July 25, 2014, 02:35:51 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 - Lee Jay

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 44
1
Exactly! :D And with five custom settings, you'ed pretty much be set for...anything.

I guess I've never used the custom settings so I don't know what they can do.  Not having them on my cameras could be the root cause.

2
Here's hoping they have a much simplified mode dial on the 7D2....

Could I suggest the following layout.....

Add C1-5, and I'd be happy. :D
Even better!

Wow....that would make it essentially useless for fast-moving subjects in fast-changing light.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 24, 2014, 11:55:17 PM »
But...but...the DR, man...you're completely ignoring the DReaded DR issue!!!   :P

I struggle with DR all the time at high ISO.  I've never had a situation where Canon's base ISO DR was insufficient AND a couple more stops would have made it sufficient.  I've had one situation where 20 more stops would have made it sufficient, but I don't think even the lenses can support that much DR.

On a sunny day just aim your camera out the back door at the woods and you will instantly find a case where the current DR is not enough but Exmor would be enough. And from there you realize that tons of shots dealing with forests will be the same scenario.

While I never visit the woods, I doubt that since I have taken pictures of trees inside a hotel with a glass ceiling, and was able to correctlyexpose the directly sunlit ceiling windows and the underside of trees that were far from the windows and under bridges.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 24, 2014, 11:43:25 AM »
But...but...the DR, man...you're completely ignoring the DReaded DR issue!!!   :P

I struggle with DR all the time at high ISO.  I've never had a situation where Canon's base ISO DR was insufficient AND a couple more stops would have made it sufficient.  I've had one situation where 20 more stops would have made it sufficient, but I don't think even the lenses can support that much DR.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 23, 2014, 02:33:38 PM »

Because, there are survey results 4-5% of customers who bought the kit lens is that it does not use only kit lens.


Would indeed be interesting to see an accurate translation of this. Do 5% never buy another lens? If so that is an amazing stst

I could believe that easily 4-5% never buy another lens.  I know people with DSLRs that bought a kit and are just fine with their kit zoom.  They take pictures only once in a while such as on a trip or at some big event.  It just depends on how much they get into photography.

I sincerely doubt it means 4-5% don't buy lens(es) beyond the kit.  The lens + body sales milestones (100M lenses, 70M bodies) aren't consistent with that interpretation.

I agree.  I thought it was more like 5% do buy lenses beyond the kit lens.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 23, 2014, 02:12:36 PM »
...
I still want a TS-E14 though ;-)
If the coverage of the TS-E17 is anything to go by, a TS-E14 with any notable shift would be somewhere between huge, expensive and impossible.
Yes, I have both the TS-E17 and EF14 mk2 :-)

Impossible - I doubt it. Huge and expensive - that's fine by me ;-)

If it makes it more likely then TS-E15 at a push... ;-)

Is stitching not doable for your application?  The TS-E17 is the widest rectilinear lens available for EF mount, it's just that you can't capture the entire image circle all at once.  If you shift it all around, you can create a very, very wide (around 10mm equivalent, IIRC) panorama all without moving the lens, just the camera behind it.

7
I wonder why nobody has so far posted any pictures that show the photographed and processed results.

Anybody?






Its because the jpeg small image results are so difficult to evaluate.


The small one is a 100% crop of the big one.  I thought that would be obvious.

8
I wonder why nobody has so far posted any pictures that show the photographed and processed results.

Anybody?




9
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 DG II HSM
« on: July 22, 2014, 09:42:42 AM »
I totally lost interest in this lens when defishing my Sigma 15mm fisheye (and Tokina 10-17 zoom fisheye) became a 1-click option in Lightroom.  Still, when shooting ultrawide, I nearly always prefer the fisheye projection, so I rarely defish.

10
Yep...for the cost of one used Popsicle stick and three glue dots, in addition to the stuff I already had.


11
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 45x Zoom for Waterproof Camera
« on: July 21, 2014, 10:45:58 AM »
Stupid.

Want a useful underwater hyperzoom?

Full frame fisheye (180° diagonal) to 100mm.
You can get most of that right now by combining any of the current generation of waterproof compacts with a gopro

It's difficult for me to imagine a reason I'd ever buy a gopro.
For what it is designed for, it's the best camera out there. For everything else, it sucks. It all comes down to the right tool for the job..

For what it's designed for, I'd buy at least four of the other alternatives before a gopro - Panasonic HX-A500, Sony AS-100V, Polaroid XS100i, Mobius Action Cam.

It's not so much the camera, it's the mounting system. I have mounted one onto a kayak, a bicycle, several helmets, suction cupped it to vehicle windows and bodywork, on a pole 30 feet in the air, shot video from the canoe's perspective on portages, mounted it on tracking satellite dishes, to a stunt kite, to a quadricopter, on a Siberian husky, and even on a tripod.

People buy them more for the versatility of the mounting system than the image quality. Their marketing has been superb.... you can pick up accessories darn near anywhere, where with most of the competition you have to go to camera stores and usually order in what you want. One must look at the whole package instead of just the camera to understand why it's the world's best selling camera.

Many of those I mentioned come with mounting systems that mount them to just about anything.

I was thinking about mounting one to a high-speed model airplane, but the gopro is too boxy and unaerodynamic.  In fact, it would nearly double the total profile drag of the entire airplane, thereby defeating the whole purpose.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 45x Zoom for Waterproof Camera
« on: July 21, 2014, 09:28:35 AM »
Stupid.

Want a useful underwater hyperzoom?

Full frame fisheye (180° diagonal) to 100mm.
You can get most of that right now by combining any of the current generation of waterproof compacts with a gopro

It's difficult for me to imagine a reason I'd ever buy a gopro.
For what it is designed for, it's the best camera out there. For everything else, it sucks. It all comes down to the right tool for the job..

For what it's designed for, I'd buy at least four of the other alternatives before a gopro - Panasonic HX-A500, Sony AS-100V, Polaroid XS100i, Mobius Action Cam.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 45x Zoom for Waterproof Camera
« on: July 20, 2014, 04:13:33 AM »
Stupid.

Want a useful underwater hyperzoom?

Full frame fisheye (180° diagonal) to 100mm.
You can get most of that right now by combining any of the current generation of waterproof compacts with a gopro

It's difficult for me to imagine a reason I'd ever buy a gopro.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 45x Zoom for Waterproof Camera
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:14:33 AM »
Stupid.

Want a useful underwater hyperzoom?

Full frame fisheye (180° diagonal) to 100mm.

15
Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 16, 2014, 09:54:47 PM »
By far the biggest hole is a lens between the sub $2,000ish 100-400 / 400/5.6 / 300/4 etc. and the over $7,000 300/2.8.

That hole is absolutely gaping, and only filled by third parties with lenses like the Sigma 120-300/2.8.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 44