October 23, 2014, 01:21:33 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 - KKCFamilyman

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
1
Reviews / Re: Camera Store Trashes New G7X
« on: October 21, 2014, 03:00:00 PM »
I haven't commented on this forum for a while (even though I read it regularly) because the attitude of most people here. The notion that you have to be a total Canon fanboy to have legitimacy to post here, is absurd at best and does nothing to help the end user nor Canon.


I am not the casual photographer like many here, I make my living from photography and my work is published in magazines like Vogue so it might be possible that I know a few things.


That being said, NO I don't own a G7X, but I do agree with the Camera Store's assessment of Canon as a company lately. They seem to put just enough features on their cameras to stay above water, but never go that extra mile to make a ground-breakingly outstanding product. When compared to other products on the market, Canon always seems to be following not leading, which is a shame. I absolutely loath their "play it safe" attitude toward product development.


I own and shoot with all Canon gear (except for my recently purchased Phase One) and I'm generally happy with it, but it does not mean it's all perfect. For example, the rubber zoom ring on my new 24-70 MkII dislodged itself from the lens barrel and is now warped and in need of repair. Are you kidding me?!!! Unacceptable for a lens I paid over $2,000 for.


It should also be noted that I am regularly an early adopter of all Canon gear and usually own one while most people are still sitting on forums discussing specs. I was one of the first people in the world to own the original 7D, the 5D Mark III and the 1DX as well as various lenses. Again, I am happy with most of my Canon gear and the 1DX's low light performance continues to astonish me, but in no way do I think all Canon gear is perfect and I think the people on this forum should have a more open minded attitude toward possible flaws and imperfections and not just write anyone who brings them up as unknowledgeable and just a trolling. You are not helping Canon make better products by defending their flaws and/or shortcomings.

I agree with the only Canon love but nothing wrong with being a Canon lover if your on a Canon Rumor forum. I also have the 5d3 and 1dx.  I have the G7x and it is kind of a let down. I was hoping to have that small always with you camera with a decent sensor and control. It has inconsistent focusing no matter what setting I choose. The touch shutter seems like it would be faster but is worse. I had the Sony Nex 6 that I sold to downgrade to the Canon but it was just a faster camera to focus. I know they are different but that is what I am leaving behind and the G7x was supposed to replace it in a smaller body.

Also the ergonomics of where you place your thumb to hold the camera is much better than the Sony RX100 M3 and the touch screen for selecting focus points is better but it does not work. I am left to look at other options again. The sony EVF is not all that by the way since you have to eject it and pull it out which is time consuming for a quick candid. If an evf is a must I think the Canon G1x II or Sony A6000 are better options. Also it is hard to know the true quality since all I have is dpp to process the images so do not really know how much I can pull out of the raw files.

2



IPhone 6



Canon G7X



Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.


Just wondering if some of the soft focus issue is actually depth of field related?? How close were you to these objects/dog?  There's a fair amount of close-up wide-angle nature to these photos... wondering if you were zoomed in and very close to your targets... in other words, nearing macro-focus end of the camera's lens? 

The focal plane on my compact cameras at close range is pretty narrow for similar distances - while I don't have the G1X II or G7X - their physical lenses and types of focusing systems are very similar - with live-view, it's hard to always tell where you're precisely focused - the green box isn't all that accurate as far as the exact location of the focal point... at least that's what I found on my G1X especially.  It takes very nice photos, but certainly isn't as easy to drive to sharp focus-ville as a DSLR, especially at close working distances. 

In my opinion - comparing them to an Iphone 6 (or just about any other cell phone/micro camera) isn't really a fair comparison mathematically - the aperture and physical lens size play a big role in those camera's abilities to render images.  While they may shoot very nice pictures and give you "35mm equivalent focal length comparisons", they have very small physical construction - the potential for their lens components to "miss" on focus is imperceivably microscopic in comparison to the internals of an external/interchangeable DSLR or even fixed compact camera lens.  Using your example photos - the Iphone photo clearly shows an unequal comparison in relative aperture - the bokeh is much less - indicating, at least to me, that it has a deeper depth of field at this given focal length.  It's going to show more objects in more detail/sharp focus in this example. 

A pretty good explanation here:  http://petapixel.com/2013/08/01/a-tour-of-the-equipment-found-in-modern-smartphone-cameras/


Now... I'll be the first to admit and support the argument that you should throw all of the "math/optical forumlae etc" out the window and shoot with the device(s) that get the images you want to see, unless you're one of those folks (like me sometimes) who really enjoy the math/physics part of equipment selection (including the math of sale price).  If your phone's camera does what you need it to do, do you need a $700 brick in your pocket?  Since getting back into SLR/DSLR cameras, I barely, if ever pick up my G1X... even on mountain-climbing/hiking adventures where the size/weight and all-in-one-nature of the G1X trumps the DSLR handily.  I will fully admit my galaxy phone's camera gets quite a bit of use on those adventures though too... if for no other reason than instant ability to share photos with internet friends while still on-site at the adventure.

I certainly understand what your saying but this camera just struggles too much to get sharp images. Since my wife will mostly use it then $700 is too much for a small travel camera. I will keep the search and look at the sony rx3 and g1x ii. I may consider the sony a6000 with the 20mm pancake for her.

3
Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.

Honestly, I don't care about the camera.  That is an adorable picture of your dog.   :)

Thanks

4
Reviews / Re: Camera Store Trashes New G7X
« on: October 19, 2014, 11:42:45 PM »
I have used the camera since friday. It is inconsistent in af accuracy. Most pictures are soft. When all hits then the pics are great but for a $700 convience camera it shoukd work better than that. I would like to consider the rx100 but do not like the short focal range and handling. I think the extra bulk and IQ would be better invested in the sony a6000 for the money. At least your carrying apsc sized sensor and hopefully the af can keep up.

5


IPhone 6



Canon G7X



Molly my dog. It shows decent detail when really close.

6
I just got the G7x today and took some shots on a walk and indoors. The camera is nice but after looking at the jpeg and raw files. The picture appears to have a decent IQ but looking at it closer there is a tough distinction to determine if it was even in focus since it does not have any sharp areas in the image. there are details but slight at best. Was hoping since it was a good option for a portable camera. I liked the touch interface but the pictures are just soft even at low iso's. I can try taking a pic of a book on a shelf but that's not how I am going to use it. I am going to have to rethink this. Maybe the G1x II or look at the Sony Nex series again even though I prefer to stay all Canon. $700 is too much for just ok.

7
Iphone 6. Tried the 6 plus but it was too big. The 6 so far has the better sensor. I have had every Iphone and the main reason I stick with them is the focus on the camera function to some degree. Like this one has better focusing. The front camera has a larger aperature which is nice. They will never replace my dslr but can produce some good images for what it is. I like the time lapse they added. Also the metering and colors are pretty good for a phone.

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 07, 2014, 09:49:34 AM »
Ok brought
5d3
1dx

16-35
24-70
70-200
600ex
Tripod first ever for disney since the family always made me leave it back

Figured that should cover it. Also brought a spare sling bag if it gets heavy

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 11:09:24 PM »
Random got there first but it occurs to me that a better answer might be two parts; the things I'd leave home with, and the things I'd take along for the day at the park itself.  I'd take a camera bag with both bodies and the zooms for the trip as a whole, but for actually walking around the park all day I'd pack light. 

I would like to hear from anyone who has been to Disneyland with a family and anything bigger than a P&S; the closest experience I had was walking around a comic con with a 5D2 and a full-up camera bag.  I wouldn't do it like that again!

Jim

I could bring the extra body and a spare smaller bag so I have options.

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 10:40:22 PM »
Consider actually carrying all this; a 5D3 and one lens (I'd say the 16-35) will pack down into one small bag, and is easier to carry on a sling with the lens pointed forward so you can keep a hand on it.  Your call, but I'd limit myself to the essentials.

Jim

Yeah I want to but I have always left the 70-200 2.8 behind and just have to try it in the parks. And the 16-35 is new and want to try that. I coukd leave the prime behind since that will most likely not get used and that woukd lighten up a little.

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 10:38:09 PM »
Unless you ask a7 vs 1dx/5dIII, otherwise, can you really go wrong with 1DX ::)

If I have to shoot with DSLR, the X would be my 1st choice ;)

I thought that would be the answer but the 5d is lighter and like I said it will be hot but this would be a rare opportunity to focus on photography so excited about the 1d. Only thing is I only have one battery but charged daily should be fine.

I was bringing
16-35 f4 is
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
35mm 1.4

Too much?


So many lenses, and just one body?

Yeah I could bring both and decide there.

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 09:53:38 PM »
Unless you ask a7 vs 1dx/5dIII, otherwise, can you really go wrong with 1DX ::)

If I have to shoot with DSLR, the X would be my 1st choice ;)

I thought that would be the answer but the 5d is lighter and like I said it will be hot but this would be a rare opportunity to focus on photography so excited about the 1d. Only thing is I only have one battery but charged daily should be fine.

I was bringing
16-35 f4 is
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
35mm 1.4

Too much?

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Which body to bring
« on: September 06, 2014, 09:41:04 PM »
I am leaving for a trip to orlando, fl tom and love photographing disney. I went during june and with the family rwlized my af was front focusing and ruined a lot of pics. Since then it jas been fixed. Just curious if I should bring the 1dx or 5d3 for this trip it will be hot and may rain. I may only get 3-4 hrs a day to shoot. Would the 1dx be overkill? Or shoukd I bring the 5d?

14
There is a misconception than Apple production does not need calibration :) The truth is that you have to calibrate all monitors if you need accurate colours. Also, this calibration should be performed on a monthly basis due to shift in colours. Generall laptop monitors (even with IPS) are worse than normal monitors. My suggestion for you would be simple: buy calibrator (x-rite i1 display pro or Spyder) and calibrate your monitor. I bought x-rite i1 display pro and i am very happy with it. I was surprised when I saw a really huge difference in colors after my laptop calibration. Also, x-rite i1 display pro has an ability of assessing ambient light in calibration process.

I have always used my spyder 4 pro but when looking side by side. The dell looks to be warmer and was wondering if an accurate display was pure white say on empty space in a web browser or a slightly warmer yellow was the more accurate colors. Basically its not the color space but the white point that I am concerned about. I am not sure if it will get me closer to white buy altering the targeted gamma of 2.2 to 2.0 or when they show 6500k change it to 6000k to cool down the white point? This laptop if you look it up is design for photo/video editing and is considered a mobile workstation. Just stuck on the whites

15
Hello all CR,

I have been using macbook pro's for my editing running windows. I have tried several laptops and while they are close in color gamut and contast. The Macbook whites look pure white. Is this just because its a cooler (k temp) screen or does all the others that are a bit more warm and slightly leaning toward yellow correct? Does anyone have a test they do when calibrating a laptop? The one I have settled on is the dell m3800 with the 3200 x 1800 screen. For $1500 it seemed like the best editing laptop for the money not including mac's.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31