January 30, 2015, 10:51:36 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 - dufflover

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel 750D Spec List [CR1]
« on: January 22, 2015, 02:59:29 AM »
I'm also leaning toward the guess that either these specs are just way off, or it is a non-DPAF non-Canon sensor. Although that would be interesting too because it would mean it carries the little advantages "the other mob" have (nothing that I'd give up my DPAF for but that's not everyone ...).

To me a Rebel (simpler AF, body and buffer) around the 70D/7DII sensor seemed like the next obvious step to me too.

2
Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: January 11, 2015, 01:44:48 AM »
Keeping in mind the whole premise of a zoom is flexibility over IQ (of which isn't really an issue anymore either) the difference in transmission I doubt will influence the majority of buyers.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Plastic/Resin Mount for DSLRs
« on: January 04, 2015, 01:32:42 AM »
Bit overwhelmed with the details translation, but in general I have no issue with good. decent/modern plastic. The stuff used in the later bodies is plenty decent enough for me (even after I accidentally dropped 60D once).

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 31, 2014, 02:20:52 AM »
Quote
Northlight has been told that the high resolution camera coming from Canon will be based on the 4.2 micron pixel design of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II, not the long-in-the-tooth 4.3 micron design of the 18mp APS-C sensors
Guess the people waiting for that "evolution" will still be waiting ...

I like DPAF and all but for the application of a hi-res FF camera I'd still rather have seen that first step in a new sensor design even if it's not perfect. At least show it's not constantly flogging the old thing.
(FYI I love my 70D)

5
Lenses / Re: Quick Comparison: Canon's new 400mm Options
« on: December 20, 2014, 09:11:26 PM »
I have to Photozone overall has the most consistent results that match what I see in my lenses and others online. I find TDP to be the most inconsistent, at least in-terms of what I see in the "Lens Image Quality" tool. All resources are useful though; in the end the more results the better whether it be reviews, testing houses and forum feedback to get a good average.

I don't find anything too special with this particular topic though. A bit like the 7D2 sensor topics, this is the sort of improvement that is basically EXPECTED given the price and time differences.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Sony Sensors Coming to Canon DSLRs? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:19:08 AM »
Personally I don't think it will happen. They haven't cared about competing sensors for ages, I don't think they are suddenly going to now. Even though it would be nice sign anyway for them to improve on the sensor areas people are really wanting improved to match the competition.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 10, 2014, 02:25:01 AM »
Whilst the f-number itself is not a fixed step thing, it is when it comes to a setting on Canon cameras, so I would expect such a lens (highly doubt it'll get developed) would have a max zoom aperture setting of f/8?

I've had similar (unwieldy/bad) experiences with using an M with longer lenses at arms lengths, however using long lenses with the 70D swivel screen and DPAF is quite nice for low angle and decent enough for static subjects, obviously not BiF. Both features something the next EOS-M everyone expects after the DPAF tech was released (ok ok so the M2 didn't do much lol).

For whatever reason there is something worth patenting in there ...

8
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 04, 2014, 02:59:09 AM »
Why do so many people including reviewers seem to pretend the 70D doesn't exist or is really really new by always comparing it against the 7D just to make it look that much newer and better?

(for the record I really like my 70D - it's just this almost goggles view to compare it with the 5yr old model instead and then say it's new ...)

9
The old white on my 100-400 stopped looking so white when I got the 2x TC III (which is the "new" L white). Hey, just got me thinking of a pretty cynical (but corporate smart?) reason for the colour change - makes people who do bother buying the white L paint have to rebuy it in the new shade.

10
I'm in Australia, I'm expecting $2500+ AU$ for this lens ... I'm totally ok with that ... check it out .. it's a great lens, even before the reviews I'm sold.

Pre-order estimate at Digi is $2.7k!

11
Shut up and take my money!!!!

haha lol j/k. Too bad the product pages aren't working yet. Wanna see those theoretical MTF charts!

Edit: I see they've been added here. Good enough! lol

12
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 10, 2014, 05:38:19 AM »
Couldn't it have depended on the optics and/or size though? Like if the focusing group is at the back there?

13
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 10, 2014, 02:55:31 AM »
Front fat ring is the zoom. Can even see half an FL marker in the graphic.

14
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 09, 2014, 07:48:58 PM »
Probably will be for us with the Australia-tax lol

15
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 09, 2014, 07:48:15 PM »
Pretty sure this one will include the tripod foot by default.
Unless they really really do suddenly lump it in the same group as the 70-300L and 70-200L/4 (as in the "smaller" whites, but it's not that small).

There is one big indicator I would still upgrade, eventually - I went from a 70-200 mk1 to mk2 LOL
(sadly it gets very very little use considering the price :( )

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11