December 18, 2014, 02:52:16 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 - shutterlag

Pages: [1] 2
1
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 02, 2014, 04:58:19 PM »
game changing, game changing, game changing, blah blah..

But show photos from 7d1 and 7d2 to people, and they' won't recognize what camera is where.

What is really game changing, sony A7 or a7s. Or new 5-axis sensor stabilization in A7 II. Btw it cost as much as 7d2.

OK, so I've read the rest of your posts.  You obviously haven't used those A7* bodies in the real world or payed attention to the lens lineup.  While they have their merits, and in several ways NUKE Canon, they also have their faults. 

The AF is HORRIBLE- I mean I'd rather shoot manual with them than try to use the AF.  There are zero improvements in the A7m2 as far as AF - they tweaked the firmware only. 

The A7R shutter slap might as well the a full-blown thunder clap, is so fracking loud, I've never heard anything like it in digital.

The IBIS is wicked, I agree, and blatantly demonstrates that Canon and Nikon have been ripping us off for years charging extra for IS in lenses when they could have done IBIS.  But the bottom line is that it doesn't offer "better" IS, just IS across the board with all lenses. 

The Sony FE lens lineup is severely gimped- so much so that no pro can use it IMO.  There is NO F2.8 STANDARD ZOOM, NO F2.8 70-200 ZOOM, and the ZEISS 24-70mm F4 is so soft I'd rather use the kit lens.  Sure, you can bolt on an adapter, but at that point, why not use something else with better AF?  The 55mm prime is wicked, and the 35mm F2.8 is nice and small, but that hardly makes up for a complete lack of zooms.

Bottom line:  Yes, A7k lineup is shiny, but not ready for prime time, not even close.  Fix the AF (must be at least as good as the A6000), release F2.8 zooms (or at least fix the garbage Zeiss 24-70mm F4), and add a 2nd card slot.  The A9 should be nice next year and take care of the AF and card issues, but that lens issue is going to plague the system for many more years.  While the IBIS offers no significant advantage in the short term, it does make Canon and Nikon look silly, which is good:)
The trolls know all of this or they would be using those brands now rather than hanging out in Canon Forums. No fed troll ever went away. Just ignore them.

Agreed.   I normally don't feed the troll but in this case pretty much all of what I wrote was my own personal frustration  on the topic.  If Canon was actually innovating I wouldn't have to be looking at Sony.  Even without a viable FE standard zoom I will be changing over to the A9.  I'm tired of getting ripped off by Canon paying for image stabilization that should be in body. I'm also tired of subpar low-light performance. I'm also tired of subpar dynamic range performance. I'm also tired of lugging around heavy gear with antiquated mirror boxes.  I'm annoyed I have to do that though.   I am excited about getting the A9.   I'll fill the gaps with the Alpha adapter.  My back will be much happier with the lighter kit.   The completely silent shutter will be nice as well. I'm sure the autofocus won't be on par with the 7d Mark 2, but having used the a6000 I'm sure it will be good enough.

2
Lenses / Re: Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II
« on: December 02, 2014, 10:56:32 AM »
game changing, game changing, game changing, blah blah..

But show photos from 7d1 and 7d2 to people, and they' won't recognize what camera is where.

What is really game changing, sony A7 or a7s. Or new 5-axis sensor stabilization in A7 II. Btw it cost as much as 7d2.

OK, so I've read the rest of your posts.  You obviously haven't used those A7* bodies in the real world or payed attention to the lens lineup.  While they have their merits, and in several ways NUKE Canon, they also have their faults. 

The AF is HORRIBLE- I mean I'd rather shoot manual with them than try to use the AF.  There are zero improvements in the A7m2 as far as AF - they tweaked the firmware only. 

The A7R shutter slap might as well the a full-blown thunder clap, is so fracking loud, I've never heard anything like it in digital.

The IBIS is wicked, I agree, and blatantly demonstrates that Canon and Nikon have been ripping us off for years charging extra for IS in lenses when they could have done IBIS.  But the bottom line is that it doesn't offer "better" IS, just IS across the board with all lenses. 

The Sony FE lens lineup is severely gimped- so much so that no pro can use it IMO.  There is NO F2.8 STANDARD ZOOM, NO F2.8 70-200 ZOOM, and the ZEISS 24-70mm F4 is so soft I'd rather use the kit lens.  Sure, you can bolt on an adapter, but at that point, why not use something else with better AF?  The 55mm prime is wicked, and the 35mm F2.8 is nice and small, but that hardly makes up for a complete lack of zooms.

Bottom line:  Yes, A7k lineup is shiny, but not ready for prime time, not even close.  Fix the AF (must be at least as good as the A6000), release F2.8 zooms (or at least fix the garbage Zeiss 24-70mm F4), and add a 2nd card slot.  The A9 should be nice next year and take care of the AF and card issues, but that lens issue is going to plague the system for many more years.  While the IBIS offers no significant advantage in the short term, it does make Canon and Nikon look silly, which is good:)


3
This right here is what I'd expect from Nikon support, and kills the last remaining strength Canon had for me as an enthusiast.

I've been on the fence ever since the X-T1 and the big Fuji lens rebates came out.  Those discounts expire tomorrow.  This issue made the decision much easier. 

The only regret I'll have is leaving behind the Sigma 35mm, and that's not even a Canon lens!  Maybe I'll give that lens a shot with an adapter on the T1. 

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 09:20:07 PM »
Well, I loved the original M because it's small and the images from the 22mm lens was indeed beautiful.
However, that was merely a 650D in a small body which is fine for the price i paid. But it was always only going to be a "fun" grab an go camera.

The EOS M2 if rumoured specs (they usually are) are true, then i would say boo hoo...these specs should've been in the EOS M fromt he beginning.
They had 2yr maybe to develop a new M and all they could do is to put a 70D into a small body?

Do note that everyone else in the market has already uped  their game...and CES2014...i belive Sony has plenty of new stuff coming out as well...

Is the EOS M2 going to be able to compete? I highly doubt.

I love Canon stuff, always have but with the market moving so fast recently, and with Canon taking it's own sweet time, i couldn't wait.

i still have my EOS M, i still have a few L lenses for it because i sold my 5D3...

But i can see myself slowly getting rid of everything because i got tired of waiting for Canon..

I love my A7R now and using that camera, makes me wished Canon did it first...it really is what i wanted and more..just a pity it has a Sony name, not Canon...i'm not a fan of Sony but i have to give it to them for this camera...Canon, please buck up and maybe i will go back to you one day.

I agree with you 100%.  I have a 6D as well as an EOS M.  Question for you- since you've got the A7R - what do you think of using an adapter with the L glass?  Have you tried any?  I'm also looking at the Contax G mount Zeiss glass, since the adapter supports AF.  There appears to be several interesting lenses in G mount for not much money.

5
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Mentioned [CR1]
« on: June 24, 2013, 03:13:42 PM »
With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties. 

Except for the Sigma 35/1.4, 'decent or nearly as good from 3rd parties' would be a lot more accurate than 'as good if not better'.  Of course, they're cheaper...and there's always a market for cheaper stuff.

I would submit the Tamron 24-70 definitely better than the Canon, depending on your use case.  The equivalent to the 18-35mm F1.8 Sigma doesn't even exist in the Canon or Nikon lineups, so that would also be "better" if not "holy crap better".  That leaves the Tammy 70-200, which dxomark has as edging out the Canon mk2 by a hair.  I'll stand by my "as good if not better" statement.

6
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Mentioned [CR1]
« on: June 24, 2013, 12:33:55 PM »
They've gotta be feeling the pain at this point.  With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties.  It has to be taking a toll on sales.  In this particular case, everyone who needed a better 35mm F1.4 already has or will have the Sigma by the time this mk2 comes out.  The remaining mk1 owners that didn't upgrade will have a choice of the Sigma for $900 or the mk2 likely for $2200 minimum $1800?  And barring some massively revolutionary engineering break through, it will only be as-good as the Sigma, not better. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see changes from Canikon soon, as far as technology lock-down.  It's the only way they're going to maintain profit margins.  "Foreign Lens Detected, disabling feature XXXX".

7
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 19, 2013, 03:54:50 PM »
Please Canon, just give us a sharp prime in the teens at a reasonable cost?  I love the IQ on my 14mm SamRokinBow, but the build quality makes it almost a throwaway.  We've got the choice of that for $350, or the 14mm L v2 for $2,200!!!  There must be a happy medium in there, maybe an F3.5, or F4 17mm for $1,000?  Please?

8
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 29, 2013, 02:06:10 PM »


I love my Canon gear for sure. But the Sticker price shock is wearing me down too.
Now I'm keeping a much closer eye on the competition than I ever did before, including bodies and whole systems. I can't say that I'm going to jump ship, but a few years ago even the thought of considering it never entered my mind. I guess I was confident that Canon would always be the best value gear (FF) for me. But the competition is fierce in every arena today, and Canon needs to to go all in to stay ahead.
[/quote]

I think the game changer will be the Sony FF NEX system.  It just leaked that the A58 will be the last SLT model.  That can mean only one thing- they learned well from their success with the RX-1.  FF A-mount mirrorless is on the way.  It'll be interesting to see how Canon and Nikon react to that.  I expect Sony will implement a global shutter as well, so no more rolling shutter for video people.

9
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 29, 2013, 02:01:08 PM »
I'd use the Tamron 70-200 VC with extenders, speed booster, a NEX-7, and focus peaking:D


[/quote]

so what other 100-400mm lens you have in mind....  ::)

it´s great when you have alternatives... no question.
but i don´t really see one for the 100-400mm, do you?

sigma?  not the existing sigma lenses. nah.. sorry.
[/quote]

10
This is useful:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=674&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=104&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

I bought two lenses and I prefer to take most of my shots near or on the mythical sweetspot in regards to aperture.  With the presumption of sufficient light, for my 50mm f/1.4 I try to stay between 2.8 and 4.0.  For my 24-105mm f/4 I make an effort to approach f/8, but that isn't always an option.

So that raises the aforementioned question.  What aperture range is the 100mm and the 70-200 the sharpest?  And don't hesitate to tell me that I was wrong about the 50 and 24-105... if indeed I'm way off.

Thanks a bunch.

11
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 29, 2013, 11:43:02 AM »
I see no reason to either be excited or care about Canon lens releases anymore.  With Nikon taking the lead in inflated pricing with the 80-400mm by charging a mind-blowing $2700, Canon is certain to do the same.

Since upgrading to FF, I've bought and returned a 24-70 F4 IS and a 35mm IS.  I bet you can guess what I went with instead ;D  I have also scrapped plans to buy the 70-200mm F2.8 IS L v2, targeting the Tamron F2.8 VC instead.

The days where Canon and Nikon could command massive margins over 3rd party due to higher quality are gone.  H*ll, they can't even get rebates right.  That last round increased pricing on half the items.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: The sound of silence
« on: April 24, 2013, 12:48:41 PM »
Speaking of silence, check out this hilarious review from the camera store on the "new" T5i:

Canon Rebel T5i (700d) Hands-On


13
It's about time Tamron and Sigma started cranking out really competitive glass.  They have the larger audience, while the body vendors are gimped to only one platform.  There's no reason Tamron and Sigma shouldn't beat Canikon.  They have the entire interchangeable lens body owner market to target- far more customers than a single platform.  Spend the R&D to make the best 35mm F1.4 and you can sell it to _every_ owner, not just Canikon, or Pentax, or Sony, etc. 

Tamron with their 24-70 VC and 70-200 VC, Sigma with the 35mm and F1.8 zoom, both of them have now caught on.  I've got a new 6D with a 24-105mm IS.  My next two purchases will be the two Tamrons.  Why?  A six year warranty- 5 more years than Canon, way less $$$, equivalent (or better) optics, and VC with F2.8 on the 24-70. 

Canon is totally detached from the market, delivering late and under-performing on critical core lenses.  The management that approved the redundant 24-70 IS F4 should be fired.

14
18mm?  What the heck is it with these idiotic lens makers.  We've got the 17-55, 18-55, 18-135, 18-200, 18-270 and now 18-35.  What do we have that starts at 24mm-equivalent?  The only one I own - the 15-85IS.

f/1.8 sounds interesting, but not if it starts at 18mm!!!

Pass.

First of all, this is the dumbest gripe I've read in a while.  If you're that unhappy, get a FF with a 24-70 and stop whining. 

Second, it's not even a valid gripe, as Tokina has a 16-28mm constant F2.8 that gets excellent reviews on crop.  Are you really that concerned about the difference between 25.6 and 24?

15
Well this is fracking stupid.  These rebates caused the 6D kit price on Amazon to actually go UP by $70 in the U.S!

The Best Buy website is at $2199, but as mentioned, they do charge tax, even for online only sales.  That's still $2330, which is cheaper than most other places now that the rebate has raised prices.

 

Pages: [1] 2