September 19, 2014, 12:23:00 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 - dgatwood

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48
1
Canon General / Re: Canon Developing New-Concept Photo-Storage Device
« on: September 18, 2014, 01:42:29 PM »
Hi dgatwood.
I agree with everything you said here, with the clarification it is Near field, not Touching field  :o so you could put the camera and reader within a few inches to maybe a couple of feet whilst downloading.  :)

Yes, I realize they don't literally have to be touching, but with standard (nondirectional) antennas, the typical range of NFC is only about four inches (10 cm).  The longest-range versions that I'm aware of only reach about twice that distance.  That's a short enough range to preclude, for example, the obvious use case—putting this device in your pocket and hanging the camera around your neck and having the devices synchronize with each other transparently over NFC.

Edit: Also, the speed is probably dependent on distance, so that maximum speed is likely measured at an inch or two away.  Even if it managed to barely pick up a signal from pocket-to-chest distance, it would be slower than molasses in February.

2
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deals: EOS 5D Mark III Body & With Lens Kits
« on: September 17, 2014, 04:39:08 PM »

Only $300 more for a 24–105L?  My, how the mighty have fallen.  Guess Sigma's 24–105 really is cutting into sales for this lens.  :)

3
EOS Bodies / Re: AE-1 Styled DSLR from Canon?
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:35:53 PM »
Depends on what they leave out when adding the extra controls.  GPS?  Wi-Fi?  Focus points?  DPAF?

4
EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:32:47 PM »
I wouldn't go that far. Neuro has never failed me before.
Who would shoot at 3200 ISO a non-moving model during day time?
I would be convinced when they show me 6400 of a dunking player in a school interior basketball field.

Agreed.  There's nothing dark in these images, and that's where noise at high ISO tends to be the most obvious.  And it's a camera-processed image, so who knows how much DNR has been applied.


But seriously if you look at the past the one thing that Canon does very well is place products in their line. They will not let the 7D II be better than the 1D X or the 5D III especially in IQ.

Why not?  The 6D is considerably better than the 5D Mark III in IQ, and is apparently pretty comparable to the 1DX.

Mind you, the laws of physics probably won't let the 7D Mark II be better than the full-frame bodies (ignoring resolution differences).

5
Ive already had one photographer ask to change back to the version 2 Utility as he believed using Live View on 3.0 was too slow and clunky.  So back to v 2.14 for him.  Now Ive had another photographer report an issue when capturing images and reviewing in Adobe Bridge.  What he's seeing (and I replicated) was capturing CR2's and every "say" 5th image had a generic cr2 icon instead of a preview. If you double clicked and opened the file, it then made a preview. Then a couple would be OK then another one or couple with CR2 generic.

The preview is probably created by Spotlight, in which case it's a timing issue.  Spotlight uses file system event notifications to decide when to index the files in a folder.  If an app opens a file for writing, quickly dumps the data in, and closes it, that file will be typically already be on disk by the time the Spotlight importer gets around to indexing it.  If an app dribbles the data out, it can't index it.  I don't recall the details of when it retries—maybe when it gets a subsequent file open event.

6
Lenses / Re: 100-400mm and more DO lenses confirmed
« on: September 17, 2014, 02:18:35 AM »
My sole beef with built-in extenders is that they add length to gear. Sometimes space isnt an option especially on handcarry.

I would say it's the other way around.  There's always room for a couple of extenders in the same lens compartment as your shortest prime (with a spacer in between), but there's not room for a lens that's two inches taller without making the camera bag itself too tall for the overhead bin.  :)

7
Canon General / Re: Canon Developing New-Concept Photo-Storage Device
« on: September 17, 2014, 02:00:22 AM »
My understanding of the wikipedia's description of NFC is that it supports data transfer rates of up to 424 kbit/s. That's ~50KB/sec or <200MB per hour.

That doesn't sound useful beyond a day's worth of jpegs from a P&S.

I suspect they'd use NFC for device detection and initial credential negotiation, followed by a data connection over a faster medium such as Wi-Fi Direct, similar to the way some cell phones configure themselves for use with some Wi-Fi access points.

After all, even a small JPEG from a point-and-shoot camera is going to be a meg or two, and nobody is going to just stand there holding a device to their camera for twenty seconds or more just to copy a single photo.

With that said, why would anyone buy this when they probably already have a set-top device like an Apple TV or Roku?  If Canon had any clue, they'd be focusing on trying to make their experience more seamless with existing ecosystems instead of trying to convince people to replace an already locked-in movie viewing ecosystem with an incompatible Canon offering just to get slightly easier (maybe) access to their photos.

Okay, I take that back.  I can see one potential situation where it might be nice—showing photos to your family in a hotel room.  But most folks have a laptop for that, and if they don't, there's the problem that half the hotel TVs out there have to be tricked into letting you access the HDMI ports.  And besides, if you have to carry an HDMI cable anyway, why not just use the camera itself for photo viewing?

So... I guess I reiterate my original question: Why would anyone buy this?

8
EOS Bodies / Re: How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
« on: September 17, 2014, 12:02:22 AM »
My list, in order from most important to least:

  • Make it a feature-for-feature upgrade from the 6D.  This means:
    • Built-in Wi-Fi
    • Built-in GPS
    • No banding problems at high ISO levels
  • Add DPAF
  • Add eye tracking
  • Add 4K video
  • Add auto-AFMA

9
Lenses / Re: Choose your Weapon: Ultra Wide Zooms for Canon
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:47:47 PM »

10–22.  Since moving to full-frame, the 16–35 L II just doesn't seem quite as sharp to me.

10
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:44:56 PM »
85 L III
135 L II
100–400 L II
24–300 DO

11
Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:42:34 PM »
While its disappointing that this isn't a L-series lens with a fixed f/stop, it appears to be a similar lens to the EF-S 18-135 STM geared for dual pixel video focusing on a future full frame canon camera, like a 6d mark II.

Too bad the loss of the constant f-stop wasn't made up for by an increase in reach to match the 18–135....

12
EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII No Wifi
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:44:07 PM »
For those who aren't aware, I read that Canon was not able to integrate Wi-Fi because the magnesium alloy chassis (as opposed to plastic on 70D) causes too much interference with the signal. They had to decide between durability and features. Though Wi-Fi would have been nice, there's still IR shooting and tethered USB...which works well enough for me.

Funny, it always worked fine in all-metal MacBook Pro laptops.  So what you're really saying is that Canon isn't as good at designing hardware today as Apple was a decade ago....  I don't think I buy that argument.

Besides, an amazingly strong GPS signal is about -115 dBm.  A Wi-Fi signal won't stay connected below about -70 dBm.  That's a 45 dB difference, meaning that a GPS signal has less than one ten-thousandth the power of a Wi-Fi signal.  If they can deal with GPS-level signals, then they could take their antenna team, get them completely wasted, and still pull off Wi-Fi.  :D


I think that was the point right from the first post in this thread. I don't think anybody uses it to post to Facebook.

I use it for posting to Facebook all the time when I'm traveling.  In-body Wi-Fi means I don't have to carry any extra gear with me besides my phone and my camera.  No attachment could ever provide that same ease of use.

13
Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:03:50 PM »
I wouldn't be surprised if they phase out the 24-105 to push the more expensive 24-70. This would make an ideal kit lens for lots of photographers, especially if they get round to releasing a FF rebel camera.

I hope not.  Yes, this probably will be the new kit lens, but I fully expect Canon to update the 24–105 L soon to better compete with Sigma's offering.  If Canon expects their full-frame line to remain competitive among anybody but pure studio shooters, they absolutely must have a high-end lens with at least a 4:1 zoom ratio covering the wide angle to moderate telephoto zoom range.

I can't imagine Canon seriously being crazy enough to push the 24–70 as a serious alternative to the 24–105.  Even the 24–105 is just barely adequate reach-wise.  After switching to full-frame, I still find myself wishing I could have my 17–85 back (except in terms of sharpness), because that extra bit of reach between 105 and 135 makes a huge difference in situations where you can only realistically carry around one lens.

Yes, there's always going to be a tradeoff between reach and IQ, but not if it means being limited to f/5.6 at a mere 105mm.  :)

14
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark IV announcement on March 2015 or later
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:42:41 PM »
If it has integrated Wi-Fi and GPS, I might consider it as an upgrade for my 6D.  If it doesn't, it's a downgrade, and I'll just wait for a 6D Mark II.  The number of times I've been glad that I had GPS and Wi-Fi greatly exceed the number of times I've sworn because of the 6D's AF system being insufficient for the task at hand.

These features add so little to the camera's BOM cost that I consider it utterly criminal to see Canon continuing to ship high-end bodies without them at this point—particularly in product lines with three-year upgrade cycles.  Just saying.

15
849 for wireless and it doesn't even support 802.11ac is this a joke?

Canon's entire concept of Wi-Fi in cameras is a joke.  What could Canon possibly be thinking charging that kind of money for such a basic, limited device?  Fifty bucks, I could see.  Maybe a hundred on the high side.  At $849, I no longer see refurbished 70D bodies as great cameras with wireless, but rather as WFTs that come with a free camera!

In other words, there's not enough crack in the world for this to make sense.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48