July 29, 2014, 11:24:24 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 - dgatwood

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 38

Is your camera set to use back-button autofocus?

EOS Bodies / Re: Photokina 2014
« on: Today at 08:30:29 PM »
Lol Canon 18Mpx sensor made it to most rubbish bottom model 1200D. Why do you expect they repeat this and put the same sensor into 750D and M3?

Rolls eyes, how many times...   Repeat after me, "there's more to a camera performance than just the megapixel count !" Now say it over 500 times

But when it comes to consumer demand, you might as well be arguing the megahertz myth.  It didn't work then, and it won't work now.

Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 28, 2014, 03:16:32 PM »
2014 is the Yeah of the Lens!*

*disclaimer: may actually be next year

I'm assuming this has zero bearing on the (rumored) upcoming 100-400mm ii... I'd feel more confident if there reports of the current 100-400mm being discontinued like the 7D.
If anything, it basically confirms the 100-400. It won't be a new 200/300/400mm prime. It wont be an update to the 55-250, 18-135, etc (all just recently done with STM). So, what does that really leave?

I guess they could update the 15-85 or 17-55, but I'd doubt that. And they just re-did all their wide and mid-range zooms, so it cant be those. Basically only leaves the 28-135 and the 100-400. And since there really isnt any room for a 28-135 update...

I'd love it if they updated the 28–135 to be a 24–135, to be the full-frame equivalent for the 15–85.  The crop bodies got that treatment back in 2009, but the full-frame cameras don't have anything similar.  And while they're at it, they should tighten up the tolerances to fix the extreme lens creep problems (not a creep so much as a flop).  Basically turn it into a solid full-frame kit lens.

Then again, I'd love a full-frame equivalent to the 18–135 lens—basically an IS update to the 28–200.


Could be.  If they make a weather-sealed version that is shorter when closed (even if it's just a nonfunctional, heavily vignetted mess below 120mm with a pushbutton stop to prevent you from accidentally zooming it that wide), I'd be interested.

Now there's something I don't get.  My 70–300L is 5.6" long, and that's barely practical to carry in a normal camera bag.  How do people deal with carrying lenses that are half again longer than that when retracted?  And why do manufacturers build lenses that are so impractical when it would be trivial to make them retract to a shorter length?

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 27, 2014, 11:48:03 AM »
So, there is no official mention of a high-resolution camera by Canon.

But Canon must respond to the D800/E and a7R.  Canon must respond because (1) the 5DIII outsold the D800, and the a7R isn't really competitive in the relative sales numbers, and (2) Nikon responded by trying to boost sales with an incremental update and Sony responded by releasing a model with 1/3 the resolution.  So everyone can see why Canon must deliver a high resolution sensor, right?!?

I wonder if it would be possible to make the 1DX2 as a 60 megapixel camera and run it in "crop mode" where it uses the central part of the sensor for reach, "full mode" for those monstrously large files, and "bin mode" where a 2X2 bin would give you a 15Mpixel camera with good low light performance, or even a 3X3 bin mode for a 7Mpixel camera with really good low light performance. ?

I think they need to take advantage of the fact that the amount of information you get from each pixel effectively decreases as the pixel density increases.  Most of the photo won't have high-resolution components with any real intensity, so it ought to be possible to come up with a hybrid compression scheme that reflects this reality and nets you lots of compression losslessly.  I'm just not sure what that compression scheme would look like.

Is everyone saying that it is working using the 'ipod touch' as the OP?

I wish I could talk to the engineering team who developed it to give some very direct feedback about UX

You and everybody else who has ever used the Wi-Fi feature in any way, shape, or form.  :)

Most companies go one step further and just extend the warranty on the entire device to 90 days from the date they return it to you, but I don't think that's strictly required.

I don't think so.  No car repair place extends a 90 day warranty on a entire car after a repair.  Otherwise, we'd all be in having them fix trivial issues like a flat tire.  I'd say giving a 90 day warranty on a entire device after a repair is pretty unusual.

Just to clarify, I was talking about consumer electronics companies.  And it's not official policy even then, I don't think; it's just the way they actually tend to operate in practice.  It's particularly common among companies that do flat-rate repairs.

Lenses / Re: How many years before we see a 50L II
« on: July 26, 2014, 07:50:59 PM »
So the question is... When will Canon respond to the Sigma 50 Art with an update to the 50L?

Canon's lenses have historically had a life of somewhere between 15 and 20 years as a current product.

Expect the 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 to be updated well before the 50/1.2L.

Maybe, but probably not, unless they decide to add IS to one of them as part of an "IS everywhere" campaign.  Both are over two decades old, which tells me Canon probably doesn't care much about updating them.  They're more than good enough for low-end lenses.

Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years

Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.

Lenses / Re: Exorbitant repair costs, Canon Australia
« on: July 26, 2014, 10:54:32 AM »

This isn't a laptop, where half the cost of the device comes from a single part.  It's a lens.  You'd expect repairs to never cost more than a quarter the cost of the hardware.  If they do, you're getting screwed, and you're better off parting it out and selling the pieces on eBay for twice what it costs to buy a replacement lens.  It takes longer, but if you're seeing five hundred bucks for a lens repair, there's some massive pocket padding going on there.

No matter what, a repair shouldn't take three hours of a technician's time.  if the lens really took that much time to calibrate, it would cost a lot more than that to sell it to begin with.  I'd expect Canon to just replace an entire lens group, then send back the pieces for remanufacturing, where the parts of the lens group get put back together and calibrated in an automated fashion, just like they do during manufacturing.  This leaves just a handful of calibration adjustments that technicians actually make during most servicing.  I could be wrong.  If I am, then Canon needs to rethink their service procedures.

Photography Technique / Re: Getting photos home from overseas
« on: July 26, 2014, 10:42:51 AM »
16 GB per day is ~700+ images shooting RAW on the 1D X.  If you are awake for 16 hrs per day, that's 960 minutes.  If you actually plan to average a picture every 82 seconds, I strongly recommend that you take some time to see the sights of Europe without your view being constrained by a viewfinder.   ;)


That's also about what I average when I'm traveling, unless I'm either somewhere with little to see or I'm somewhere that I've been many times before.  It quite frequently involves periods of "Ooh, I'm at the top of [insert random building].  Let me take a thousand photos from this vantage point," interspersed with periods of much lower shooting density.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 25, 2014, 10:38:52 PM »

I'm pretty sure they would have to have permission from Canon to display their logo in this situation; I don't think it falls under fair use of the trademark.  Not every company is willing to give that permission.  Canon's absence from that list likely means very little other than that Canon is protective of their logo.  :)


He seemed to find it a weird thing to ask, but I work for a car dealership network and I'm quite sure that if we change some part on a car that's not under warranty anymore, we still have to provide some warranty on the part we installed (obviously not on wear, but on faults of the part or the work done)...

Anyway, lets hope the new shutter will hold longer
thanks and good night

If your camera was out of warranty and Canon charged you to repair it, then there is a warranty on the repair, I think its three months.  However, they do not extend the original warranty for free repairs.

Depends on where you live and how much time is left on the warranty.  For example, in California, I'm pretty sure that companies are required by law to warrant any repair for at least 90 days, whether the repair was free under warranty or not.  So if there's less than 90 days left on your warranty, the warranty on that part would be extended to 90 days.  Most companies go one step further and just extend the warranty on the entire device to 90 days from the date they return it to you, but I don't think that's strictly required.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 24, 2014, 12:19:27 PM »
The line says that 4-5% dont buy lenses other than the kit lens.

Which line?  The one in the original Japanese, or the one in the poor machine-translation of the original?   ::)

70 million cameras, 100 million lenses – 1.43 lenses/body isn't consistent with 95% of people buying additional lenses.

Actually, it is consistent.  The bad machine translation didn't say that 95% of cameras get a second lens, but rather that 95% of users do (or don't).  If a user buys a camera with a kit lens, then buys a second lens, then buys a second camera and a third lens, that person is at 1.5 lenses per body, which is pretty close to 1.43.  The user has bought non-kit lenses, but still averages less than two lenses per body.

Most users don't replace their glass as often as they replace their camera bodies.  More to the point, most people upgrade their lenses when they move to full-frame, but otherwise keep using whatever lens they got to begin with unless they have a specific reason to do otherwise (e.g. wanting more zoom range in a walk-around lens).  But they often do add another lens for more reach or for a wider wide-angle.

That said, it would not surprise me if 95% of users don't have any lenses other than the kit lens.  In fact, it seems pretty likely.  My point is that comparing the camera and lens sales don't get you any closer to knowing whether this is true or not unless you assume that one user one camera body.  :)

Lenses / Re: Buying a used lens from Adorama
« on: July 23, 2014, 09:11:18 PM »

Unless you absolutely can't live without weather sealing, I'd probably just buy the Sigma version instead.  From what I've read, it's sharper, cheaper, and has similar or better build quality....

food for thought from another topic ---http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21908.msg417183;topicseen#new ---  only 5% of the buying public buys more than 1 lens apparently.  That leaves 95% with a kit lens.  What to venture a bet as to what percentage of that 95% never even take a peek at their manual? What percentage of that 95% even knows what an AF point is?  LOL....that is why AFMA won't be in a rebel!  How many users are in P mode would end up messing with their AFMA because they have blurry shots -  because they don't know their shooting at a slow SS?  Or because the AF is locking on to other things (all point active!!!).  I would love to have more faith in humanity that this wouldn't happen, but, time and time again I get questions from the first time DSLR user and yup, theynever even opened the manual, hell they don't know where it is and ----yeah they look at me like I'm Satan for asking....I paid $$$$ for this and it should just work.  UGGGGGG....no no no no no....AFMA just has no place in the rebel line....

Actually, I'd go the opposite direction.  The Rebel bodies should have their kit lenses pre-AFMAed as part of the initial burn-in and packing process.  That way, non-advanced users won't ever even have to think about it.

and most of those people shoot in "green box" mode.... do you really want them to be doing a complex and precise calibration sequence on a tool that they do not know how to use? AFMA is hard for advanced users to get right....

Only because Canon didn't bother designing an AFMA UI that makes sense for non-advanced users.  There's nothing even slightly complex about AFMA in principle.  The UI just sucks harder than a Hoover. 

Instead, the camera should just provide a one-button-press option to recalibrate the currently attached lens, and should hide the AFMA values from the user entirely.  I would envision something like this:

Would you like to calibrate this lens?


Please set the zoom to its widest setting.


Please put the camera on a tripod and aim it at something more than 50 feet away.

[Too Close]/[OK]

I'm having trouble.  Please make sure the camera is on a tripod, aim it at something far away, then press OK.

[Too Close]/[OK]

No, seriously, you [expletive] dolt, put it on a tripod.



(At this point, it flips the mirror up and down repeatedly, focusing in alternation between live view and normal mode.  Periodically, it kicks the focus way out and repeats this process.  Then, after about twenty flips, it continues.)

Please aim the camera at something about 5 feet away, then press OK.

[Camera goes into servo focus mode.]

[Too Close]/[Too Far]/[OK]


(At this point, it flips the mirror up and down repeatedly, focusing in alternation between live view and normal mode.  Periodically, it kicks the focus way out and repeats this process.  Then, after about twenty flips, it continues.)

Please set the zoom to its narrowest setting.


Repeat these screens:
  • Please point the camera at something more than 50 feet away, then press OK.
  • Calibrating.
  • Please point the camera at something about 5 feet away, then press OK.
  • Calibrating.

Done calibrating.


That's the sort of UI that you need when designing a feature like this for end users.  From there, you calculate the mean AFMA value and the standard deviation.  Then, throw away any outliers, and recompute the mean.  If the standard deviation is too high or there are too many outliers, display the "make sure the camera is on a tripod" screen.  Otherwise, use the resulting mean (with outliers removed) as the AFMA setting.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 38