1
Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: March 13, 2013, 04:20:41 AM »
Here's a few of mine 
May 22, 2013, 07:02:58 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.
2
Landscape / Re: How Would You Edit This Landscape Photo?
« on: March 08, 2013, 08:40:13 PM »
Here's my attempt 
3
Lenses / Re: New EOS-M Lenses Soon [CR2]
« on: January 19, 2013, 02:51:14 AM »I agree, they don't have to be large.... but the APS-C sized ones are even smaller, that means cheaper to make, and more likely to hit the mass market... If I were top take long term bets on Canon, I would say that the Rebel line morphs into the EOS-M line, and the APS-C mirrored cameras and APS-C lenses fall out of production.... leaving the FF lines at the top and the mirrorless as the enthusiast market.... but that's just my guess.
The EOS-M cameras are targeted at that enthusiast market. The lack of ability of that mount to cover a FF sensor indicates to me that Canon has no intentions of going FF mirrorless. Personally, I wish they had gone that route because now they are competing with the herd... FF would have allowed them to stand out in the mirrorless race.
As you can probably guess, I am conflicted on the issue. I can understand why they have done and why they have done it. I think it makes sense from a competition point of view, but it fails at taking a leadership role.
I'm right there with ya. "Conflicted" is a really good way to put it
4
Lenses / Re: New EOS-M Lenses Soon [CR2]
« on: January 18, 2013, 11:09:24 PM »Of course, this particular product could surely have been 'better', whatever that means. On the other hand so could ALL the other products in the market, so basically it's a meaningless statement. I just turned against the fact that there are people on this forum that never misses a chance to bash Canon for whatever reason. Whenever there is a launch of something they crawl out from their hiding places to complain about whatever features Canon has included in these products, or left out.
I'm not in a position to say what they should or shouldn't have done with the M. From what I understand it takes great pictures but its main shortcoming is the slow AF. It's plain ridiculous to compare it to 5000 dollar products.
I think Canon will address the what ifs in the future releases, maybe not to everybody's liking but building a new platform like they're doing here means that they have to start somewhere and to me it makes most sense to launch the volume product first. It'll be exciting to see what comes next.
I agree with you that Canon would have opportunities like basically no other player in the market to develop innovating products. I would argue that in a way they did that in 2012 though. Let's hope for an even more exciting 2013.
I agree that it's in Canon's best interest to release the volume product first. I love the fact Canon finally joined the mirrorless world. I don't even have a problem with the EOS-M (easy to say when you don't own it
) My only gripe is now we're stuck with aps-c lenses. If they made lenses that could cover a full-frame sensor, then eventually they could release a FF mirrorless and not have to restart with another new lens catalog.Anyways, I'm with you in that they had a better 2012 than most people give them credit for. I think 2013 is going to be exciting too
5
Lenses / Re: New EOS-M Lenses Soon [CR2]
« on: January 18, 2013, 11:01:57 PM »That's right.... bash Canon for trying to make an inexpensive compact camera and not using a full frame sensor....
Do you realize what using a full frame sensor means...... it means that you need full frame sized lenses... remember the silly looking picture of the EOS-M mounted onto the 800/5.6 just after it was released.. that's the direction you head with full frame sensors.... large and expensive.
Let's all sing the praises of the FF sensor. They are better than APS-C... that's a fact and not debateable... but why not continue this discussion on to it's logical conclusion and skip past medium format sensors and go straight to large format sensors.... a large format sensor could be made that would anahilate the specs of any FF sensor. Ok, the camera and lens(s) would be insanely large, heavy, and expensive, and only the photo elite could use it or afford it, but the pictures would be better.... I used to carry around a 8x10 with glass plates....did that mean that every other film camera was a piece of S___?of course not! Same logic holds with sensor sizes.
The reason for APS-C (and smaller) sensors is to make cameras of a size and cost that will appeal to the masses. It is a cost and ergonomics thing at the expense of image quality. A lens that covers an APS-C circle is smaller, lighter, and less expensive to manufacture than a FF lens. The vast bulk of people will never understand why you would pay $500 for a lens.... and $5,000 for a lens is unthinkable. these are the same people that buy hundreds of rebels and point/shoots for every "pro" camera sold.... these are the people that are paying for the R/D to keep new inovations coming, these are the people that are paying to keep the lights on at the Canon factory.
Next time you want to start a rant about something, think before you type.....
I don't think you're directing the rant part at me, but just in case you were, I didn't mean to sound like I was ranting
Anyways, I disagree about the lens size. Full-frame mirrorless lenses don't have to be large - just look at all the Leica lenses out there. Those are full-frame lenses and plenty of them are puny (and still excellent). Obviously there are some big ones too, so I'm not saying they can't be large. I just saying they don't have to be. Even the RX1's 35mm is decently small, and apparently it's an excellent lens.
6
Lenses / Re: New EOS-M Lenses Soon [CR2]
« on: January 18, 2013, 10:52:56 PM »Canon could have easily churned out a mirrorless with a 5d mark ii-like sensor in it with a similar body style to the EOS-M, and kept it priced competitively.
Pricing a camera with a FF sensor competitively is pretty hard. Just look at the fixed lens Sony RX1 as a guide.Want a cheaper FF camera? You've already got the D600 and 6D.
Canon is in the business of money making. I'm sure their marketing staff must have done their homework and concluded APS-C is the way of the future. The sensors are cheaper to produce and the accompanying lenses are also smaller. Until manufacturers find a cheaper means to produce FF sensors, they'll always be reserved for a niche market.
I understand that full-frame isn't cheap. I also realize aps-c is at a really good place price/performance-wise. I just think that Canon could have easily leap-frogged the competition with a cheap-body full frame mirrorless (to help keep costs lower.
When Microsoft's Xbox came out back in 2006 (I think), it was as powerful as some $2000 gaming computers, and they sold it for $400. They knew they were going to sell a lot of them, and the games that went along with it, so they kept the price low enough for it to take off. A full-frame mirrorless, priced aggressively, and banking on lens sales to maintain larger profits, could do exceptionally well for Canon. Seeing as they're probably the only company on this planet that could pull something like that off, it's disappointing to have them play it safe in the market with a smaller sensor, and remove a reason for them to make Full-frame mirrorless lenses.
I guess I'm in the minority, but I just think full-frame should be more readily available to the masses (I know somebody's going to say film is cheap). If somebody told me each aps-c sensor costs 50 bucks to make, but a full-frame sensor costs like $1000, then I'm completely wrong and I take everything back
7
Lenses / Re: New EOS-M Lenses Soon [CR2]
« on: January 17, 2013, 05:03:19 AM »Again, nobody is surprised to see you bashing Canon's products. As usual you don't prove your point to why say it's a failure. It's like you didn't get the idea of this product. It's a consumer camera providing high margins for Canon. A great platform for them to start developing a whole new series of lenses for. I would say it was smart of them to start by launching the expected high volume model ahead of any higher end product. They get the word out, they get to sell a lot of lenses going with it and finance further development for this platform.
Canon being the dominant player in the camera market will have resources to bring to market a number of interesting products should they see this segment grow further.
I think I'm going to have to side with Ricku on this one. Canon went the aps-c route, which is better than another company that I won't mention, but it's still something that's been around for a while. So now we're stuck with something that has specific lenses that won't be of any use to a full-frame sensored mirrorless if they choose to go down that route in the future.
Part of being the best camera manufacturer in the world, is using your dominance in the industry to bring innovation and new ideas to the table that your competitors simply can't afford to compete with. Canon could have easily churned out a mirrorless with a 5d mark ii-like sensor in it with a similar body style to the EOS-M, and kept it priced competitively. Sure it isn't necessarily the epitome of innovation since Leica has been doing it for years, but at least it would be light years ahead of Canon's competitors. And don't tell me the glass would be way more expensive - there are plenty of good cheap Canon full-frame lenses, they could easily make new ones for a mirrorless.
It's not like the EOS-M is a bad camera, it's the what-if that's disappointing.
9
Canon General / Re: DxO: Current phone-cameras beat 5 yr old digital still cameras
« on: October 13, 2012, 12:26:20 AM »
The small camera sensor modules in phones are being upgraded all the time - at a much faster pace than dslr sensors. It's a very competitive field since a phone contract can be huge. Obviously they'll be closing the gap in quality compared to standalone cameras with comparatively less rapid improvements. Then again, as long as phone sizes dictate smaller sensors, standalone cameras will always have certain benefits (depth of field control, handling, interchangeable lenses, etc...)
10
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Mission San Juan Capistrano - California
« on: July 18, 2012, 10:10:00 PM »
So much for the 5d iii's lack of dynamic range. Nice shots Dylan!
11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Making of a Leica M9-P
« on: July 12, 2012, 01:38:19 AM »
Finally a "how-it's-made" video without annoying music or voice overs. Just let the work speak for itself. Really enjoyed the video.
13
Lenses / Re: Canon 40mm/f2.8 STM review at photozone.de
« on: June 27, 2012, 02:53:29 AM »
Dang the Shorty is sharp! Might just have to pick one up because it looks incredibly fun to use.
14
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Results from my first week with the 5D3
« on: June 20, 2012, 01:23:39 AM »
Looks like you're enjoying your new camera! And the photos you've posted are great! I thought the third photo was a spaceship or something haha.
15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Mirrorless Entry
« on: June 20, 2012, 12:02:31 AM »I fully expect the lowest possible consumer-crappy mirrorless camera from Canon.
It will be a G1X with a lens mount and possibly a sorry little EVF instead of the G1X's sorry little OVF.
The lenses will be three sorry crappy kit lenses, a 28-90 equivalent f/3.5-5.6 kit zoom, a slow 40mm pancake of some sort and a slow tele zoom.
Autofocus will be dead slow like on the G1X. It will not have the hybrid FPPD-AF + CD-AF of the 650D.
fps and operational speed will be dead slow. The thing will suck in every possible way and still cost as much as a 60D.
I really hate them for it already in advance.
Instead of pouring your hate into every thread why not have a more objective approach backed up with some real experience/evidence instead of just malicious rumour and gueswork?
+1
Sure some people have been a bit disappointed by their latest releases, but that doesn't mean you can't have some hope for something awesome on the horizon