August 31, 2014, 06:43:32 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 - DWM

Pages: [1]
1
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 16, 2013, 06:54:33 PM »
I only mentioned it because a user wrote that newer cameras necessarily have a better sensor across all aspects, and this simply isn't correct.
I must have missed that because I haven't seen where anybody said a newer camera necessarily have a better sensor across all aspects. 

2
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 16, 2013, 03:47:10 PM »

The max. selectable iso says absolutely nothing about usable or clean iso - take the 5d2->5d3->6d, the latter has the highest usable iso, but the older 5d2 has still the best (sharpest/dr-rich) low iso. And there's unfortunately no one stopping marketing from implementing a H4 mode @iso51200 for impressive tech specs, even though it's a noise generator unless downsizing to 320x200.

Maybe I am the one that don't understand then. The 6D and 5DIII have the same ISO range 100-25600. (Keep in mind I disregard all the H modes because they are useless to me.) You would expect the 5DIII to perform better than the 6D being that the latter is what I consider the Rebel of full frame. Now for the 5DII I can't say if if is better than the mkIII. I have no experience with any full frame but many seem to believe the mkIII is better. Can you show me where the mk ii beats the mk iii? 

3
EOS Bodies / Re: It's the 15th!
« on: January 16, 2013, 12:33:13 PM »
Just sayin'.  Awfully quiet in here...

Remember, rumors are generally for discussion and for fun.  Taking them seriously will almost always leave you disappointed.

Exception:  CR3 rumors are 99% likely.

Have Fun, and don't take rumors too seriously.

Where is that like button when you need it?  ;D

4
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 16, 2013, 12:23:27 PM »
If that ISO rumor is right then Canon will be kicking themselves. I'm not buying this rumor. Can't imagine the lower lever camera (T4i) having better ISO performance than their higher counterpart.

Good grief, it's about usable iso settings, what good would 6d-like settings do if all you get is noise? If you are so desperate for noisy pictures, just shoot @iso12800 on crop and underexpose -3ev...

... I'd be happy if Canon would end the marketing race in both the mp and iso setting category but just release sensors with more dr and 2 stops better iso than now.
No need for the "Good grief"  ;D I don't recall anybody saying they were desperate for noisy pictures. Not sure where you conjured up that idea from.  ;D  I clearly said they they will need to improve IQ or sales will drop.  If you understood you would realize that the higher unusable max ISO rating they give will mean a higher usable ISO which means a cleaner low ISO. That is the way it works. Anytime they clean up the low end it will give them the ability to go higher. If they can go higher they will definitely use that number to boost sales. I never shoot above ISO 1600 now because of IQ and very seldom shoot above ISO 500. It would be very nice to have good clean pictures in the 1600- 3200 range for very low light wildlife shooting and super clean shots below that. Sorry if you got so touchy because I am not buying the rumor you posted. It's just rumor talk. Take a chill pill, relax and have fun.  ;D  Keep in mind high mp and ISO ratings sell cameras and that is all any of these companies want, To sell products!

5
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 16, 2013, 10:36:45 AM »
thenewcamera.com 70d specification new rumor: http://thenewcamera.com/canon-70d-specification-rumor/

ASP-C
20.2 MP (effective)
DIGIC 5
ISO 100-6400, expandable to 12800
LCD: 3.0"
additional features: dustproof, real-time viewfinder electronic level

sounds interesting... seems like new sensor, but lower maximum ISO than on 650D?
If that ISO rumor is right then Canon will be kicking themselves. I'm not buying this rumor. Can't imagine the lower lever camera (T4i) having better ISO performance than their higher counterpart. Once you get above the Rebel line the buyer is more aware of the performance spec's instead of the features list. They want better performance and not just more toys on a camera. I expect at least a 12800 ISO on the 70D and 7D II when released. If they don't make a significant IQ improvement then these two cameras will loose sales. JMO

6
Lenses / Re: The great battle: primes vs zooms
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:37:59 AM »
Should have listed the cost of each option. That might have a big impact on which one someone would actually pick.

7
Lenses / Re: Canon's lens plans
« on: December 17, 2012, 11:32:48 AM »
This is one messed up poll. Why would Canon not want to improve everything? All lenses sharper, better AF, better IS, etc, etc. What part would anybody not want inproved? 

8
Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2012, 09:13:01 PM »
Or a 400mm f/4 below 3 grand.
If they build one under 3 grand you better stay clear of it for quality purposes. Keep in mind that the reason the current 400 f4 is a DO is because it is cheaper to build that way. A non DO will positively be higher than the current DO f4 which is right around $5900

9
Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2012, 07:49:46 PM »
...a twist zoom instead of the push/pull that sucks dirt and moisture in everytime you slide it.

Is that Internet wisdom speaking, or do you have that problem with your copy of the lens?  If the latter, your copy is likely defective and should be sent for service.  If the former, did that 'expert' mention the fact that the 100-400L has dust/moisture seals under the switches and zoom/focus ring, and lacks only the mount gasket to be a 'weather sealed' lens like its push-pull cousin, the 28-300L? 

I trust you're aware that lenses aren't hermetically sealed - any extending zoom design, whether push-pull or twist, 'sucks air' with every extension and expels it with every retraction.  If you have a 'sealed' extending zoom like a 24-105L, etc., extend the barrel, then hold the lens up and look into the lens mount while retracting the barrel - the eye-blow will make you blink!  The 100-400 moves more air, because of the larger internal volume, but making it a twist zoom won't change that. Making it an internal zoom, like the 70-200L lenses, would change that...at the cost of making it an >11" long lens, all the time.  I say, "No, thanks," to that.
No it is not internet wisdom. I do have the 100-400. So far I have not had a problem big enough to send it in for service. There is some dust visible but does not effect image quality yet. I know others that have sold theirs for this reason before it got too bad so it is not just my copy. Ironically I have have had more dust problems with the camera it is used on. Obviously something that moves that much air is going to move dust and moisture. I am far more cautious with this lens than with my other setups because of this risk. Unless they install a filter system the seal will not stop small dust and moisture particals. If the seal is tight enough to stop this without a filter then the lens wouldn't slide very well because the air couldn't pass through.

Now on the second part,(sorry I didn't make it clear enough) I was refering to the internal zoom like the 70-200 f2.8 where the air exchange is all inside because nothing externally extends. I'm smart enough to know that there is no difference simply because of the method used to extend it.

 As the length goes, I feel it would not need to be >11". It should be doable by adding only a little more length than say the 70-200 2.8 IS II with a 2x tele installed. Yes I know there would be more to it than just add 2x optics. That is why I said a "little more" length. That should put it just under 11" which isn't a problem for me on a lens with that much range. A fixed length lens is a lot easier to keep balanced on a gimbal tripod at all focal lengths. Interesting thing is the 70-200 2.8 IS II I had with a 2x tele was just as sharp as the 100-400 in the center which is about all I'm concerned with at that focal length. Only time will tell what Canon will decide is best if any change comes.

10
Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2012, 04:59:01 PM »
I would like to see the 100-400 improved with the 4 stop IS, better image quality and a twist zoom instead of the push/pull that sucks dirt and moisture in everytime you slide it. If they would improve it enough then there wouldn't be a need for the 400 f5.6 prime. Better yet I would love for them to make a high IQ zoom to go up to 500mm f5.6 to compete with the 500mm f6.3 zoom that both Sigma and Tamron have.

Pages: [1]