August 23, 2014, 01:22:20 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 ... 52
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Update on the EOS 7D Mark II Spec List
« on: Today at 11:02:30 AM »
Funny , all this fuss about a consumer camera . Dreamers discuss specs on plastic consumer cameras like the 7d, Real photographers just buy the pro body , ie. the Canon 1dx . Nuff said

What a dumb thing to say.

The 7D and the 1D series have about the same ratio of plastic to metal (it's pretty high, actually).

I know lots of pros who will not use the 1D series because of the idiotic built-in grip.

The 7D will crush the 1Dx when it comes to focal length or magnification limited situations.

2
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: Today at 10:59:15 AM »
The beauty of the 400 prime over the zoom is size/weight and image quality, as well as it would be cheaper.

A new 100-400L would very likely improve over the old one in size, weight, and image quality, and improve for Canon in cost.   ;D

As in 'improve' you mean 'more' I think? I also think a new 100-400 will be bigger and heavier especially if it's twist zoom.

All the newer teles have gotten lighter.  I expect the same.

3
oh and my two cents about the ongoing DR debate here:

1) for me it appears to be mainly some swaggering by different sides about who knows most about signal processing or on-chip circuitry. My "blabla indicator" beeps all the time while reading these posts.
2) this debate has nothing to do with the actual discussing of 7D rumors
3) the whining about "I'm not able to get decent photos until the DR finally improves... :'( :'( :'(" sssh! If the professional photographers get to know about the horrific DR issue with canon cameras, they will move to Nikon or Sony! AAAH! (For some reaons, they still stick to Canon despite this horrible horrible low DR...). Go outside, take beautiful pictures, be happy. Don't ever waste a thought about DR. I presume limited DR is not the reason if your pictures look bad for 95% of your pictures...

DR is a huge problem for me, but not at base ISO.  Given the choice between getting 15 stops of DR at base ISO and getting 11 stops at ISO 6400, I'd take the later in a heartbeat.

4
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: Today at 10:13:33 AM »
The beauty of the 400 prime over the zoom is size/weight and image quality, as well as it would be cheaper.

A new 100-400L would very likely improve over the old one in size, weight, and image quality, and improve for Canon in cost.   ;D

5
Just a few thoughts:

With the 70D, Canon introduced a new sensor, which was quite revolutionary with its two photodiode layout.
Do you really, really believe, that they will produce an entirely, completely new sensor for the 7D after having included their new, in some terms ground-breaking, DPAF sensor in...let me count... exactly one body?

They could use the same basic pixel design and use a different readout system like on-chip A-to-D's, one per column.  That would provide the same shot noise but improved read noise.  Or, maybe the DIGIC 6 has improved readout.

6
PowerShot / Re: New Large Sensor PowerShot Rumor [CR2]
« on: Today at 09:15:20 AM »
Any news on the SX60?

7
PowerShot / Re: New Large Sensor PowerShot Rumor [CR2]
« on: Today at 09:14:49 AM »
The S120 is too big.  Size and shape wise, my Elph 500HS is just perfect.  The rounded and beveled corners really make a difference as far as comfort in your pocket goes.  Now, if I could get an S120, even with a 1/1.7" sensor in that size and shape, that would be something I'd buy.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Update on the EOS 7D Mark II Spec List
« on: Today at 09:11:44 AM »
What about a hybrid viewfinder for video?  What about variable windowing or at least 1:1 crop more in video?

9
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: Today at 09:09:10 AM »
The thorn in my side is a new version of the 400 5.6L. The oldest lens in the line up now yet to be re-worked
IS plus a closer min focus.
Thank you please Canon

In my view, there's no need if the do they 100-400L II properly.

10
Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: Today at 09:07:46 AM »
I wanted a 100-400L replacement in 2005!

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Update on the EOS 7D Mark II Spec List
« on: Today at 09:06:51 AM »
24MP is better.  6000x4000 pixels just works better with my sense of mathematical beauty!

Come on, Canon, I'm tired of 3504 and 4368 pixel sensors.  Heck, my compacts are 4000x3000!

 :)

12
ISO 16000?  When have they ever limited out at a place between 1 full stop increments from 100?

I didn't notice until now, but the original post has changed this to 12,800.

13
BTW Interesting that the CR list does not mention the sensor size...

That's because it goes without saying that any 7D replacement would have the same size sensor as a 7D.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 11:07:45 PM »
Actually, the use of Dual DIGIC 6 makes me really think that there is NO more magic cooked into the sensor, and that all the "magic" is happening after the signal is pulled OFF the sensor. It's probably roughly the same sensor that employs a slightly new DPAF design, and probably has a very weak or no AA filter, but is otherwise unchanged from the 70D. DIGIC 6, which actually came out before Sony BionzX, actually has a LOT of the same capabilities, and is the primary reason the IQ on their smaller form factor cameras is good. They really cook the signal coming off the sensor.

Since DIGIC 6 supposedly allows frame rates to 14fps and 60fps video, why would they need two of them?  Dual pixel works okay on the 70D with just one DIGIC 5+.

Not positive but doesn't the 1dx have dual digic and one is to process images the other for for AF?  Could that be what is going on for the 7d2?

Could be, but those are DIGIC 5+ chips.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 10:50:19 PM »
I'm not talking about DxO's reporting of DR, I'm talking about computing real well capacity and read noise from DxO's measurements.  DxO's interpretation of their own data is pretty much total crap, and I never visit their site.  But the raw measurements are useful if properly interpreted.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 52