December 18, 2014, 04:09:18 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 - Efka76

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Wedding Photography / Re: Tough LARGE group photo
« on: November 11, 2014, 05:01:56 PM »
Very good photo taking into account all circumstances! I have a question regarding your logo: is it Photoshoped or is really hanging on that wall ? ;)

Lenses / Re: Selling 200-400
« on: October 05, 2014, 01:16:33 AM »
Im really interested in what you decide to do as I am waiting for the Sigma 150-600 to see how it compares to the Canon 200-400. Obviously its not going to be the same but will the Canon be worth $10000 extra? I dont mind paying if it is but for a lens that wont be my primary Im kinda thinking about the Sigma.. .hoping there is some reviews coming out asap!

You are making a conceptual error here :) You should compare Sigma 150-600 with Tamron 150-600. Comparison with Canon is useless as Canon 200-400 is in absolutely different league. It would be the same as to compare Mercedes with Kia :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 03:40:41 AM »
I have never read in my life so much bullshit from senior person. Few my comments:

1) Canon should fire all their engineers if they need 5 years to include 1Dx autofocus technology into other camera.  According to Maeda, 7DII was redesigned but remained absolutely the same as previous model :)

2) Canon's sensors are significantly behind Exmor sensor. If you are not capable producing competitive sensor, please buy it from Sony.

3) Significant focus on mirrorless - are you joking or are you stupid? Canon produced mirrorless camera which is maybe worst in the market. OF course theu sold many such cameras at a loss :)

4) What I see now when look to Canon: arrogant company, which is led by very old japanese person who still thinks that he is living in 60s' :) Canon is still able to support its leadership as it is not easy to change firm when you have many L lenses. For example, myself are not considering changing system into Sony or Nikon as I do not want to incur financial losses due to sale of lenses. But if we talk about new customers, it is doubtful that Canon is winning on this side.

5) It is very clear that Canon is a big ship and starts sinking slowly. This is due to not flexible management. Canon need to replace this old man and put American in CEO position, who would shake the whole corporation and kick engineers asses :)

6) Also, I think it would be a good idea to take Steve Jobs strategy and produce smaller number of models, which are much better than competitors.

Mirrorless market is getting serious and many new customers might buy mirrorless cameras. Canon and Nikon are practically newcomers in this market and need to put more focus and not just provide BS answers to journalists ;)

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70mm
« on: September 25, 2014, 02:24:06 AM »
I would suggest to think "out of the box" and consider Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. This lens is much better in all aspects than Canon EF 24-70 MkI, much cheaper than Canon's 24-70 MKII. Tamron is slightly less sharper than Canon, however it has built-in image stabilisation. Currently this lens is the most used lens from my bunch of lenses that I own.

Canon produces marginally better lenses than competitors but for 2x price :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 17, 2014, 06:54:47 AM »
In the good old days of film, I shot a lot of Kodachrome64... When lighting was not good your options were to use artificial lights or stop taking pictures. My second body usually had a roll of "high speed" film in it... ISO400 or ISO800..... same problem.... loose the light and you go home.

My first digital DSLR was unusable at ISO800 and topped out at a very noisy ISO1600. Now there isn't a DSLR (or mirrorless) on the market that does not produce better results at ISO12,800 than film did at ISO800.... and the numbers are slowly creeping upward.

Last night I mounted a laser pointer on the top of my camera and tried taking pictures of the cats chasing the red dot. You could not see the red dot. I turned the lights down low and cranked up the ISO to 12800 and it worked very well. These are shots that were impossible before and I have come to accept this as normal.... so yes, I need high ISO....


+1 again.

This is very true. Good cameras have always been expensive and out of the hands of most people. Now however, we in the digital age have gotten spoiled some with the advances in technology and I think the "noise" comparisons between film and digital are largely being forgotten.

I don't really stop and think about what ISO I need my 7D to be at to get the shot. I use whatever ISO I need to get the shot I want. I have said this in the past that I have shot as high as ISO 3200 with hummingbirds in flight and after processing the images look fantastic, both on screen and in print.

Guys are doing today with digital that could never have been accomplished with film back in the day. I think noise levels today are very acceptable even with crop sensors and you should buy the camera body that you need at the price you can afford and then use the heck out of it.

I also think because of computers too many people have become "pixel peepers" and look way too closely at the images they take. I usually print my photos at 11 x 14 and even at higher ISO's with my 7D they look great. Looking at an image zoomed in at 100% will destroy just about any image and I think any camera would have a hard time holding up to someone who is convinced that viewing them at that large of size is the only way to judge a camera's worth.

The way I look at it is, once I have processed my RAW image (regardless of what ISO I used on my 7D) and converted it to Jpeg and if the image looks good on screen, then make a print to be sure... good to go!
My 2 cents.


Maybe we are spoiled...however, maybe we are on the cusp of another revolutionary leap forward in IQ again. Ten years from now, we could be looking back at today, and saying the very same thing about noise levels today as we are about noise levels with film.

Yes, we have amazing technology today, and it's allowed for wonderful things. However, counter to "We have it great" is, we could have it better. And, we likely WILL have it better. Most companies are rocketing forward at lightning speed on all camera capability fronts. I know that Samsung doesn't have a great lens selection yet...but, YET. They have a 7D II killer on their hands (well, with the exception that the high speed 15fps rate is 12-bit RAW, which is kind of a Samsung killer :P). All they really need is a great lens selection and a reliable support department. Those things simply need time to accumulate and build up.

Same goes for Sony...they are redefining a lot of the market today, and like Nikon, throwing out a lot of products to see what sticks (although I actually think Sony is doing a better job with product naming and whatnot than Nikon has ever done). It is, again, only a matter of time before Sony's lens lineup bulks up, and they have the benefit of Zeiss behind their glass.

Ten years from now, 14-16 stops of DR (maybe even as much as 20...there are already video sensors that do that with multi-bucket exposures) and ultra, ultra low noise, even at ultra high ISO settings, will be so common that we'll be looking at todays cameras like we look at film. For me, I honestly wonder if Canon will be a big player in that future. They may have lenses and support, but their products, technologically, are being matched or surpassed by even the likes of Samsung....  ???

jrista, I 100% agree with you. Currently I see the following trends:

1) Sony  - its superb sensor is used in many cameras, 35 mm and MF. Recently they introduced super autofocus Combine Sony's sensor with such autofocus and Zeiss lenses and you will get product that puts Canon products at least few generations behind. Of course, Neuro will say his famous words "but Canon's financial situation is better than Sony and Canon sells more cameras", however, he should try not to behave like Canon fanboy but start looking and other companies' innovations more seroulsly.
2) Samsung - look at Samsung NX camera and you will see significant improvements compared with 7D Mk II. Taking a look at Samsung and their innovations pace I would bet on Samsung rather on Canon which became very stagnant company. It is pathetic that after 5 years Canon released 7DMkII, without any innovations (it included current autofocus technology from 1Dx which already paid-off few years ago).
3) Tamron and Sigma - looking at their lenses quality, e.g. Sigma 35 mm Art. Sigma 50 mm art, Sigma 150-600 mm, Tamron 24-70, Tamron 150-600, I see that significant lens market share will be overtaken bu these 2 companies in the future. Canon will be relleasing 7.000-10.000 USD lenses, which will be interesting to some millionaires or lucky sports journalists.   

Lenses / Re: Canon Reveals Details for future Telephoto Lens Line
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:46:26 AM »
Do I understand correctly that DO lenses (with green ring) are considered as worse quality than L class lenses? Also, can someone explain what this "Diffractive optics" means and what are advantages / disadvantages?

EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:39:48 AM »
Though these jpegs look promising; Tony Northrop has a preliminary review concluding little to no improvement over the 7D; while Scott Kelby claims, " It's "high" ISO performance is the best he's ever seen on an APS-C camera".

I'm hoping Kelby's conclusion is the "correct" one!

Scott Kelby is very good salesman who sits in Canon's pocket. Due to Dustin Abbott or other independent reviewer opinion is much more reliable.

A number of people were offered pre-production camera and from their images few best images were selected. Also, it would be very strange if such reviewers would say that this camera has similar low noice performance as old 7D or there are improvements in autofocus area only (which did not cost Canon any additional penny).

Let's calm down and wait until camera is released and then let's watch real reviews.

Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: September 16, 2014, 02:58:59 AM »
Maybe I'm just losing hope.  I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:46:21 PM »
I am looking at Canon 7D MKII specs and I am quite surprised that Canon who is a leader in image making made such a poor job. The reasoning is as follows:

1) MKII version is released after 5 years!!!! This is extremely long period of time for technology makers.
2) 7D at release date was the best APS-C camera which was using breaktrough technology, however, looking at current 7D MkII specs I do not see any INOVATIONS.
3) Looking at current 7D MK II specs I see very little effort from Canon side:
 a) Practically the same body design - no efforts in this area. I like this design but I am a bit surprised that Canon goes such way
 b) 2 DIGIC 6 processors - it is very simple to replace DIGIC 4 processors with current DIGIC 6 processors. Absolutely no efforts required. I would have expected DIGIC 7 processors. Of course dual DIGIC 6 will bu much better than older processors.
 c) AF technology form 1DX and dual pixel technology - no efforts from Canon side. They just simply included very good autofocus in this camera. I expected a bit more from them.
4) Sensor - everybody expected to see a new technology in this area, which would put Canon and Nikon sensors on the same plate. Now it is very big disappointment from Canon side.

By all means,  the new 7D MkII will be extremely good camera with much better autofocus, better battery, GPS (personnaly GPS and WiFi are not needed features for me but RT technology would be useful). Canon could release such camera at least 2-3 years ago as we see that it just implemented a current technology in this camera but it lacks innovations which we see especially in Sony.

Will I buy this camera? Definitely not :) That's because my current 7D is very good camera, I am happy with AF abilities (mainly shoot weddings and studio) and have intentions to buy FF camera (5D MKIII or MK IV) :)

Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: September 12, 2014, 04:51:38 PM »
Guys, maybe it is a stupid question but I wanted to ask the following: If I put EF lenses on my crop camera (7D), I know that 24 mm lens will be equivalent of 38 mm. lens. However, if I put EF-S lenses of 24 mm, will I have 24 mm on crop camera or that will be 38 mm equivalent.

Once more time, sorry for such question but I really want to know the answer.

Jrista, you can not make valid conclusions due to the following:

1) Data is not complete. You are analysing US Amazon sales only. This data is not sufficient even for analysing US marker as there are many more internet and standard sales channels in US.
2) In order to make valid conclusions about dominance in the global market you should include all Amazon shops (US, UK, FR, etc.), B&H, retail stores and many others. Practically it is impossible to gather exact data as you will definitely will not include all sales channels.
3) It would be more reliable to gather data from Financial statements or management reports, bank analyst reports on Canon, Nikon, Olympus, etc. However, here we encounter a problem that even segment reporting data is too aggregated. These companies are involved in many businesses (e.g. Sony, Canon, etc.) and do not provide in financial statements very detailed data about some particular business segment (in our case that would be specific camara data). Of course it would be very interesting for us to see what are Canon global sales of specific cameras in different markets, what is profitability of specific products (we would see that 1Dx, 5D MarkIII are the most profitable models... by the way, it is my assumption :) ). However, such data would be very interesting to competitors and everybody is trying to disclose required information according to various accounting standard requirements (US GAAP, IFRS) and aggregate data in such way in order not to disclose its strengths and real position in the market to competitors. The Bank analysts are obtaining more specific data during various press releases, conf call, etc. (however that data is not audited and nobody can place 100% reliance on it). For example, if you take market position (in percentages) from different companies (I am talking about their own assessments), add everything together I am almost sure that you get more than 100% :D

I am writing this as I was an Audit director for many years in BIG4 and know such things :)

Greetings to everyone from Vilnius, Lithuania! I guess there are not many Lithuanians in this forum :) By the way, if you do not know where Lithuania is located, you can find 3 small Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) in near Baltic sea, Poland and Russia.

Of course, everybody has spare > 10,000 USD, which can spend on Canon 600 mm lenses :) Think thirst before you write :)

From specs it seems that these lenses will be in direct competition with very popular Tamron lenses. Real pros will be using expensive Canon lenses, but general public will be satisfied with affordable and very high quality lenses. Currently Tamron and Sigma are stealing show.... Canon is sleeping....

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: And what does Canon do?
« on: September 05, 2014, 04:22:04 AM »
Red Dragon, Phase One, Hasselblad, medium format, cine lenses, etc. are the names, which most of us see only on internet screen :) These products are currently extremely expensive, however they show what technological achievements are possible in the future for standard consumers.

Neuro always advocates Canon by saying that Canon financial results are better than Nikon or other, that 5D Mark III outsells RED in thousands of times :) However, by looking at technological achievements during the last 20 years we can see how technology (especially computers) became so advanced, very cheap (compare 90's supercomputer abilities and price with simple current computer and price.... today even phone processor abilities are much more advanced than 90s' supercomputer).

Many years photography quality was related to optics only as it was quite hard to make significant and visible improvements in analog camera, however, with introduction of digital cameras everything has changed. Cameras are no different from computers, however, I do not see significant improvements in this area for years (especially from Canon side). My reasoning is the following:

1) The 2 main components in digital camera are sensors and processing chip. When computer processors became extremely powerful and quite cheap camera's processor advancement pace is much slower.

Sensor technology - I still can not understand why sensors are still so expensive. e.g. Canon using the same sensors for many years, R&D costs are already written-off few years ago, production facilities already paid-off also few years ago. As far as I understand initial sensor production costs were quite high, that's why smaller APS-C sensors were used (they were cheaper), however, today everybody should be producing FF sensors for fractional costs comparing to costs few years ago.

2) From Canon (industry leader, profitable company) I would expect significant R&D in sensor technology in order to fortify its leadership in the future as well. However, what we see: the same sensor is used for many years, 7D is not updated for 5 years. And we are living in technology years. For example, if Apply would sell their computers with 5 year old processors they would be bankrupt already.

Also, we see that Sony makes quite significant breakthroughs in sensor technology as their sensors have higher DR, better noise performance, investing in curved sensors and etc. This is how technology company's should behave.

3) Currently Canon has a very big number of different  camera models, which seems stopping their technological advancement as Canon has to think quite hard how not to make good camera, i.e. not to include same features in newer camera models which are considered in lower level cameras. For example, Canon 6D was made a really cripled camera with old autofocus system in order not to canibalise 5D III.

Few years ago  Steve Jobs get rid of many Apply products and concentrated company's effors on few models of compputers and 1 phone and made these products really superb. Canon also should revise their product portfolio. IMHO the following products cameras could be produced:

a) Pro level - Canon 1Dx (FF)
b) Semi pro - Canon 5D Mark III
c) Consumer - Canon 7D
d) Forget all Rebels and P&S cameras.

Also, camera prices should be at least 2 times less comparing to current prices, In such case much higher volume of cameras could be sold.

4) If Canon is not willing  / able to produce good sensors it can buy sensors from Sony. In computer market there is Intel and AMD processor manufacturers. In sensor market also there is no need to have many sensor manufacturers.

5) Lenses - for many years Canon was considered as a real leader in manufacturing quality lenses, however, currently it started to significantly lose competition to Sigma and Tamron due to the following factors:

1) Canon does not update many of its popular lenses for many many years (e.g. Canon 50 1.4 is produced since 199X). Come on, guys, you can not expect that you can compete with Sigma 50 1.4 Art, which are produced by using the current technology comparing with 20 year old technology.

2) Canon does not listen to customer needs. E.g. 100-400 lens update many loyal customers are waiting for many years.

3) Price: just compare Canons 24-70 2.8 L with Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. Tamron is twice cheaper, has vibration control and just only fractionally lower quality. Many customers are happy by paying twice less and getting superb product. Another case Canon 600 mm lens comparison with Tamron 150-600. Of course, Tamron quality is worse but not 10 times comparing to their price difference.

This shows that Canon is either ripping its customers or is not controlling its costs and not able to produce quality products cheaper.

There is a misconception than Apple production does not need calibration :) The truth is that you have to calibrate all monitors if you need accurate colours. Also, this calibration should be performed on a monthly basis due to shift in colours. Generall laptop monitors (even with IPS) are worse than normal monitors. My suggestion for you would be simple: buy calibrator (x-rite i1 display pro or Spyder) and calibrate your monitor. I bought x-rite i1 display pro and i am very happy with it. I was surprised when I saw a really huge difference in colors after my laptop calibration. Also, x-rite i1 display pro has an ability of assessing ambient light in calibration process.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7