October 01, 2014, 02:54:46 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 - CarlMillerPhoto

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?
« on: September 29, 2014, 12:37:14 PM »
I am guessing that Canon will not abandon that audience but rather try to develop features that continues to give wedding and event photographers using canon a competitive advantage. It seems to me the biggest problem these photographers have today is that brides want pictures up on Facebook immediately (as in before the ceremony ends) and their friends can do it with their cellphones more quickly than the person they are paying to shoot the wedding can do it. The first manufacturer who can help pro photographers get images posted to social media as quickly and seamlessly as the wedding guest using an iPhone will have a winner in the marketplace. That's the sort of thing that will sell cameras, not megapixels, dynamic range, etc.

At first glance, I was onboard with that idea, but after thinking about it I have completely changed my mind. Everyone knows camera phone pictures are quickly digested. They are visual fast food. I wouldn't want to associate my photography with that, nevermind the fact that directly uploaded images won't be properly edited. I think it's good that couples are waiting to see their professional pictures. It's an implicit demonstration that a lot of work goes into creating them. Additionally, I rarely see a bride on her phone during her wedding, so at best her friends will see it. And anyone who still has a Facebook page for their business knows what a profit hungry platform it is now, forcing you to "boost" page posts to get them seem. So, even if you do get them uploaded quickly it'll only be to a limited audience. Long story short, pro photogs shouldn't be worried about competing with camera phones. If a bride really wants to see her pictures right away, she can pay extra for a reception slideshow.

All that being said, the 5D IV sure as heck better have wifi/NFC built in. They can do some good ol' fashioned engineering and move around the supposed obstacles.

I assume that what Sigma does with their wonky copies is the same that Canon does with their wonky copies which is pretty close to what Nikon does with their wonky copies....


Perhaps the percentage of returned lenses is much less than what one would guess from reading online reviews and blogs?


The vast, vast majority of those with a Sigma Art lens don't have issues. There's another common variable that might be to blame for those who go through three of four copies.... ::)

Lenses / Re: Which L prime will be the first Canon upgrade?
« on: September 25, 2014, 06:42:28 PM »
I'm going to say 35mm f/1.4, because it was the first to be challenged by Sigma's Art line.

Is it standard operating procedure now for companies to put out a press release that their products are simply being used?

My guess is that the producers of the film shopped around for a company willing to partner with them. Canon is probably giving them the C500's and 1Dc's at either reduced cost or at zero cost in an attempt to beef up the Cinema Line's reputation.


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC Gets First Test
« on: September 22, 2014, 06:44:57 PM »
I love what Tamron has been doing with their zoom lenses.

I wonder why Canon seems incapable of making a standard and UWA f/2.8 zoom with IS.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 22, 2014, 01:24:54 PM »
This is good news if it is indeed in reference to a FF mirrorless mount. Canon really can't shrink camera and lens size down if they're forced to maintain the EF flange distance. They'd be smart to follow Sony's lead in regard to the A and E mount, as the lack of a good mirrorless system is holding Canon back IMO. 

And it won't be hard at all for Canon to offer an EF adapter for this new mount. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 03:14:35 AM »
I think they'll "answer" Sony on a tech/feature level, but not on a price-point level. I think Canon is okay letting go of the budget/indie filmmaker. I don't know the revenue that market brings in for them, but perhaps it's irrelevant. Maybe it's purely a branding decision (i.e. Canon doesn't want to be associated with the low-end video market). Maybe they're okay letting every student filmmaker, wedding videographer, and individual that's getting started in video go to other brands. Perhaps the same person in charge of video strategy also heads Canon's mirrorless strategy  ::)

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 02:09:35 AM »
DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

Lol. You yourself don't even believe those purchasing a C300 are doing so because of DPAF. Troll.

My mistake. I guess you're just bad at getting your point across:

My point wasn't that people are buying the C300 for DPAF, but that Canon...decided to offer DPAF as a feature upgrade on a $12000 camera aimed at the professional market.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 19, 2014, 09:12:22 PM »
Here is my take on Canon and their video DSLR.

If Canon want to do the smart thing they will bet some money on Cinema EOS line. Where I am from the C300 has been hugely popular among production companies and broadcasters.

The main reason I think is that it bridged gap between the DSLR and the large sensor camcorders. If you have worked with a ENG camera, you know how a camera should feel and work, if you want to an effective tool.
We want to use all our Canon glass with a large sensor, but the DSLR hassle can get tiredsome. The answer have been C300 for the most part.

If think Canon have a good chance to cement their position in this market if they make an effort with the Cinema EOS line.

On the other hand, if the 5d Mark IV is a complete game changer, it might turn out different, but I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet. .

The thing is, the market for video DSLRs and the market for the Cinema EOS cameras are not the same market. They never were. A dude may stretch his wallet to get a 5D to shoot some short films, but there was no way that guy was ever going to pony up $15 grand for a C300.

Literally all Canon had to do to own the micro budget marketplace was to take all of the existing components of a 5D and put them into a more video-centric ergonomic body, and throw in the Magic Lantern video features as software. That's it. That's what people have been begging Canon for these last four or five years. They didn't have to create new sensors or even 4k recording, any of that. But they never built it. Instead they came out with cameras that had most of those features but priced $10k above people's reach, so only actual production companies could afford it.

Now, even if Canon did come out with a Cinema 5D tomorrow, it would be too late. The tech has moved way beyond it, way beyond what even the Cinema EOS line is capable of, and for far less money. There isn't a single thing that the 5D or 7DII can do with video that isn't done better by somebody else, for the same price or less.

That's the bottom line.

This. +1

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 19, 2014, 09:04:17 PM »
It's [7d mk II] now the leader in video image quality compared to the entire competition under 5000$ C100/FS100 league, markedly in low-light performance (D7100, K3, A6000).

Are you trolling?

The 7d mk II is at the BOTTOM compared to the competition, and it just came out. The 7d has mushy, detail-less footage like the rest of the Canon DSLRs. The A7s, GH4, A600, A5100, Black Magic Pocket Cam...they all destroy this brand new camera. Yes, it might have better ISO performance, but who cares when the image looks like crap anyway. And what about focus peaking, zebras, c-log, etc? They're all absent, and I'm so over depending on Magic Lantern to make Canon's viable for video.

Unless Canon has something up its sleeve for an affordable Cinema EOS cam, they're letting all their budget-minded filmmakers go to other brands. Tugela said it perfect:

It is possible that Canon think that maybe they can get people to buy two separate cameras, and therefore get revenue from that customer twice, but I doubt it is going to work if that is their plan. The people who want both functions want cameras that can do both, they don't want to carry two completely separate kits around with them. Professionals might, but consumers and prosumers generally will not. And since cameras such as the 5 and 7 series are marketed at the consumer/prosumers, Canon are basically shooting themselves in the foot and literally handing market share (for those who want both functions) over to competitors like Panasonic, Sony and Samsung. And make no mistake, those companies are going to use the opportunity to get their foot in the door, and once that foot is in, the rest of the body is sure to follow.

EOS Bodies / Re: AE-1 Styled DSLR from Canon?
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:09:34 PM »
Only the hopelessly-hip would like the hokey-hybrid-viewfinder that Fuji uses. It took the X-T1 for me to take Fuji seriously.

I haven't used the X-Pro but the X-E1/2 are incredible for what they are.  The X-T1 is fantastic as well.  Fuji is playing it really smart by carving out their third party niche in the retro-stylish camera world instead of trying to out-DSLR Canikon.  The lens lineup/roadmap complements the cameras perfectly with top-notch, fast standard primes and great quality standard zooms. Their customer support and dedication to keep updating older models' firmware along with the new really builds trust in the ecosystem.  If I didn't do bird/wildlife photography primarily, subjects where they obviously can't compete, I would drop Canon completely for Fuji. They make really good stuff!

+1. The X-T1 would be my dream camera if it was FF. And I hear their 56mm f/1.2 is what the Canon 85 f/1.2 II would be if it could focus faster.

However, I really need EF glass for the video work I do. I don't have the money to have video AND photo lenses, each on different systems. Here's hoping Metabones makes an EF to X-mount Speedbooster.

EOS Bodies / AE-1 Styled DSLR from Canon?
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:29:40 PM »
Maybe some don't, but I think many of us love the feel and process of using a film SLR. Rotating through the shutter speeds. Deciding to set and burn 160 ASA film at 100 for slight overexposure when shooting portraits. Being able to see all your camera's settings without having to look at an LCD. Nikon tried to appeal to this sentiment with their Df, but fell short and ended up with a messy hybrid. Fuji seems to be doing it right, and I've been eye-balling the X-T1, if only based on aesthetics. I want Canon to put out something similar. I'd love to see an AE-1 styled digital body with at least the specs below:

  • Full Frame (6d sensor maybe?)
  • Shutter Speed Dial
  • ISO Dial
  • Exposure Comp Dial
  • LP-E6 battery, if possible
  • PC Sync port
  • No pop-up flash
  • Replaceable focus screens

Who else is interested in this sort of Camera?

PowerShot / Re: Official: Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:17:12 PM »
Why is Canon so in love with 20.2 mp sensors?

Price for the new battery and Wifi/LAN adapter is a joke.

Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 15, 2014, 12:12:11 PM »
I'm actually glad to see Canon releasing a lens like this. Seems affordable FF is at least one trend they're willing to support.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9