November 24, 2014, 09:19:34 PM

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 - swrightgfx

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Teaser Appears in Korea
« on: November 10, 2013, 08:38:47 AM »
Maybe the camera under the shape is NOT the new product but a camera the designer used to create this teaser.

I would think more about the wording? What could white world mean? Is this like an idiom for something in Korea?

Aside from the Winter Olympics and a design "enhancement", as suggested by others, the only other thing I can think of that is white and means a lot to Canon, is their lenses. I highly doubt it, but maybe this is a body given the White L treatment?

I think we need some salt.

2
PowerShot / Re: Canon France Denies Large Sensor Compacts
« on: June 28, 2013, 10:58:31 AM »
It appears their web developers have got a pay rise, as they were very efficient in removing the offending material. You will notice Compact APS and 24x36 have now disappeared.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 100D Detailed Specs Appear
« on: March 18, 2013, 12:00:50 PM »
"Lens Features: EF-S 18 – 55mm f/3.5 – 5.6 IS zoom lens"

"Lens Focal Length(s) 35mm equivalent 18 – 55mm (with included lens)"

If those are correct, it's a full-frame body.
Somehow I don't really think so, but if it were...

EF-S not compatible with full frame. Definitely not full frame. That would be crazy.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Are there 39mp & 50mp+ Test Bodies in the Wild? [CR1]
« on: October 23, 2012, 01:31:16 AM »
The answer is NO. Simply adding a TC does not change the number of megapixels your camera has. It only magnifies the subject. The output of Camera A will be a PART of the subject, in high detail. The output of Camera B will be THE WHOLE subject, in high detail.

One could always take multiple shots with the 2xTC and stitch together. :P See: http://www.shen-hao.com/PRODUCTSabout.aspx?i=1012&id=n3 and DSC3212 on Vimeo.

EDIT: Video doesn't embed properly, so click the link at the bottom.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Comparing 6D with 5D3
« on: September 25, 2012, 04:55:16 AM »
One thing no one has mentioned so far, but might be relevant for some users.  The 5DIII does not have a user-replaceable focus screen, but the 6D does - and it's compatible with the Eg-S super precision screen (whereas even the 1D X is not metering compatible with the corresponding Ec-S).

This is not true. Adapted screens can be fitted to the 5D Mark III by simply removing two small screws. There are a limited number of suppliers for the screens that, while not as easy to replace as in the 1Dx, or in fact the consumer APS-C devices, take no more than ten minutes to swap.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Why are flash sync shutter speeds getting worse?
« on: September 25, 2012, 02:55:53 AM »
This limitation is one of the reasons why medium format camera systems (where the size of the shutter would be greater, and thus maximum synch speed lower) tended to use a leaf shutter.  The leaf shutter rather like the lens aperture has concentric blades and can close and open fully, thus at any speed you can always get flash synch (although I cannot recall ever seeing anything higher than 1/800 sec).

I agree. Yet another reason shooting film is still relevant and vital. Not only can I sync a flash to 1/500, but I can even handhold a Bronica SQ-Ai at 1/15 and still get a sharp shot, too.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Firmware?
« on: August 22, 2012, 12:49:55 PM »
Also the other major request as quoted by Chuck was the image zoom button not being on the side by the shutter like all their cameras before was something Chuck seemed to suggest, he knows its a big rant but he will leave it up to the engineers to decide the fate of that feature. I personally have been using the set button and it automatically zooms in really close so i can view if i have achieved critical focus or not.

I really don't see this as a problem given you can remap and switch it with another button...

As for the lights - yeah, someone stuffed up!

8
Lenses / Re: smashed 24-105 F4 L Lens front element
« on: August 22, 2012, 08:14:57 AM »
well the good news canon came back with a quote which was £200 for full repair, not bad for pretty much fixing the entire lens - wonder why its £800 new ;0)

I think that is because there are eighteen elements and not just the one you damaged. So really, 18x£200 - they should be charging £3600!!?

Good to hear you are getting it fixed!

9
Lenses / Re: EF-M lens
« on: August 22, 2012, 08:02:27 AM »
No, they will only fit the EOS-M and any other camera with a flange focal distance greater than that of the EOS-M (18mm). The lenses would have to sit inside the camera and even if they could fit, would collide with the mirror.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk
« on: August 21, 2012, 12:23:18 AM »
What mount would a FF mirrorless use, anyway? The only Canon mount that will work would be the EF mount, as it is the only one that would provide a large enough image circle; however, in order to have it focus, you'd need to maintain the existing flange focal distance, which would also do away with any hope of maintaining a compact form factor anywhere similar to the EOS-M (not to mention the lenses would dwarf the camera itself).

As I have said before (see below), a high-megapixel square "APS-H" 28x28mm sensor rangefinder would provide a good mirrorless solution fr the pro user.

Hey if we are gonna dream, how about we make that sensor square too?! Then we are really cooking :D

I'll buy that.

While the EF mount can accommodate a much larger image circle than most EF lenses currently provide, using a square sensor would indeed only be possible with APS-H and not full-frame, without users having to invest in new glass. The image circle for "APS-H" 28x28 would equate to ~40mm, while square "full frame" 36x36 would require ~50mm (which would only allow for TS-E lenses to be used without severe vignette).

The key point, though, is that both would most likely need to be mirrorless to provide enough lens clearance and maintain infinity.

What about a "Square APS-H" rangefinder targeted to plug the mirrorless gap for professionals?

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Rebel T4i/650 Recall (Again)
« on: August 14, 2012, 08:31:44 PM »
This is evident on my 500D from five years ago (I'm guessing the same problem as described). A white powder has leeched from it since the day I got it.

The camera still seems to take photos. :P

12
How about a full frame 7D that is still EF-S compatible? When you stick an EF-S lens on it all pictures are cropped to 1.6x. And obviously it would shoot full frame when you use a EF lens, but maybe you could still have the option to shoot at 1.6x for the telephoto advantage?

Forgive me if something like this has already been suggested, I only scanned through the rest of the thread.

The mirror would collide with the rear element of the majority of EF-S lenses, particularly the wides. Third-party lenses tend to have much larger image circles and also greater clearance and can be retro-fitted.

13
Hey if we are gonna dream, how about we make that sensor square too?! Then we are really cooking :D

I'll buy that.

While the EF mount can accommodate a much larger image circle than most EF lenses currently provide, using a square sensor would indeed only be possible with APS-H and not full-frame, without users having to invest in new glass. The image circle for "APS-H" 28x28 would equate to ~40mm, while square "full frame" 36x36 would require ~50mm (which would only allow for TS-E lenses to be used without severe vignette).

The key point, though, is that both would most likely need to be mirrorless to provide enough lens clearance and maintain infinity.

What about a "Square APS-H" rangefinder targeted to plug the mirrorless gap for professionals?

14
Not a huge difference, though real world frames seem to say otherwise in some reviews. The main difference I can see here is the moire, where the D800 fails miserably. Personally, losing that bit of sharpness for less moire probably cancels out the difference. That and I don't have to invest in new lenses.

Thank you. That gave me a good laugh...

Just compare the lines at the left of the frame and the sharpness of the numbers all over the frame...

This is a resolution test, you're talking about acutance, which is a different aspect of what people call "sharpness".
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009/06/have-you-seen-my-acutance

Yes, the D800 has better acutance than the 5D3, but that can be easily fixed in post (a convolution sharpness filter seems to be the best option). Resolution is quite similar, and actually I would rather take the cleaner image of the 5D3. With the DR of the Nikon, but with all the goodies that the 5D3 will soon get thanks to the Magic Lantern people.

And please don't mistake me for a Canon fanboy, I'm one of those complaining endlessly in these forums about the silly price of the 5D3: it should be $2800, it's definitely not worth more than the D800.

Indeed. And the in-camera AA filter, while reducing moire, also results in a loss of actuance, but when comparing on a chart as above, also increases the perceived resolution within certain constrains. You can see an example of this at 5, 6 and 7 of the diagonal lines.

Additionally, I was referring to the video at 100%, and not the frame-grab above, where the difference in actuance is harder to perceive and both cameras do well (albeit, for 720p).

To be honest, all this Nikon vs Canon stuff is a bit petty, in my opinion. There were days before the internet when this kind of blabber was constricted to club meetings; the rest of the time, people were using their equipment, not comparing it.

If you have invested in some stellar Canon glass as I have, get a 5D Mark III and be done with it; if not, get a D800. Lenses are with you for a lifetime, while bodies get changed and replaced in just a few years. Chances are, Canon will be king when the next round of full-frame (or otherwise) cameras are released.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« on: July 24, 2012, 02:36:06 AM »
if i really wanted a compact and solid powerful camera.
i would go to OM-D from olympus. Not for an old sensor wrapped in new shell.

Most power comes here from the lens selection, which BTW makes it no pocketable anymore. :)

Let me re-quote myself:

If they were to front up with a decent, discreet EVF and a small triplet like the Perar below, I'd actually, surprising to myself, consider this.

*IMAGE REMOVED*

If we had a couple of really simple lens designs, even if only manual focus, I think this could still be considered pocketable. The OM-D body is much larger (if it was full-frame, I'd forgive them).

I personally don't mind carrying around large cameras, as I still use medium format film, but it would be a handy addition if everything was "right."

And u think Eos-m is pocketable with all the adaptors.
who care if some body wanted shitty old sensor which fairly poor low light quality.

go ahed fan boy, buy two or more. At least canon might compensate the losses from 5d3.

I think you misunderstood me. I was referring to the possible development of lenses that of a low profile similar to the MS Optical Perar (10mm), to be designed specifically for the EOS-M (ie. no EOS-M adapter) and leaving it with an overall depth of just over 40mm. I have a wallet that, when crammed with notes, cards and receipts, measures that wide - still fits in my pocket.

In terms of the sensor, I think you will find it is pretty, bloody good for a mirrorless. They could certainly do more, I do not deny, but as an entry into the mirrorless market, I don't think the sensor is the main concern here. I would like to see a rangefinder or at least an optical viewfinder, as well as a small pop-out flash, amongst other things.

I am no fan-boy and probably wouldn't buy one of the things mentioned above being included (which may result from a higher end version released in the future). I will say one thing, though - I don't think the 5D Mark III is a loss for Canon, with both it and the D800 selling in high numbers.

I think you need to start taking some photos.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8