January 25, 2015, 11:40:57 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 - shunsai

Pages: [1] 2 3
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 11:56:45 PM »
I'm happy to admit and glad I was wrong about the price point. I thought for sure it was gonna be over $2000. Even though I'm not in the market for a new camera at the moment, I admit this 7D Mark II looks pretty good; the excelling point being the very reasonable price. I still don't understand the $3500 introductory price tag for the Mark III. I hope this 7D II sells well! And I hope when the 5D Mark IV does come that they don't make that mistake again. It's still unbelievable to me to think that the 5D Mark III started out at basically twice the price of the 7D Mark II...

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 09:04:28 PM »

They raised the 5-series price substantially, which left a gap to be filled by the 6D.  With what will Canon fill the $1500 gap between the $1K 70D and your proposed 250% higher-priced 7D?  There may be quite a few 7D owners who would upgrade to a 7DII...but there's a far larger customer base of Rebel/xxxD and xxD owners that Canon would like to see upgrade, and a >$1800 7DII will preclude most of that.

$1699 at launch.

For a while, the original 7D will fill in that gap. Then will eventually come along the 80D.

I would love to believe you're right- I'm not a fan of Canon's current pricing scheme. But I was personally gobsmacked by the $3500 price tag of the 5D3. I would love to believe that that was an isolated case and that Canon still engages in sensible pricing when it comes to upgrades, but I'm not inclined to believe that Canon is that principled. They will charge what they think they can get for it, not based on how neatly it fits into a pricing tier.

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 08:06:38 PM »
A sub-$2000 7DII doesn't sound realistic to me. Cheaper than the 6D? Why would they do that? Those 2 cameras seem targeted at quite different users. 6D is the entry-level full frame for people who want to get their feet wet; 7D is the top-of-the-line crop body for people who want to shoot quick action and have some built in reach. I'm much more inclined to believe Canon will do to the 7DII pricing what they did to the 5DIII pricing- add on $1000 bucks to the price of the predecessor.

$2499 at start.

Here's a follow up from my last email from Canon:
Thank you for following up with us.

I understand your concerns, and cannot say with certainty how many more Operating systems will support DPP v3. I know there is a plan to have DPP v4 support more than the current 4 models, so it is likely your model will be supported by DPP v4 in the near future.

Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance with your EOS 7D. Thank you for choosing Canon.


You must've been a whole lot politer than me, because you got 2 responses, and I haven't even gotten one. That's great news that they will at some point include other models. Thanks for the update!

Site Information / Re: Forum software (upgrade) wish-list
« on: June 17, 2014, 11:01:43 PM »
We are moving to vbulletin in the next 15-30 days.

Post Rating will be included.

Collapsing Threads will be included.

Not sure about your third suggestion, I'll look into it.

There will be a few hiccups with vBulletin, most notably everyone will have to reset their passwords. Some threads will also get bumped when imported and some posted images will disappear. We're working to make it as smooth as possible.

Tapatalk will be installed on the forum.

Not sure about a whiners section. :)

Categories for specific cameras, that may be required and I'll think about it. The issue is moving current topics to the new boards.


I realize this thread is a couple years old, but has any headway been made on integrating Tapatalk access? Were these plans scuttled?

Site Information / Re: Smartphone users - interested in Tapatalk?
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:57:03 PM »
I just found this topic after a quick search because I have been thinking of asking the same question: is there any reason why Canonrumors.com forums can't be made available on Tapatalk? I would love it if it was added. I enjoy this forum and love the ease of use and access on Tapatalk. It would be the best of both worlds.

This does make me wonder what it would take in labor to get support for more camera bodies, lenses, etc... and whether a company could get help from the user community.  Plenty of us are in software, and many users would be very happy to create a lens profile to support their uncommon/outdated lens.  I think it would be cool to have community-constructed profiles for old FD glass, third-party lenses, etc... and be able to import them into DPP.

That would be a dream come true. I still use the 28-70mm 2.8L and the 80-200mm 2.8L lenses, as well as a Tokina UWA. I would love it if these lenses had supported profiles, but I know better than to get my hopes up about that. And perhaps you're right- maybe this split software will be a permanent thing. If they insist on keeping them split, I hope that they will keep updating version 3 for a while to come. But with a software split like this, it seems more likely that 3 will fall by the wayside and get neglected till they just scuttle it altogether.

Canon is one of the few companies I purchase from that has never given me any major causes for complaint, so I have been pretty loyal to them with my camera gear purchases. I think I've bought no less than 10 different digital cameras (SLRs and point-and-shoots) and 4 or 5 different lenses (three Ls) from them over the past 15 years so I have quite a few different file formats in my collection. While this is not yet a major deal, it's still a ding in their reputation with me and may make me rethink some of my purchases from them in the future.

The only reasonable explanation I can accept is that version 4.0 has very different algorithms to better render and extract details from the latest sensors. The upcoming updated 3.x will include the new controls, GUI etc and support the older models.

Otherwise, they are seriously SERIOUSLY on thin ice.

I find it helpful when thinking about these things to put myself into the shoes of other users as well as Canon's profit-making machine.

I currently have only minimal use for DPP.  What I would like to see is the migration of EU into DPP, with advanced tethered control of the camera in DPP--something not likely to be available with Lightroom or Photoshop.  If I can take a shot tethered, and process out aberrations while doing so, then catalog and post-process with Adobe tools, I'd be a fairly happy camper.  This makes better sense to me as it gives desirable value added to the products and does so within a common advanced amateur/professional workflow (and those are the people who care and also drive profits).  If I were in Canon's shoes, now that the move to 64-bit hardware is complete I would be studying Phase One's Capture One software for popular features to swipe for version 4.1.  I would also be adding further lens profiles.

I don't think Canon is on any "thin ice" here.  As noted previously, there was a nice update to the older software released this month, and that version can be used alongside the 4.0.00 version.  DPP is a poor cataloging/ image management tool compared to Lightroom, and totally inadequate for post-processing compared to Photoshop with its innumerable plugins.  Most pros and advanced amateurs build a workflow around those or some less costly alternatives (eg: Bridge subbed for Lightroom for pure Photoshop 5-6 owners, or perhaps Google's storage and tools or ACDsee's Pro and Photo Editor for those unable to afford the Adobe Clod [sic]). 

Add in that Canon is very good at profiling their customers and probably realizes that someone owning a $2000-4000 camera also probably has 64-bit computer hardware, and you can see where they're coming from.  There might be a subset of Rebel users still eking life out on an older 32-bit machine, and those couldn't use version 4.0.00 anyway.  My old XTi is 10Mp and uses an old file format--that hardware is only 7 years old, but I really don't expect Canon to write new-fangled software for it since I am an advanced amateur who can move on to a better camera.  If I was a point-and-shooter using my Rebel just to shoot Christmas with the kids I might not care that I couldn't use the newest DPP.  Throw those subsets together, and I don't believe that the vast majority of the user base will complain at all.

I may be mistaken as I'm away from my home pc at the moment, but if I recall, I think I saw something about tethering in DPP 4.0.

I also saw (at least in the thumbnail customization options) where you could choose to display or not CR2, CRW, JPG, TIFF, and movie files. I dunno if this is a hint that this one has some form of video editing capability, but the fact that you can view thumbnails of RAWs from older models seems to indicate that the limited file-format editing capability it is not a limitation of the file format itself.

I hope you're wrong in that I hope more people complain. I too sent a pretty testy letter to Canon support as soon as I discovered I DPP 4.0 wouldn't read my RAWs. Unlike many users here, DPP is the main and generally only software I use to edit my photos. I have Photoshop, but I like that I can keep my RAW files in the proprietary Canon file format and simply save my edits by means of a recipe file. I don't want to convert to DNG and use up more space than necessary.

DPP never had the best workflow and the tools were pretty rudimentary, but for most of my photos it sufficed. If I needed to do heavy lifting, in special cases I would import it into Photoshop. For years and through several different EOS models with different RAW formats, I have used DPP. For a long time I've been hoping for an more than incremental upgrade. It looks like they finally did it, but they decided that they would rather divide their customer base instead of unite.

Canon specifically state support only for the EOS 1D C, 1D X, 5D III, and 6D.  Seems foolish, hopefully they make it fully backward compatible.

Yeah, it's pretty disappointing.  :-\  I hope they come to their senses in a later version. It's a great looking update... but not necessarily enough to get me to update to a new camera.


I hope this is just the buggy beta version.

I managed to make up a 5D3-esque serial number, download and install DPP 4.0; but I only own a 5D2. And as a previous poster mentioned, I can't edit my 5D2 cr2s in this program. When I open it in the edit window, it is just a thumbnail of the RAW file with a symbol indicating 'uneditable'.

If that isn't disturbing and backwards enough, JPGs open up just fine for editing.

Tiff files open and edit fine too. I also tried some of my old CRW images, but they can't be edited. So it seems like Canon has chosen to target and insult old faithful Canon users specifically. Wow...

Canon General / Re: Why Wedding Photographers’ Prices are “Wack”?
« on: December 23, 2013, 07:43:48 PM »
There are lots of price points in the market. If a customer isn't offering what you're worth then politely decline.

I think that's mostly where I stand on this discussion. I'm no Professional Wedding Photographer. I'm the guy that friends want to ask to shoot their weddings (usually for free). While at my current skill level I would never dream of charging $3000 for a wedding, I think "free" for anyone not joined to me at the hip would be grossly underselling myself (and very presumptuous). Don't get me wrong, I have shot several of my friends weddings for "free" (and to gain experience), but in general, I've always felt that they got the better end of the deal.

I can see and agree with both sides. Customers want the best value. Photographers want fair compensation for their work... and for most, their work doesn't end after the dancing stops,  the lights go out, and the decorations come down.

Lately, I've been declining to shoot as the sole or main photographer at friends' weddings. I don't want the pressure- I just want to enjoy the day like a regular guest. Of the probably 10 weddings I've shot, only one I can think of has ever paid me for it.

As a photographer who knows that some good photos are luck, but consistent good photos are skill, I tend to side with the photographer charging what they believe their skill is worth. If the customer doesn't believe you're worth your price tag, I'm sure there are plenty suckers like me (friends, relatives, etc) that will shoot for "experience." In some cases it's legit to complain about the prices photographers charge, but in most cases, it's best to just find someone that fits your price point for the quality you're willing to accept.

Software & Accessories / Re: Ode to Adobe CC
« on: May 23, 2013, 01:49:31 AM »
Oh Adobe how do I love thee,
take my credit card for your monthly fee.
My work ever more trapped in a bastion
bound and shackled by your subscription.
No more software for us to buy and own
but only in perpetual servitude use on loan
Thy minions scour the land for signs of dissent
Where resistance builds against software for rent.
Customers silenced if they be not full of joy
at being beholden to Adobe's ploy.
The lowly customer, Adobe's golden goose,
now suffers at the hangmans noose.


impressive. i'm moved!  ;D

Canon General / Re: How well do you see color?
« on: February 26, 2013, 02:41:53 AM »
    Your score: 11
    Gender: Male
    Age range: 30-39
    Best score for your gender and age range: 0
    Highest score for your gender and age range: 1520

Not sure how to interpret that...  ???

Canon General / Re: What's your definition of "Pro"?
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:00:24 AM »
I'm really impressed with the depth, insight and humor of some of these answers!

My definition of the difference between an amateur and pro has always been...

(Honestly though, I kind of prefer some of the other definitions.)


This pretty much sums up how I feel. I'm getting a kick out of reading this thread and the wide variety of responses! I still have my own ideas, but they're not so concrete as some of the ones here. Still giving me a lot to think about.  :D I'm starting to think that for many people here, it doesn't have to be "either" "or"... for some of you, you can very well be- BOTH!

Pages: [1] 2 3