March 03, 2015, 12:07:26 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Efka76

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Canon General / Re: Decline in DSLR sales explained
« on: February 17, 2015, 04:35:11 AM »
I watched this presentation from the beginning to the end and can make very few very strong statements:

1) Presentation was absolute bullS___;
2) Presenter was making wrong assumptions and wrong conclusions.

My reasoning for such conclusions is the following:

1) At first you do not need to prove obvious things (e.g. there is a snow in winter, water is liquid and etc.). Presenter wanted to prove that photo market is declining. This is obvious fact, which does not require to be proved.
2) Presenter put a lot of not necessary bullS___ in presentation (on Bruce Willis, impala population, correlation trends and correlation formula). The problem with statistics is that if you apply wrong assumptions and make correct statistical calculations you will get wrong results, which contradict to common logic. Accordingly, presenter conclusion that smartphone introduction is NOT killing compact camera market is wrong.
3) All discussions about market saturation (when we speak about compact cameras) is wrong is due to CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY. Cameras in smartphones are sufficiently good to fully replace compact cameras. The same could be applied to PDAs and MP3 players. Talks about market saturation in compact cameras would make sense if there is no such shift in technology.
4) Accordingly, presenter was wrong regarding market saturation related to DSLRs. Peak was in 2012 when Canon  / Nikon introduced 5DMark III, D800 series cameras. AT that year technology was at peak, which drove consumers to buy DSLRs, however, the last few years were really in "milking the cow" stage. There were no new major technology breaktroughs, which would drive consumers to buy new cameras. Another fact is that such highly advanced cameras are really expensive. e.g. You are not buying a new car every year, yo replace it when it becomes really obsolete (physically and morally). Accordingly, it is normal to consumers to replace such cameras every 2-5 years.

Presenter was also wrong in arguments, which were trying to show why photo camera sales are declining:

1) Different aspect ratios in photo cameras and printers. This is not a limiting factor as most of consumers do not print photos but store them in digital format. Other part of consumers do not face issues as they send jpegs to photo labs and get prints. Process is extremely simple.
2) Photo books argument - maybe presenter had in mind CAMERA MANUALS? :) Because all photo books explain principles of photography and usually are not written to specific camera or manufacturer. Principles of photography are the same for all cameras.
3) RAW and Adobe. This argument is absolute bullS___ as there are more RAW converters and consumer do not need to stick to Adobe only. Also, ordinary consumers can shoot in JPEG mode and they do not need any editing software.

Presenter said incorrect statement: meeting consumers wishes is not equal to technology we offer. Ordinary consumers are not buying compact cameras as smartphones are really sufficient. Compact camera market is dead. That is a fact. However, more advanced consumers want really better technology (e.g. better dynamic range, better high ISO capabilities, faster FPS, etc.). During the last few years there were no such breakthroughs. I am sure that if Canon put Exxmor sensor in Canon Mark 5dMkIV such camera sales would be really significant.

Some words on SOLUTIONS that presenter presented:

1) More fun but not technology - in other words he could say "better marketing is required", however in such specialized industry as photography you need to have at least basic knowledge about light, ISO Av TV dependence and etc. If you want very simple approach you can make photos with smartphones or in AUTO regime in DSLRs.
2) He proposes to abolish scene modes in cameras. This is wrong as ordinary users (who do not have knowledge on photography) use them. In such case you would loos quite a big part of ordinary hobbyists who buy expensive DSLRs.
3) Simplifying photo eco system, abolish patents, open secrets :)  Whout would be Canon advantage if it openly announce protocols related to AF, Sony abolishes Exxmor sensor patents, all manufacturers use unified lens mount???? In such case all photo maufacturers should consolidate and that will never happen. Stupid idea which is impossible to implement.
4) Harmonising and unifying hardqare and software. Stupid argument as well. Hardware harmonisation would be killing lens and camera sales. Software is already harmonised - Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom are industry standards.

It was funny to watch how presenter gave ideas how to improve photo workflow from taking picture to printing it. This process is ALREADY IMPLEMENTED.

In summary, presentation included a lot of bullS___, wrong assumptions and conclusions, as well as outdated ideas. Other trends which drive young generation (e.g. making selfies) were not discussed at all. That's because presenter still lives in XX century and do not have any new ideas. I am very surprised that he was invited to CES.


Software & Accessories / Re: Photo Editing Laptop Recommendations
« on: January 13, 2015, 03:21:37 PM »
The last week I bough a new laptop Asus G751. Specs are the following:

1) Monitor - 17.3'' IPS FHD 1920 x 1080 anti-glare
2) Processor - Intel i7-4710 HQ @ 2.5 Ghz (turbo up to 3.5 Ghz)
3) Video - Nvidia GeForce 970M 3 GB
4) SSD 256 GB, HDD 1 TB
5) 16 GB RAM
6) Windows 8.1

I mainly use Lightroom and Photoshop with various Plug-ins. Computer works extremely fast. I was amazed when I saw how LR works ( I have appr. 100.000 images in my archive). I definetely recommend this laptop for photo editing.

EOS Bodies / Re: 2015 wishlist
« on: January 12, 2015, 04:08:16 AM »
My 2015 wishlist is the following:

1) Canon 5D MkIV
2) Change Canon 50 mm 1.4 to Sigma 50 mm 1.4 ART;
3) Sigma 150-600 mm or Canon 100-400 mm MkII

Wedding Photography / Re: Tough LARGE group photo
« on: November 11, 2014, 05:01:56 PM »
Very good photo taking into account all circumstances! I have a question regarding your logo: is it Photoshoped or is really hanging on that wall ? ;)

Lenses / Re: Selling 200-400
« on: October 05, 2014, 01:16:33 AM »
Im really interested in what you decide to do as I am waiting for the Sigma 150-600 to see how it compares to the Canon 200-400. Obviously its not going to be the same but will the Canon be worth $10000 extra? I dont mind paying if it is but for a lens that wont be my primary Im kinda thinking about the Sigma.. .hoping there is some reviews coming out asap!

You are making a conceptual error here :) You should compare Sigma 150-600 with Tamron 150-600. Comparison with Canon is useless as Canon 200-400 is in absolutely different league. It would be the same as to compare Mercedes with Kia :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 03:40:41 AM »
I have never read in my life so much bullS___ from senior person. Few my comments:

1) Canon should fire all their engineers if they need 5 years to include 1Dx autofocus technology into other camera.  According to Maeda, 7DII was redesigned but remained absolutely the same as previous model :)

2) Canon's sensors are significantly behind Exmor sensor. If you are not capable producing competitive sensor, please buy it from Sony.

3) Significant focus on mirrorless - are you joking or are you stupid? Canon produced mirrorless camera which is maybe worst in the market. OF course theu sold many such cameras at a loss :)

4) What I see now when look to Canon: arrogant company, which is led by very old japanese person who still thinks that he is living in 60s' :) Canon is still able to support its leadership as it is not easy to change firm when you have many L lenses. For example, myself are not considering changing system into Sony or Nikon as I do not want to incur financial losses due to sale of lenses. But if we talk about new customers, it is doubtful that Canon is winning on this side.

5) It is very clear that Canon is a big ship and starts sinking slowly. This is due to not flexible management. Canon need to replace this old man and put American in CEO position, who would shake the whole corporation and kick engineers asses :)

6) Also, I think it would be a good idea to take Steve Jobs strategy and produce smaller number of models, which are much better than competitors.

Mirrorless market is getting serious and many new customers might buy mirrorless cameras. Canon and Nikon are practically newcomers in this market and need to put more focus and not just provide BS answers to journalists ;)

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70mm
« on: September 25, 2014, 02:24:06 AM »
I would suggest to think "out of the box" and consider Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. This lens is much better in all aspects than Canon EF 24-70 MkI, much cheaper than Canon's 24-70 MKII. Tamron is slightly less sharper than Canon, however it has built-in image stabilisation. Currently this lens is the most used lens from my bunch of lenses that I own.

Canon produces marginally better lenses than competitors but for 2x price :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 17, 2014, 06:54:47 AM »
In the good old days of film, I shot a lot of Kodachrome64... When lighting was not good your options were to use artificial lights or stop taking pictures. My second body usually had a roll of "high speed" film in it... ISO400 or ISO800..... same problem.... loose the light and you go home.

My first digital DSLR was unusable at ISO800 and topped out at a very noisy ISO1600. Now there isn't a DSLR (or mirrorless) on the market that does not produce better results at ISO12,800 than film did at ISO800.... and the numbers are slowly creeping upward.

Last night I mounted a laser pointer on the top of my camera and tried taking pictures of the cats chasing the red dot. You could not see the red dot. I turned the lights down low and cranked up the ISO to 12800 and it worked very well. These are shots that were impossible before and I have come to accept this as normal.... so yes, I need high ISO....


+1 again.

This is very true. Good cameras have always been expensive and out of the hands of most people. Now however, we in the digital age have gotten spoiled some with the advances in technology and I think the "noise" comparisons between film and digital are largely being forgotten.

I don't really stop and think about what ISO I need my 7D to be at to get the shot. I use whatever ISO I need to get the shot I want. I have said this in the past that I have shot as high as ISO 3200 with hummingbirds in flight and after processing the images look fantastic, both on screen and in print.

Guys are doing today with digital that could never have been accomplished with film back in the day. I think noise levels today are very acceptable even with crop sensors and you should buy the camera body that you need at the price you can afford and then use the heck out of it.

I also think because of computers too many people have become "pixel peepers" and look way too closely at the images they take. I usually print my photos at 11 x 14 and even at higher ISO's with my 7D they look great. Looking at an image zoomed in at 100% will destroy just about any image and I think any camera would have a hard time holding up to someone who is convinced that viewing them at that large of size is the only way to judge a camera's worth.

The way I look at it is, once I have processed my RAW image (regardless of what ISO I used on my 7D) and converted it to Jpeg and if the image looks good on screen, then make a print to be sure... good to go!
My 2 cents.


Maybe we are spoiled...however, maybe we are on the cusp of another revolutionary leap forward in IQ again. Ten years from now, we could be looking back at today, and saying the very same thing about noise levels today as we are about noise levels with film.

Yes, we have amazing technology today, and it's allowed for wonderful things. However, counter to "We have it great" is, we could have it better. And, we likely WILL have it better. Most companies are rocketing forward at lightning speed on all camera capability fronts. I know that Samsung doesn't have a great lens selection yet...but, YET. They have a 7D II killer on their hands (well, with the exception that the high speed 15fps rate is 12-bit RAW, which is kind of a Samsung killer :P). All they really need is a great lens selection and a reliable support department. Those things simply need time to accumulate and build up.

Same goes for Sony...they are redefining a lot of the market today, and like Nikon, throwing out a lot of products to see what sticks (although I actually think Sony is doing a better job with product naming and whatnot than Nikon has ever done). It is, again, only a matter of time before Sony's lens lineup bulks up, and they have the benefit of Zeiss behind their glass.

Ten years from now, 14-16 stops of DR (maybe even as much as 20...there are already video sensors that do that with multi-bucket exposures) and ultra, ultra low noise, even at ultra high ISO settings, will be so common that we'll be looking at todays cameras like we look at film. For me, I honestly wonder if Canon will be a big player in that future. They may have lenses and support, but their products, technologically, are being matched or surpassed by even the likes of Samsung....  ???

jrista, I 100% agree with you. Currently I see the following trends:

1) Sony  - its superb sensor is used in many cameras, 35 mm and MF. Recently they introduced super autofocus Combine Sony's sensor with such autofocus and Zeiss lenses and you will get product that puts Canon products at least few generations behind. Of course, Neuro will say his famous words "but Canon's financial situation is better than Sony and Canon sells more cameras", however, he should try not to behave like Canon fanboy but start looking and other companies' innovations more seroulsly.
2) Samsung - look at Samsung NX camera and you will see significant improvements compared with 7D Mk II. Taking a look at Samsung and their innovations pace I would bet on Samsung rather on Canon which became very stagnant company. It is pathetic that after 5 years Canon released 7DMkII, without any innovations (it included current autofocus technology from 1Dx which already paid-off few years ago).
3) Tamron and Sigma - looking at their lenses quality, e.g. Sigma 35 mm Art. Sigma 50 mm art, Sigma 150-600 mm, Tamron 24-70, Tamron 150-600, I see that significant lens market share will be overtaken bu these 2 companies in the future. Canon will be relleasing 7.000-10.000 USD lenses, which will be interesting to some millionaires or lucky sports journalists.   

Lenses / Re: Canon Reveals Details for future Telephoto Lens Line
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:46:26 AM »
Do I understand correctly that DO lenses (with green ring) are considered as worse quality than L class lenses? Also, can someone explain what this "Diffractive optics" means and what are advantages / disadvantages?

EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:39:48 AM »
Though these jpegs look promising; Tony Northrop has a preliminary review concluding little to no improvement over the 7D; while Scott Kelby claims, " It's "high" ISO performance is the best he's ever seen on an APS-C camera".

I'm hoping Kelby's conclusion is the "correct" one!

Scott Kelby is very good salesman who sits in Canon's pocket. Due to Dustin Abbott or other independent reviewer opinion is much more reliable.

A number of people were offered pre-production camera and from their images few best images were selected. Also, it would be very strange if such reviewers would say that this camera has similar low noice performance as old 7D or there are improvements in autofocus area only (which did not cost Canon any additional penny).

Let's calm down and wait until camera is released and then let's watch real reviews.

Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: September 16, 2014, 02:58:59 AM »
Maybe I'm just losing hope.  I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:46:21 PM »
I am looking at Canon 7D MKII specs and I am quite surprised that Canon who is a leader in image making made such a poor job. The reasoning is as follows:

1) MKII version is released after 5 years!!!! This is extremely long period of time for technology makers.
2) 7D at release date was the best APS-C camera which was using breaktrough technology, however, looking at current 7D MkII specs I do not see any INOVATIONS.
3) Looking at current 7D MK II specs I see very little effort from Canon side:
 a) Practically the same body design - no efforts in this area. I like this design but I am a bit surprised that Canon goes such way
 b) 2 DIGIC 6 processors - it is very simple to replace DIGIC 4 processors with current DIGIC 6 processors. Absolutely no efforts required. I would have expected DIGIC 7 processors. Of course dual DIGIC 6 will bu much better than older processors.
 c) AF technology form 1DX and dual pixel technology - no efforts from Canon side. They just simply included very good autofocus in this camera. I expected a bit more from them.
4) Sensor - everybody expected to see a new technology in this area, which would put Canon and Nikon sensors on the same plate. Now it is very big disappointment from Canon side.

By all means,  the new 7D MkII will be extremely good camera with much better autofocus, better battery, GPS (personnaly GPS and WiFi are not needed features for me but RT technology would be useful). Canon could release such camera at least 2-3 years ago as we see that it just implemented a current technology in this camera but it lacks innovations which we see especially in Sony.

Will I buy this camera? Definitely not :) That's because my current 7D is very good camera, I am happy with AF abilities (mainly shoot weddings and studio) and have intentions to buy FF camera (5D MKIII or MK IV) :)

Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: September 12, 2014, 04:51:38 PM »
Guys, maybe it is a stupid question but I wanted to ask the following: If I put EF lenses on my crop camera (7D), I know that 24 mm lens will be equivalent of 38 mm. lens. However, if I put EF-S lenses of 24 mm, will I have 24 mm on crop camera or that will be 38 mm equivalent.

Once more time, sorry for such question but I really want to know the answer.

Jrista, you can not make valid conclusions due to the following:

1) Data is not complete. You are analysing US Amazon sales only. This data is not sufficient even for analysing US marker as there are many more internet and standard sales channels in US.
2) In order to make valid conclusions about dominance in the global market you should include all Amazon shops (US, UK, FR, etc.), B&H, retail stores and many others. Practically it is impossible to gather exact data as you will definitely will not include all sales channels.
3) It would be more reliable to gather data from Financial statements or management reports, bank analyst reports on Canon, Nikon, Olympus, etc. However, here we encounter a problem that even segment reporting data is too aggregated. These companies are involved in many businesses (e.g. Sony, Canon, etc.) and do not provide in financial statements very detailed data about some particular business segment (in our case that would be specific camara data). Of course it would be very interesting for us to see what are Canon global sales of specific cameras in different markets, what is profitability of specific products (we would see that 1Dx, 5D MarkIII are the most profitable models... by the way, it is my assumption :) ). However, such data would be very interesting to competitors and everybody is trying to disclose required information according to various accounting standard requirements (US GAAP, IFRS) and aggregate data in such way in order not to disclose its strengths and real position in the market to competitors. The Bank analysts are obtaining more specific data during various press releases, conf call, etc. (however that data is not audited and nobody can place 100% reliance on it). For example, if you take market position (in percentages) from different companies (I am talking about their own assessments), add everything together I am almost sure that you get more than 100% :D

I am writing this as I was an Audit director for many years in BIG4 and know such things :)

Greetings to everyone from Vilnius, Lithuania! I guess there are not many Lithuanians in this forum :) By the way, if you do not know where Lithuania is located, you can find 3 small Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) in near Baltic sea, Poland and Russia.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7