October 23, 2014, 06:12:58 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 - Otara

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Reviews / Re: Gizmodo reviews the Canon 7D Mark II
« on: October 21, 2014, 07:25:39 PM »

The wildcard is, of course, how many people see the 7D2 as a specialist's tool and how many see it as a roundly robust camera for general photography?

Enthusiasts see the 7D2 as being a camera for the reach-obsessed and budget constrained.  And there are sports/wildlife/birding folks out there that will be able to do 95% as much with a 7D2 + 400 prime as those with a 1DX + 600 prime for a ton less money.

But, let's face it, those folks have to be only, what, five percent of the eventual people that will end up buying a 7D2?  Sure, we talk about them.  Sure, the value proposition is through the roof for those folks.  But how many really are there?

So, yes, Gizmodo readers and Best Buy walk-in dudes/dudettes will buy one because it's new, it's powerful, and it's built to last.  They aren't hung up on SLR footprint, size, weight, etc.  They also aren't hung up on needing a FF sensor.  But man, will it nail the shot of their kid at a school concert, sporting event, family trip, etc.

Im sure thats what the salespeople will be saying to them in order to sell it, but the first comment I get from almost everyone picking up my 7D and 70-200mm F4 is 'wow thats heavy' and thats not exactly the heaviest lens around.  Perception of camera weight alone has changed a fair bit in the last few years in my view.

2
Reviews / Re: Gizmodo reviews the Canon 7D Mark II
« on: October 21, 2014, 05:30:36 PM »
Im buying it, and I generally agree with the review.  I dont carry my 7D much now unless its for birds or underwater, I bought a 6D for people, but even that with lenses is starting to feel relatively heavy, given what image quality you can get with smaller cameras now for walkaround photography.

The market has changed, and most people wont want what this camera offers in exchange for the downsides for your average joe - if they just bought it on the basis of the plaudits it will get without realising its relative specialisation in todays market, they would be shortchanged.

3
"Even if you don't need it, it won't hurt you "

Uh no - unless that improvement costs nothing, something else wont be done, or cost will increase or both.  When you're talking a new fab, thats more than a few dollars.  It remains to be seen how easy dual pixel for video and increased DR at the same time is for instance and thats a feature many would value over a measurable but not meaningful (to them)  increase in DR. 

Its unlikely to be an everyone wins scenario in the short to medium term.  If a feature gets overvalued, other features inherently end up being undervalued by comparison.
 

4
Apparently, now, theories and math and known facts are all useless and pointless...only the experience of a "handful of pros matters, and what a pro says goes. "

They're not pointless but this kind of stuff boils down to whether theory and facts show whether a measurable difference exists and then the next question after that is whether any difference found actually matters, ie is meaningful. 

The test of 'do the people demanding this actually seem to be ending up with better pictures when they have it' is trying to find a way to address the meaningful aspect. It isnt perfect, but nor is focussing on measurement alone.

Sure, but that's why I included "evidence" in my list. There has been some evidence provided for this debate, some of it very good, on a number of occasions.

'Evidence' is again in the measurable category, not really in the 'meaningful' category.   This whole thread shows that in regards to how important the two images were to you compared to many others.

To put it one way, you can see these differences very clearly and think they are highly important.   Twenty years from now they probably will mean squat and probably be invisible compared to the overall progress made in that time.  The magnitude wont have changed, but how meaningful that difference is probably will have. 

5
Apparently, now, theories and math and known facts are all useless and pointless...only the experience of a "handful of pros matters, and what a pro says goes. "

They're not pointless but this kind of stuff boils down to whether theory and facts show whether a measurable difference exists and then the next question after that is whether any difference found actually matters, ie is meaningful. 

The test of 'do the people demanding this actually seem to be ending up with better pictures when they have it' is trying to find a way to address the meaningful aspect. It isnt perfect, but nor is focussing on measurement alone.

6
:

A) world-renowned photographers and masters of their craft with numerous years experience between them, all shooting Canon (despite any flaws or limitations) in extremely diverse conditions with diverse lighting and subject matter, and producing high quality work with their reputations at stake.

FYI

That is an example of both an "argument from authority" and "bandwagoning" both of which are logical fallacies.

Simply observing that a large number of succcessful photographers use a specific brand does not indicate that the specific brand is better or worse than any other brand -- unless a relationship of causation between camera brands and succcess as a photographer can be established.

Which will be difficult to establish since we like to proclaim that it is the photographer not the equipment that makes the good picture.  ;)

There are many reasons why one would consider a specific camera brand to be better.  The fact that a bunch of famous successful people use a particular brand should not be one of them.  :)

Not really, this is a common mistake.  An argument from authority from a logic perspective says it _must_ be true, which is rather different from the idea that some opinions on topics that involve judgment are more valuable than others - I ask a doctor what to do when I break my leg, not anonymous people on the internet, even though it is still possible they make an incorrect diagnosis.  While the photographer may be most important, theres a reason not too many are using kodak brownies any more.

Otara




7
As an underwater photographer I did the reverse - I constantly upgraded cameras for a few years I got worse - I was so busy relearning new systems while trying to take pictures underwater I went backwards rather than forwards.   Meanwhile my friend next to me went ahead as he didnt suffer upgraditis in the way I did and so was able to focus on getting the best out of what he had, which made far more practical difference than comparatively minor IQ or AF improvements.   Having the 7d not have an upgrade for so long was very helpful for me, and luckily I had a child to stop full frame being too alluring as well.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:53:54 PM »
The 7D II is similar to the 7D in that it has 2 Digic processors, which delayed magic lantern work on it for some time, and has caused ongoing problems with its development.

I wouldnt put too much hope on that being the answer at this stage, particularly given most work tends to be focussed on the 5D series anyway.

9
Lenses / Re: Exorbitant repair costs, Canon Australia
« on: July 25, 2014, 07:33:32 AM »
I think thats about right for electronic repairs, the problem is you read about USA Canon policies so its quite a shock when you find out how different it is in Oz, and apparently Germany as well.  I had similar for the 50 1.4, and didnt even bother to get a real quote when my 7D finally went, the rough estimate at least saved me the $50 quote.

Otara


10
Software & Accessories / Re: Gimbal head or not for Tamron 150-600
« on: June 16, 2014, 07:36:20 AM »
I have the Tamron 150-600mm and recently got a NEXT carbon fibre gimbal and Sirui tripod, complete overkill given the lens weight but I have noticed a fair difference. 

Now for me, Im not great at getting very low shutter speeds even with VR, so thats the subjective factor I guess, and I dont do much better with a monopod.  The downside is carrying it about so its not useful for every scenario, but I do much prefer it over the ball and pistol tripod options I have instead.   I dont find the zoom impact on balance to be a major issue as Im generally going for 600mm if Im using it anyhow, so its dialled in for that.

11
Lenses / Re: Tamron 150-600mm AF servo issues?
« on: March 27, 2014, 08:32:44 PM »
There has been a major delay in getting the lens here in Australia, in that an order I made in early February has been delayed to April.  Everything Ive read indicates there was an issue, and some level of correction has been carried out, which has caused the supply delays.  As stated, they seem to be only with some bodies, but the 7D would be a pretty popular camera for this lens, so it will be important to fix it.

Latest update is that it might be here next week, so will be able to check for myself, have a 6D and 7D.

Otara

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 09, 2014, 11:41:37 PM »
And you have hit the nail on the head.... You can take any current DSLR...Nikon, Sony, Canon, whatever.... And take wonderful pictures... The differences are minimal to the average user.


This gets brought up in these discussions regularly, but it's not really saying anything at all, is it?

Every camera  technological debate thread can end with "all cameras take nice pictures".   

But a site such as this operates within a tech-context, and tech thrives on incremental improvement. So saying "the difference is minimal" over an over in every thread along with other platitudes dilutes the discussion.

The particular tech matters though, particularly when advising on buying options to  comparatively uninformed people - HiFi is dead to most people as an important thing to argue over, while CPU or videocards can be shown to have quite large differences for instance.

For most people, digital camera advances are getting smaller and smaller over time, particularly with more automated editting and the main display format being screens rather than print.  Making it clear that the practical difference means you cant lose can be rather helpful for people anxious about whether they have to worry too much.

13
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro autofocus?
« on: December 26, 2013, 06:46:05 PM »
Underwater macro often uses AF too, for fairly obvious reasons.  Supermacro, tripods etc and/or rock back and forth start getting used more.

Otara

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« on: December 16, 2013, 07:20:35 PM »
You keep working backwards though - if the yield for FF is high enough, the increased rate of failure becomes more and more irrelevant.

You quoted 90% or APS-C, but I dont see where that came from vs FF max rates possible - what is the max rate likely, and is 99, or 99.9 or whatever possible at some point or anything? The usefulness of your figures rest mostly on how often FF have to be failed, and to me thats the rate that we need to know about most.

Edit: So we seem to agree that the differences get smaller and smaller where the sensor price becomes comparatively irrelevant ie we talk 7 vs 30+ times.  The 6D price alone shows either dumping is occurring, or the price of sensors are getting very low as part of the total cost - any improvement is going to have to be pretty amazing to overcome the introduction cost of something new with 10% rates etc etc.

Otara

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« on: December 16, 2013, 05:59:16 PM »
The actual die yield rate matters quite a bit though doesnt it?

As in if you get 1 failed sensor out of 1000 for a full frame, its not going to really matter all that much that its even only 1 in a million for the APS-C sensors.  Its going to be much closer to just the actual 1.6 square, ie about 3 times as much.

So depending on the numbers, we could be talking a $10 sensor vs a ~$30 one, or 10 vs 340.

The gap in price between the 6D and and a 60D or the like does seem surprisingly close though. 

Pages: [1] 2 3