Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Do you use lens correction profiles when processing raw files or not with LR4

« on: March 18, 2013, 03:33:50 PM »

I'm not buying another "fast" wide angle lens until a manufacturer can offer me near-zero coma and near-zero CA. My Sigma 35mm f/1.4 was a *horror* in this regard at f/1.4; the only useful portion of an astro image was perhaps 10% (at most) near the center. And if a lens can't shoot cleanly at f/1.4, I don't think they ought to advertise it as such. My Sigma 35mm was only useful at f/2.8 and above. At 1.4 it was a joke.

As consumers, we've been far too forgiving of these horribly distorted lens designs. Here's hoping the manufacturers are listening.

2

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS & EF 28 f/2.8 IS Available for Preorder

« on: May 30, 2012, 12:38:59 AM »

If it isn't f/1.4 or faster, I'm not even *slightly* interested.

What I'd like to see is a 24mm f/1.0 IS.

C'mon Canon, there are a zillion f/2.8 and the like lenses. From a zillion manufacturers! Give us something COOL!

3

EOS Bodies / Is anyone else as...

« on: February 08, 2012, 04:06:16 PM »

...completely unmoved by Canon's recent gear as I am?

For lenses, I'm interested in fast, low-CA lenses. And no, 2.8 isn't fast. 1.2 or 1.0 is fast.

For cameras, I'm interested in high ISO and low noise and more dynamic range. Not more pixels. 10...15mp is fine.

As for price, I'm interested in 5DmkII territory... $7000 is cause for hilarity, not purchase.

Seriously, it's been years since Canon released *anything* I actually wanted to go out and buy.

Half of every day is spent in the dark. Cameras and lenses that do poorly in the dark are of exactly zero interest, especially when we're talking the prices we do for EF/EOS.

I'm hoping for a 5DmkIII priced like the mkII that will add even more light-gathering capacity to my 85mm and 50mm f1.2 lenses. $3000 absolute tops.

The 5DmkII is *really* long in the tooth now. I like it, all right, but it's long past time it was retired for something better.

Better shots. In darker environments. That's the key. After all, a camera that can do that will do well in the daytime, too.

4

EOS Bodies / OK...

« on: November 03, 2011, 08:47:29 PM »

...now that we video in a device designed for it, can we get back to real DSLRs now?

I am *so* tired of manufacturers trying to pimp video as if it were a feature of a DSLR... it's 100% useless to me. Give me dynamic range and low noise and high ISO and 15 MP/FF or so and quit trying to turn a still camera into mommy's home movie maker.

I understand people want to use our fabulous lenses, yeah, great, but this is the way to do it -- with a dedicated device -- not by filling up an otherwise fine still camera with irrelevancy.

Where's my 5DmkIII?

/rant
 

5

EOS Bodies / Re: More New Full Frame Rumors [CR1]

« on: September 19, 2011, 02:09:02 PM »

a camera with lower megapixels than might be expected for a new release, but with excellent dynamic range and ISO performance.

Ok, NOW you have my attention. It's about time!

This describes a camera I would buy right out of the gate.

Faster transfers from the camera, less PC storage space, faster image processing, less noise, better performance  over the hours of darkness, more images on the camera's card, faster processing and potentially faster per-frame capture... and it uses my lens collection! You bet I'd buy a Canon camera like this. In a heartbeat.

6

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATED* Big Megapixel Camera Next Week.

« on: August 18, 2011, 05:47:26 PM »

Not looking for megapixels -- 21 is already too many for FF. Huge files, slow transfers, slow processing.

Looking for better low light performance; lower noise; better EVF previewing for longer exposures; GPS; wireless downloading; wireless charging; programmable exposures longer than 30 seconds; Switchable IR filtering (or none... I'd be happy to slap an IR block filter on the lenses when shooting normally.) (C'mon Canon, don't you want to sell a boatload of highly profitable filters???)

You know... things that will actually improve the images and the regimes, and the shooting experience, as opposed to giving us, yet again, an even more detailed view of the flaws in the lenses.

But of course, what we'll GET is... more megapixels. Bigger files. Slower processing. Slower transfers. Oh yeah, and more effort wasted on trying to inappropriately multipurpose these beautiful still cameras into video cameras. And maybe a new battery style so as to obsolete the hugely expensive ones we've already bought.

I am *so* tired of "Hey, look more megapixels!" and frankly, I'm not going to buy unless the camera actually performs better. Increases in megapixels work *against* my buy-in. And no, throwing out half  or 3/4ths of the pixels in the camera isn't the right way to go -- the less sensor area involved in taking the shot, the more noise there will be. With a nominally high megapixel camera, you have to take the entire image and then bin the results in order to approach the actual noise reducing effect of larger sensels. So modes like SRAW and SRAW2 don't really help (unless the cameras are modified to do the binning, that would be a useful change.)

7

Site Information / Re: *Update* Canon Rumors & Facebook

« on: January 07, 2011, 09:13:19 AM »

You don't need facebook. Facebook needs *you*, and in my honest opinion, you'd be better off not paying any attention to them. They're WAY too self-important. Stick with the site here and as-is. You do a good job with it. Facebook is shite by comparison. You think facebook is commonly mentioned over at DPR? No. But YOU are!

8

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5DmkIII

« on: October 23, 2010, 06:20:37 AM »

Set a 5DII to sRAW2 -- volia, 10.8MP... Keep in mind tho that a single photosite of the 21MP sensor is bigger than a single photosite of the 50D or even 40D sensors...

I'd be more likely to take a full res shot and then reduce it. That gives some improvement on the noise too. That's probably what'll happen. Still end up with ridiculous RAWs, but noise and ISO are critical to my needs, so I don't see a a lot of choice. Unless Canon puts out a competitor to the Nikon D3s... now that would be a camera I'd willingly plunk down some money for!

9

EOS Bodies / Canon 5DmkIII

« on: October 22, 2010, 05:36:34 PM »

Here's what I want.

About 8...10 MP. Why? Because large sensels produce larger signals and this will improve the signal to noise ratio, hence allow higher ISOs, a'la the D3s *except* that Canon handles black better than Nikon and also doesn't foul up my images with noise reduction I can't turn off. Also, because an image of this size transfers faster, takes up less space both in the camera and on disk, processes faster, loads faster, saves faster, and also means the camera can shoot faster, and ALSO means that the available lenses will do an excellent job because the size of the individual pixels pushes diffraction further up the f-stops and doesn't require such tight focus to be pixel-accurate, either.

The *only* reason I don't own a 5DmkII is because of the 21 MP. That's ridiculous. My 50D, at 15 MP, is already making images that are far too large. My 40D was better; but the 50D's ability to shoot at ISO 12800 has me hooked. But I can't see going to 21 MP for ISO 25k (still, if it was in my hands... the wallet might be in danger.)

Other than low noise, high ISO, and hopefully an end to megapixel madness, I don't really care about things like AF - give me one good center point and I'd be happy; I *really* don't care about video; I'd like approximately the 50D feature set and that'd be fine.

Having said that, I'm sure they'll give me a plastic body camera with 50 MP, ISO 6400, and every video mode known in NTSC, PAL, SECAM and HD. And I'll have to stick with my 50D or break down and buy a 5DmkII.