September 22, 2014, 02:39:07 AM

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 - AvTvM

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64
1
Lenses / Re: Do you keep all your boxes?
« on: September 21, 2014, 09:07:47 AM »
Yes. Got a large box full of them. It helps a bit when selling off used gear. And some folks even manage to sell the empty box on ebay at the price of the item itself.  ;D

2
Um, let us know how that works out for you after you've slapped that poor old L-glass onto a 40+mpixel body, will you?
In fact, I'll bet a beer (or however many it takes to make this bet attractive to you) that current consumer grade optics of a shockingly wide variety will be more than sufficient to remain critically sharp from wide open down through f/11 on your new Wonder Toy.

full ack!

3
I am a photographer and not a videographer. After viewing the Chuck Westhall video I was not really inspired to want to upgrade my 7D. We seem to have waited a long time for the 7D2 and I was expecting more 'must have' features.

I'm honestly baffled by comments like this - what else could anyone possibly (reasonably) want from the 7D Mk II?

It's a uniquely capable camera, far and away the most feature-heavy APS-C body out there, bringing umpteen novel features to the APS-C market, and improvements to the 7D.

Quite simple. A better sensor with significantly less read-noise. Visibly less noise and banding in Hi-ISO. Visibly more DR at all ISOs, including 100. :-)

On the other hand, I do not care at all for 10 fps, don't need more than 5-6 fps. But I still want a fully sealed mg-alloy shell camera with a top-notch AF. Essentially I want a FF-sensored 5D IV as a mirrorless camera sized like Sony A7R, with Canon user interface and a sensor at least as good as the 36 MP Sony sensor ... at a price like the Sony A7R. :-)

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: What's more important, gps or wifi?
« on: September 21, 2014, 08:56:01 AM »
In 2014 I only consider Canon cameras with all 4 radio modules built-in. No excuse tolerated.

* WiFi (b/g/n and ac)
* GPS
* NFC
* RT-EX radio flash commander

Since Canon is not willing and/or able to .. I will not buy anything from them. It's that simple.

5
The Samsung does 420MP/Sec.

The Samsung is also saving 12-bit files during continuous shooting vs. the full 14-bits in single shot mode.

So what?

You keep telling us that DR (and by extension 12bits vs 14bits) isn't important except to a small number of people so therefore this difference that you've highlighted is also relatively unimportant. Or do you wish to become one of your own DRones and insist that the extra bit-depth and thus DR is all of a sudden important?

Hehehe ... Spot on! :-)

6
I am looking forward to reviews of the nx-1. will be interestingvto see what their BSI sensor + electronics/processors  behind it are capable of. Until then i'll hold my jugdement. But i am really hoping this korean mirrorless cam can teach  canons boring mirrorslappers a lesson or two.

The pair of samsung f/2.8 zooms looks quite interesting too, although i have mot seen mtf's or sample pics. I would have loved to get a really good EF-S 50-150/2.8 IS from Canon.

I don't have many Samsung products except some top notch SSDs but they sure know their stuff. So far their NX line was too consumer-oriented to be of interest to me... But who knows, maybe that nx1 is going to cut it. At least its no mirrorslapper . :-)

7
EOS-M / Re: More EF-M lenses in the future
« on: September 20, 2014, 06:17:40 AM »
I am fairly happy with the selection of EF-M lenses. It's only 4, but all of them are good and affordable.
No need whatsoever for another 2 EF-M 18-200/6.3  consumer zooms every month (like Sony or mFT).

I am only missing a 70 to 80mm EF-M portrait pancake ... similar to either Pentx 70/2.4 Limited or Pentax 77/1.8 Limited. Plus possibly a smaller/lighter EF-M version of the EF-S 60/2.8 Macro.

Really missing is a much better EOS M body. With top-notch EVF, way better AF system, fully aritculated LCD and LP-E6N battery in a slightly larger grip. 

And I don't care at all, whether it is called mirrorless or EVIL or anything else. As long as it comes without a flippin' mirror.  Acutally I'd like to get a mirrorless camera with a fully electronic, non-mechanical shutter and an electronic aperture. I'd call that one "solid state camera" ... or in short S.S.C.  ;D :P:-)

8
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Accessory question
« on: September 20, 2014, 06:06:24 AM »
1. Canon EF-EF-M adapter:
got it. Use it ever so often ... primarily for tele with EF-S 55-250 IS STM and with EF 40/2.8 STM. STM lenses are the only ones I find working reasonably well as far as AF is concerned. Also use EF-S 60 Macro for close-ups.

2. Wrist strap: don't have one. use it without strap most of the time. Only at crowded events and for mauntaineering I use the original neck strap.

3. Batteries: got 2x original LP-E12 + 2x Patona. I need all 4 for a day of shooting. Patona are OK-ish, but originals are clearly better, hold more charge. Don't do video at all.

4. Bag: LowePro Dashpoint 30 for M + 18-55 incl. lens shade. Plus a Hama bag Nashville 130 for entire kit.

9
yawn. Another bunch of expensive manual focus lenses. Come back Schneider, Zeiss and all of you germanic dinosaurs once you have learned autofocus.

10
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 17, 2014, 01:44:05 PM »
Sony RX100 III vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compare/#555,573
Canon Powershot S-120 vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compare/#475,573
Canon EOS M2 vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compact/#496,573,ha,f
Canon EOS M2 w/ 22/2.0 vs. Canon G7 X: http://camerasize.com/compact/#496.349,573,ha,t
Canon G1X II vs. EOS M2 vs. G7 X vs. S120: http://camerasize.com/compact/#534,496,573,475,ha,f

Panasonix LX100 vs Canon G7 X: not available yet

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 14, 2014, 11:07:00 AM »
What's pathetic is the inflated sense of entitlement some of you lot have - "how dare Canon not make me my perfect camera..."
It's infantile - Canon isn't in the business of keeping you happy.

Well, if Canon is not in the business of keeping US happ ... representing pretty much a cross-section of their best, most loyal and longstanding clients who typically have shelled out anywhere from a couple 1000 bucks to a couple 10.000 on Canon products ... THEN Canon has no business. AS far as I am concerned.

And YES, we are fully ENTITLED to demand better products from Canon ... as we are entitled towards any other supplier of gear who fails to deliver products that are not as good as as they could be and that are not at least as good (!) in every which way as competitor's products and "technical state of the art" is.

We are even more entitled to demand this from the self-proclaimed global leader in imaging technology who has claimed on numerous occasions to bring us nothing less than "the future of photography".

Tell that to the many thousands of pros back in the '80's when they swapped from FD to EF mounts. Canon will do what it believes is in the best interests of its shareholders in the mid to long term, coincidentally they very often know better than us what we actually need.

The switch from FD to EF in 1987 was clearly for the better. Not only for Canon shareholders but for any photographer willing to buy their new products and enjoy the advantages of autofocus and alls sorts of beenfits associated with electron communication between lens and camera ... in the best implementation on the entire market. Yes, Canon could also have kept muddling on ... like Nikon did with their long obsolete F-mount and mechanical aprture coupling, but that was and is a very sub-optimal scenario for their clients and one of the reasons why many of us chose and choose Canon over Nikon and other screwdriver-AF companies.

Also, those clients who did not see the benefits of AF for their work had no problem to just hold on to their FD lenses and cameras. After all, those were analogue SLRs and not DSLRs were you need to upgrade to get improvements in image quality. Mechanical Film SLRs were little more than film holders with a shutter and viewfinder in them and progress between mechanical model generations was fairly limited ... real progress was only achieved once that lens mount was changed and electrified.

Even I - being a tough critic of Canon and certainly no fanboy - applaud them for the foresight that went into the EF mount. It has held up during the major changeover from analogue film cameras to digital DSLRs and is only now approaching the end of its lifecycle, as we soon will switch-over to native mirrorless lenses with shorter flange distance. The transitions will not be as painful, because this time round it is easy to privide simple extension tube adapters to keep the EF-glass working for as long as we are willing to accept the inconveniences of such an adpater solution. :-)

12
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 14, 2014, 10:57:35 AM »
Looks almost identical to the 5DM3 body ... most buttons in the same place (small variations) which means easy to learn and great to use together. 
...
Lots of 'disappointment' posted on here, but not in my camp.  I'd expect if this camera 'improved' as much as some seem to think it should, then the price point would be more near the $3000 figure than the $1800 figure.
Canon aimed at the 7D crop market with it, and priced it to fit there.  Anyone wants more than this 7D2 (?), should just go up to the 5DM3 and spend the $3000 it requires.  Otherwise, this fits just fine in the niche for which it was built.

Personally, I'm not a tech genius, and have problems even defining the "greatness" of a specific technology, but I am a photographer and use the tools Canon builds to create the best images I can - and don't worry about what Canon didn't build, and use what it did build to create those images - instead of sitting at home wondering why it's not better.  The specs look fine to me, and I'm betting we get a nice surprise when this camera starts showing us what it will produce in the field instead of what it looks like on paper.

I fully agree that it is a good thing Canon keeps the user interface among their DSLRs for similar target groups as similar as possible and that the 7D II/5D III is a rather good user interface overall .

I do not agree, that "we basically sholuld just shut up and take whatever Canon decides to put in fron of us" and "in the field it will perform much better than on paper".

There are a number of specs on paper that you can tell from just looking at them, that it will cause problems in the field any time you encounter a specific shooting situation or task.   Lack of WiFi for example ... is just a pain, when one could be controlling their camera easily from their smartphone in situations were this would be beneficial.  This will NOT improve with use in the field or proven to be not relevant. It is a PITA on paper and it is an even bigger PITA in the field. Unless one never encounters such situations.

Of course at the end of the day we have to capture images using the gear we get ... but there is no excuse for Canon to not equip our gear as best as possible - especially when we are talking low cost items like a WiFi chip (to stick with this as an example) and/or mere firmware issues ... like a truly useful, fully competent AUto-ISO function which also allows compensation correction in M mode for instance. No word on that front, btw as far as the 7D II is concerned.

There is a hige amount of marketing differntiation and crippling and milking of clients going on and we have  every right to call out Canon for doing this to us.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 14, 2014, 10:47:55 AM »
What's pathetic is the inflated sense of entitlement some of you lot have - "how dare Canon not make me my perfect camera..."
It's infantile - Canon isn't in the business of keeping you happy.

Well, if Canon is not in the business of keeping US happ ... representing pretty much a cross-section of their best, most loyal and longstanding clients who typically have shelled out anywhere from a couple 1000 bucks to a couple 10.000 on Canon products ... THEN Canon has no business. AS far as I am concerned.

And YES, we are fully ENTITLED to demand better products from Canon ... as we are entitled towards any other supplier of gear who fails to deliver products that are not as good as as they could be and that are not at least as good (!) in every which way as competitor's products and "technical state of the art" is.

We are even more entitled to demand this from the self-proclaimed global leader in imaging technology who has claimed on numerous occasions to bring us nothing less than "the future of photography".

14
EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
« on: September 14, 2014, 10:01:16 AM »
the duel card slots are a good thing and the tighter weather sealing sounds good the vague standard for the 70d of equal to a eos1-n tells me nothing really still scared of getting caught in the rain

I agree. Those claims are extremely vague and pretty useless.

Camera makers should finally start providing ratings on a recognized scale as to the level of ingress protection on their cameras [with lens cap on], lenses  [with rear lens cap on] and camera w/attached lens (which would always be the lower rating, at best) ... my preferred grading scale would be the IP grid, but I would also be fine with some US mil standard rating grid, as long as I can read up on what the values mean.

Evenn (premium) makers of photobags and other accessories are able to provide IP numbers for their products, but camera makers refuse to do so until now. 

15
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 14, 2014, 04:51:50 AM »
a viewfinder is one of the most valuable features on any camera to me (and others). Adding a good EVF also is significantly more costly than the difference between a touch LCD + user interface and a non-touch LCD.

As far as I am concerned, an EVF might be worth paying something extra. 250 would be a little high, compared to overall camera price. I'd imagine Canon can source those little EVF-screens for less than 50 from Epson or Sony ... depending on number of units  ;D

Anything more than $550 isn't worth the money.  Better value on the RX100 II or III.

The RX100 M3 is selling for $800. While G7X has touch screen, the RX100 M3 has EVF. Is the EVF worth $250? Not to me.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64