April 16, 2014, 07:23:44 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 - Bob Howland

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
1
It should be mirrorless with an APS-H-sized sensor.

2
Animal Kingdom / Re: Grizzly Bears
« on: March 28, 2014, 03:37:47 PM »
How do you tell one Grizzly from another? They all look pretty much the same to me.

3
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: March 26, 2014, 11:58:23 AM »
Buy an EF adapter and you have all the lenses you need

And most of those lenses are so big that the advantage of a small camera body is lost. If I'm going to put an EF lens on an M body, I want that lens attached to something like a Metabones Speed Booster. As luck would have it, the Canon APS-C sensor is exactly the right size to make it a 1-1/3 stop device, not a 1 stop device like the Metabones.

4
Photography Technique / Re: photographing motorsport particularly F1
« on: March 26, 2014, 08:12:21 AM »
You might want to look at these for input on shutter speeds:

http://www.pbase.com/rhowland/2005_06_12_watkins_glen

The cars were about 200 yards away, moving across my field of view at 80-100 mph. The lens was my 70-200 Sigma EX. The longest lens I've ever used for panning was a 100-400.

I've never been able to use a tripod or monopod when panning. When you're panning, you have to rotate your body not a tripod or monopod. I have found that I want my body in its most comfortable resting position at the end of the pan. Then twist your body, with your feed stationary, to where you expect the pan to begin, wait for the car to enter the viewfinder and unwind your body while following the car. If you're most comfortable at the start of the pan, you'll tend to lag behind the car.  With my 40D, I was shooting at 6.5 FPS, which mostly was adequate. The 10D used for these shots was a bit slow. I wanted the car to be directly perpendicular to me or with just a little of the front showing, so timing was extremely tight. I'm waiting for Canon to introduce a mirrorless FF camera that can take 20 FPS, full resolution.


5
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: March 24, 2014, 04:11:27 PM »
I want a tiny 15-85 f/3.5-5.6

I don't own an M and I won't buy one until they introduce something like this. If the only body available is the current M or M2, I won't be buying one anyway.

6
perhaps the new lens will have a built-in 1.4

This should be mandatory design for all new superteles industry wide.  There's really no reason not to at this point.

Mandatory?!?!

7
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: March 11, 2014, 05:48:36 PM »
dead end is a generous description.  this system was still born - Canon shoved it out the door ...  Now you're in
a "pasting feathers on a turkey" mode and you might be better off kissing it off and starting from scratch.

The EOS M was the second best-selling MILC in Japan last year.  One country's meat is another one's spoiled turkey...   ;)

I just wonder how many Japanese buyers buy it with only one lens and will never even put another lens on it. Of course, as I recall, the average number of lenses owned by Canon DSLR buyers is less than two.

There are many people who would buy it without any EF-M lenses. They only care about adapters for lenses they already have, like Canon EF. That makes a lot of sense for telephoto, because there are no small CSC tele lenses without huge compromises in IQ. EF-S 55-250mm IS STM can be considered "near native" lens for EOS-M (via the adapter) - fast AF, nice optics, stabilized, compact (for 88-400mm equivalent :) ) and affordable. Many are using old manual lenses and they love it.

That might be true in North America and Europe. (It certainly is part of the reason that Neuro bought his.) But is it true in Japan? I thought a lot of buyers there were young women looking for a fashion accessory.

8
Lenses / Re: Sigma ART Series: 70-200mm f2.8 possible?
« on: March 11, 2014, 11:54:04 AM »
It would be a "sport" lens but probably won't come soon since that market is already very saturated.

+1, although I voted "Yes"

9
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: March 11, 2014, 11:33:22 AM »
dead end is a generous description.  this system was still born - Canon shoved it out the door ...  Now you're in
a "pasting feathers on a turkey" mode and you might be better off kissing it off and starting from scratch.

The EOS M was the second best-selling MILC in Japan last year.  One country's meat is another one's spoiled turkey...   ;)

I just wonder how many Japanese buyers buy it with only one lens and will never even put another lens on it. Of course, as I recall, the average number of lenses owned by Canon DSLR buyers is less than two.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Suggestions of a NAB 2014 DSLR Announcement [CR1]
« on: March 03, 2014, 10:33:39 PM »
For NAB, Canon will introduce a FF mirrorless camera using a version of the current EF mount only with a flange-sensor distance of 24mm. The 24mm distance will allow native lenses, whenever they appear, to be used on the M mount with a relatively simple (and very thin) adapter. Like the Panasonic GH4, it'll do 8bit 4K at 4:2:0, which can be processed to 10bit 1080p at 4:4:4. The half-pixels will be settable to different ISOs, allowing a 14 stop dynamic range. It'll cost as much as a 1Dx, maybe more.

Hey, a fella can dream.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M2 Coming to North America & Europe?
« on: March 01, 2014, 08:41:32 AM »
Apparently not - An update from Imaging Resource:

"[Editor's note: We received an update after we went to press that Canon USA does not have plans to sell the EOS M2 at this time. We'll let you guys know if this changes!]"

Wild guess: Canon still has M's in stock and they don't want to completely kill the market for them.

12
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 19, 2014, 09:18:13 AM »
Something like this:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/thecamerastoretv-a6000-video-review-its-a-fantastic-solid-product/

is what the Canon M2 should have been: 11FPS, 24MP (I'd settle for 18MP), EVF and comparatively small. And, oh yes, it's $650.

13
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 18, 2014, 08:19:31 PM »
If this EOS-m [was] still selling @ $700-$800, I wonder how many of us would consider the M as backup camera?

Probably not many, especially considering that an SL1 body costs less than $500. Given the competition, including the competition in Canon's own lineup, a reasonable price for an M or M2 body is $300-$400, no more.

14
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 17, 2014, 04:32:15 PM »
You are mistaken. The eos-m mount can ├╝hysically not handle an ff image circle. Sony was smarzer and made their e-mount just barely large enough to also handle ff. Canon was stupid, as so often. Aps-c only. Dead-slow AF. Same tired old 18 MP sensor, a dinosaur from 5 years ago. Bad low iso performance. Poor hi-iso performance.

Sony was smarter?? They now have to support both the E-mount and Alpha-mount in both APS-C and FF versions and they don't seem to be providing clear guidance about which mounts and configurations will be emphasized, thereby creating confusion among potential buyers. Fuji and the micro-4/3 manufacturers are doing a much better job of creating workable systems.

FF is the Holy Grail only because it is the same size as a standard slide or negative, resulting in an enormous body of legacy lenses. In a similar fashion, in a similar fashion, Super-35 is a video standard because of the dominance of that image size for movies and the resulting development of now-highly prized and extremely expensive PL mount lenses for that image size.

There's no technical reason why Canon couldn't release an EOS FF mirrorless system by simply shortening the distance between sensor and lens flange to 18mm, introducing an adapter allowing use of DSLR lenses on the mirrorless bodies and taking their time introducing FF mirrorless lenses. About the only thing that Canon has done right with EOS-M is restrict it to APS-C-sized sensors. Canon has publicly stated that the emphasis of the EOS-M system would be small size. It's too bad that their implementation sucks.

 

15
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 16, 2014, 11:38:13 AM »
It's lower by around 6-8 stops.

Proof?

I've tried it.  The EVFs are showing what is in essence the out-of-camera JPEG, with about 1 stop clipped from each end.  And as we all know, the out-of-camera JPEG contains several stops less DR than is available in the raw data.

The out-of-camera JPEG would probably contain considerably more resolution than the EVF requires, or are you talking about something like the JPEG that gets embedded in the Raw? Could you provide more details about how you "tried" it?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16