« on: January 29, 2015, 09:36:14 AM »
Magiclangern provides a button to "expose to the right". Adjust exposure in postprocessing to fit your needs. Problem solved, case closed.
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.
It was some rumors about Canon wanting to move 6D upmarket, if that is the case, then it does make sense to give the 5D4 52mpx, if the 6D then becomes the "real" 5D4, under the cover of the name 6D2. Hopefully it stays below 36 mpx as well.
Looks like I'm the only one who's looking forward to a high MP 5DM4. Add in GPS and the 7DM2's focus and I'm sold. Canon needs to respond to the competition. So many Canon users have defected to Sony and Fujitsu because Canon is no longer meeting their needs.
People complain loudkly in forums and yet Canon sales remain good.
They are not. According to Canon financial statements their DSLR sales have been into a double digit fall in both 12/13 and 13/14... So I'd say - and I'm pretty sure the board room talk is - "Canon DSLR sales are dismal and we need to act now before its too late".
I'd be interested to see a comparison when these are out.
100-400L II at 400mm and f/5.6 upresed 50% compared to Tamron 150-600 at 600mm and f/6.3.
100-400L II + 1.4x TC III at 560mm and f/8 compared to Tamron 150-600 at 600mm and f/8.
My prediction as that both would be a near tie, except the Canon will have less CA and faster focusing on the first test.
my prediction is that the first comparison would put the tamron far ahead for total detail, 200mm is an insane amount to make up for, the tamron would have to pale even compared to a coke bottle for that to be true
now in the second case maybe it would be about a tie? who knows or even better?
You're just shooting 50 and 85mm. Think of the conversion, not what says on the lens.
This is not true. You still need to consider actual focal length. Just because there's a crop factor it does not change the actual focal length of the lens. There's a big difference in distortion between 35mm on a crop and 50mm on full frame. The field of view will be similar but the 35mm is still a 35mm, regardless of the size of the sensor behind it.
So, if I read this correctly, Canon have given up trying to compete with other manufacturers technology, and instead are going to focus on stories about how their customers "use" the products they make as a sales pitch?
Great. So we can expect smoke and mirrors but no substance.
It is like a fashion house deciding to focus not on being the cutting edge of fashion, but rather on how their customers were their garments in everyday use.
Where does Canon say that exactly?
After 25 pages this thread is starting to provide some useful information. How disappointing.
Can we go back to lifting shadows by five stops and arguing over banding?
With all respect, but this was the dumbest, silliest, least conceived action I have seen from Canon!
They see everybody complaining about missing DR, high MP or Mirrorless, they build up quite a lot of tension (look at this thread, 20 pages of speculations), everyone does expect a revolutionary product even more, but instead of bringing on a development announcement of the mythical 3D or the M3, what do they do?
With respect, anyone expecting a development announcement coming specifically from Canon USA was deluding themselves.
As for the complaining...people with issues should complain where it matters... Hint: that's not here.
Indeed, the way you complain is by not buying Canon products and that's why next April, I won't be spending money on Canon but on Sony. Hit them where it hurts: in the pocket. They won't listen to anything else.
While you're complaining, I'm sticking with Canon. Which other system offers these options? —
8-15 fisheye zoom
24 with IS
28 with IS
35 with IS
24-70/4 with IS and macro
200-400 with built-in 1.4X
flash with built-in radio
world's lightest DSLR