September 21, 2014, 12:35:50 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 - Bruce Photography

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14
1
EOS Bodies / Re: A New EOS Pro Body With 46mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:12:12 PM »
There's one other thing we can almost be certain of: this sensor is HIGHLY unlikely to end up in the 5D4. Canon lost a bunch of 1DsIII sales to the 5D2 and I can't see them doing that again.

But what then? They lose all sales to D810 and Sony?
They can't just have some 8k camera that offers high MP and high DR and expect that to compete with the $2000-2500 stuff. The 8k cam might also have high fps and this and that and be the best, but 8k is simply too much for most people to afford no matter how much they'd love to get it (and some don't like mega large bodies).

Isn't it better to have 85,000 sales of 5D4 than 4000 sales of 1DsX?

Depends on your margins.

But why can't I have 85,000 sales of 5D4 *AND* 4000 sales of 1DsX?
And how do I achieve that if I'm Canon?

8MP APS-C (20D, 30D, 350D) = 21MP FF (5D2, 1Ds3, 5D3)
10MP APS-C (40D, 400D, 1000D) = 26MP FF
12MP APS-C (450D) = 31MP FF
15MP APS-C (50D, 500D) = 38MP FF
18MP APS-C (7D, 700D, 650D, 600D, 550D, 60D, 60Da, 100D) = 46MP FF (1DsX or 3D?)
20MP APS-C (70D, 7D2) = 51MP FF

Your numbers showing that by using the same pixel density that is already in Canon's APS-C format cameras but producing a full frame sensor with the same pixel density should produce a sensor in the range of that rumor.  I think that Nikon probably had that choice but decided to back off to 36MP to retain a higher DR and also not to "frighten" those out their that said there were "Too Many Megapixels - my little slow computer couldn't handle those 40+mp files."  And don't waste my time in quoting the "uncompressed" size which I never use and can never understand why anyone would use it.  14 bit non-loss compression works great on all the D800 line.

If Canon did this, I would probably buy it.  Canon at this point may feel that it is now time for Canon to truly establish dominance even if they don't sell a boatload.  With a price like that they will have a great profit margin and have something to take to every trade show and not just a fast APS-C camera.

2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SIGMA 150-600!!
« on: September 05, 2014, 01:49:20 PM »
It'll be interesting to see side-by-side performance comparisons between this and the Tamron.
+1
+1; When is availability scheduled?

3
Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: August 25, 2014, 08:19:38 PM »
You can always make a JPEG from RAW.  Going the other way ain't so easy.  ;D
If fact making a raw from a JPG is impossible (just in case someone didn't understand the humor).

4
Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:33:31 AM »
JPGs use only 8 bits per color channel for 255 tones of Red, Green, and blue.  With most digital cameras you can select either 12 bit or 14 bit color.  If you choose 14 bit per channel you have over 16,000 tones per color channel.  You choose: 255 or more than 16,000 per channel?  Which do you think preserves colors better?

5
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 07:52:08 PM »
I wish Canon well.  It would be nice to think about purchasing a Canon camera again.  I love their tilt shift lenses.

6
Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 16, 2014, 01:02:12 PM »
400 mm f/4 IS
400 mm f/5.6 IS

I would be seriously interested in either of these if they were to come to market.

Canon already produce the 400mm f4 DO IS lens and it is similarly built to L class. 400mm f5.6L with IS is my dream for travel light.
I miss a light-weight do-it-all zoom like the Nikon 28-300mm VR, it delivers very good IQ and sharpness. I have not tried the new tammy.

I also support the 12-24mm f4L and a low-CA 50mm f1.8-2 IS lens with similar built, IQ and sharpness to the excellent 35mm f2 IS.

+1 on the 400mm (Nikon should add one of these too), Canon could add a non-tank like 28-300 similar in price and quality to the Nikon 28-300 as well as the Nikon 18-300.  I use the 18-300 on my D7100 and that has replaced by for my event camera which was a 60D with 18-200.  I've been surprised just how good the 18-300 and D7100 combo is.  They have been a joy to use.

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Nikon D800s... Why?
« on: June 25, 2014, 01:08:26 PM »
New Nikon D800s... Why (in a forum named EOS Bodies)?

It's a development pipeline discussion, not a Nikon discussion.   :P
- A

I would love it to be about a Canon release for a new high MP body (I do landscapes and seascapes), but from what I've read, 2015 will be the earliest that we can have that discussion.  So I'm interested in the 810 because of the newer processor.  I'm hoping for a larger buffer so I can finally get continuous shooting at the top frame rate of 6 fps.  I know that doesn't mean much in the Canon lineup but to have 6 fps (with battery grip) and 36mp, that is a 50% improvement over what I have today.  I don't use it very often at the top speed (birds), but then speed of shooting is important sometimes.  Since the specs really haven't been released I suppose this is a premature discussion, but I like to have a general knowledge of what both (all) sides for upper end cameras are doing because that will be where the industry is heading.  More dynamic range also seems to be the trend that I welcome even though I am quite pleased with what the D800 and D800E already have.  The elimination of the AA filter on high MP cameras seems to be another trend that we'll see in future cameras.  I have shot extensively with both the D800 and the D800E.  I do see the difference in my large prints when I do everything right.  Elimination of the AA filter on high MP cameras does seem like a good thing (be sure to do capture sharpening to see the effect, otherwise you'll miss it).  If Canon comes up with this new 54 mp camera rumored to be a new Sony sensor this fall in Germany, then we can all talk about that.
 
 

8
Just one more year and we might come out with something.....

9
This lens will not be competing in the same league as the Canon 28-300mmL in terms of build quality, weather seal, focusing speed and size. I will be a consumer lens like the one found in Nikon that is a fantastic lens. I will wait for reviews to then take a decision but, it's an attractive do-it-all lens for canon users. I don't think it will be the same for nikon users since they already have it and it's priced at the same range.

I will wait for the reviews.  Out of all the Canon lenses, I decided to skip the Canon 28-300mm mostly because of size and price.  I waited for the really good Canon 70-300mm L.  I know that it is not the same but I've been very happy with this 70-300mm.  In fact, Nikon would do well to try to compete with it.  However I do have the Nikon 28-300 and my copy has exceeded my expectations.  I really don't see buying a Tamron since I've always been let down on their lenses.  I wish this new lens really competes with the Sigma Art line which I have been so happy with.  I'd love to see the IQ the same as the Art line.  I was testing the Tamron 150-600 at 600mm all weekend and the center quality was minimally ok but all the edges away from the center were just poor.  At first I thought it was me so I tried the Wimberly, RRS RH50, and an Arcatech. I tried hand one top of lens to stabilize it, then no hand.  With VC, no VC.  Full sun, then shade.  Rock, grass, cars, and even people (in wet suits).  What I found was close subjects seemed ok but distant subjects not.  I tried four different days.  I'm just not in love with Tamron.

10
Software & Accessories / Re: Gimbal head or not for Tamron 150-600
« on: June 16, 2014, 10:00:33 PM »

It's not just the weight of the lens...That Bigron extends out quite a bit and factor in that big hood.  Center of gravity shifts depending on where you have it extended.   Hence gimbal over ballhead in this case.   PLUNK !
[/quote]
+1 on that.  I have the ArcaTech and I tried it in normal ballhead mode and I was having a hard time getting it to stabilize using the Tamron 150-600.  I tried it on the Wimberly II and I'm much more pleased.  It also seems fine on the RRS BH50.  I think the ballhead on the Arcatech may just be too small.  What I have not tried is the ArcaTech in gimbal mode.  That may be better but racked out to 600mm, it stands out there a long way.  When I use the Wimberly, I do use a series 5 gitzo so this is probably overkill for the light Tamron.  I talked to Tameron service and then said to turn off the VC.  But the subject of gimbals never came up because many lenses say for gimbals you should leave the VC on and for monopods.  Anyone want to comment?
 

11
As of today, here is B&H's update - "I am sorry but at this time the manufacturer has not given us a delivery date for this lens " that they sent me in response to an online query about the status of this lens.

Me too.

12
Lenses / Re: Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC Availability
« on: June 05, 2014, 12:19:05 PM »
I ordered my Tamron 150-600 in late December (Nikon mount) and I just got it last month so it took almost 5 months.  If the economy is still in bad shape, why does it take so long to get delivery on lenses?  I know they are made in Japan, Thailand (before military take over) or China but you would think with such demand that products would come out faster.  Of course, in some cases, manufacturers are purging their supply channels of inventory leading up to a new model, but the Tammy was really an all new product.

By the way, it is worth the wait.  At least my copy exceeded my expectations for such a low price.
 

13
Canon General / Re: Canon Announces the \
« on: May 27, 2014, 07:43:34 PM »
Does this mean that when they announce and new lens/camera that Canon will "bring it" to market?
+1 to that...


14
Canon General / Re: Canon Announces the \
« on: May 27, 2014, 01:11:00 PM »
I guess if you can't bring new products (like high MP camera), you might as well announce a really great marketing campaign.  I'm sure all customers would all appreciate that.....

15
I've read a number of reviews (in print and online) that indicate that the D800 starts to fall apart once you get above ISO 800-1600.

I don't agree and I use D800/e bodies.
you can get perfectly usable shots at 1600 & 3200 with very little NR required so it's nowhere near "falling apart" at 800.  I don't even bother with NR at 800 and it's still good at a per-pixel level.

otherwise..
As for the constant comments on superiority of Canon glass, what's the point of it until there's a more capable EOS body to put it on?  Did no one here bother to look at the lens tests for D800e on DxOmark?
There's a good many lenses capable of rendering more MP than Canon has theoretical ones and you can mount them on a D800e .

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Best-lenses-for-the-Nikon-D800E-The-sharpest-full-frame-camera-ever-measured/Best-DxOMark-sharpness-rankings

e.g.  The flyweight Nikon 70-200 f/4 VR is capable of stunning resolution, handheld, a few stops below the usual 1/FL rule as well.  A little technique and decent glass can get a lot of MP out of these bodies, if needed, and the sensor performance in other areas is still top-of-class.

Truly good and unique Canon glass, like the TS series, are better adapted for use on Sony A7 bodies.

Canon has, for years, been a letdown for those hoping for improved sensor performance and-or resolution.
I was one of those people but, with little patience, I found better options, went there, and have enjoyed the benefits of that decision since 2012. I don't have time to waste on Canon-HOPE.

+2 At long last someone that reports the same results for the D800/E as I have been getting.  I was shooting the new Tamron 150-600mm at 3200 on the D800 last night hand-held and I was pleased with the results (except for the fact that all the birds in the area took off when they saw the lens).  I did have to do some noise reduction but I really like the tighter grain (I mean noise) and can smooth it over to what print size I'm aiming at.  Thanks again for letting Canon users know they do have options.
 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14