April 17, 2014, 03:12:29 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 - KyleSTL

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27
1
A DC-AC converter (with USB charging port) that allows me to charge batteries and devices while traveling.
+1, I have a Pearstone charger and 6 plates for it (3 Canon DSLR, 2 Canon P&S, 1 Nikon DSLR).  I carry one charger and all the plates for the cameras I'm carrying at any time, and have the ability to charge my iPhone, iPad, etc at the same time.  I wish it was a 10W or 12W USB charger, but for convenience, it cannot be beat.

2
Lenses / Re: Speculation: Year of the Lens
« on: March 03, 2014, 11:41:25 AM »
...and I think the only money I regret spending is on a 70-300 (non-L) because that lens was SO soft at 300mm.
+1, I wish Canon would update this lens with the features (non-rotating focus, Ring USM) and build quality of the Tamron and Nikon equivalents.  The 70-300L looks like a great lens, but is much larger and more expensive.  I have also considered the 70-200 f4L and f4L IS, but neither will fit it my current bag (I know, not the most valid excuse, but I like my current bag).  I have considered going back to the 70-210 USM and/or 100-300 USM I owned previously (I love their focusing speeds and the IQ from both almost exactly matches the 70-300 IS).  I can't complain, though, I got the 70-300 IS for a song, and could easily sell it for a profit.  I'm just bitter because I've used the Nikon 70-300 VR (released 2006), and enjoyed the experience much more than the Canon (released 2005) lens I have.  I think Canon owes it to it's 6D customers to have some reasonable-quality entry level (read: non-L) zoom lenses, and currently they have zero in the UWA and normal ranges, and three relatively mediocre tele zooms.  Yes, the 24-105L, 24-70 f4L, 17-40L and 70-300L IS are great lenses, but they are not in the same price range (un-kitted) as Nikon's 24-85 VR, 18-35 and 70-300 VR.  Entry-level consumers (and purchasers of used 5D's and 5D Mark II's) need more choices for their cameras without taking the 'L' plunge.

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 40D with grip for $300, or something else?
« on: February 05, 2014, 05:29:08 PM »
Positives (on top of what has already been mentioned):
• Large LCD - 3" (although at the lower resolution, the 50D and 7D were the first to have the higher DPI)
• All 9 AF points are cross-type (better than 5D and 5D Mark II)
• Burst of 6.5 fps (better than 50D, 60D and all Rebels)

Negatives:
• No video (any T*i or SL1 will have it)
• Size (compared with Rebels)
• Weight (compared with Rebels or 6D)

Price seems pretty good, so long as it is clean and in good functioning condition (and doesn't have 200k actuations).

4
Sports / Re: Your favourite motorsports events
« on: January 21, 2014, 10:48:21 AM »
Sadly, I have not been to a motorsports race since I bought my first DSLR 4 years ago.  I grew up attending 1-2 races each year at Mid Ohio Sportscar Course in Lexington, OH, USA (between Columbus and Cleveland).  I love that place, and I've missed it for the past 6 or 7 years.  My favorite events there are the SCCA Vintage Races and the ALMS Series/Grand Am Series (now United SportsCar Championship).  I miss the days of the Camel GT series, as well, as that era of racecars holds a special place in my heart.

On the bucket list of automotive events I would like to attend, the following: 24 Hours of Le Mans, Monoco GP, 24 Hours of Daytona, Goodwood Festival of Speed, Rennsport Reunion, Barrett Jackson and Pebble Beach Concours.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 18, 2014, 03:27:55 PM »

HurtinMinorKey, Don't let them drive you off! More iPhone-itis quotes (either still or video quotes are just fine), please.   & please, please, PLEASE keep quoting Ken Rockwell! (ur not Ken, using another handle, r u??) 

& I thought being stuck at home on a Friday night was going to be boring....

I aim to please/entertain/enrage. One thing i've realized over the years on this forum: nothing gets you more responses of righteous indignation than citing Ken Rockwell.  That make him a pretty powerful tool;)

The question remains, though, do you still stand by your assertion that the iPhone [5S, I assume] produces better video than a 720p DSLR (the 1100D specifically)?

6
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:51:08 AM »
Not surprising. The specifications of the 1100D are embarrassing compared to the D3300 (and the D3200 and D3100 that preceded it). The Pentax K500 and all the Sony offerings are considerably better in every aspect as well.  With the exception of the 100D (size) and 70D (dual pixel AF), Canon's crop offering are pretty dated and uninteresting.

And yet...not surprisingly, the SL1, T3i, and T3 are all outselling the D3200 and D3100 on Amazon - so maybe Nikon should be embarrassed?  Pentax and Sony?  LOL.  Judging by their sales rankings, consumers don't find them interesting at all.  No Sony cameras in Amazon's Top 30 dSLRs.  Speaking of 'dated', there is a Pentax at #29...but it's not the 'considerably better' K500, but rather the K-1000...I guess it's a good thing you can buy the film (!) for it on Amazon, too.
As a business, I agree with you 100% - Sony, Pentax and Nikon are definitely lack-luster.

As a [well-informed] consumer, I would never buy a current entry-level DSLR from Canon, or recommend them to a friend or family member due to the lack of competitive specifications - even though I think Canon is a superior system overall.  That's saying something.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 16, 2014, 11:13:35 PM »
Not surprising. The specifications of the 1100D are embarrassing compared to the D3300 (and the D3200 and D3100 that preceded it). The Pentax K500 and all the Sony offerings are considerably better in every aspect as well.  With the exception of the 100D (size) and 70D (dual pixel AF), Canon's crop offering are pretty dated and uninteresting. That said, I have no idea how they will update the 1100D (throw in a T1i sensor with 1080p, perhaps?).  That would make sense since the 1000D was a reheated 400D (XTi) with a slightly larger screen, and the 1100D was a reheated 450D (XSi) with video.  I'm not sure how they would differentiate a 1200D from the 100D, 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D, 60D or 7D that all contain 18MP sensors.

8
That's what I was thinking too. "Don't go guys... we have something GREAT in store for you. Have faith!"

Yep, we have the D4s - it has a new Expeed processor that will really make your jpg images pop, because we know none of you out there shoot NEF files.  Oh, and better AF.  Better how?  Just better.  Trust us.

The same happened with the D70s.  'Modest' would be a stretch to describe the difference between the two.  Granted that camera was nearly 9 years ago and is at least 3 rungs below the D4 in the hierarchical ladder, but it does show a history of claims and results.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Not Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 15, 2013, 07:06:57 PM »
The 6D is #11 an #16

That probably reflects the fact that B&H and Adorama tend to sell the higher-end cameras in packages for the same price as Amazon, but with lots of extras, which would skew the low-end purchases towards Amazon and the high-end purchases towards other companies.

If you look at Flickr stats, there are 10 times as many photos taken with the 6D as with the 70D, with almost 5 times as many average daily users.  Even adjusting for the 6D having been on the market twice as long, that suggests that the 70D probably isn't doing as well as one would hope.

Could that speak to the demographic of 6D owners, or that it was the first DSLR with built-in WiFi (which the 70D also has now), or the fact it was released many months before the 70D was announced or available?  You cannot accurately infer sales data from such an observation.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Not Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 14, 2013, 01:06:22 PM »
You might have only needed a 400mm lens on a crop but now you need a 600mm on a FF so it encourages sales of more expensive lenses.

That is simply not true.  A 400mm lens on a cropped FF image is exactly the same as 400mm on a crop sensor.  The only [current] benefits of a crop sensor is sensor/camera production costs, cropped image resolution, image, fps, and lens size/weight. 

A crop camera has a higher magnification VF (although it is overall smaller) means that subjects are easier to focus on and compose accurately even if they have the same pixel density.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: December 12, 2013, 02:38:05 PM »
A pro intimated to me that has seen / used the camera that its a 45MP sensor. He put it in a way that didnt infringe his NDA.
That's a spicy little tidbit.  Keep us posted.

12
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 12, 2013, 01:24:52 PM »
Just out of curiosity, I ran the numbers for these rumored lenses for 'hand-holdability'. Here's the breakdown:

The 50mm f/1.8 IS would tie the 35mm f/2 IS for 'most handholdable':
EV 0 = 35mm | f2 | 0.4 sec | ISO 1000
EV 0 = 50mm | f1.8 | 0.5 sec | ISO 1000

A 50mm f/1.4 IS would be the new 'most handholdable' lens:
EV 0 = 50mm | f1.4 | 0.5 sec | ISO 640

The 85mm f/1.8 IS would be
EV 0 = 85mm | f1.8 | 1/6 sec | ISO 2000

And 135mm f/1.8, 2 and 2.8 would be
EV 0 = 135mm | f1.8 | 1/10 sec | ISO 3200
EV 0 = 135mm | f2 | 1/10 sec | ISO 4000
EV 0 = 135mm | f2.8 | 1/10 sec | ISO 8000

Nothing important, just thought I'd share what I found.

13
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 11, 2013, 05:26:29 PM »
Yes I would be all over a 1.7x TC too.  But I guess since Nikon has had one for a decade, Canon needs to wait another couple of decades before they bring one to market.  You know, just to make sure they get it right!

Oh, you mean like ultrasonic motors (Canon: 1987, Nikon: 1998)?
Or image stabilization in 35mm lenses (Canon: 1995, Nikon: 2000)?
Or electromagnetic aperture mechanisms (Canon: 1987, Nikon: 2008)?
How about full frame digital sensors (Canon: 2002, Nikon: 2007)?
Or CMOS sensors for DSLRs (Canon: 2000, Nikon: 2004)?
Built in teleconverter (Canon: 1984 [2012 for AF], Nikon: never)?

Yeah, like those.

I know I have cherry-picked a few examples, but you can't possibly think that Nikon is a substantially faster-moving and more innovative company overall.  And that 1.7x TC you desire, there are two versions for Nikon: 1) that works only with AF-S and AF-I lenses, and 2) a version that is manual focus only for all lenses.  Own an nice AF 300mm f/2.8 or 80-200mm f/2.8D?  Tough luck, no AF for you (not that Nikon AF lenses are fast by anyone's definition).

Grass still greener?

14
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: December 11, 2013, 10:02:49 AM »
Just a thought, but how many people (especially unhappy 17-40mm or 16-35mm owners complaining of soft corners) would be please if Canon replaced the 20mm f/2.8 USM with a 20mm f/2.8 IS or 18mm f/2.8 IS for around the same street price as the 17-40mm (not initially, but eventually drift down like the 24/28/35mm IS primes)?

I know 20mm is much longer than 16mm or 17mm, but I'm sure a new IS prime would be incredible sharp, and still fairly small.  Sounds like the perfect solution for video (widest stabilized lens in Canon EOS mount) and tripod-free nighttime landscape photography (theoretically handholdable at 0.8 sec).  What does the CR community think of such a replacement?

You can handhold a 24-105 IS for .8 seconds at 24mm, can't you?  I think I've done it...well at least for .5 seconds.  Of course that's an f/4 lens...One of the shots I posted in the "anything shot with a 6D" thread, was at 105mm handheld, I think for 1/8 or 1/5 of a second, ISO 5000...was during the "blue hour".

I think Zeiss should make an f/1.4 wide angle zoom that autofocuses, has tilt shift, along with IS, weather sealing, and magnesium/carbon fiber construction...for $500!  :P
That is not what I was trying to say, at all.  Carl, you are one of the most argumentative and unreasonable people on this forum, your level of discourse brings the entire community down. 

It is not unreasonable to say that Canon will replace the 20mm f/2.8 in the near future with IS, if they are replacing the 85mm f/1.8 USM with an IS version.  Price should be pretty comparable to the 24/28/35mm IS primes.  My assumption of this future lens was in no way unrealistic.

Also, a stop faster lens means either: 1) a lower ISO for less noise, or 2) even lower light levels than the 24-105mm f/4L.  I'm sure you can get sharp pictures at 24mm at 0.8 sec with a somewhat acceptable keeper rate, but a wider, 20mm lens should in-theory increase that keeper rate (especially with the newest IS version and a fixed focal length lens that they can really optimized its effectiveness).  I'm not trying to convince you I'm right, but your tendency to denegrate fellow forum members is disturbing.

EDIT: Sorry if I misread the tone of your post, I just noticed the tongue smiley.

15
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 10, 2013, 04:33:16 PM »
I raised the camera [1Dx and 600mm f/4L IS II USM with 2.0x III TC] that was hanging from a Blackrapid strap, and took a couple of bursts.
I want to see a picture of that (rig hanging on a BR), it sounds rather epic.  Please tell me you have a DR-2 and had your EOS M and 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM on the other side.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27