August 23, 2014, 04:17:18 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 - bseitz234

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
1
Would I? No, I've been happy with the 85 1.8. Do I see a market for it? Maybe... I think it would mostly depend on the price. If they knocked a bit off the current 85L II, maybe $1400-$1600? Otherwise they'd lose more sales to the likes of what I'm sure is coming out from Sigma in a new 85 art.

As a sidenote, 1.4 vs. 1.2 is only half a stop, not a whole stop. So 25% less light, 50% would be one full stop slower. ;-)

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 03:57:45 PM »
Regarding the sensor...very disappointing. Sounds like a re-purposed 70D sensor with a DPAF improvement. I was REALLY, REALLY hoping Canon would really show something impressive on the sensor front with the 7D II. If the camera really does hit the streets with a 20mp sensor, I fully expect it to have the same DR limitations as all of Canon's previous sensors. Extremely disappointing.  :'( Guess we'll have to wait for the 5D IV to see if Canon can actually step up their sensor IQ game or not...which is just...so far down the road...Bleh.

Also worried about the "fine detail"...I really don't want them to start removing AA filters. That is just a dumb trend that photographers like simply because they do not understand the value of an AA filter, or the ease by which AA softening can be sharpened.

+1

it sorta almost leads one to believe that Japanese Canon Fangirls post here where they were claiming that Canon feels they have Canon users trapped enough that it won't matter if the bodies they push out can't keep up as per sensors and even other features at times (still not a hint that they are actually moving any DSLR sensors to new fabs and the panny gets 4k and yet the super new 7D2 which was promised to have revolutionary video and this and that is still 1080p)

and yeah the AA filter-less stuff I am not a big fan of, maybe when we get to 180MP FF or 60MP APS-C or something.

Yeah, we really need sensors to significantly oversample the lens before we can legitimately start dropping AA filters. Otherwise we just end up WITH aliasing, and that's never good.

I was not really interested in the 7D II being a big video DSLR anyway...I don't really know that anyone truly was, you just don't get that cinematic look with a smaller sensor...not without having very wide apertures anyway (like a lot of expensive cinema lenses do).

The thing that I think Canon really needed to nail, and which increasingly appears as they will not, is producing a truly new sensor with a fundamentally new design on a smaller fabrication process size. It just isn't happening. If this thing is still a 500nm transistor part...I mean...WOW. That technology is about fifteen years old!! What is Canon doing? It's one thing to be conservative, but now it's just getting ludicrous...

I have always wondered about this, and you may be the guy to answer. Intel's next series of chips is what, 14nm process? I understand that Intel is purely in the microprocessor business, and Canon has to do a lot more than just optimize processes for sensors, but is there any practical reason why sensor transistors are / should be / need to be on such a different scale? Or is it just a matter of business and not wanting to make the necessary investment to keep shrinking? The fact that intel shrinks every other year has just made me wonder... because clearly there's an advantage to a smaller process.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 03:37:09 PM »
Sounds like it could be good... I'm in the "hedged optimism" camp. I'll probably buy it, but probably not till the post-Christmas refurb sales. 10FPS and 65pt AF are enough to keep my interest, and the 70D sensor is good enough for me at this point, so I'm not immediately turned off. Hoping for more... guess that remains to be seen!

(And if we can get more details about that sensor, that would be great!)

4
and if one at bat leads to 5 runs

The most runs that can result from one at-bat is 4... just saying  ::)

If it were me in that situation, I probably would have brought a camera, taken the pictures I could while there was enough light, and once the sun was down, put the camera down, grabbed a grilled sausage (it looks like the Seadogs were the visiting team, but at their home field, there is an amazing brew pavilion. Great beer, great food), and enjoyed the game.

I think if you really want better pictures from the stands, you have a few options: slow your shutter a bit, get some motion blur in the pitcher's arm, but mostly have a sharp shot that captures the speed and motion of the pitching; ditch the 1.4x, open up to 2.8, and crop later; bump your ISO and accept some grain, but have a nice sharp image; accept that you're going to have to get a divorce, and go with the 200/2 (or better, 200 1.8) on a 1dx.  ;D

5
I am confused.  Why not just manually defocus the shot?
That was my thought... just bump the focus ring a bit towards infinity. Also, as far as b) goes, if you put the focus point on the eye, it should focus there and not the nose...

6
Animal Kingdom / Re: Mary had a Little Lamb
« on: August 21, 2014, 06:31:50 AM »
That's actually a kid (goat) Anil.

 :-X  :o  8)

I don't know why but this made my morning...

7
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 09:04:37 AM »
man, if half of that spec list comes true, and the launch price is $2k or less, I'm going to have a hard time waiting for refurbs to show up...


With the few rumored specs here this may be top of the line camera with an APS-C sensor that will target semi-pro and pro. My expectation is that the price will be in the same league as the 5D MKIII at launch.

When it was launched, though, the original 7D was exactly that, was it not? And it was $1799? Not saying it couldn't be as much as the 5d3, just that I don't think it necessarily will. I'm certainly not counting on $2k, but I'll be disappointed if it's north of $2500. Time will tell!

8
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 08:41:23 AM »
man, if half of that spec list comes true, and the launch price is $2k or less, I'm going to have a hard time waiting for refurbs to show up...

9
EOS Bodies / Re: popup-flash - made a "pro feature"?
« on: August 13, 2014, 11:46:46 AM »
Um, is it just me, or aren't canon's popup flashes already optical masters? I don't think they'd add a popup flash to the 5d4 and remove that capability....

IMO "pro" would be radio master, but that doesn't require a flash. That can just be built into the body. At this point, any pros who haven't gone to the radio system are probably pretty well invested in the optical system, and have a master that works for them, I don't think adding a built-in master would add a whole lot of appeal. Heck, I usually use a 580 as a master anyway, it's got better range and can do HSS, which the 7d popup can't.

What else could they do? Make it waterproof, so it doesn't compromise weather sealing at all? I can't see any way they can make it as powerful as a 430, but that would help...

10
By "supplier" I assume you mean a retail store? I also assume they must have some sort of return policy? If you think the camera is at fault just ask them to exchange it and let them deal wih canon, if you don't want to. Or call canon yourself  they've always been a breeze to deal with in my experience.

11
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 04, 2014, 02:55:00 PM »
Human eye

Field of view

The approximate field of view of an individual human eye is 95° away from the nose, 75° downward, 60° toward the nose, and 60° upward, allowing humans to have an almost 180-degree forward-facing horizontal field of view. With eyeball rotation of about 90° (head rotation excluded, peripheral vision included), horizontal field of view is as high as 270°. About 12–15° temporal and 1.5° below the horizontal is the optic nerve or blind spot which is roughly 7.5° high and 5.5° wide.

Link:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_eye#Field_of_view

Either I'm misunderstanding the use of angles here, or this cannot possibly be right. A horizontal field of view of more than 180º would mean I can see stuff that is behind me without turning my head... that's simply not true. I wish it were, because that would be kind of cool.

Alas, with rotating my eyes, I'll grant 180º. Staring straight ahead at a fixed point, with both eyes open, I feel like 120º is a good estimate. With one eye open... 90º?

12
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 24, 2014, 11:56:36 PM »
...
This really isn't a surprise. DxO and Nikon are inseparably joined at the hip.
...

Do you have any evidence of this?

All of this (everyone's comments) just sounds like more sour grapes from Canon fans because their cameras don't score as well and it is well recognised that Canon's sensors aren't as good.

Does anyone complain that the scores for Canon sensors are too high?
Or that DxO incorrectly says that Canon camera X has a better/worse sensor than Canon camera Y?

^--- This ---^

Isn't a surprise, either. :P  ;D Our resident Nikon foreverfanboyyayz!

BTW, Dilbert...are you ACTUALLY asking me if Nikon and DXO are "literally" joined at the hip?   ???  I mean, your asking for "evidence" of that...I've been racking my brain for a way to describe how organizations and companies have "hips", conjure up some kind of...evidence, for that...but I'm at a loss for...anything...here...... :P

I hear in a song once that hips don't lie.

Nah, that only applies if you're Shakira.

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 24, 2014, 11:16:25 PM »
As DXO has given a near perfect score to the D810, they may have painted themselves into a corner. Their proprietary scale doesn't give DXO much room to heap hyperbolic praise on the next Nikon release.

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/07/24/nikon-d810-sensor-new-dxomark-leader.aspx/

<lots of tech talk clipped>

I usually skip over these threads, as they seem to rapidly devolve to drivel... but this was a very interesting post to read. Things I never really think about in the pipeline of signal processing. Thanks for that! (and thanks for getting it on the first page ;-) )

14
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D the new 6Ti?
« on: July 23, 2014, 09:34:05 PM »
Wouldn't the trend suggest that the t6i will be the t5i, with a new name badge and a better kit lens? Maybe they'll up the AF system, but the biggest strength of that system is its customizability, and ability to select and use outer focus points with cross-type reliability. Most (yes, I'm generalizing, but that generalization is based on the target market for the rebel), most rebel users are less-advanced users, and using either full auto, or a program mode, which won't really take full advantage of the AF. FPS definitely won't exceed 70D, I guess no more than 6fps. And body/build will certainly stay rebel. The 7D was already recycled to make the 70D, and it's what, 5, pushing 6 years old? They've gotten plenty of mileage out of that R&D already....

15
Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 21, 2014, 03:11:37 PM »
EF-S prime in the range 20-24mm
EF-S 50-150 f2.8 IS
200mm f2.8 IS
100-300 f4 IS
A replacement to the 22-55mm would be nice, it is a very handy focal range. 20-50 f4 IS would be ideal and would make a killer holiday lens

Oh how I would love an EF-S 22mm 1.4. Or even 1.8. That would be awesome. I just can't justify the cost of the 24L, but if there were an EF-S version for $500 or $600 I'd be all over it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19