November 24, 2014, 05:54:11 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 - Maui5150

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: Today at 03:03:44 PM »
7D2 is a prosumer camera, like the 5D3 and tells us Canon release cycles are increasing, both for economical and technological reasons.
But forget the 7D and revise your math on the 5D. if the 5D2 was 3 years and 5D4 was 3.5 years, the 5D4 will be?
Exactly: 4 years (rounded down from 4.1). So that would be March 2016. But we will not be so lucky.

You have fallacy in your logic to believe on two data points that a release cycle is linear.

I highly doubt the 5DMKIV will be released 4.1 years after the 5DMKIII and the D5V 4.9 years after that.

If anything, seems to me that the 5D MK III might have been a tad late. 

More importantly, Canon will likely release its upgrades when it feels there is a demand as well as have a product they think meets that demand

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: Today at 02:54:44 PM »
Still waiting, still hoping, but not for long. 2015 will be my final year, I've been waiting since 2008 for a decent replacement. While Sony is evolving at a steady pace, Canon isn't. A pity !

Something tells me if you really have been waiting since 2008, you would have found this site and had at least 5 or 6 posts by now instead of three... ) 

Anyone on the fence or pining for 6 years would be far more vocal

Street & City / Re: Singapore - Marina Bay
« on: Today at 10:37:11 AM »
Very pretty.  Is that from outside or shot through glass?

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: Today at 09:51:47 AM »
Interesting, I can't see it personally, a 5D4 is waiting its upgrade and will be the 4K camera, how can Canon release 2 50mps cameras in 2015 and not 1 of them be a 5D4 unless the 5D4 is 50 mp and does 4k! Highly unlikely!

Why does one have to be a 5D IV

Beast / Beast Astro


5D MK IV in 2016

I think both the 1DX and the 5D will be upgraded in the 20s but stay below 30MP, just as the Nikon 4 has stayed less than the 810 and the 750 did not jump up into the 30s either. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: Today at 09:46:50 AM »
I am expecting 45MP - 50MP

My feeling has been Canon has been making strides, the 7D MK II was a solid upgrade, maybe not as much as some people wanted but it is far and away their best APS-C with pro-level AF and burst. 

My guess is this will be a high MP beast, decent AF, moderate low light.

Position wise, 1DX MK II will still be the flagship, next version gets a boost, 20+ MP (maybe 24), still 12+ FPS, and canons best AF (another step up) and low light.

The BEAST will sit in between the 1DX and the 5D MK IV.  The BEAST will have 50MP sensor, 4 - 5 FPS, 5D MK III AF, and low light comparable to the 5D MK III

The 5D MK IV will have high 20s MP (maybe around 28 MP) , 5 FPS, Low Light close to the 1 DX MK II and AF around what the 7d MK II is

Fun to speculate, but can easily see Canon making a beast MP camera

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5DIV: 36 MP US $ 3799 TBA in March 2015
« on: November 23, 2014, 11:42:47 AM »
All you have to do is look at the Dual CF card slots to know it's linkbait. While CF is good and an industry standard, I don't think Canon will offer another flaghsip DSLR without an SD slot. write Speeds are getting too good and they are too cheap. I hate to even dignify this one with a response, but hey, sometimes you have to feed the trolls.

Maybe for you, but personally I would prefer dual CF cards to CF/SD combo. 

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 23, 2014, 11:35:56 AM »
But Neuro currently is much more than DR. Mirror less, MP, 7d2 sensor improvement and such are in the scanner.

What about lenses?  Yesterday I went on a 5 mile hike with my 840mm f/5.6 combo (600/4 II + 1.4xIII), shooting flying raptors entirely handheld.  After lunch, I shot a lighthouse, and on the narrow spit of land, only an ultrawide lens with shift could capture the full height with correct verticals, so I used my new TS-E 17/4.  How's the competition doing on meeting those needs?  Should I go to forums dedicated to other brands and complain about their lack of innovation in areas which matter to me?

I get that people want it all (and usually for free).  But no single manufacturer offers it all.  So, you have to make a choice... 

  • Keep wishing for one system to offer everything.
  • Complain incessantly on the Internet.
  • Pick the system that best meets their needs.

Regarding the first, my dad used to say wish in one hand and...well, you get the idea (or Google will fill in the rest).  Regarding the second, that's certainly your prerogative, but hopefully you understand that doing so here is worse than useless.  That leaves the third option as the most logical one, by far.  Kind of sad that people are so illogical...

Wait?  You mean Sony does not have a decent combo that will produce 800MM+ at f/5.6

Who would ever need such a thing? 

I think Sony has some nice products that fit a limited range and in some areas may even have a temporary advantage. 

Things change over time.

Ask any one who invested in a Betamax library how that worked out for them. 

Sony has a history of innovating, then cutting the cord and the big questions I would ask:

1)  Is there a large enough market for people who will switch to support their DSLR bodies AND lenses for continued development

2)  How well do products hold their price and is their a market - Lets face it a lot of photogs are gear hounds and the fact that I can sell off bodies and lenses at a fair exchange is a plus for those in the Canon / Nikon camps, because of demand a new users coming in.  I still see decent prices on even the 70-200 F/4 or F/2.8 MK I

3)  If Sony is out of the DSLR market in 5 years, what happens to all of your gear and will you then be jumping ship back to Nikon or Canon. 

I think Sony is doing a nice job, but don't think there are enough people entering or switching camps to support their business, especially was the P&S market is getting pummeled.  I do think Canon has to respond and step up to the plate, so will be an interesting few years

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 22, 2014, 04:23:37 PM »

But now, with mirrorless arriving and sony having more resources (and probably patents) for sensor research, I feel uneasiness grows if you've bet on the right horse. Canon might very well pull a rabbit out of the hat and surprise us all, but flat out denial that further sensor enhancement (dr or resolution) can be can be beneficial to some is counterproductive: No smoke without fire. Calling people names doesn't help either.

Sony having more resources? 

How long has Canon been in the photography business?  How long has Sony?

I don't think I have seen Canon post a loss  in recent years.  Sony just will post over $2B loss for the year.


These were all businesses in which Sony was not only aggressive, but considered the leader.

Where is Betamax these days?

Also note.  The original projected loss was $466 Million, so they really hit the s&^&*(tter on that one.  They are doing o.k. with their imaging, but as far as I can see the big chunk of that is the sale of their sensors to other manufacturers

One of Sony's bright spots is their Devices division, which basically is semiconductors and other parts to other manufacturers.

Major layoffs and can see Sony out of the phone business in the next year if not two years and I am predicting the Camera lines will be the next to go.  I can see Sony remaining in the Sensors

There will always be niche adopters, but can Sony sell enough bodies and lenses year over year to justify R&D costs when they are posting increasing losses. 

Reviews / Re: Samyang/Rokinon 24mm f/3.5 Tilt-Shift Review (Text + Video)
« on: November 20, 2014, 12:38:00 PM »
Sort of disappointed.

Did not expect the build quality, but was hopping would not have to be stopped down quite so much. 

This to me is a nice to have lens, so right now no sense investing in one of the better Canons but if it has so much softness opened up, cutting corners to add this does not make sense either

Sony entered the market with little to nothing.  They had no market share.  Commercial pros (sports, wildlife, illustration, corporate, wedding, portrait) and imaging artists could buy "better" gear from Canon or Nikon.  Sony acquired Minolta/Konica and with them came certain technologies that Sony didn't have to develop in-house.  Meanwhile, Sony put what appears to be a significant investment in sensor technologies.  Finally, when Olympus' management team screwed up and had to sell the imaging group, Sony was able to pick up yet more technology.

At some point Sony would have to surpass the traditional camera manufacturers somehow, someway, right?

Sony's marketing team must be going nuts! with all this great "sizzle" they can sell.  This kind of stuff is good attention grabbing material.

Perhaps more importantly, these things are actually useful technologies and can help solve a number of problems for Sony and bring them level with Nikon and Canon.  I'm thinking in terms of Sony not having to invest in OSS development for their 70-400mm competitor to Canon's much-loved 100-400L.  I'm thinking of all the vintage glass that now has image stabilization (as noted below).

NOW we're getting somewhere!  A machine like this will temp even me to try out a Sony body... with lots of lens adapters...

...for those who haven't experienced IBIS in a Pentax or Olympus body, it can work very well.  Makes nearly every lens you have stabilized, even classic old primes...

Higher-end A-9 model still rumored for early 2015,  Hmmm...

My biggest question remains, given Sony's financial troubles and how in recent years they have sold off Laptops, TV and other electronics, who will be Sony selling there camera business to in 2015

Lenses / Re: What's your favourite focal length?
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:15:13 AM »
is that a 600mm on your body, or are you just happy to see me?  :D

Post Processing / Re: 16 bit vs 8 bit
« on: November 18, 2014, 05:33:21 PM »
I'm shooting RAW with a 7D2 and 5DM3 ... when I do the conversion, it asks me which one to convert into ... 16 bit Tiff or 8 bit Tiff ---

Imho your best bet is not to convert raw at all until the last possible moment. For this, use ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) which is Lightroom and part of Photoshop. The advantage of this workflow is that it's non-destructive and you can revert anything at any moment. Last not least, you might profit from future developments in the raw conversion process (esp. denoising).

Can anyone explain which one and what is the difference - I mean, I can see 8 - 16 is twice the size (or is it depth) ... I'm not very tech smart, so please explain this in lay terms, basically -- thanks ... BD

The current Canon resolution is 14bits, i.e. with 16bits you're wasting two bits - doesn't matter if you compress the tiff file though. The largest difference you'll see is in gradients, for example an evening sky going from somewhat blue-ish to something red-ish. Using only 8 bits will introduce nasty color steps and make your precious dslr look like a mobile phone.

Note that 16bit files need more memory when editing and more hard disk space, but in the year 2015 of our lord (other year number for followers of other lords) this shouldn't matter unless you're stacking a lot of layers in Photoshop.

I disagree with how you look at it. 

For me, if I am shooting 14-bit and my editing platform handles 16-bit, chances are quite high that every color my camera shot is represented in the editing program

If I downsample to 8-bit, then 6-bits of colors need to be mapped to a different color.

I just don't think I am throwing away 2-bits of color, rather I have 2-bits of color more to assure I am as accurate as I can be (i.e. better to have more room) 

Dear Teachers and Friends.
Form all the Details that Indicate = Sigma  150-600mm. is better than Tamron 150-600 mm.
My stupid question is =  Do the better /sharper Lens of Sigma worth $ 1,000 US Dollars more than Tamron ( Which Better AF for all of my Canon Camerta bodies ???)
$ 1999  Sigma VS $ 1199 US Dollars of Tamron.
Thank you, Sir/ Madam.
Have a great Weekend.
PS. Yes, I already have Canon 600mm. / The Great Lens for Birds, But  too big to carry on the small airplane= Yes, I will need  smaller 600 mm.  Lens soon. Yes, I  use 100-400 mm L + 1.4X and 2X all of my trip, and worth it too.

It is $800 difference... Not $1000

May not seem like a lot, but it is around 65% more expensive, not double.

In these areas, I opt for better.  It may be marginally different, but I don't mind spending $800 for get a faster, better build lens that has better performance and sharpness, over a manufacturer I generally don't trust as much. 

I would also expect the Sigma to hold its value a little better, so if you go to sell this lens in 4 years, I think you will still get a decent return, where a lot of people with the Tamron may suffer from the "economical" version. 

I have only used a few Sigma lenses.  I like them in general.  Still like the Canon's better, but I have been on the fence and came close to picking up the Tamron earlier but they were out of stock and since the Sigmas were announced, have not even thought twice about the Tamrons.

$800 is a lot of money.  The Sigma is a serious lens, may be a little heavy for some, but I expect that for a 150-600 zoom.

While the 300 F/4 L of Canon with a 2X may be slightly better, I do know AF will be 2 times as long as well, so would be interested in really seeing performance of the Canon 300 with 2x III versus the Sigma S in terms of AF speed.  I have shot the Canon with 2x before and while it gave good results, the AF bugged me

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: YN 600EX-RT - my review
« on: November 18, 2014, 08:53:30 AM »
Any updates?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How long until the next FF body? Or buy now?
« on: November 18, 2014, 08:52:22 AM »

Remember that the vast majority (around 95%) of people never buy another lens after their original purchase of a DSLR.

Please provide a legitimate survey/research to this fact.

I believe if you are talking CAMERAS as a whole, that may be true since Point and Shoots do not take other lenses (though some will take adapters for macro, etc)

Empirically, the stat in my own experience is utter bulls^&*t.

For myself, multiple bodies and lenses.
My father, more a hobbiest, multiple lenses
My sister, more to take pics of the kids, even with a T5i she has 3 lenses
A Doctor friend - has about 4 lenses
Another racing friend - 4 lenses

Ironically, my sister and myself are the only Canon shooters in that crowd, the rest Nikon, but I can't think of a person I know casually who owns a DSLR body and does not own multiple lenses

I am excluding others I know who are professional or semi-Professional (actually on that side I know about 75% Canon shooters).  If I go into that realm, of those I personally know, I am at about 65 - 70

So statistically, as I approach 100 people (at least 70% the way there) I cannot think of one person I know or have met who owns a Dslr and does not have at least one more lense, and the average number is somewhere between 3 and 4  (I am at 7 and soon to be 8) 

I deliberately tried to go into thinking about more family, non photographers, non hobbiest, but, those folks tended to break into more point and shoot or camera phone. 


I would be more surprised if 50% of those who buy a DSLR do not by at least one additional lens with 12 months of getting their camera. 

I have a proposition for you...

Lets do this.

For every DSLR owner you find that has owned their camera more than a year and has only used a kit lens, I will give you $1

For every DSLR owner I find that has owned their camera and have purchased at least one or more lenses beyond what came with that camera (including those who purchased body only because they wanted a better lens ) you will give me $20. 

By your statistics, this gives me a slight edge of $5 per $100

Professional and Hobbyiest shooters can be included. 

I would like to also give a warning... if you look at polls like this:

9% say they do not own DSLRs
9% say they only own one lens
23% own 2
59% own 3 or more.

Out of 36244
3247 are excluded because they do not own a DSLR

Congratulations, 3263 own only one lens.. I owe you $3263... but

29522 own more than one lens.... OUCH

You owe me $590,440, minus the $3263 I owe you...

I will give you a little break and lets just call it $585,000

By that poll, about 10% own only a kit lens, and in fact 3x as many people own 5 or more lenses.

And given who you are... I would prefer CASH.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31