September 19, 2014, 10:21:07 AM

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 - Lee Jay

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 63
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 10:18:27 AM »
7D2 sensor = 70D sensor

The performance is similar (I'd call it a 1/3 stop advantage or so), the sensors are different.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 09:50:54 AM »
I don't think that most enthisiasts, semi-pros, or pros are going to sit on a camera body for ten years. I think your average consumer tends to churn through cameras at a pretty fast rate as well, although there are certainly some who stick with what they've got as long as they can to get the most for their money.

The vast majority of dSLR purchasers never buy another one.  Only pros and genuine enthusiasts do.  Of all the people I know that have dSLRs, almost all of them still use the first one they ever bought.  I'll provide a list of people I know, aside from me - 10D, D70, 5DII, Rebel XT, 300D, T2i, T4i.  In fact, of everyone I know, only one person aside from me has ever "upgraded" and that was to move from Canon (40D) to Nikon (D200 - still using that one).  And my upgrade was from 10D to 5D when the 5D first came out.

This next path (looking like 20D+5D to 7D2+6D) will be my first body upgrade since 2005.  I've cycled through a great many lens changes since my first DSLR purchase (17-40L, 28-135IS, 75-300IS, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/2, 35/1.4L, Sigma 20/1.8, Sigma 15mm fisheye, 100/2, 85/1.8, 24-105L, 70-200/2.8L IS, 70-200/2.8L IS II, Tamron 1.4x, Tamron 2x, Kenko Pro 1.4x, Canon 1.4x II Canon 2x III, Meade ETX-125PE, Celestron Edge HD 11).

3
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:09:45 PM »
70-400/4-5.6L IS
15-28/2.8 fisheye
24-85/2.8L IS

4
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:08:01 PM »
Watching a documentary in a true large format IMAX theater is impressive visually.  For most everything else, whether it's on the big screen or on my SDTV makes essentially no difference to me.

I find the difference between ML raw video and native 5D3 video to be entirely immaterial.

Wow.

No difference seen in detail and texture between waxy 5D3 native video and richly textured ML RAW and no difference in blown highlights and crushed black detail between the two?

No difference between 4k and 1080i and 480i even for nature?

I guess people sure see things differently. To me the difference is almost unimagineably great.

Im baffled by "photographers" who care so much about the quality of their still pictures but don't appreciate the quality of moving pictures.

Well, that's probably me.  I stopped going to the movies years ago and prefer to watch them at home on my CRT TV.  You know why?  The audio quality at most theaters is horrible, and that annoys me far more than a small, low resolution screen.  The audio quality I have at home is far superior to that at most theaters.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:04:32 PM »
Oh I see the differences, and I have 20/13 vision once corrected.  I just find those differences mostly immaterial to the use or enjoyment of video.  Not so with stills.

I was just looking at some video I shot last weekend.  It was of a favorite subject of mine, aiplanes.  I had some shot at 500mm and some at 50mm.  Really, the difference wasn't a big deal.  I could clearly see what was going on with both, and the what was going on part is what mattered, not the imagery itself.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:54:11 PM »
Watching a documentary in a true large format IMAX theater is impressive visually.  For most everything else, whether it's on the big screen or on my SDTV makes essentially no difference to me.

I find the difference between ML raw video and native 5D3 video to be entirely immaterial.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D and 7D II Combo or 5D III?
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:14:06 PM »
I'm going for the combo.  I've loved shooting with my 20D and 5D, and I don't expect that to change.  I'll use the 7D2 in good light for action, and the 6D in poor light for slower subjects.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:11:42 PM »
Let me be frank.  Image quality matters much, much less for videos than for stills.  Videos have many more frames, audio, and all of it in time sequence to provide more information than the viewer of a single still can get from a single still frame.

The reason I wanted 4k, even if it was low end 4k, was for stabilization in post, which can cost you 3/4 of your pixels in some cases.  The reason I want digital zoom is so I can get more zoom range out of a cheaper and better narrower zoom lens (18-135 versus 18-300, for example).

But, for properly framed shots, this performance is more than acceptable.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Chuck Westfall Talks Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:42:00 AM »
I sure wish someone would ask Canon about the 3x movie digital zoom mode from the 70D being in or out of the 7D2.  I was really hoping they would expand that to smooth continuous zoom from 1x to 3x, but it appears they went the other way and got rid of it entirely.

It would also be nice to know if it reads the whole sensor or still line skips in video mode.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: AE-1 Styled DSLR from Canon?
« on: September 17, 2014, 07:52:00 PM »
The AE-1 was my first camera, bought at the age of 9.  I used it exclusively for many years (13, I think).

And I'd never, ever, buy a camera shaped like that again.  Nostalgia doesn't help lousy ergonomics.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 17, 2014, 02:41:01 PM »
True...however, one doesn't need to buy into the whole Sony system. You can just buy their bodies (which are ephemeral anyway, from every manufacturer, unlike lenses), and use an adapter to attach your Canon lenses. Stick with the Canon "system", but gain the benefit of Exmor with the rest of that system. ;)

Do you still get the same fast focusing?

Quote
If Sony somehow did end up belly up...eh, no real harm done...most people would have replaced an old A7whatever body in a couple years anyway.

Well, maybe if it is a Sony.  I just finished a huge shoot using nothing but my over 10 year old 20D, and I got more glowing comments on this shoot than on any shoot ever.  I plan to buy two new (Canon) cameras in the next 6 months, and I plan to keep them for at least 10 years.

12
Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 10:54:08 AM »
By the way, this lens is just as heavy (or light) as 70-200/2.8, that's quite manageable actually!

I don't know where you got that idea, but the 70-200/2.8L IS II is 1,490g, and the 400/4DO II is 2,100g.

13
Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 10:11:57 AM »
Am I the only one that thinks making the tripod foot non-removable almost totally defeats the purpose of this lens, which is to make it very light and easily handholdable?  If I were in the market for a lens like this, this one simple thing would be a show-stopper for me.  I keep the tripod ring off my 70-200/2.8 and 100-400L unless I'm actually using it on a tripod for exactly this reason - handholding comfort.  It even looks really uncomfortable to hold in the video with the foot in his palm.

i agree that the foot should be removable, are you sure it's not?

I guess I'm not totally sure, but it doesn't look removable, and I don't see any evidence that it is.

looking at the product photo i see it has slots in the ring like its supposed to slide off the studs.

Well, if it is removable, then that's good.

14
Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:40:55 AM »
Am I the only one that thinks making the tripod foot non-removable almost totally defeats the purpose of this lens, which is to make it very light and easily handholdable?  If I were in the market for a lens like this, this one simple thing would be a show-stopper for me.  I keep the tripod ring off my 70-200/2.8 and 100-400L unless I'm actually using it on a tripod for exactly this reason - handholding comfort.  It even looks really uncomfortable to hold in the video with the foot in his palm.

i agree that the foot should be removable, are you sure it's not?

I guess I'm not totally sure, but it doesn't look removable, and I don't see any evidence that it is.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark IV announcement on March 2015 or later
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:29:49 AM »
I can't think of a reason to believe the 5DIV will be anything more than a full-frame version of the 7DII with the popup flash removed and a somewhat slower frame rate.  But maybe Canon will surprise us with some new sensor technology or 4k or something else.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 63