July 31, 2014, 09:15:43 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 - Don Haines

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 190
1
Canon General / Re: What do you Splurge on?
« on: Today at 08:52:51 PM »
Inordinate amounts of tuna and catnip for princess Fluffy

2
Canon made revolution  few years ago. Currently it is a stagnant company, which still focuses significant aattention to dying P&S market. Product cycle for semi-pro and pro products is very long and shows that Canon does not sufficiently invest in R&D as other companies. Canon started loosing in the following areas:

1) Mirrorless market - they loose to Fuji, Olympus, Sony;
2) Sensor technology - loosing to Sony;
3) Lenses - starting to loose to Sigma and Tamron as these 2 companies started producing high quality lenses, which match or in some cases exceed qulity of Canon lenses (e.g. Sigma 50 mm 1.4 Art, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC) for affordable price.

Losing is a tough way to put it.  Being #1 means you have many mouths to feed -- not just enthusiasts and pros in a forum.  I'm truly curious to see what chunk of Canon's business folks like us in this forum (and like-minded shooters not in this forum) actually represent to them.

Also, advances in one small segment of the photography world does not make Fuji, Olympus, Sony, Sigma and Tamron the 'team to beat'.  It means that they have had success in one small segment of the photography world.  That's all.

And lest we forget, the company arguably most revered for its innovation and 'firsts in the industry' -- Sony -- can't seem to understand photographers well enough to produce a top-to-bottom well thought out camera that is free of non-trivial flaws.  They seem predisposed to come up with something cool and useful (that I might want!), shoot it out to the market half-cocked, and under-deliver.  What's worse is that they don't seem to learn from this, and they just shoot out another version in record time with similarly iffy results. 

So it's more than who is on a roll or has the best team or most innovative pipeline -- I want the company that most consistently satisfies its customers.  Bleeding edge innovation isn't my driver.  I want a camera/system that does exactly what I want it to do.  Canon may be slow, but they have never let me down with what they have delivered.

- A
When I jumped ship from Olympus to Canon, the choice was Canon or Nikon. Canon had the lenses that I liked and when it came to the user interface, there was no comparison...Canon let me do what I wanted easily, Nikon had me diving into menus... I went Canon

As things stand today, for my purposes everything about the Canons is superior to the Nikon and Sony offerings except for the sensors and I expect the gap to narrow drastically or even disappear soon.

Look at the clues...

Clue #1: Canon sensors are inferior to Nikon/Sony. Everyone knows that. You can bet that the people at Canon know that too.
Clue #2: Canon executives have hinted that something big or revolutionary is coming.
Clue #3: The 7D2 has been delayed for "production reasons".. We know it isn't just making another copy of the 70D sensor with a few more or less pixels.. it has to be something else.
Clue #4: The delay is NOT DPAF. It is here and in production in the 70D. Being a lower cost camera and stocked and sold in general consumer stores, it is a safe bet that 70D sales will exceed that of the 7D2 AND the entire FF lineup. A bit more for a 7D2 will not matter.
Clue #5: Canon has sensor fabrication facilities that work on much finer lithography than the APS-C and FF sensors of today. Pick up a Canon P/S camera for proof....
Clue #6: P/S sales are declining and this means extra capacity is opening up on those finer lithography production lines...
Clue #7: We know that by going to row or column A/D on the sensor that they could drastically drop noise and increase the DR of their sensors. You can bet that Canon knows this too.

My bet is that the delays in 7D2 production are due to moving the A/D onto sensors with finer lithography. This has to happen at some point and now is the logical time. I would expect a rapid refresh of the FF lineup after this.

3
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: Today at 10:48:24 AM »
Humm, I'm going to say, my Sekonic light meter.
YES!!!!!

that said, I used it last night :)

4
I use my Tamron at f/8 (stopped down 2/3 stop), and the results are very good.  At least as good as what I get with the 100-400, but subjectively better in many cases because of the additional pixels on-target.  I am not sure that a 100-400 with a 1.4 TC will beat it.  There would have to be some major improvements over the current 100-400 + TC performance for this to be a viable option.  As far as IS, Tamron's VC (vibration control) is excellent.  I do agree that Canon focusing will likely be faster and it that the Canon will be lighter.  But if I have to spend at least twice as much for  the lens, plus more for a decent TC, it just doesn't add up, for me.  I suspect that the same will be true for many birders on a budget.  There will be, however, great deals on used samples of the current 100-400 regardless.

I think even the current 100-400L with 1.4x is quite good optically, at least in the center.  I've used mine for moon shots with stacked 1.4x TCs and it's still very good optically even with the 18MP crop sensor behind it.

So, to me, the question is, are you willing to pay double for a lens that's smaller and lighter, has better handling, has better AF, and can get to the 100-150mm range versus the Tamron, if the optical quality is better over the 150-400 range and just as good over the 400+ range at f/8?  I think many - myself included - would be willing to do that.  In fact, this possibility is the very reason I have not bought the Tamron.  If the Tamron were as good at 600mm wide open as it is at 400mm wide open, that would be another story.  But it's not.
As a happy owner of the Tamron, let me say this:

I agree! Over the 150-400 range, the Tamron as a bit better than the 100-400 and obviously, from 400 to 600 there is no comparison. When I bought it I did not believe that an updated 100-400 would be coming out any time soon and so I bought and have enjoyed many many great pictures that I would not have got without it.

The current 100-400 is substandard for IQ in the Canon lens lineup. If the improvements in quality are anything like the quality we see in the 70-200's, then the new one will be a kick-ass lens with IQ and AF that blows the Tamron away in the 150-400 range and quite possibly will out-resolve the Tamron at 600mm WITHOUT a teleconverter.

5
And if you stay through it gives you motion sickness for free...;-)

I should post the video of it on a stunt kite..... now that was a nausea inducing unwatchable video!  :)

They are a great toy and you can have lots of fun with them. I have a friend who tried mounting one on the head of a sled dog and ended up with a video of another dog eating the camera..... be creative... go out there and do stupid things :)

Don, this is the best description for the intended use ;-)
And you can dare to explore extremely unusual visual perspectives (have you recovered the eaten GoPro?)
I still have playing kids inshallow water in mind, from a shark's perspective ;-))
And yes, the stunt kite video would be cool - how did you mount it?
Thanks for sharing
Olaf

The eaten gopro was fine, but the case was not.... they are not husky-proof.

The stunt kite mount was done by using an adhesive mount onto a very thin plastic cutting board that has the rubbery non-slip backing. The board was deeply scored across the middle and folded in two and used to sandwich the leading edge of the kite. A bunch of rare earth magnets were duct taped to the back edges of the cutting board and that held it closed in place. I figure that since I managed to use both duct tape and magnets, that it had to be a good idea. surprisingly, it worked :)

6
Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: Today at 10:01:07 AM »
Green-crowned brilliant hummingbird, Costa Rica.  Multi flash set up.
This is the type of picture that one should see in an article showing the benefits of using multiple flashes. Well done!

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: Today at 09:58:57 AM »
So "4x5, 8x10 spanks you all" and so he chooses...the aps-c, because it's not that much worse than full frame.

That makes no sense.
That's because you are looking at it logically :)

8

 Canon started loosing in the following areas:

1) Mirrorless market - they loose to Fuji, Olympus, Sony;
2) Sensor technology - loosing to Sony;
3) Lenses - starting to loose to Sigma and Tamron as these 2 companies started producing high quality lenses, which match or in some cases exceed qulity of Canon lenses (e.g. Sigma 50 mm 1.4 Art, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC) for affordable price.

if you loose momentum you can loos all business very soon.

The word is "lose".
but loos is ok :)

9
And if you stay through it gives you motion sickness for free...;-)

I should post the video of it on a stunt kite..... now that was a nausea inducing unwatchable video!  :)

They are a great toy and you can have lots of fun with them. I have a friend who tried mounting one on the head of a sled dog and ended up with a video of another dog eating the camera..... be creative... go out there and do stupid things :)


10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: Today at 08:15:51 AM »
Comparisons are "interesting" to say the least..... People love to stack the deck when making comparisons. An APS-C fanboy will compare a new Nikon APS-C against a 5D2.... and there isn't a whole lot of difference. The FF fanboy will compare a new Nikon FF against a 7D and the FF is miles ahead. You can't compare new technology to old and you can't compare different technologies.

A fair comparison is the same technology of the same age.... and good luck finding it because technology is not static and unlike the automotive world, Sony, Canon, or Nikon don't release all their 2014 models at the same time.... releases are staggered and there are changes between releases.

In theory, if the two cameras had the exact same pixel count and the exact same level of technology, you would expect the FF would have a 1 1/3 stop advantage over the APS-C camera. Yes that is a difference, but it is not earth shattering. That's the difference we saw going from the 5D2 to the 6D.

The reality is that todays cameras are far superior to those of the past. My first DSLR produced terrible images at ISO800 and the upper limit of ISO1600 produced garbage... years go by and I end up with a 60D that shoots all the way up to ISO12800... still a crop camera, but at ISO12800 produced superior images to my E-300 at ISO400, despite the pixels of the 60D only being half the size.... that's about 6 stops of improvement and if I were to rush out and buy a new Nikon crop camera I could get another 2 stops.

Today, cameras are stabilizing. In the crop world there is about 2 stop of difference between new models of similar pixel count of different manufacturers, and that is mostly because Canon is still using old technology in their sensors. It is believed that they are switching over to new designs and new manufacturing processes, so expect that gap to disappear. As things stand now, we are approaching the theoretical limits of current technology so unless there is some new magic technology that erupts on the scene, expect things to get even closer.... and as Sony has just shown us, pixel count has more impact in a stable market than swapping between FF and crop.


11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 10:30:36 PM »
This conflicts with the whole idea of having ISO anyway (the "s" being for standardization). If it were different between film and digital, light meters, etc. wouldn't work properly.

You might think so, but in fact, they are governor by different standards (which is actually what the 'S' stands for, lots of different standards for lots of different things).  ISO 6, ISO 2240, and ISO 5800 define speed for B&W negative, color reversal, and color negative film, respectively.  ISO 12232 governs sensitivity for digital sensors.
I did a metering comparison tonight... My Olympus OM-1, my Nikon FM, and my light meter all agree... They all date back to the good old days of film and film speeds are ASA numbers. On the test scene they all agreed at 1/400th of a second.

In the digital world, My 60D says 1/1000 sec, my Olympus E-510 says 1/800 sec, and my SX-50 says 1/1000. sensor speeds are ISO numbers.

I know ISO and ASA are supposed to be the same... but this is curious....

12
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 05:55:44 PM »
...
Then I am told "you're saying you need 12800 for to avoid motion blur has been done and it's been done well, on 400 ISO film, by people who took pride in practising it over and over again" despite that ISO400 would have required a shutter speed of 1 1/3 seconds, and then told "Don't use current tech to make up for not knowing what you're doing".
...

About 10 years ago I tried an experiment where I used the same speed settings on a film cameras as I had used on a digital camera. It didn't work - the film was exposed very differently to digital (I don't remember if it was under/over.) The ISO number that you get when you take a picture with your DSLR is not the same as the ISO number used for film. Try it for yourself.
Thanks for a good laugh....I tried the exact same experiment ages ago and found that the two cameras were off by a factor of two... and I can't remember if it was twice as high or twice as low... DOH! Glad to be in such good company :)

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 02:53:23 PM »
... I guess I should be shooting the subject a 1/3 second....

That might work...if you're a pro.  Are you a pro?  Are you??

 ;)
I am a pro..... just not a photography pro...

14
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 02:41:27 PM »
"What should I have done to have avoided using ISO12800?" The only advice I got from anyone is to get a camera that shoots better at high ISO.... so if 12800 is bad, then 25,600 must be evil and 51,200 would make me the spawn of Satan...

so perhaps someone else can answer this question.... Why does my use of technology to shoot at ISO12800 make me a bad photographer, yet someone else`s use of technology to shoot with an additional 2 stops of DR make them a great photographer?

The one answer you got for your first question – get a camera with better high ISO performance, is one reasonable answer (even if only renting to meet an occasional need).  With a current Canon FF body you could shoot at ISO 25600 and still have less noise, allowing you an extra stop to 'spend' on shutter speed or DoF.  Depending on your RAW conversion software (I know you said that was SOOC JPG, but you also shoot RAW), with the 60D you could have underexposed by a stop or so, pushed in post, and used the best available NR tools (DxO PRIME, for example), and that might have been better, but might not.

As to your second question, the answer is bias - if you think more DR at low ISO is important to you (especially if you spent a lot of money to get it), but you don't shoot at high ISO, then more DR is critical for your professional photography, but less noise and more DR at very high ISO is a technological crutch for unskilled amatur pichur takers like us.
That's what I thought.... I can borrow a 5D2 and get a 2 stop jump in noise, or buy a 5D3 or 6D and get an additional stop in value, or I could go out and get a Sony a7S and shoot at ISO409,600... but however you slice it, I would still be shooting at ISO12800 or higher. I am told not to go above 1600 so I need to find 3 stops somewhere... I checked at B+H and they don't sell a 50MM F0.50 lens so that option is out... I guess I should be shooting the subject at 1/3 second....

15
and the time lapse.... a drive from Goose bay down to the Labrador coast at the strait of Bell Isle...

https://vimeo.com/102139645

it was about 48Mbytes of GoPro images...

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 190