April 18, 2014, 12:31:01 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 - LDS

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Software & Accessories / Re: Louis Vuitton bag
« on: March 04, 2014, 04:17:04 PM »
too bad for the ladies with GAS!  ;D
The target LV lady is never behind a camera, always in front of it...

EOS Bodies / Re: UPDATE: EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: March 02, 2014, 01:00:32 PM »
So your saying Canon is dumb? For being number 1 and best selling camera brand on earth. So you are smarter than their engineering and marketing departments.
Truth is that big, successful companies make big mistakes too. Look at Microsoft with Windows Vista and 8. Or with its Surface 1.0 tablets. Users told them they were bad products even before they were released, Microsoft didn't accept critics, delivered products that didn't sell and had to return on its steps and correct mistakes that were clearly visible to everybody, but to those in charge of the products. And there are many examples from many other companies.
The fact that Canon will not sell the M2 in Western markets shows it understood it's the wrong product for such markets - and some humble user can spot them and find better ideas. But it looks that someone at Canon is unwillingly to say "I was wrong - we need a different kind of product". Don't believe Canon engineering and marketing is populated by superhumans who never make mistakes. And I prefer a company that learns from mistakes, that one that stubbornly denies them.

EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 19, 2014, 03:59:44 AM »
...their first MILC was the second best-selling MILC in their home country (where MILCs are popular), beating out many of the established vendors in that space.
It was the second one - not the first, anyway. Which was the first, and by what margin? That happened in a single country that has a somewhat "special" market compared to the Western one, Japanese buyers have a different mindset. Here the Canon M was a big failure, and to sell had to reduce price greatly. The successor is not even sold.
Is it wise to design a camera for the home market only, and then try to sell it worldwide, and fail? Why design a single model, instead of a couple, a lower-end one and an higher-end one, to fulfill different needs, instead of insisting on a lower-end one only, despite interchangeable lenses could appeal to higher-end users?
Sure, Canon sell a lot of DSLR, but how many of them are thanks to its higher-end models traction? People may dream of a 1D or 5D and then maybe buy a 7D or 60D because they can't afford the formers, but they anyway "feel good" because they know they're entering a "professional system" that can last many years.
But with the M? It's ok to sell more lenses and use a different mount for smaller ones, especially from Canon perspective, but if the user feels that those lenses may be bound to a camera system going nowhere, how many will be interesting in buying them instead of going EF?
The M camera was successul in Japan, OK, how many M lenses were sold to the average Japanese M user? Was the system successful, or most users found the kit lens enough, as it was just a fixed lens camera, just a little "cooler" "hey, see, I could remove the lens if I wish, and it looks a little like an expensive Leica..."

EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 17, 2014, 03:24:01 PM »
They are very clear about poor acceptance of mirrorless in the USA and Europe, its poor.  In Asia, its much better.  Nikon claims that people in the USA feel that a large DSLR provides better images due to its size. 
IMHO their marketing depts. are unable to understand what is the prospect customer of such kind of cameras. "Mirrorless" cameras with interchangeable lenses are the digital counterpart of rangefinder cameras - and they became a niche market for a given type of photographer, the one looking for a smaller, yet powerful camera with lenses allowing for more versatility than a fixed lens zoom. Often, one already owning an SLR, but looking for something lighter and smaller to complement it. In Europe, and probably in the USA also, it's not the camera you can sell to the P&S user looking for something "cooler". Because or their happy with their P&S (or even their phone, today), or they will look for an SLR for the "cool" factor - maybe never removing the kit lens to mount a different one. Interchangeable lenses are appealing to a very different kind of customer.
I believe the actual M cameras are products looking for a customer. I would buy a "digital rangefinder" to complement my 5D, especially if I can mount my EF lenses on it, but it needs to be a camera able to be a smaller, lighter alternative to the 5D - not a PowerShot with interchangeable lenses. It means some kind of good viewfinder - sorry - I can't stand taking pictures looking at a screen with the camera fifteen centimetres from my nose - and "professional" control for settings. But I see that instead of moving up the M line, Canon decided to "dumb down" the GX line.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 14, 2014, 03:55:18 PM »
My wariness of touchscreens with an SLR will die over time.  I liken SLRs going to touchscreens to video game
The issue is not how touchscreen technology evolves, but how our senses evolve. Touch screens are designed to be used using eyes, and lack all the different kind of other feedbacks we get from other senses using for example mechanical dials (tactile and audible ones). Sure, some devices try to employ vibrations to imitate that kind of feedbacks, but they don't work as well - because they lack the proper "positioning". Can you type on a virtual keyboard as you can do on a physical one? Can you know how many stops you changed aperture without looking at the numbers with a dial, and with a touch screen?
Touch screens are very versatile because they can display different interfaces and adapt to different tasks, that's why they can be very good on smartphones. But with a dedicated device like a camera, a touchscreen looks more a way to save on a camera design and building, and not to improve ergonomics.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 12, 2014, 05:58:52 AM »
Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen? C'mon!
Never used a touched screen or what?  EOS M has no dials at all and it's quite slick to use.  This appears to have TWO control rings in ADDITION.  I do like the knobs and dials on the original G1X, but I'm sure this one will be PLENTY useable.   
LOL! I do use touch screens every day - even code software for them, and I know all their deficiencies when it comes to usability for tasks that don't require to look at the screen - or when on-screen controls makes the screen display far less usable because of the clutter.
They are versatile, true, they are cheap, but in many situations they are far less usable because the lack of "physical feedback" they offer, and the need of looking at them while using controls simply drawn on them. They are good display devices, far less control devices. And that's one of the reason I didn't buy an EOS M even if I would like to buy a smaller camera to complement my EOS 5.
About the rings, in the past thirty years cameras moved controls from lens rings to on-camera dials. Why? Because of ergonomy - one finger on the shutter button, another controlling the front dial, thumb controlling the rear dial, left hand controlling zoom/focus. Now they're moving settings again to lens rings - but not the zoom!-, where they are less ergonomic to use? That happens when your design choices are made by designers who just follow fashion and not good, ergonomic design principles.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 12, 2014, 05:47:59 AM »
Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen?
Explain how a touch screen is a step back??
Because a touch screen is far slower to use compared to a dial, and requires you to move your fingers to the screen from the position you use to take a photo.
You need to look at it while using it, has no "physical" feedback, and requires more time to get at the setting you need - with a dial you just need to "feel" it and turn it - no distractions. Sure, it's cheaper than a dial, because now electronics is dead cheap compared to mechanical items, and looks more "techie", but it is not.
It looks the two rings around the lens are used instead of dials - can't understand why in the past thirty years Canon worked hard to move settings from lens rings to camera dials which you could easily (and it was the pioneer, timidly with the A-1 then full steam with the T90 and EOS cameras) and now it brings them back to the lens rings just because of fashion? But not the zoom command which looks still to be the uncomfortable less precise one around the shutter button (one of the things I like less about my sister's G11).
It looks the rise of phones as compact cameras alternatives left Canon designers clueless how to design the next generations of cameras - but making them more "phone like" doesn't help - it just help people switching fully to phones. Maybe the Nokia 1520 is already better than this G1X MII, at least it can make phone calls also... and play Angry Birds, on the touch screen... I wonder what kind of customer this camera is aimed to. It doesn't look like a lighter smaller alternative to the DSLR user needing something to carry around everywhere everytime.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 03:59:08 PM »
Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen? C'mon! I was looking for something smaller and lighter than my 5D to carry around every day - I was about to get a G1X but waited when the M was announced - then the M was almost a joke and hoped something better with a true viewefinder (EVF, OVF, EVF+OVF...) would come, now this one that looks like a Powershot S? No way to spend something alike 700+ on something like this. Maybe I'll get a bargain G1X, or somthing better - but it looks it won't be from Canon unless they surprise me with a far better M model.

Technical Support / Re: How to use cf and sd cards Mark5d3
« on: February 09, 2014, 09:16:51 AM »
Depends on where I'm shooting and why.
Usually I just use the CF card and leave the SD as a "overflow card" in the case I'm shooting, I filled the CF, and can't stop shooting to insert a new card.
When I'm shooting in a situation where some people may want a jpeg copy of photos immediately, and I do not need fast shooting, I select to write jpegs to the SD and RAWs to the CF.
If I'm shooting something important I can't shoot again easily, I may write to both cards at once to avoid a single card failure will mean total data loss.
Settings are versatile enough you can choose what the best way for what you're doing.

Canon General / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Image
« on: February 08, 2014, 06:11:06 AM »
The external EVF is really ugly and makes the camera far less comfortable to store and use. Can't understand why Canon can't deliver a mixed internal OVF/EVF like the Fuji one. I was looking for a smaller camera to complement my 5D, but it looks nor the M nor the GX fits my needs. Guess I'll get the Fuji.

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom for iPad Coming Soon
« on: January 21, 2014, 11:27:07 AM »
Nawww, please don't reduce my posting to the pricing question again... particularly because I have addressed that in some detail. ;)
It all come down to this - it's price that matters, nothing else. Most people are not interested in affirming "freedom rights" or "ethical rights" when using a tool - and for most people software is just a tool. What most people look at what is the "TCO" of a given tool. People using it for their professional job are interested only in compatibility with industry standards, ease of use, support, outcome quality, time spent learning/using the tool to obtain a given result so they can earn as much money as they can - the quicker you finish an assignment, the earlier you can switch to the next one.
Amateurs may be still interested in ease of use, documentation available (books, courses, etc.), compatibility with their gear, "feel good factor" ("I'm using a pro tool!") and price. Only a handful are interested in some kind of "holy war" against the "software powers".
As long as the price is perceived "right", most won't care if the software is not open, if they need to pay a yearly fee or not, and so on. After all most photo professionals are using Apple products, which are among the closest and most pricey around, and no one complains because they know they will get their job done easily and quickly. And most people using open source tools don't do that because of the "freedom", but just because they have not to pay for them. Software is not a political issue, it's just a tool. And like most tools, price is one of the main factor to choose one or another. Sure, bad commercial practices could kill a good software if the users find them too restrictive or unpractical.
Otherwise all we should be using instead a Canon camera (another closed system totally controlled by Canon), some free, open source cameras, maybe built with a Raspberry Pi and some sensor inside a wooden box with home made lenses (I've friends who build their own telescopes, why don't photographers build their own lens for "freedom"?), and an open source capture software...

Software & Accessories / Re: Screen gamut
« on: January 21, 2014, 11:09:50 AM »
touchscreen ASUS N550JV as a replacement
IMHO "touch screen" (aka "fingerprints") and "image processing" don't go well together. After some usr no matter what the gamut is, the dirt on the screen will change it...

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 20, 2014, 03:43:29 PM »
Now he can write a whole new bunch of books about Canon gear... and sell them to Canonites who will happily buy them just because he switched to Canon...

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom for iPad Coming Soon
« on: January 20, 2014, 03:39:43 PM »
many non-cloud, free software alternatives to LR (Darktable probably being the most popular). These alternatives may not come with the same comfort as LR (yet) - but that's a small price to pay if the software respects your rights in return.
The issue with such kind of software in this area is how many cameras, lenses, printers, etc. they are able to test the application with. Adobe has the resources to test and support all major brands, work with major companies (Apple, Microsoft, etc.) to ensure best compatibility, take advantage of the experience of professional photographers, and has an extensive knowledge in image processing - and can pay good developers. Also, some FOSS projects unless backed by some commercial interests, may stop suddenly, if developers move to something else, and are not replaced by someone with enough skill.
For a professional photographer, and even an advanced amateur, after all the software cost is just a tiny fraction of the expenses, and an hassle-free software (install - and use, no issue configuring in whatsoever) with a large industry support may be well worth its price. And why a software is expensive at $99, and a lens or a camera is almost not at $2499? Just because we perceive a different value in a "soft" asset compared to an "hard" one?
That said, I do not like the "cloud" model too much, especially when I have in-house resources that doesn't require me to use systems outside. Nor I like the rent-a-software model, it was common in the past (a lot of Unix software was rented with yearly fees, and those costs was one of the reasons of the PC ascent), and is being reintroduced. Again, it could be ok for pros, less for "occasional" users.

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom for iPad Coming Soon
« on: January 20, 2014, 04:29:06 AM »
to size vs performance, the tablets are not really there yet ... if they have enough power they tend to be heavy,
So heavy cameras and lenses are OK if they are powerful, but if a tablet weights a little more for the same reason is not? Sure, I would also like a 100g EOS 1Dx with a 150g 70-200/2.8 lens... but I wouldn't mind to carry a little heavier tablet (instead of an even heavier laptop), it it allows me to work with the right tools in the field.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4