January 29, 2015, 09:45:46 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 - lw

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 27, 2015, 02:47:13 PM »

I've tried 70-200 f2.8 IS II + adapter on eos-m Vs native 22mm. AF speed is not the same. Why? I can't tell you.

Neuro confirmed his adapter + L lenses is faster then native 22mm. Maybe, other members can give their feedbacks.

Hardly a valid comparison though as it is two different lenses. It doesn't demonstrate that the adaptor makes a difference....

The fastest focusing lens I have used by far on my M is the EF-S 55-250mm IS STM - via the adaptor - it is faster focusing than any native EF-M lens hence demonstrating the adaptor has no impact I can see. My belief is because it is able to house a bigger STM motor than the EF-M lenses, and the M is optimised for STM lenses. It is faster than my EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II. Nothing to do with the adaptor AFAICS.

So, I can't see any reason that a new adaptor is needed for the M

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 27, 2015, 12:55:10 PM »
The MOST important factor for Canon to gain ground in mirrorless world is EF adapter to mirrorless. If they can come up with adapter with decent AF speed, better than current ones on the market, I think that will give Sony, Fuji etc... good run.

Enlighten me on why they need an (EF adaptor to mirrorless) "adaptor to mirrorless with decent AF speed"?

In what way does the current EF-EOS M Mount Adaptor affect "AF speed"? And how would you improve it?
Or are you talking about some other adaptor?

For Canon shooters, standard EF and L lenses are as good as gold. These lenses can still be used with EOS-M system with an adaptor, however, AF speed becomes slower.


The adaptor doesn't make AF slower though does it?
It is the EOS M body that has slower AF.  All the adaptor does is pass through the signals, doesn't it? It is just electrical contacts.
I can already put my EF and EF-S lenses on my EOS M.  I don't need a new adaptor for that.
What I need is a new EOS M AF system that focuses them quicker.

I will repeat, in what way does the current EF-EOS M Mount Adaptor affect "AF speed"?  (I am actually interested to know, as I am not aware of it.  Not keen on having to buy another adaptor as well as a new M!)


3
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 27, 2015, 10:43:24 AM »
The MOST important factor for Canon to gain ground in mirrorless world is EF adapter to mirrorless. If they can come up with adapter with decent AF speed, better than current ones on the market, I think that will give Sony, Fuji etc... good run.

Enlighten me on why they need an (EF adaptor to mirrorless) "adaptor to mirrorless with decent AF speed"?

In what way does the current EF-EOS M Mount Adaptor affect "AF speed"? And how would you improve it?

Or are you talking about some other adaptor?

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: January 27, 2015, 09:39:42 AM »

What surprises me the most is the idea that all these announcements would come together ... Is it common for Canon to release several major products like these all together? Because these all do feel like major announcements, first high MP cameras, first rectilinear lens to 11mm, the Rebel which is always their biggest seller, the M3 ... arguably lower profile, but still an important step for the future of the line. It feels like each of those would make a big enough splash if they were announced on their own, I'd be somewhat surprised to see them all announced together (or close to each other) at the risk of stealing each other's thunder ...

Perhaps they are not separate announcements.

Perhaps it is a 53mp M3 with a 11-24 F4 kit lens  ;D

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel 750D Spec List [CR1]
« on: January 23, 2015, 11:49:11 AM »
As to whether the 750D has the 70D sensor, or some new sensor, or even a sensor from another brand, I guess this is relevant
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/02/27/canon-qa-future-eos-mirrorless-challenges-on-sensor-af

(Canon) GT: Compared to Dual Pixel CMOS AF, the Hybrid CMOS AF is cheaper. We have plans to use both of those sensors going forward.

I had myself dismissed the 24mp sensor on the basis that I assumed they would trickle the 70D dual pixel sensor down to more models.  But perhaps that isn't the case, and Canon do have a new 24mp Hybrid CMOS AF sensor for the 750D.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel 750D Spec List [CR1]
« on: January 22, 2015, 06:28:43 AM »
This rebel would be the logical step, sitting behind the 70D, and then the 7D II on the top.

It may be the 750D will leapfrog the 70D in some areas. The 70D will be near 2 years old when the 750D is announced, and may be due for a replacement itself. 
Just like the 70D leapfrogged the 7D in some areas, like the dual-pixel sensor.

So it might "sit behind" the 70D in Canon's own positioning, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was more advanced in some areas, and users might chose the 750D in preference to the 70D because of its capabilities, not just because it is cheaper.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel 750D Spec List [CR1]
« on: January 22, 2015, 05:10:11 AM »
Why do people keep calling it the T6i, everybody knows that 7 is the new 6.  The new camera should be called the T7i.

I would jump straight to 10  ;)

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel 750D Spec List [CR1]
« on: January 21, 2015, 09:12:47 AM »
And if it is not a new sensor but a sensor from another brand that altready exists?

It would still need to be better than the 70D sensor, or why use it?

And if it is better, the same 'problem' for 7DMKII owners and potential owners persists, whomever the brand is?
Why did you put a 'tuned' 70D sensor in the 7DMKII, only to then release a 750D at half the price with a new sensor with (probably) more megapixels, greater dynamic range, and less noise?

Well of course the 70D sensor was better than the 7D - new cameras leapfrog old ones all the time.  But not usually when the previous one is just weeks old.

And of course, the 7DMKII has a whole host of features that the 750D would not.  But even so, a 750D with a better 24mp sensor would still be a better alternative to the 7DMKII for a whole host of scenarios where things like weather sealing and 10fps are not required.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel 750D Spec List [CR1]
« on: January 21, 2015, 08:54:35 AM »
Apart from what can be deduced from those 'leaked' images, such as the top LCD, and that it would have NFC (or else it wouldn't have been shown with the CS100) I wouldn't put much faith in the rest of that spec list.

Why a new sensor when they have to recover the investment on the dual-sensor and can reuse the existing 70D/7DMKII sensor?
If they did, it would have to be better than the 70D sensor else why use it? And if it is better (even if only in some dimensions, if not all), then all hell will break lose in the 7DMKII camp...

Unless it is a replacement for the 70D as well with that 19 cross point AF - perhaps that is why there is a new 24mp dual-pixel sensor.  And the two model split mentioned is more like a 750D and 75D, rather than a 750/760D

Whatever, its good fun speculating. Even if we are totally wrong :-)

10
EOS Bodies / Re: NEW CAMERA - EOS 80D?
« on: January 09, 2015, 03:24:33 AM »
Does it have to be a DSRL I wonder?
I know it looks most likely it is (my bet is on a 750D), but could it be a new large sensor 'pro' bridge camera to compete with the Sony RX10, that takes its styling cues from a DSLR rather than compact cameras?
Just a thought...

11
Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 10:32:49 AM »


Grey market items from Asia are a bit different though because they aren't usually UL approved. If a non-approved charger burns down your house, it may nullify your insurance so that's not something I would mess with personally. If however you DO get a genuine Canon charger and battery (which can be difficult to tell) and it is UL approved, it is difficult for Canon to say they won't service the item. Notice in the press release that it says "MAY not be eligible", not WILL not be eligible. Warranty service by Canon USA would be billed back to the factory, so it doesn't cost them anything to fix it AND the fact is that if they are genuine Canon products, they come from the same factory with the same name on it. Canon USA is also a wholly owned subsidiary of Canon Inc. who in the end, has to support their products.

If you have a genuine Canon product and you make enough noise, they should honor the warranty regardless of where you bought it.

BUT Beware of non-approved knockoff batteries and chargers. Those will void your warranty and possibly endanger your life. For me, the risk of saving a couple of hundred bucks isn't worth it. If you are talking about lenses and non-electrical accessories, it is less risky. Personally, I'd rather have local support as well as supporting my local dealers. Go negotiate!

None of my Canon lenses has so far required a battery or charger.  :)
So what is the excuse for making them country specific, or not servicing them in different counties - it can only be to deliberately segment the market to optimize profitability.

12
Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 09:11:00 AM »
So what do Canon recommend the EOS M user does, who has invested in the M system through a proper local Canon authorized dealer only to then find that new components of the system are not offered for sale in their geography?

13
Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 08:58:08 AM »
I am sure the issue is there is a minimum advertise price(MAP) that the authorized dealers in each region must sell the cameras and lenses for if they want to stay as an authorized dealer with Canon. If they try to advertise for a lower price than MAP online without authorization they may be removed as an authorized dealer. .

Setting MAP is actually illegal in the UK and EU due to competition law.

Of course manufacturers might do it under the covers - but it would still be illegal.

As it is, I see no evidence that there is a MAP in play in the UK - market forces seem to be at work, and Amazon seem to be the one who routinely establish the lowest price, and are usually the first ones to drop the price from the 'recommended price' that Canon put in their press release at launch once the lens is actually available.

Just check http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Canon to see how widely prices can vary from retailer to retailer.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 10, 2014, 11:11:22 AM »
Can you share the link?

You need to go to the Japanese Patent Database, and search on the patent number
http://www4.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/Tokujitu/tjsogodben.ipdl?N0000=115

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 10, 2014, 09:49:18 AM »
BTW, the patent does cover IS, though I am not exactly sure what it is implying!

[0039]
It may be made to correct image blur when a part of any lens group or lens group is moved so that it may have a vertical component to an optic axis, and a zoom lens vibrates in each working example. According to this, the whole optical system can be prevented from being able to perform vibration control, without newly adding the lens group for optical members, such as a variable vertex angle prism, or vibration control, and being enlarged.


May I ask you where this text comes from? I can't find it :(


The patent filing

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7