September 21, 2014, 08:43:04 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 - takesome1

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 06:08:39 PM »
You asked for info regarding the latest interchangeable lens camera market. Thom Hogan has done the job for you:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/interchangeable-lens-market.html

"So I went back to Canon and Nikon’s recent published numbers and the CIPA shipment numbers for 2014 so far and plugged them into a spreadsheet with Sony’s claims and an assumption about Sony’s DSLR sales (which they didn’t disclose). What I came up with was a range of values that went like this:

Canon — 38 to 40%
Nikon — 33 to 35%
Sony — 12 to 14%

...But, overall, it looks to me that we’re still locked into the same basic pattern for unit volume in interchangeable lens cameras that we’ve had since the early 90’s: Canon leading, Nikon following, and Sony (originally Minolta) trailing. At the moment, there’s nothing appearing from any of the three that seems to be going to alter that any time soon."

For now, because product loyalty takes time to overcome. Canonites will still swear true to the faith long after logic dictates otherwise, but eventually logic will prevail. If the three companies continue to address the future as they are now, Sony will be top dog with the other two a distant second.

If Canon and Nikon want to still be around in 10 years, they are going to need to radically revise their product design paradigm, because right now both of them are failing miserably.

Sony should focus on their TV, they once had the finest TV in the world and they have slipped in the last few years.
They once made a fine computer, I bought one they make now about two months ago, lucky I was able to get my money back. Sony the top DSLR company in ten years? :o

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 05:34:31 PM »
These threads pop up occasionally and often sales volume, market share and profits are quoted to try and prove one sensor or camera company is better than the other.

This information is good if you are considering buying Canon stock CAJ but absolutely worthless in determining who has the best camera or sensor.

Of course, proving which camera or sensor is the best isn't the point of bringing up sales data and market share.  But if you want to deliberately misconstrue the reason in order to dismiss the information, that's your choice.

What I funny is how people try to use these statistics to show how the 1DX is better than the D810 (and vici versa) and fixate on high end camera comparisons..... Yet the vast bulk of sales for both Canon and Nikon are the introductory crop cameras and the two biggest factors used by the average consumer are price and megapixels... Image quality,

As most of us probably do, people I know ask for camera advice. Most want an easy to use DSLR and do not know much else. They understand the concept of megapixels but then you mention high ISO noise and dynamic range and a blank stare comes over their face, you just provided TMI. To them mp = IQ unfortunately.

The last guy that asked me for advice wanted a small DSLR, of course I suggested SL1 with a kit lens for his budget and needs. He ended up buying a Nikon body, and why? He had a 20 year old Nikon lens he could use on it. Sensor wasn't even a thought for him.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 05:26:08 PM »
These threads pop up occasionally and often sales volume, market share and profits are quoted to try and prove one sensor or camera company is better than the other.

This information is good if you are considering buying Canon stock CAJ but absolutely worthless in determining who has the best camera or sensor.

 I believe Canon has the technology to improve their sensor IQ, but they don't.


Ok so some of what you say may arguably be right, or not, but then you drop this statement in the middle of it.

In what business model would a leading company hold back technology that would crush their competition.
Were they feeling sorry for Nikon because they got hit harder than Canon did by the tsunami?

I think as a Canon shooter I hoped that they would release superior technology last year and even the year before. But to think they withheld technology is like believing conspiracy theories.



4
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 03:36:26 PM »
These threads pop up occasionally and often sales volume, market share and profits are quoted to try and prove one sensor or camera company is better than the other.

This information is good if you are considering buying Canon stock CAJ but absolutely worthless in determining who has the best camera or sensor.



5
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 19, 2014, 11:42:23 PM »
So if I am reading this article right, Canon is selling more low end crop bodies.
Nikon is selling more high end Pro and Prosumer bodies.

6
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CF Cards Vs SD Cards
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:42:50 AM »
No, but I guess I could use a timer to get the total write time and then add up the file sizes to get an approximate MB/s speed.  When I did the tests, my only purpose was to find the biggest buffer depth for an equestrian event I was shooting.  I knew I would be doing lots of burst shooting as it was my first event and I had no idea what I was doing.  Now that I have the 1D X, I try not to shoot too long of bursts as it results in way too many photos to review.

Along with the burst I timed till the last picture wrote to the card.

For stills the super fast card would only help in a very rare instance.
As you mentioned it helps more to try and do short bursts.

In 6 years of digital I have only lost 1 very rare chance at a pic due to a full buffer. That instance changed the way I do burst shots, look at cards and how I view what is important with digital cameras.

7
Photography Technique / Re: Square or not?
« on: September 17, 2014, 08:51:04 PM »
Not square, it makes your subject more of the center piece of the pic while square makes it only about the object.

Plus the majority of the people are saying square. Do you want to make your art according to what the majority would do?

There is no wrong or right answer to your question, only the answer you prefer.

8
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CF Cards Vs SD Cards
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:37:32 PM »

5DIII
-Sandisk 32GB 60MB/s write: 19 frames
-Lexar 32GB 90MB/s write: 23 frames
-Sandisk 32GB 90MB/s write: 25 frames
-Sandisk 64GB 160MB/s write: 35 frames
-Lexar 64GB 160MB/s write: NOT TESTED

1D X
-Sandisk 32GB 60MB/s write: NOT TESTED
-Lexar 32GB 145MB/s  write: 51 frames
-Sandisk 32GB 90MB/s write: 52 frames
-Lexar 64GB 160MB/s write: 53 frames
-Sandisk 64GB 160MB/s write: 57 frames

You didn't by chance go back and figure out the actual MB/s that was written did you?
I have my data at home I would like to compare.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:35:29 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).

I have not seen a side by side of the 6D vs 5D Mark III, might look this up later.

10
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CF Cards Vs SD Cards
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:33:07 PM »
Yup...enough with the fear mongering. 

I've been shooting CF cards for 15 years and not once have I bent pins or messed up the mechanical interface in any way.  I've had exactly one card go bad in all that time (of hundreds I've owned), and that was when one fell out of my card wallet and got run over by a fire truck.
+1 Seriously.  Unless you jam the card in the wrong way or something, it doesn't happen.  I've been using CF cards for 15+ years as well with no issues.  I've never had a card failure, either and they are tough as hell and have been through many wash cycles :D in my pants.  I've only had 1 SD card failure, but find the size a bad thing in terms of them being easier to lose. 

If the CF cards are faster in the 7DII, I'd go for them as you're going to need all the speed you can get with that camera!

It would depend on the card you used and how many mb/s it would read first, type of card second.

Were only talking how fast the buffer clears when it comes to stills and speed of cards.

I tested the 1D IV on this, anything faster than a 60mb/s card had no effect at all on the speed that the buffer cleared. No change going with 100mb/s cards. It was camera limited not card limited. At 45mb/s it would have very a small effect. We are only talking maybe a frame or two in a minute.

I suppose when the 7D II arrives I can test this again and see inside the camera body the new processors in the 7D II will clear faster with fast cards, or if there is a different bottle neck in the system that limits speed.
I have tested CF card speeds on the 5DIII and 1D X and the 1D X was much less affected by the card speed, but the 5DIII was pretty big:

The test procedure was a body cap exposure at 1/8000s; ISO 100; f/0; ALO, High ISO NR, vignette removal, CA correction OFF; RAW; High Speed Drive shot until the buffer was full.  More details are in the post itself.

5DIII
-Sandisk 32GB 60MB/s write: 19 frames
-Lexar 32GB 90MB/s write: 23 frames
-Sandisk 32GB 90MB/s write: 25 frames
-Sandisk 64GB 160MB/s write: 35 frames
-Lexar 64GB 160MB/s write: NOT TESTED

1D X
-Sandisk 32GB 60MB/s write: NOT TESTED
-Lexar 32GB 145MB/s  write: 51 frames
-Sandisk 32GB 90MB/s write: 52 frames
-Lexar 64GB 160MB/s write: 53 frames
-Sandisk 64GB 160MB/s write: 57 frames

I did it exactly the same way. I wonder why your Scandisk 64GB 160MB/s had a big jump on the 5D III but a smaller jump on the 1D X.

11
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: CF Cards Vs SD Cards
« on: September 17, 2014, 02:50:29 PM »
Yup...enough with the fear mongering. 

I've been shooting CF cards for 15 years and not once have I bent pins or messed up the mechanical interface in any way.  I've had exactly one card go bad in all that time (of hundreds I've owned), and that was when one fell out of my card wallet and got run over by a fire truck.
+1 Seriously.  Unless you jam the card in the wrong way or something, it doesn't happen.  I've been using CF cards for 15+ years as well with no issues.  I've never had a card failure, either and they are tough as hell and have been through many wash cycles :D in my pants.  I've only had 1 SD card failure, but find the size a bad thing in terms of them being easier to lose. 

If the CF cards are faster in the 7DII, I'd go for them as you're going to need all the speed you can get with that camera!

It would depend on the card you used and how many mb/s it would read first, type of card second.

Were only talking how fast the buffer clears when it comes to stills and speed of cards. (maybe download time but I never cared about that)

I tested the 1D IV on this, anything faster than a 60mb/s card had no effect at all on the speed that the buffer cleared. No change going with 100mb/s cards. It was camera limited not card limited. At 45mb/s it would have very a small effect. We are only talking maybe a frame or two in a minute.

I suppose when the 7D II arrives I can test this again and see inside the camera body the new processors in the 7D II will clear faster with fast cards, or if there is a different bottle neck in the system that limits speed.



12
EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 17, 2014, 02:21:03 PM »
Why does it seem that the only satisfaction some will get is hearing that the 7Dii is a huge fail?

There was a whole 'language' pre-announcement about how it's not going to make the grade and now that it's official with some sample images, disbelief that it could actually deliver.

I'm stumped.
I can only guess that it's from negative people OR from those of us with 1D Xs wondering if the 7DII hoping that the 7DII really isn't this good!

You should sell your 1D X before the 7D II hits the market. You may loose thousands on it if you wait.

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.

Dude… How can crop be better than full frame in IQ? Think about it….

The additional picture of 40 Benjamin Franklin in my wallet may be very pleasing, I like their IQ  ;)

And to answer the question directly the 7D did have slightly better resolution then the 5D II, however you had to Post Process to see it. 7D files have more headroom for processing than the 5D II. My theory was that Canon did this on purpose to set the IQ apart from the 5D II. Resolution isn't everything when it comes to IQ but in some types of photography it can be more important and carry more weight to the general IQ of a picture.

IQ of JPEGS direct out of the camera are determined by the firmware in the camera. You can bet that Canon makes sure its new models fall in line in the product order, whether by hardware or firmware.

13
Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:18:19 AM »
Am I the only one that thinks making the tripod foot non-removable almost totally defeats the purpose of this lens, which is to make it very light and easily handholdable?  If I were in the market for a lens like this, this one simple thing would be a show-stopper for me.  I keep the tripod ring off my 70-200/2.8 and 100-400L unless I'm actually using it on a tripod for exactly this reason - handholding comfort.  It even looks really uncomfortable to hold in the video with the foot in his palm.

I would want the foot to attach a plate to so I could use it with my black rapid. I wouldn't want the strap holders on the side. I prefer holding my supertele's by the foot when hand holding.

14
Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:12:42 AM »
Why isnt this a "L" Lens?

It has all the bells and whistles of L series, but the ring is green not red, that's all :)

Canon tried painting a red ring over the green one, but it came out black.  They tried painting the red ring next to the green one, but decided people might only buy it at Christmas.  So they just stuck with the green ring.

When I was a kid my sisters nail polish would have fixed the ring problem right up.

Besides if it was an L lens it would be $2000 more than it is. "L" means "Lots of Money" (I am probably wrong on that, however I arrived at that conclusion from experience and I challenge anyone to dispute my findings)

15
EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 17, 2014, 07:18:29 AM »
...
4. again, ordinary look images but does look better than yours...

Your pictures are family snaps and *to you* I'm sure they look better than anything I'll photograph.

Quote
(post your images to show or steal some and let me laugh at it.  hint:  steal from unfamous site so that i do not know... keep in mind, i recognize images via techniques, themes, contents, etc... i.e. cliff mautner with rim light and using light, jonas paterson via use of colors, soft feelings with strong contents and his choice of aperture...)

Look, let me make this easy for you.

As dull and boring as your images are to me there's no way that I could take pictures as meaningful and interesting as the ones you've taken.

Happy?

Dilbert you should post pics to prove him wrong. Can I ask if you do can you also white balance and color correct so we can have that in the discussion as we'll.  :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22