November 27, 2014, 02:01:09 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 - Woody

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 44
2
EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 01:02:33 AM »
Whereas Canon currently makes it better for you if you've bought expensive (large aperture) lenses, Nikon's is more rewarding if you're using teleconverters with your lens or you're focusing in very low light situations (-3EV on the D750.)

Errr... the 6D and 7D2 also AF at -3 eV... just a matter of time when all the single digit Canon DSLRs AF at -3 eV.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 01:00:38 AM »
Thank you for pointing outside of in certain select situations, such as sports and wildlife photography, there's no reason to buy Canon.

Other situations may also include (a) spontaneous photos of active kids (b) macro photos of relatively active insects (e.g. in the summer or tropical countries). Personally, MILC offerings do not offer the solutions I want either because of the response time of EVF or limited macro lens solutions (let me know when you find a MILC macro lens with equivalent f > 150 mm).

So, apart from relatively inactive subjects and landscape photos, I cannot find enough reasons to buy non-Canikon stuff.

4
Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 24, 2014, 06:35:13 AM »
In that light, even the tiny gains, that Canon could achieve, are great.

Yup.

While there will always be whiners who want to see 2 to 3 stops of improvement in high ISO performance for APS-C sensors, the reality is that even Sony with all their sensor wizardry cannot perform better. Just pit Nikon D7100/5300 vs Sony A6000 vs 7D2 using DPReview comparison page. Only Fujifilm 'appears' to be better... but anyone can also achieve the same kind of performance by tinkering with their RAW files.

5
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 01:12:02 AM »
I think there are 2 serious issues plaquing the Canon system:

a) sensor performance at low ISO

b) slow / inaccurate contrast based AF in their compact cameras e.g., G7X, EOS-M etc

Hopefully Canon can address these 2 problems.

6
Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 23, 2014, 08:30:28 PM »
Despite Bryan's commentary, I'm with AvTvM on this. To my eyes, the noise comparison page (link below) shows minimal difference from the 70D at any ISO and certainly less than a stop (maybe 0.5 stop?) against the 7D, which seems to me a disappointing return for five years' progress. Along with a 6D, I still have a 7D but there's not enough here for me to feel the need to upgrade it. YMMV.

I do not own the 7D2 and have no intention of getting one (too heavy for me).

I am also in agreement with you there is minimal image quality difference between 70D, 7D and 7D2. Or even the Nikon D7100, Sony A6000 etc (at least before any 5 stop shadow recovery is carried out...)

However, there is a difference between what you and I think, and what Bryan Carnathan says in his review. I do not think it's fair to state otherwise.

7
Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 23, 2014, 05:55:21 PM »
Conclusion: confirmation of what was already known ... IQ improvement vs. 70D minimal and even vs. 7D quite disappointing. Too bad. Really great DSLR otherwise, everything there, except built-in WiFi.

Wow. Did you even read the review or you just assumed Bryan will share your opinion? From http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II.aspx

"... More surprising is the 7D Mark II's high ISO noise performance....

... I predicted that the 7D II's image quality would be at least as good as the 70D but not significantly better...

Truth is, I expected to see practically no difference between the 7D II and 70D results until at least ISO 1600 or 3200...

Overall, I see more image quality improvement from the 7D II than I expected. I love when my expectations are exceeded...

I continue to be impressed with the 7D II's improvements over prior Canon APS-C bodies. The 7D II shows off its noticeably higher resolution against the 7D and shows some high ISO noise level improvements. Though very similar to the 70D at ISO 100, the 7D II shows progressively cleaner results as ISO settings are increased...

After seeing 7D II image quality exceed my expectations, and knowing the huge array of other 7D II feature advantages over the 70D, I began having serious second thoughts at this point in the review process. Overall, the Canon 7D Mark II looks impressive from an image quality perspective.

Going into this review, I was thinking that there was little chance that I was going to be replacing my 70D with a 7D II... After seeing 7D II image quality exceed my expectations, and knowing the huge array of other 7D II feature advantages over the 70D, I began having serious second thoughts at this point in the review process...

My 70D is on the porch waiting for the brown truck as I write this. I sold it to B&H Photo's Used Department to help fund the 7D II acquisition."

8
EOS Bodies / Re: A Real EOS M Replacement Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: November 19, 2014, 10:09:50 PM »
Seriously, the new M is going to be a mirrorless beater because it will have some movie AF tweets?

In my books, even the old EOS-M beats out other competing MILCs because of
(a) price (b) 22 f/2 lens (c) wireless remote control (without resorting to the battery draining WiFi feature) (d) the flexibility to mount EOS lenses without significant loss in AF capability.

As for AF, unless MILCs can beat DSLRs in overall AF response (in terms of AF servo and as well as EVF related lag), they will always play a secondary role in my bag. For serious stuff, I can only rely on my DSLR. As such, it does not matter to me whether the AF in EOS-M can ever match that of other equivalent MILC products.

I owned and used an OME EM5 for a year before I sold all my m43 stuff.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF-S 11-24mm f/3.5-4.5
« on: November 18, 2014, 09:23:47 PM »
kind of moronic because there's already an exceptional 11-22mm EF-M out there.

Ya... was wondering about that too.

Canon is now giving users multiple choices for ultrawide zooms:
EF - 16-35 f/2.8L USM II vs 16-35 f/4L IS USM vs 17-40 f/4L USM
EF-S - 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM vs 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
EF-M - 11-22 f/4-5.6 IS STM vs maybe 11-24 f/3.5-4.5?

Apart from 16-35 f/2.8L and 17-40 f/4L whose performances are somewhat controversial, all the other ultrawide lenses have top notch optical quality. Perhaps, they are trying to prove they are just as good in the ultrawide world as their telephoto stuff.  :P

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF-S 11-24mm f/3.5-4.5
« on: November 18, 2014, 11:03:42 AM »
Also the back focus of just 3.26mm means its not even EF-S, as that has a 44.0mm flange distance and a mirror box to clear.

This appears to be an EF-M lens.

Exactly my prediction. :)

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF-S 11-24mm f/3.5-4.5
« on: November 18, 2014, 06:11:20 AM »
Canon must be crazy to have so many iterations of their EF-S ultrawide lenses.

It may make sense if this is an EF-M lens.

Still, as rightly pointed out by others, I'll rather adapt an EF-S 10-22 or 10-18 to the EOS-M due to the extra 2 mm at the wide end.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: A Real EOS M Replacement Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: November 18, 2014, 12:05:24 AM »
Actually, if Canon is losing customers to the mirrorless camp, Nikon is in a worse situation. :P

For a start, Canon chose their sensor size right. As many folks have already indicated, myself included, all Canon needs to do is introduce an EOS-M2 update with DPAF and they are nearly there. Throw in features like EVF, Wifi, articulate screen, more lenses etc and they are almost ready to duke it out against the A6000/EM1/XT1.

Nikon, on the other hand, probably needs to throw out their over-priced small sensor 1 series cameras, lenses and accessories, and return to the drawing board.

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Sigma Lenses Coming Q1 of 2015 [CR1]
« on: November 17, 2014, 09:52:56 PM »
I am curious about the 14-24 f/4 lens. If it does not have a bulbous front element and has decent optical performance, I'm all for it.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: A Real EOS M Replacement Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: November 17, 2014, 08:36:23 AM »
Darn, I just paid US$320 for an EOS-M 22 f/2 kit.  :P

Realistically speaking, that would probably mean the 70D sensor, a mediocre AF system, no VF and some little handling changes... :/ come on, Canon, prove me wrong! :D

Actually, if it has the 70D sensor, DPAF should be fast enough. Will like to see some kind of VF and definitely a wired remote connection.

15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX1 First Shots
« on: November 13, 2014, 12:48:02 PM »
Here are some crops of images downloaded from Imaging Resource.  We all see things a little differently, I looked at the dark red fabric to see detail.

I will wait for RAW files.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 44