September 20, 2014, 08:29:59 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.


Topics - KyleSTL

Pages: [1]
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Camera Cleaning Suggestions
« on: December 02, 2013, 01:00:29 PM »
I have had some dust specs on my sensor for quiet a while, and I'm tried of using clone/healing to correct the spots on nice blue skies.  Any suggestions for who to send it to?  What is your experience with turnaround time and price?  I've been considering Canon, KEH, and Pro Camera Repair.  I'd rather not do the cleaning myself, and would like to leave it in the hands of a professional and absolve myself of any liability.  Let me know your experiences, and any places to use or to avoid.  Also, I'm not a CPS member or anything, so whatever I go with will be at full price.  I'd like to send it out this week and have it back the week before Christmas.

2
EOS Bodies / Prediction for next round of DSLR cameras
« on: October 01, 2013, 03:57:36 PM »
Higher resolution LCD screens

If Canon were to produce an LCD with the same pixel pitch (326 ppi) as the iPhone 4-5S and the 3:2 aspect ratio it would have a resolution of -
3.0":  814 x 542 (1.32 million dot)
3.2":  868 x 579 (1.51 million dot)
3.5":  960 x 640 (1.84 million dot) - same size as iPhone 4/4S

If Canon were to produce an LCD with the same pixel pitch (441 ppi) as the Samsung Galaxy S4 and 3:2 AR it would be -
3.0":  1100 x 733 (2.42 million dot)
3.2":  1174 x 783 (2.76 million dot)
3.5":  1284 x 856 (3.30 million dot)

Better than the current 720 x 480 (1.04 million dot) displays (288 ppi @ 3", 270 ppi @ 3.2"), and could allow Canon to tout the highest resolution LCD on any DSLR (Samsung would still have the biggest, though, with the almost-unusably-large Galaxy series at 4.8").  Does anyone know what type of panel technology is used in current DSLR LCDs (TN, MVA, PVA, IPS, eIPS, etc)?

What are your thoughts?

3
Lenses / UCSD Science FAIL
« on: September 26, 2013, 03:39:39 PM »
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/marblelike-lens-smartphone-slr,news-17607.html

I'm not even sure where to begin with this article.  If anyone can find the paper on which this is based, I would love to pick apart their scientific method.

4
Lenses / Cost for Canon Factory Adjustment/Tuning
« on: September 23, 2013, 08:01:21 PM »
I just fixed 2 copies of the 24-105mm (both had the infamous broken aperture ribbon cable issue).  They are both working flawlessly, however, I have no way of testing the lens to see what affect on image quality removing and re-installling the two sets of eccentric adjusting sliders had.  I would like to send the lens to Canon for adjustment before I sell one off, but Canon does not do up-front quotes without inspecting the lens.  Has anyone sent a lens to Canon out of warranty for adjustment (not repair)?  If so, how costly was it in the US?  Any help or experiences are greatly appreciated. 

I would like to be totally upfront about a lens when I go to sell it, and I would prefer to say it just came back from Canon for optical tuning (either way I'll tell the buyer I personally did the aperture replacement).  If the cost for tuning is fairly inexpensive I'll do it, but if it's going to run $150+ then it won't be worth it.

5
Lenses / 70-300mm IS due for update
« on: September 11, 2013, 11:41:26 PM »
I'm sure I'm not the only one with this opinion, but don't you think the 70-300mm IS is embarrassingly outdated, especially considering its Nikon equivalent?:

  Canon 70-300mm IS USM  Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR 
Focusing Design    Front focus, extending, rotating, no FTM      Internal focus, FTM 
Focusing Motor  Micro USM, noisy, slow  Ring-type SWM, silent, fairly fast 
Stabilization  3 stops  4 stops 
Year  2005  2006 
MSRP  $650 US  $590 US 
Street Price  $360 US eBay / $650 US B&H  $420 US eBay / $587 B&H 

One could say that Canon did upgrade it by releasing the 70-300mm L, but that is in a whole different price bracket, and shouldn't be compared.  It would be like comparing the Canon vs. Nikon 28-300mm lenses; they are clearly in different classes.  How has Canon not updated this lens in the past 7 years?

I must say, I miss the fast, quiet and accurate focusing my old 100-300mm USM and 70-210mm USM lenses had; and they were small and light, too.  If either of those lenses had IS I would not have considered 'upgrading' to the 70-300mm.  I wish Canon would up date this lens to be on par with Nikon and stay in the same price bracket.

I also find it funny that Canon announced this lens alongside the crowd-pleaser 24-105mm L. 

By the way, I have used both, as I own the Canon and my dad owned the Nikon (on a D600).  The Nikon wins hands-down in overall feel, responsiveness, build quality, etc.

6
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Underwater DSLR Cases
« on: September 04, 2013, 08:53:58 PM »
Just out of curiosity, how many of the CR regulars own and/or have used an underwater case with their DSLR?  What has the experience been like? 

Based on their prices (new and used) I doubt I'll be in the market for one anytime soon.  Additionally, I can't think of many occasions during which I'd use it, but I think it would be fun to play with.  Please share with the community if you have had any experiences with one.

7
EOS Bodies / Viewfinder Specifications
« on: August 22, 2013, 04:14:19 PM »
I know the typical ratings for an optical viewfinder (maginification, accuracy and sensor format) are readily available for most cameras, and often, if you dig deep enough you can even find the eye relief rating for a viewfinder.  Does anyone know why there isn't any rating for any camera (that I can think of) for apparent field of view (similar to telescopes, binoculars or microscopes)?  Anyone who has looked through the eyepiece for a high-quality microscope or telescope knows what I'm talking about.  Does anyone know what the AFOV would be for your average camera VF?

Primer on binocular FOV:
http://www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/how_to/guide/binoculars/basic/basic_08.htm

8
Lenses / Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM 99% off
« on: December 13, 2012, 01:20:40 PM »
Thought this was hilarious at KEH:

http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-EOS-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-CE069991276240?r=FE

Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM marked down from $14,999 to $149.  Reminds me of the stuff you'd see in Immortally Glassy Eyes in the back of Autoweek magazine (for all you American car nuts like me).

9
Lenses / Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II USM teardown
« on: September 11, 2012, 05:41:19 PM »
Roger Cicala has received his first shipment of 24-70 II's, and unsuprizingly has already disassembled one.  Great read:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/a-peak-inside-the-canon-24-70-f2-8-mk-ii

10
EOS Bodies / 3D X and 7D Mark II at Photokina?
« on: September 04, 2012, 10:23:39 AM »
Photo Rumors is reporting Canon will announce these two bodies at Photokina.  Any validity to that, Craig?  What have you heard? 

http://photorumors.com/2012/09/03/what-to-expect-at-photokina/

11
Lenses / EF 50-140mm f/2 IS
« on: February 16, 2012, 04:20:43 PM »
Disclaimer:  THIS IS NOT A RUMOR, JUST A WISH LIST OR THEORETICAL LENS.

Just out of curiosity is there anything that would keep Canon (or any other maker of APS-C of FF SLRs) from making an f/2 zoom like this?  In theory, the lens would be identical to the size of a 70-200mm f/2.8 (and likely just as expensive - if not more so), and would act like an 80-225mm f/2.8 with the 1.6x crop factor of APS-C cameras.  On top of that it would make a killer portrait lens on a full frame camera and could replicate 4 other lenses (50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2, and 135mm f/2) with the flexibility of zooming and added benefit of IS.

Adding on a 1.4x teleconverter would make it a 70-200mm f/2.8; a 2.0x would bring it up to 100-280mm f/4.

What do you guys think?  Would you be interested in such a beast?  I know Olympus has made a line of f/2 zooms, just wondered what the CR community would think of one in the Canon mount.

Pages: [1]