40d image sensor has a sensor size of 3888 * 2592 importing into Canons software retains this ratio.
Import to LR2 and convert to DNG and my size suddenly reduces to 3678 * 2592
If I have both programs open side by side I can see the missing data - on a landscape image it has sliced a chunk off both ends.
Now call me picky - but I consider I am the best person to crop my images.
It also causes me to have issues when printing - I have to alter the crop size about to get it to print to a size which should have had no issues.
I cannot see anything in the preferences, so I am now at a loss.
Any suggestions appreciated.

Thanks both, and I need to come clean. It appears that it was a batch of images which were exported out to Photoshop and reimported back. I had the filters set so the originals were 'missing'.
Only excuse is that I am still a novice - and only a few hours sleep due to a young daughter with Chicken Pox

After exporting my pictures from lightroom 3 and take them to photo lab to print pictures are never right size. example 4x6 chops off some of pictures. Help

How can I fix when exporting my pictures and never are right size when take to photo lab

You need to crop them before you export them and take them to a print shop.
4x6 is a standard 3/2 ratio, 2 x 3 = 6 and 2 x 2 = 4. 90% of cameras on the market use that ratio as a sensor size. There are also 4/3, 16/9 and 1/1 ratio cameras. Which camera do you use, make and model?
More than likely the camera you are using is either a 4/3 or you have it set to take image in either the 4/3 or 16/9 ratio. If you ask the photo lab to print them as they are, No Cropping, you will get the whole image with a larger white boarder either on the top/bottom or sides.
You can crop them to a specific ratio in LR so they fit better on 4x6 paper and contain the image parts you most like.
It really has nothing to do with exporting and or exporting setting. It does have to do with the size, ratio, of the image you are exporting and taking to the print place.

6300 'Application error' with Sensor

i've had lots of fun using Sensor but all of a sudden to my horror Sensor stopped working, im getting an
'Application error' when i loads up and the
'Details' are
"com.nokia.mid.appl.sensor.S...(small text at top of screen)
Security
java/lang/SecurityException
Access denied"
i've tried reinstalling it with a backup from andy29b (thanks mate) but still the same error, i've tried restoring it with a backup of my phone + memory card using PC Suite but the backup log showed that it only restore the Sensor '.jad' file.
Please help
Thanks

update:
i figured if i highlight Sensor press 'Options' go to
'Application access>Data access>Add and edit data' there is 4 option:
"Ask every time
Ask first time only (disabled-grey)
Always allowed (disabled-grey)
Not allowed (highlighted)"
when i change this option to 'Ask every time' Sensor doesn't give me the 'Application error' any more but its not usable because it continuously asks to 'Allow application to edit and add new data in: Gallery' less then every second, i need to set this to 'Ask first time only' or 'Always allowed' but it wont let me
does anyone have a solution
and just incase my Sensor>Options>Details is:
Name: Sensor
Size: 320 kB
Created: 11-10-2007 07:37
Version: 1.23
Vendor: Nokia
Certificate: No

Sensor and Pixel Basics

The recent introduction of the 5Ds with its 50.6 megapixels leads me to ask about sensor size and pixels. There is an on-line tome by W. H. Majoros that describes the situation well, I think. You can reference it at "digitalbirdphotography.com".
Frequently when discussing full-frame vs APS-C cameras, the fact that the image appears larger on the APS-C photo is spoken of as its having an increased magnification. But this is misleading. The "real" size of a photo, when displayed on a computer monitor, is seen when looking at it at 100% magnification, in which case there is a one-to-one mapping of sensor pixels to monitor pixels. The displayed photo size of a photo is due to the linear pixel density of the camera sensor, not the overall size of the sensor.
Regarding the ultimate sharpness of a photo, while it is limited by the pixel density (higher is better), it is also limited by the pixel size because of electronic noise (lower pixel density and thus larger pixel size is better). So at some point higher linear pixel density becomes a negative feature.
Which brings me to a comparison of the new cameras, the full-frame 5Ds and the APS-C 7D Mark II. I compute that the linear pixel densities of tese are both about 240 pixels/mm. Until now the full-frame 5D cameras have had lower pixel densities, which seemed like an advantage due to their larger pixels, especially at higher ISO.
So except for the larger FOV provided by the 5Ds, why would anyone want this over the 7D Mark II? I'd appreciate others' thoughts on this.
Thanks,
Edward1064

Edward1064 wrote:
The recent introduction of the 5Ds with its 50.6 megapixels leads me to ask about sensor size and pixels. There is an on-line tome by W. H. Majoros that describes the situation well, I think. You can reference it at "digitalbirdphotography.com".
Frequently when discussing full-frame vs APS-C cameras, the fact that the image appears larger on the APS-C photo is spoken of as its having an increased magnification. But this is misleading. The "real" size of a photo, when displayed on a computer monitor, is seen when looking at it at 100% magnification, in which case there is a one-to-one mapping of sensor pixels to monitor pixels. The displayed photo size of a photo is due to the linear pixel density of the camera sensor, not the overall size of the sensor.
Regarding the ultimate sharpness of a photo, while it is limited by the pixel density (higher is better), it is also limited by the pixel size because of electronic noise (lower pixel density and thus larger pixel size is better). So at some point higher linear pixel density becomes a negative feature.
Which brings me to a comparison of the new cameras, the full-frame 5Ds and the APS-C 7D Mark II. I compute that the linear pixel densities of tese are both about 240 pixels/mm. Until now the full-frame 5D cameras have had lower pixel densities, which seemed like an advantage due to their larger pixels, especially at higher ISO.
So except for the larger FOV provided by the 5Ds, why would anyone want this over the 7D Mark II? I'd appreciate others' thoughts on this.
Thanks,
Edward1064
Canon's ISO ranges include, at the top end, a regime described as "ISO speed expansion" or something similar. One way to describe the transition point into that regime is "the point beyond which you may not want to go if you can't tolerate a lot of noise". If you look closely at the specs, you'll see that that point is two stops lower for the 5Ds than for the 5D Mk III.
So yes, larger pixels are better, and the greater FOV may be the only advantage of the 5Ds over the 7D2. But if you need it, that's how to get it.
And one is left to hope that the 5D3, with its evidently better low-light performance (and noticeably lower price), will remain in the product line for the foreseeable future.
Bob
Boston, Massachusetts USA

Increase Brush size limit.

Camera sensor sizes are growing and now we have to deal with 7000+ pixel images, but the brush size doesn't go over 2500pix which makes it hard to produce smooth results when dealing with large areas. Easy to implement I guess.

i was just looking for the solution to this issue.... and came to this thread, i think there isnt any solution to it yet.
i hope Adobe will increase the brush size limit to like ..... 5000px? or 10k px would be great for working on large banners or posters.

Low-light Cameras

Hey Everyone,
As camera and sensor technology has advanced, so has the ability of digital cameras to record in lower light without an external light source. In the past if you wanted to capture a useable image in low-light conditions you would have to use flash, strobes, or in a pinch you could use hot-lights.
Sensors have really come a long way. Modern Backlit CMOS sensors allow far more light to actually reach the photosites that capture the image, and because of this the data needs far less amplification. These types of sensors should produce images with far less digital noise while shooting at higher sensitivities. Over the last couple of years I have seen cameras with much higher selectable sensitivity to light (this is called the camera’s ISO).
Another feature that’s become better-and-better over the years, which also helps out in shooting in low-light situations, is image stabilization. Basically Image stabilization shifts either the lens elements, or the sensor itself, to compensate for any movement on the part of the shooter. This really does help out while shooting in low-light.
If you really intend on shooting a lot in low-light the best thing you can do is get a camera with the above features, but also one that uses a large sensor. While most point-and-shoot cameras do a much better job in low-light than they used to, there really is no substitution for a physically large sensor of a DSLR or Compact System Camera when shooting under low light levels.
Happy Shooting,
Allan|Senior Social Media Specialist | Best Buy® Corporate
Private Message

Allan-BBY wrote:
If you really intend on shooting a lot in low-light the best thing you can do is get a camera with the above features, but also one that uses a large sensor. While most point-and-shoot cameras do a much better job in low-light than they used to, there really is no substitution for a physically large sensor of a DSLR or Compact System Camera when shooting under low light levels.
I think the biggest low-light accomplishment is how modern cameras are able to capture starlight and galaxies with the right lenses.
While sensor size is important, choosing lenses with large apertures also helps to minimize sensor noise. Look for lenses with f/2.8, f/1.8, or f/1.4 designations.
Of course you can just cheat. Nikon's SB-910 or a Quantum bare-bulb works wonders in challenging light conditions.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+-+Speedlight+SB-910+Flashlight/4675495.p?id=1218505325342&skuId=46...
Note, many compact cameras are now shipping with larger sensors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8dVE9gu96A

Nokia Lumia 800 - Camera non flash = very pink - ....

As subject.
Nokia, please address this issue, could be a white balance issues, but I am semi-colour blind to red and even I can see this ruins the pictures.
Please, I am losing patience with this phone, I could almost deal with the battery issues, but with this as well, it just takes the Michael.

Highly noisy images. (Please use some better noise reduction algorithm)
Are you taking images in low lighting conditions? If yes, it is normal due to the sensor size. In any event, try utilizing flash or reduce the ISO settings. I've never experienced noisy pictures in outdoors.
Overexposed/Burned-out Images. (Tried reducing exposure and contrast, but still getting burned out images!)
I guess this is partly due to the fact that you are focusing on the wrong areas, try manual focusing by tapping on the screen. Play around with "metering mode" might help.
Very Blurry images (Getting blurry images even after staying still as much as possible. Feels like there's no image stabilizer inside. Most other camera phones can take good stills even while moving in a car)
By "blur", do you mean like "motion blur" or "out of focus" blur? Motion blur WILL occur if the shutter speed is low and that is definitely so if lighting conditions are low. Try wiping your lens once in a while, sometimes smudges from your fingerprints might caused them.
Macro not focusing correctly. Cannot get to focus close up objects. This is very annoying! The focus quickly turns back to normal mode when the shutter is released.
I agree this, the macro focusing mode is indeed a bit "off" and without the proper indication to show that it's on focus (eg. my n78 has the box turned to green to indicate focus) it's a bit hassle. However, once you get used to it, you'll be fine. You just have to find the sweet spot ie the minimum distance in which the lens must be from the object for macro to be shot.The Lumia 800 8MP camera does not have a 0 minimum distance.
Hope the above helps.

Sync Cannon 5D video and external audio

Hi,
I'm recording video on a Cannon 5D Mark II Camera and audio separately at 30 fps.
What sort of worlflow should I use from production to editing - to make sure the sound will sync correctly?
Is there a particular frame rate the video should be shot at?
If it is shot at 23.98 fps, how can I sync the 30fps audio in Final Cut in the end?
Thanks in advance for the help!
Fernanda.

Maria Fernanda Affonseca wrote:
My situation is this: the director wants to shoot both 5D and 16mm footage and eventually edit them together, but she doesn't know how she wants to finish it - whether in film or video - yet.
She needs to record video and audio separately because this is a choir singing in a studio. They need to record the sound in a studio for quality. But the video shood take place outside. There is no way to record the choir singing on location.
Excellent. Preplanning is what good production is based upon.
Shooting double system sound is not new, we've been doing it for, like, a century. It's all been invented, it's all been done, the entire workflow has long been perfected. Long ago. In every first time dual system shooting situation, the director thinks he/she knows more than the collected 100 years of experience of millions of sound people and the project descends into preventable chaos.
You are going to be shooting a common situation, lip-syncing to playback. "Playback" is one of the terms applied to the use of prerecorded sound or music providing the foundation or motivation during staged photography. The director rolls film, slates the take, calls for playback, and then says, "Action."
The technique is easily researched in any good library, look for film production handbooks.
Here's what you need (one version of a list, other wonks, of course, will offer a different list):
1. Studio recorded music tracks with SMPTE timecode track (look it up)
2. Playback equipment and sound delivery amplification/speakers for shooting on location that includes the ability to play the timecode track and feed it to a couple of devices
3. A timecode slate that receives timecode from the sound track playback
4. A timecode reader that will send the same timecode to all cameras
5. Timecode receivers that will record timecode to the camera's timecode track
(Timecode can either be provided by a playback device or by a master generator. There are reasons why you choose one over the other. You might record a master t/c on the timecode track and feed the playback t/c to an aux input or u-bits or use the playback t/c to jam the master t/c generator.)
That's one of the ways the big boys do this. There are many others. The fundamental idea is that everything sees the same timecode and so cannot possibly get out of sync. It's not complicated but it's not trivial. It's a simple engineering project and the equipment is all off the shelf and standardized. Your director, of course, is going to say "We cannot afford to do this the correct way and I do not believe anyone who says it is actually more expensive to attempt to fix audio sync in post instead of doing it properly in the filed, so, how can we hack this for free?"
And you will be back after your shoot to ask us how you can get this fixed.
Shooting 16mm is fun and an excellent stylization decision but it carries additional planning ad post production considerations. If you or your director have never shot fil, you should hire an experienced photographer because you don't get second chances with film and the ability to repair film in post with digital effects is not only limited, it's an expensive waste of time if the film could have been exposed properl. Deliberate post production film grading ad effects are not included in that statement because they require extensive preplanning and knowledge that, looks to me, your production staff and crew do not yet possess.
You need to know the differences between the sensor sizes of 16m cameras and DSLRs produce wildly different depth of field tables for any given focal length and focus distance. The idea that you can intercut the two media must not be based on the misperception the formats have similar looks. They are wildly different in every way.
yadayadayada
bogiesan

Mega pixel or zoom

I looking to get a new camera and was wondering which is more important to look for:
more mega pixels or more Wide-Angle Optical Zoom.
(don't get me wrong I would look for something that has more mega pixels than a phone does)
I've seen some cameras that have 12mega pixels and 50 zoom. Canon.
then some that have 16mega pixels and only 6-10 zoom. Canon and Nikon.
Any suggestions I which one I should value more?

Good question....
Some thoughts....
Yes with the Nikon D800. Macro lenses and zoom lenses are nearly redundant as you can basically crop in and still have excellent resolution. Have a look at this image where a photographer found his reflection in the bird's eye...
http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/03/example_mini.jpg
with a DSLR you have the best of both worlds. Match the resolution and DSLR sensor size to an appropriate zoom lens you need. Do you want more zoom or a lens that smaller.
want something better with low light, consider a prime or a f/2.8 zoom lens
Zoom is great, but too much zoom creations pincushion and barrel distortion
how wide do you want? Most kit lenses are limited to 18mm. However, I recently discovered Nikon's 10-24mm. It's Rectilinear to help straighten out curves. Great for indoor pictures.
Back to your original question. I crave for both....
I want megapixels for sharpness. However some cameras (especially camera phones) need a flash to capture a sharp images.
I am tired of fixed lenses (primes). My fav lens is the Nikon 18-300mm. This lens does both wide angle and telephone. Takes up less space than two lenses in my camera bag.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbkcsaDMekw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1-BD9S08UQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXTD-1EHW7c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVQiN568izQ&hd=1

Macro ability/sensor size?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for