November 29, 2014, 12:14:09 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 - Sella174

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53
1
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 28, 2014, 11:16:26 AM »
7D2?

... did Canon release any camera's in 2014 in time to be evaluated for this article that fit into any of the categories?

My take on this is either that a few "list compilers" view the 7D2 as unworthy, or that Canon's wonderful marketing dept. flubbed big on the release date of the 7D2, or both.

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMKII Focus keeper rate ideas?
« on: November 28, 2014, 11:05:09 AM »
I am a big fan of job-creation.  ;)

Most companies are not big fans of increased labor costs.  Those costs are passed on to the consumer.  So, I guess you're also a big fan of higher prices.

I am also a fan of lower crime rates, which would lead to lower/zero insurance premiums ... thereby reducing the total cost of ownership.

3
Funny, I am seeing quite a lot fulltime wedding, portrait and landscape photographers in my vincity, who use 5D mk2 bodies with 17-40, 24-70 mk1 and 70-200 mk1 lenses, while making a living and creating spectacular images. I guess somebody should tell them the wrong of their ways :P

Obviously.

Question to be asked is why haven't they "upgraded" yet?

Probably because it doesn't matter, as their current gear is good enough and will remain good enough for quite a few more years. So if someone "switches" to Sony now and Sony discontinues the line three years into the future, but the gear remains sufficient then there's no real issue/problem with its continued use and so again there is no "huge price hit".

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMKII Focus keeper rate ideas?
« on: November 28, 2014, 04:59:54 AM »
I don't know what the scope is for automating this process, would it require quite a high human interaction to mount and dismount each item, thinking lens release button?

I am a big fan of job-creation.  ;)

I would imagine that each machine would be costly, plus use a lot of floor space, thinking test an 800mm lens, plus there would be a requirement for more than one of each, routine calibration etc, I still see the price climbing, though possibly by a much smaller margin.

Canon either already has dedicated assembly lines for each and every lens in production; or Canon produces lenses in batches, adjusting the assembly line each time. (I remember reading an article on how Henschel built locomotives in the 1930's ... )

5
And in the world of photography.

If you jump ship today... sell off all your Canon or Nikon gear and then 2 or 3 years down the line Sony BetaMaxes/Vaios/XBRs the Alphas and sticks to making sensors and other devices for other manufacturers... what happens to your gear?  Will you take a huge price hit trying to get back into Nikon / Canon or who ever is now the market?  Or do you just say how great your camera was back in the day and try and justify that you don't need the latest. 

No. For any (real) professional photographer, their gear are tools. Only, they are tools that must be kept up to date to provide their clients with the best possible product. This means that even if a professional photographer does stick to one brand (e.g. Canon), she/he will anyway be replacing their gear in three-four year cycles.

For example, any professional photographer worth his/her salt have upgraded their 24-70mm from the Mark I to the Mark II. Same with the 70-200mm lens. The same will be with the 100-400mm lens. Now when we start looking at cameras, we see that real pros have all upped from the 5D2 to the Mark III. Or from the 1D4 to the 1DX.

So if a real professional photographer is anyway constantly replacing gear as new models/marks/versions are introduced by their chosen brand, then it becomes a small mental jump to realise that "switching" brands (or rather "mixing" brands) is not really such a financial disaster as most enthusiasts think.

Therefore, if a real professional photographer "switches" to Sony and Sony terminates the product-line after three years, then the professional just "switches" to another brand. He/she then uses that brand, possibly upgrading within it for a few years ... and then maybe "switches" again.

On the other end of the scale, most enthusiasts, nearly all of which have invested in lenses they do not really need, will take a financial hit. But then, they've already set themselves up for that hit due to GAS.

Did I take a financial hit when "switching"? No ... actually, I came out of the deal with heaps of extra dinero because I realised I did not have to replace certain lenses due to (a) me not using them very much and (b) a replacement lens incorporating the abilities of at least two-three previous lenses.

6
Photography Technique / Re: Share 3x your own advice to yourself!
« on: November 27, 2014, 02:32:57 PM »
Apart from the excellent advice already mentioned and not to repeat anything, these are lower on my list:

- Develop a distinctive style of photography;
- Camera gear isn't an investment; and
- Zoom lenses generally suck / primes are the best lenses.

7
It has the potential to be the most revolutionary and disruptive technological development on the horizon.

No need for ...

No more ...

...

[joke]No more ... you?[/joke]

8
... the graphic shows a small increase in dSLR market share from now to 2017.

You actually measured it? With a ruler or calipers?

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMKII Focus keeper rate ideas?
« on: November 27, 2014, 01:33:21 PM »
Any professional-grade equipment must work 100% perfectly straight out of the box.

That's a nice pipe dream.  Cinematographers spend substantial time calibrating new lenses costing tens of thousands of dollars.

Are you a cinematographer that spends valuable time calibrating new lenses because the manufacturer didn't do it (properly)? Are you even a cinematographer? Unless you can answer yes to both questions, then what you wrote is hearsay and of absolutely no value whatsoever.

I think it is more of a lowering-production-cost-through-lowering-quality-control situation. I never had any problems when using old Canon lenses on my old Canon cameras (film and digital). Only when I started purchasing/borrowing new lenses did I encounter focusing issues - all of which could have been corrected using AFMA, which my old cameras did not possess.

It's more of a your-old-gear-lacked-sufficient-resolution-to-make-the-problems-evident situation.

A yes, the old standard put-down. Give it rest, it's getting really old ... and totally redundant, because I do own new photographic gear ... just not Canon.

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMKII Focus keeper rate ideas?
« on: November 27, 2014, 01:12:16 PM »
I just showed this thread to a psychologist who's used to working with obstinate and "damaged" children; she almost wet herself and asked to borrow the bathroom. I don't know if it was from laughter, or if she got a glimpse of future revenues...

The trouble with "rules" on forums are that they only prohibit the ridicule of an individual, and not that of several (unnamed) individuals as a group.

That said, if your psychologist had that reaction from this thread, then she's obviously not ready for the real world.

11
All I can say is...WOW. I'm hooked on the NX1!! :P I think it may be my new high speed birding camera some time next year, assuming the lenses pan out. I think I'd get this before I got an A7r even...as I am well and truly impressed.

...an APS-C with BETTER IQ than an FF?? Noo! Say it ain't so! :P

I think Sony has a real competitor. Samsung is another electronics powerhouse...I am very curious to see how they do in the marketplace. I love that they have produced a DSLR-style mirrorless body, instead of some micro-cramped body like the Sony A7 series. I think it is much more along the lines of what I have been looking for, and in comparison to the 7D II...it seems the NX1 tops it in just about every category except lens selection (and, if the adapters work well, that may not even be an issue...and certainly won't be an issue for terribly long, as Samsung is already working on some nice big white supertelephoto lenses.)

Are you the same jrista who so vehemently crossed swords with me a few months ago?

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMKII Focus keeper rate ideas?
« on: November 27, 2014, 11:19:01 AM »
Hi Sella.

Howdy.

I read posts like this and realise you either have bottomless pockets stuffed with money or lack a clear understanding of manufacturing tolerances.

The bolded statement I do not understand, giving what you explain later on in the same post (quoted below).

To have to calibrate a lens to a body is in my opinion not only acceptable but necessary. Each body and each lens are made to a plus or minus tolerance, measured in 0.01 or 0.001mm or even smaller! If both lens and body are middle limit, or out in complementary directions, ie the tolerances cancel all will be fine, if they are out in the other direction the tolerances are additive, I suspect each lens and each body is allowed + or - 10 AFMA POINTS and given this, a worst case scenario could see you needing all 20 AFMA points. (I don't know how many bits of a mm = 1 AFMA point)
To halve the tolerance range could add a significant percentage (I don't know how much so I won't quantify it) to the cost through extra manufacturing time and component scrapage! And then what you still have a tolerance, yes smaller, and still need to calibrate! So halve the tolerance again, can you see where this is going? Except the next reduction will cost more than the first reduction!
[..]14 yrs toolmaking working to tenths of a thousandth of an inch so I know a bit about increase of time with lower limits and scrapage rates.[..]

True. Now apply it in reverse: Double the tolerance and you reduce the production cost by a significant percentage (unknown, as you stated) due to a lower scrapping rate.

Personally I'd sooner be able to afford a camera and lenses and calibrate than dream about equipment that is perfect, + or - 0.0000000mm and doesn't need calibration.

I partly agree. Canon, as an example, could use a larger tolerance criterion for the "Rebel" to reduce cost, but must then offer AFMA in those models. In "professional"-grade gear (both cameras and lenses), although also offering AFMA, it should not be necessary because of the more accurate machining of the mechanical/physical parts.

But that's just my opinion. I like good stuff that work 100% out of the box and don't mind paying extra for that convenience.

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 27, 2014, 06:45:25 AM »
Is there any info from Fujifilm re. possible impact on shortest X-Sync speed?

I am not into flash photography, but the manual for the X-T1 states that "[t]he flash will synchronize with the shutter at shutter speeds of 1/180s or slower".

14
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 27, 2014, 06:17:47 AM »
Canon G1 X II has optional 2.36 MPix EVF...

[cheesy]That EVF is probably just a rebranded Olympus VF-4 (which uses the EPSON EVF) ... they even look the same![/cheesy]

15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7DMKII Focus keeper rate ideas?
« on: November 27, 2014, 05:47:09 AM »
In my experience (just Canon) it works almost always right out of the box. But I see your point. Is this just how cameras are or there is a QC issue? Is this not same with other brands of cameras?

I think it is more of a lowering-production-cost-through-lowering-quality-control situation. I never had any problems when using old Canon lenses on my old Canon cameras (film and digital). Only when I started purchasing/borrowing new lenses did I encounter focusing issues - all of which could have been corrected using AFMA, which my old cameras did not possess.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 53