October 01, 2014, 05:02:58 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 - sailingsilkeborg

Pages: [1] 2
1
EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 01:14:31 PM »
... I really expect it to be closer to 5000 or 6000.

For a crop sensor? Who would pay that price?

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: December 03, 2013, 05:08:29 PM »
"Myself and Bryan... were told by Canon..."?

I don't like to be too nit-picky about grammar, since this site is supposed to be far more about photography and gear than it is about English, but... "Myself and Bryan..."? You've got to be kidding. How about, "Canon told Bryan and me..."?

3
Thanks for your thoughts, K3nt.

4
Hello, I'm planning to take some early morning photos of a friend, running on a dirt road as the sun rises, at a distance of about 30 yards from her, with a goal of having the background blurred. The hope is to come up with some shots that can be blown up; the kind you might see in a running shoes store of a runner in training, except this is for her, and not commecial purposes. I'll be using a Canon 5D Mark II, and a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 that's not image stabilized, on a tripod. I'm generally aware of the 5D Mark II's limitations in taking action photograhy/ sports shots, but  that's what I have to work with, and I have no real experience at this type of shot. I'm thinking shutter priority, with shutter speed of 1/1000, ISO at probably 800, and am planning on setting the AF to Al Servo, with her in the center of the frame and using the center focus point. She will be running toward me, and the sun will be at my back and in her face, as it rises.

Can any of you give me any pointers on obvious flaws in this game plan, or obvious things I can do to have a better chance of getting some shots in focus with background blurred? I would really appreciate it. Thanks.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D MKII Used?
« on: October 02, 2012, 01:02:03 PM »
In my opinion, to pay $1400 for a 5D Mark II with 43,000 actuations is a bit high. You can get one now brand new with zero actuations for $1799, and my guess is that the price drop and the move to clear out inventories of the 5D Mark II will markedly affect the Ebay price soon, and quite possibly make used 5D Mark II's with just a few thousand actuations available for the price you are considering. Even though the camera is built to live considerably longer than it has thus far, forty three thousand actuations is quite a bit more than a mere test drive. I think that seller is going to soon have trouble moving the camera because there'll be so many others available at nearly the same price but a fraction of the actuations.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Brand New 5d3 with 1500 shutter counts.
« on: May 14, 2012, 04:41:25 PM »
It's mind boggling to me to read comments to the effect that it's not a big deal to get a used camera with 1500 actuations (sold as though it's brand new), because the total shutter life of the camera is going to be much much more than that.

The law in my state and 2 adjoining states is directly contrary to that proposition, as the law should be.

It would be better for us all if those few who hold this notion just send periodic cash donations to manufacturers to help them with their bottom line. The last thing in the world that I need is for commercial producers of consumer goods to start making the exaggerated claim that "most people" now think a little bit of prior, undisclosed use of "new" products is alright, as long as there's just not "too much" prior use. A more vague, ready-for-abuse criteria for "new" could hardly be imagined. Just as you're either you're pregnant, or you're not, a product sold as brand new is either brand new, or it's not. And if you see other retailers "doing it too," you should be calling them because it's blatantly illegal in the several states whose law I'm familiar with, and probably in yours, too.

7
I don't see anything harsh or out of line about the OP's view on this. This isn't about being a "good guy" or demonstrating that you can grin and bear the small stuff. And it's not about expecting a perfect product, either. It's about the expectation that for your money, which here, is plenty, you'll receive what we call a "merchantable" product.

The light leak seems to admittedly be a flaw, correctable or not. With all bigger money DSLR's, the manufacturer of the product needs to know that flaws that are incompatible with the basic object of the product aren't going to be considered small stuff. Likewise, loyalists and people that pride themselves in "not sweating the small stuff" can be mum if they choose to, but they shouldn't be squelching polite commentary about such issues. Trust me, manufacturers need to know that customer satisfaction and loyalty do not go so far as to make flaws or errors off limits to discussion. At the end of the day, if you expect less, you'll get less.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: The Big Megapixel Body in 2013?
« on: April 18, 2012, 02:14:25 PM »
"There’s a big price gap between the 5D Mark III at $3500 and the 1D X at $6799 that I think needs filled. APS-H is dead, so something has to go in there around $4500-$5000."

I don't follow the suggestion that Canon could price a high megapixel DSLR at $4500-$5000, when a 36 MP Nikon is available at $2999. There must be more to the thinking on what the Canon would offer, besides high MP.

9
I went to the store of a major retailer that also runs a major online camera/electronics site (One Call) at 1:00 PST, and they did not know what the camera was going to retail at, nor what dealer cost is going to be. The sales guy checked their internal pricing data base and could only tell me "it may be around $3500" retail. That may be where it ends up, but he clearly did not know for sure even now. He didn't invite me to "preorder" at that price, even though he knows I'm a serious buyer.

You're talking about one salesman at a shop, and I'm sure he'll tell you tomorrow that you can preorder for $3500.  And do you have a personal relationship with these people or are you just another customer walking into a photo store?  Is this store one of the 17 stores that Canon chose to carry the C300?

In my situation, I know the people at the shop very well, and have spent over $20k there in the last year.  They are also the biggest canon dealer in Georgia.  They didn't invite me to do anything, I went in there with $4k and demanded that I get one of the first ones they get.  They wouldn't take my money, but they put me on the list.  I asked if they thought it might be any cheaper or more expensive, and they said no, not to worry because they already had the SKU in the computer for it, $3499.99.

People have been saying $3500 all over the web and they said the same thing, meaning that is the set price until proven otherwise.  I go to the shop, and they say $3500.  If that's not enough for someone to believe that it's going to be $3500, they must really really want it to be cheaper.  See when you really want something, you'll cling onto any little shred of evidence that you may be right.  Even if you read 10 articles contradicting your belief, you'll only focus on the one article you found just to hold on to that little piece of hope.  It's called confirmation bias, and if you have a brain this affects you, and that's ok, it affects me too.  But in this situation I am indifferent, if it cost $4000 I wouldn't care, and if it cost $3000 I wouldn't care. 
I was just about to write a "jump back, dude" response to this, when it occurred to me that you probably thought I was a doubting Thomas about your preorder experience, rather than just a guy who had a contrasting experience at a different location. Sorry if you took it that way, that's not what was intended. 

10
I went to the store of a major retailer that also runs a major online camera/electronics site (One Call) at 1:00 PST, and they did not know what the camera was going to retail at, nor what dealer cost is going to be. The sales guy checked their internal pricing data base and could only tell me "it may be around $3500" retail. That may be where it ends up, but he clearly did not know for sure even now. He didn't invite me to "preorder" at that price, even though he knows I'm a serious buyer.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III - Body Price At Announcement
« on: February 29, 2012, 02:23:26 PM »
With the specs that are being most frequently bandied about right now, I predict $2999-- maybe a little less, but not more.

And in the unlikely (my view) event it's priced at $3500, Canon will be making a big pricing blunder unless the thing has the 1X AF system and well over 6FPS.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: The new 5D Mark III ?!?! PICS!
« on: February 29, 2012, 01:12:48 PM »
The term "DR" was coined not so much to describe the attributes of a high end camera body, as his body ;
In his presence there is more zoom in the approach of the opposite sex than in the world's finest lenses... 

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Search on 5D mark iii with B&H provides a hint
« on: February 24, 2012, 12:04:38 PM »
"This brings up a couple of points:
1. This error message appears specially crafted for the mark III.  The capitalization has changed."

Changed from what? Doesn't the 5D Mark II itself have "upper case" Roman numerals on the body?

14
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 05:27:07 PM »
Those of you who are fretting that there will be no deals and no reasonable used market prices on 5D II's are getting too uptight, too fast. In a perfect economic world, where all sellers are well informed and rational, one 5D II "good deal" in a blue moon might be an accurate prediction. But while the market for higher end DSLR's may include a disproportionate number of educated owner/sellers, still, it isn't a perfectly informed, rational economic world. Even otherwise rational sellers get motivated at times and for reasons that defy explanation. In addition, and more basically, not everybody is the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree. As PT Barnum (or somebody) once said, there's another sucker born every minute. That goes for sellers, as well as buyers. Breath deep, seek peace, and you will find that bargain 5D II. 

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Can someone debunk this Peter Lik picture... PLEASE!!!
« on: February 03, 2012, 08:18:59 PM »
"Who gives a flying f%&K whether he doctors, manipulates, combines or blends frames to come up with his shots?  I certainly don't.  You either like his stuff or you don't. You like the guy or you don't. 
With all due respect some of the posters on this thread need to get out more / take more photographs / be more personally creative / get a girlfriend (delete as applicable)."

Once again, the issue isn't manipulation of the image, post-processing or any of those things. Listen carefully: many people believe that if you're going to write up a breathless epiphany about what you did to capture a photo, it ought to contain some semblance of the truth about what you did to capture the photo. The problem here isn't manipulation of the image or images, it's the   disingenuous description that seems clearly to be designed to create the false impression that the image consists of one click, one photo. Several dozen posters have rather convincingly described why that cannot be so.

I'm quite OK with the notion that if you choose to talk, what you say ought to be true. Whoever pointed out the difference between declaring you're the King of England, vs. merely taking a photo of yourself wearing a crown, made the point quite well. And I don't think I need to be a professional (which I'm not) to have the right to an opinion about the need for some basic integrity, even among obvious self-promoters. 

Pages: [1] 2