October 23, 2014, 06:22:54 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 - scarbo

Pages: [1] 2
1
Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - D810 vs. 5D Mk3
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:31:25 PM »
Clearly, Sony have the edge when it comes to sensor technology, but that does not mean Canon produce bad sensors. They are just not the current leaders in sensor technology when it comes to image quality. Can they really be blamed for not producing the absolute best sensor, when everyone else comes second to Sony too?

Watching the link below, it seems that Sony have hit upon some innovations which have made them the world's leading camera sensor manufacturer and, by the looks of it, it will be some time before their competitors discover equally efficient innovations. That's just the way the cookie crumbles sometimes. Happenstance would have it that one engineer or a group of engineers who discovered these innovations were employed by Sony and not Canon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXp0u1XsrZw

All it takes is one instance of thinking outside the box and securing that new idea against immitation to change the fortunes of a company for many years to come. It seems that Sony have experienced something like this with camera sensors. Of course other manufacturers may discover better or equally good innovations, but that's easier said than done and becomes progressively more difficult as technology matures. By flipping the switch like this, Sony look odds on to remain ahead of the game despite general advances in technology. Their innovations will simply benefit from more general advances. It will take a new, exclusive and more efficient innovation from another manufacturer to displace them.

It's impossible to predict the future, but in the absense of similar yielding innovations from others, a larger part of Sony's business may morph into a sensor manufacturing business for many of the other camera companies, in the way Intel produce processors for computer companies. Sony already make sensors for Nikon, Hasselblad and Apple. Canon will also have the option to become one of their clients, which might be the right move if their sensor technology is not forthcoming.

In any case, I think it's unfair to compare the 5D III with the D810 given the latter was released 2 years later. Yes, the D800 and D800E were strong offerings too (and so was/is the 5D III), but back then both companies were entering the market blind to what the other would be doing (assuming there were no spies in either camp). Now that they know more about their main competitor's direction, I'm sure their decisions will be more informed going forward. We should see what this yields before we predict doom and gloom. It's only been 2 years.

2
Having looked at the WonderPana 145 Essentials Kit I am interested in getting one for the polarizer. Could somebody who owns one post a picture of it mounted on the 17TS-E please? Whilst I can understand how it works on the 14mm and the Nikon 14-24 I don't see how it fits the 17TS-E without mounting on the focus ring. It would be a great help if I could see one before ordering, thanks.

Here you go. As you can see it is mounted via the bayonet of the lens cap. Very secure and does not vignette with movement.
Added Bonus is some protection of the front element.

Normalnorm, how are you finding the WonderPana 145 holder? There's not much information about it in the way of reviews. I'd like to know if it in any way marks the lens.

Anyone else should pipe in too if they own this holder. Thanks.

It is a superb system. I got it and couldn't be happier. The holder is custom made and mounts to the lens cap bayonet mount of the 17 TS-E, it does not mark the lens at all, it is a much neater implementation that how they do it to the Nikon 14-24 as there is no locking collar.

They have since come out with a modification to the 66 part of the system, if you are a grad filter user then 100% get the FreeArc version, I am not so am quite happy with the cheaper and smaller original version.

Couldn't recommend this higher.

Thanks.

I find it strange that Fotodiox have not done more to show the implementation of the holder on the 17mm TS-E or any lenses that are not the Nikon 14-24mm. There are very few examples out there.

3
Having looked at the WonderPana 145 Essentials Kit I am interested in getting one for the polarizer. Could somebody who owns one post a picture of it mounted on the 17TS-E please? Whilst I can understand how it works on the 14mm and the Nikon 14-24 I don't see how it fits the 17TS-E without mounting on the focus ring. It would be a great help if I could see one before ordering, thanks.

Here you go. As you can see it is mounted via the bayonet of the lens cap. Very secure and does not vignette with movement.
Added Bonus is some protection of the front element.

Normalnorm, how are you finding the WonderPana 145 holder? There's not much information about it in the way of reviews. I'd like to know if it in any way marks the lens.

Anyone else should pipe in too if they own this holder. Thanks.

4
From what I can see there seems to be a smear campaign going on against Terry Richardson, in all probability spearheaded by the powerful radical feminist lobby and their supporters, who are rife in journalism,  very vociferous and extremely sensitive to anything they believe sexually objectifies women.

It’s no secret that Richardson’s work can be provocative and even offensive to some, due to its sexual explicitness. However, this is not a crime and accusations of sexual coercion and rape are worthless unless they are pursued through the courts. Someone feeling uncomfortable in Richardson’s studio is not sexual coercion. Given the nature and style of his work, you would imagine not everyone is going to be comfortable with his suggestions, but it would be unfair to accuse him of coercion unless he is forcing or threatening you in some way. It’s a difficult area because a young and naive person may enter this situation with all sorts of assumptions in their head which bear no relation to reality or what is expressed. They may not think they can express an opinion or may fear their future career is in the balance, without anything Richardson may say. The question is can he really be held responsible for these projections? I think the agents and agencies charged with managing the careers of these aspiring models bear a greater responsibility in ensuring models are mentally equipped with the confidence to negotiate their scenes and extract themselves if necessary.

At the moment, all we have are aspersions and accusations towards someone who is a very easy target, given the nature of his work. There also appears to be an orchestrated attempt to cast a shadow over his work and methods, by a powerful lobby that has very strong opinions about the sexualisation of women. Naturally, if he is guilty of coercion in any way, then he should have to face the consequences, but as far as I am concerned, unless he is brought before a court and convicted of something related, the accusations are weak.

5
Probably none, because they figured out that they cannot prevent clones long ago, less so if they aren't 1:1 optical copies.
Of course Unless covered by a patent, but the rt protocol wouldn't fall under that as the Samba folk reverse engineering Microsoft's network protocol showed. But Canon could converse with their technicians to add a (stronger) protocol encryption next time...
Microsoft was forced to open its protocols by antitrust investigations. But look at how Apple is protecting every patent it can enforce, even silly ones - but it sees Samsung as a real issue to its revenues. Maybe Canon thinks it would cost much more than lost revenues, especially since it's a Chinese manufacturer, and without an US or Japanese company to go after it could be very difficult to sue them. although this is really a 1:1 copy looking exactly the same, and I guess this is a real infringement of many copyright rules.
Encrypting the protocol won't help much unless you can protect encryption keys strongly - you need anti-tamper hardware to do it, but it can be broken as well if you can access that hardware (as the PS3 protection was broken). Also stronger encryption needs more powerful chips to be performed on-the-fly, and they could be more power hungry.
Anyway I don't like copies, no matter how much cheaper they are - copying is far less expensive than developing from scratch - and it's not compatibility, which is something different. It is true that Canon started copying German cameras, though...

Samsung is a South Korean company.

Also, I'm sceptical this Yongnuo transmitter is real. It has been suggested that it might be fake.

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Gitzo tripod or no?
« on: July 02, 2013, 01:46:08 PM »
It seems like Gitzo is kind of universally accepted as "the best" when it comes to tripods.  But if I try my hardest to ignore the fanboy-esque reviews and comments I see about them online, and don't let myself be tempted by their slick branding materials, it seems like there has to be a better and cheaper alternative.

Currently I have a manfrotto (it was around $100).  I'm pretty sure it's made out of aluminum. It is sturdy even with my 5d3 w/ 70-200 on it, and that's probably the largest rig I'd ever have on a tripod unless I can afford the 200mm f2 IS someday lol.  But the head isnt changable, there is no level, and the head sinks too low when I tilt the body on its side (even when it's as tight as possible).

I like the Gitzo traveler tripod (gt1542t).  The weight, max/min height is cool, weight limit is good, but the price is pretty steep even for that one at $670.  I went to a local camera shop and looked at them in person, ready to buy one if it proved to be on par with the hype online.  The rubber foot stops seemed loose on most of them.  One model's legs slid completely out and detached.  Small problems, and possibly only because they were abused as floor models.  But still, considering the price and their "...forever" tag line, I lost confidence in them.  I searched about those issues online and found reviews about the same thing happening to other people.

Does anyone have a tripod in mind that they swear by... built to last, useful features.... lightweight is a plus, but not necessary?  Was my experience coincidence and is the Gitzo really as great as it's cracked up to be??  Or is my gut right, and they are over hyped?
You should have a look at Induro tripods. They're very good quality and they look very good. They have padding at the top of the legs for a comfortable grip and they come with a nice bag with enough room at the top for a head.

7
Someone on dpreview posted the figures for 2011 if anyone wants to compare.

Quote

The final numbers for 2011 camera market shares in Japan have just been released today:
http://bcnranking.jp/award/sokuhou/index.html

Compact camera:
Canon = 16.9%
Sony = 15.1%
Casio = 13.9%

DSLR (NOT including mirrorless cameras):
Canon = 46.3%
Nikon = 39.2%
Pentax = 7.5%

The Sony Axx models are included in this category; see link further down where only mirrorless cameras according to BCNRanking are indicated in bold.

Mirrorless:
Olympus = 36.6%
Panasonic = 29.3%
Sony = 27.3%

If we examine the top 20 selling interchangeable lens cameras from Jan to Nov 2011 here:
http://bcnranking.jp/news/1201/120113_21806.html

Canon cameras = 27%
Nikon cameras = 22.5%
Sony cameras = 11.9%
Olympus cameras = 10.9%
Panasonic cameras = 8%
Pentax cameras = 3%
~ 16.7% of camera models are not accounted in the above top-20 model table

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40337633

8
Anyway, why do people care so much that the manufacturer of their camera is selling more merchandise than a rival manufacturer? I can understand being curious who sells more, but I would expect the interest to merely be academic and completely dispassionate.

9
I totally get that.  Do you think then, that Canon advertises better, influences the market more?  You're right, as a pro I never really paid attention, but maybe this is the case?

Nikon 1 system is all but utterly marvellous, yet appartently it sells like hot cake. The same can be said about the iPhone series, and many other "trendy" things.

I think a lot of things are to be taken into account, but recently it seems to me that best selling products are those that look cute and have an almost non-existent learning curve. These features appear to be more important than the end result or the value for money.

So ultimately it might well just be that Canon cameras look more slick and are easier to use.

Yes, I think looks is a key factor with most consumer products. That's a big part of the reason why Apple does so well despite often selling less spec for more money.

11
Lenses / Re: 24-70 MK II or 70-200 MK II?
« on: September 30, 2012, 08:17:26 AM »
I am going FF in October with 5D MKIII
I would like to add the 24-70 f/2.8 MK II. I like the aperture f/2.8 & zoom flexibility in one lens for indoor photography.
However, maybe the 70-200 f/2.8 MK II may be a better option. I don’t have experience on the different ranges (from 24 to 200) on a FF, just the crop (7d) So, I don’t know what I will notice or miss.
I couldn’t check all my files but I would say 1/3 of my photos are between 24-70, 1/3 between 70-200 and 1/3 between 200  to 300mm.
I currently own a 24-105mm for walk around. I really like this zoom for outdoor photography because it is giving me a good range which is important to me.
I currently own a 70-300mm L for sports mainly (with my 7D) but as walk around lens as well (small , not too heavy)
What would you do? 24-70 MK II or 70-200 MK II?


Ps (I will also add the 135mm f/2 to my primes)
Since you use these focal distances equally, I would get the 70-200 II first. Its price has settled more, as has the manufacturing process, so there appears to be less variation between lenses. Later you can pick up the 24-70 II when it has experienced the same.

13
another stupid post please remove this post and the user thankyou.
And why exactly?

I never understand why people get their knickers in a twist when someone is critical of a company. Do you work for Canon or something? It's one thing to disagree with a point of view, but to want him removed from the forum is just stupid.

While not everyone will agree with his point of view, dilbert's not saying anything reprehensible. He's simply expressing his disappointment with Canon's efforts lately. People should relax.


14
The Digital Picture resolution tests were posted yesterday. Obviously results are good, but not quite as good as the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II.

Also according to the tests, the results of the lens deteriorate significantly at 70mm. They appear to be worse than the old EF 24-70 f/2.8L at that focal length.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

15
Lenses / Re: Post your 24-70 II Experiences Here
« on: September 05, 2012, 09:57:12 AM »
I am quite curious to see how a non-IS standard zoom lens costing $2,300 performs. 70-200 IS II is one of the few zoom lenses that is sharper than primes (or as sharp as) wide open. I wonder if 24-70 II will achieve the same for say 24L, 35L, and 50L.

70-200 IS II sharper then 85L II and 135L ??? Really??? I think you need some good glasses, not for your camera, but for your eyes !!!
I think you're underestimating how sharp the 70-200 IS II is. Take a look.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=397&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=108&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Pages: [1] 2