December 20, 2014, 09:35:15 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 - Hillsilly

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 54
EOS Bodies / Re: Noise - maybe it's good?
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:51:20 AM »
I agree.  Noise is way, way down the list of attributes that I consider when deciding if I like a photo.

Canon General / Re: Pixma pro 10 or 100?
« on: December 15, 2014, 07:06:50 AM »
Thanks - Just realised I "misspoke" above.  The Chromalife test on the redriverpaper site is for the Pro100.  So maybe a better comparison for bare prints is 9-12 years for the pro-100 vs 30-40 years for Canon pigment ink per Wilhelm-Research.  And with both, you'll get extended lifespan with better framing and storage methods.

I'll find out how accurate the Pro100 prediction is in 10 years time. In any case, I can just reprint the photo.

Canon General / Re: Pixma pro 10 or 100?
« on: December 15, 2014, 04:02:50 AM »
I picked up a Pixma Pro 100 earlier this year at a good discount.  I'm an infrequent printer, only printing with it about once per month.  So far, I'm really impressed with the printer.  It produces very nice, vibrant, detailed prints.  But, deep down, I'm concerned about the longevity of the dye prints.  Therefore, I only use the printer for prints which I'm entering into competitions and want to look great for a short period.  For things which I want to last long term, I use a lab to print them on Kodak Endura, which should provide a lifespan easily surpassing any inkjet printer.

One of the benefits of the Pro 10 is that the pigment based ink is longer lasting than the the dye based ink in the Pro 100.  But just note that the Pro 10 images might still only last 9-12 years (per Redriverpaper site).  While they will last longer depending upon the framing material and how they are stored, in comparison, Kodak Endura (and Fuji Crystal Archive etc) should last 100+ years on display in a typical home environment and 200+ years in dark storage.  Dye vs Pigment lifespan is an important consideration, but if you are looking for an archival quality solution, there are better options.

Canon General / Re: Sensor life
« on: December 15, 2014, 03:21:01 AM »
Is there something like 'sensor hours' before it goes bad?
Why assume they will go bad?  Maybe we'll discover that sensors get better with age?  Perhaps in 100 years time artists will covet the sensors from the early 2000's for their colour shifts, dead pixels, CFA fading, sun damage, laser damage, accumulated background radiation exposure etc etc?  All of these should give each sensor a unique signature that sets it apart from the mainstream, making them very valuable.  In fact, I'm going to start stocking up now.

Reviews / Re: Are Gitzo's really overrated?!
« on: December 03, 2014, 04:03:11 AM »
When I look at my cheaper, non-Gitzo, 5 year old carbon fibre tripod with feet that keep falling off, tubes that pull straight out, and glue failing everywhere,  I often wonder if Gitzo's are overrated....

Lenses / Re: Lens Fungus - Advice Needed
« on: December 03, 2014, 03:59:15 AM »
If you don't see any deterioration in image quality, just learn to live with it.  The fungus is probably embedded in the glue holding the lens together.  Short of an expensive complete rebuild, a repair is just going to give you a temporary reprieve.  And if you list the lens accurately for sale, you won't get much interest.

I've had a number of lenses with fungus problems.  In my case, I suspect it is because I use my gear in the rain and I live in a hot, humid climate, creating an ideal environment.  One home remedy to try is to leave your lens out in the sun for a few days/week as some fungi don't like UV.  This won't fix up any etching currently there, but might hinder future growth.  (If you try this, place the lens on something which isn't inflammable.)

EOS Bodies / Re: Sony to capture all the non-Canon sensor sales
« on: December 01, 2014, 10:16:43 PM »
Kodak vs Fuji
Canon vs Sony

Interesting that the technology has changed so much in recent years, but photographers are still left with with only two dominant companies for image capture.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:45:08 AM »
For published fashion work I can see Fuji-blad will remain _the_ "go-to" system.

Interesting that you mention Fuji-blads - There is a very high chance that a Fuji medium format announcement is imminent.  Supposedly styled similar to an X-Pro 1 and using the ubiquitous Sony 50mp sensor, it will go head to head with a Sony/Mamiya medium format, rangefinder styled camera.  If rumors come to fruition, these two guys are going to rule landscape and travel photography.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 05:08:51 AM »
This is the first online forum I joined.  At the time of filling the profile out, it never occurred to me that you're stuck with the same user name forever...... :(

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 03:29:50 AM »
Someone keeps thinking that in the future all cameras will be full frame? :-X
I think crop cameras are safe, too.  If anything, the comments above about "pro" users makes me think the days of FF cameras might be numbered.

Crop sensors have improved significantly over the last few years.  And, if Canon was to implement the latest improvements in manufacturing techniques and sensor design, we'd struggle to see much IQ advantage of a FF sensor over an APS-C sensor (in fact, with other brands, you struggle to see the difference now).  DOF differences and shooting at very high ISOs and more MPs will still be attractive incentives for crop camera users to change to a FF camera.  But I suspect a growing number of people will decide that crop cameras are good enough. 

To differentiate themselves in a competitive market, I see more studio-based and wedding photographers moving to medium format and abandoning 1DX/D3X/D4S style cameras. (And in the next two years, there will be at least another two new, smaller, medium format systems introduced in the 1DX price range to attract these photographers.)  Many wildlife and sports shooters will prefer the extra "reach" of a 7D3.  Current 5D3 users will continue to transition to Sony and Fuji mirrorless systems.  I don't know if there will many people left to buy Canon FF cameras.

How does this all tie into this topic?  Canon have only made muted sounds about medium format and that doesn't give people looking for a medium format option the confidence to stay around for a bit longer.  They will move to other brands.  A very high percentage of mirrorless buyers are DSLR owners, yet they are also leaking away to other brands.  We can tell from the rumors posted here and the details of patents that Canon has the ability to make class leading crop sensors, but we haven't seen much evidence of Canon investing any $$$ in manufacturing plant and instead we have Canon polishing up the same sensor they've had for how many generations of cameras?  This leads to website stories about how Canon is falling behind, which might lead people doing research on their first camera to choose another brand.  Added to this, there hasn't been a noticeable drive to develop EF-S lenses anyway.  And with the Eos-M, a quick look at the B&H site suggests you can't even buy an Eos-M and if you already had one and were after another lens, I hope it is the 22/2 that you seek as it is the only one available. 

Lenses / Re: Help me decide: should I buy an EF 135L
« on: November 24, 2014, 07:01:35 AM »
I love mine, and it has essentially replaced my 70-200.  But in the absence of special uses such as wildlife or sports photography (after all, on a 7D it is essentially an equivalent of a 200mm f/2 in relation to reach and light gathering) it doesn't sound like you'll get a lot of extra benefit from it.  Still, it is a nice lens at a good price....just buy one.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 23, 2014, 07:35:35 AM »
As a Canon user since the mid-1980's, I have a strong attachment to the brand.  Before jumping across to Fuji, I gave Canon a chance and waited for their mirrorless option.  But it just wasn't what I wanted and sadly had to go elsewhere.

I still use Canon DSLRs for some things, but my kit hasn't changed in ages - Canon just haven't made anything that has excited me in a long time.  I think the 40/2.8 is the only Canon lens I've purchased in the last three years, and the new 100-400 is the first serious lens in a long time that I'm likely to buy.  But the only reason I'd consider buying a new body is if a camera breaks and I need to replace it.  Even though my cameras are several years old, for what I shoot, I don't think a new camera would be of any significant improvement.

Apart from some topics I haven't noticed an upsurge in negative comments.  This is still a very friendly, helpful forum.  But I can understand why those with particular interest, needs and desires might be disappointed with Canon's lack of development in some areas. 

EOS Bodies / Re: what is the body you want to see canon release next ?
« on: November 16, 2014, 06:44:24 AM »
I'm pretty happy with things as they are now.  Don't really see the need for any new bodies.

Largely the same as above.  I'll turn it off to remove the card at the end of the day and it will then stay turned off until I need to use it again.

I try to remember to turn it off when changing lenses as I've heard the the sensor is more likely to attract dust with the camera on due to "static electricity" and "charged particles".  Might be an old wives' tale, but sounds feasible.

Canon General / Re: Hello everyone!
« on: November 11, 2014, 10:02:39 AM »
I agree, too.  You should consider compiling some of your posts and turn them into a photography book.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 54