Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 30, 2012, 08:43:31 PM »

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

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

2

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 30, 2012, 08:23:32 PM »

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.

3

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 30, 2012, 08:18:35 PM »

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.

4

Lenses / Re: Wide or ultra-wide angle with excellent corner performance

« on: September 30, 2012, 08:26:57 AM »

The only sharp wide lenses are: 35L, 24TS II
(14L vs 24TS II: http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=454&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1)

And the Canon f/1.4 24mm II.

I do not think so:
http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=480&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=5&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1
But if AF is needed, there is no other way...

It's not as sharp as the 24L TS-E II, but it's very similar to the 35L f/1.4.

5

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.

6

Lenses / Re: Wide or ultra-wide angle with excellent corner performance

« on: September 29, 2012, 04:35:04 PM »

The only sharp wide lenses are: 35L, 24TS II
(14L vs 24TS II: http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=454&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1)

And the Canon f/1.4 24mm II.

7

Canon General / Re: Is it time for the "CEO" of Canon's DSLR division to resign?

« on: September 19, 2012, 10:53:22 AM »

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.

8

Lenses / The Digital Picture resolution tests are up for the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

« on: September 17, 2012, 08:30:03 AM »

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

9

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

10

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Is there a cheaper way to buy from "REALLY RIGHT STUFF"

« on: August 12, 2012, 09:35:31 PM »

Why do you need a $900 tripod? Please explain in detail, if you can. I want to know the rational behind such purchases. . . . nevermind the carbonfiber thingy, just tell why you have an urge to spend such for a tripod, unless you have a steady business that makes you hundreds a week or thousands a month, to even consider such a purchase where add-ons will cost you hundreds more.

Why is it necessary for him to explain himself and why exactly does he have to justify his purchases to you?  You don't have to own a business to want to purchase and use quality products. You often hear it said that a quality tripod will last you for life, but going the cheap route will only result in you having to buy a better tripod later.

In any case, one of my pet peeves with some of these photography forums is the barrage of posts one can typically expect asking individuals to justify their purchases when they want to spend a lot of money on products. Who the hell cares? It's their money, let people spend their own money as they choose to without harassing them and asking for an explanation.

but he/she is asking US . . .

and if we are to spend our time giving advice and searching for better offers to help out, then since we are ona  forum, and NOT in Afhganistan, I figure why not ask a few questin . . . while we are all here, and not have another thread tuirn out to be so bland as , " hey please help me spend less on a $1000 tripod, becasue I did not give any details or info."

get in line bud.

You can do this without asking people to explain themselves like they're children, see my post above. All he wanted to know was if there was a way to get RRS products without the tax premiums.

I've found too often on these forums that when people ask straight forward questions about their purchases, they often end up getting into big discussions and sometimes fights having to justify them to strangers. I don't think your questioning would have served any purpose in helping you answer his question.

11

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Is there a cheaper way to buy from "REALLY RIGHT STUFF"

« on: August 12, 2012, 09:19:45 PM »

It seems that the only way to buy from this American company, is to buy directly
None on eBay and no dealers

Question 1: Is there a "cheaper" way, or a way to get a discount on new stuff?
Question 2: Are UK VAT and duties, a guaranteed consequence on all imports from them

I am intending to buy the TVC-24 Tripod with BH-40 LR Ballhead
I needed some other stuff from themWith other attachments
So, the bill kept mounting
Add to that over $100 shipping

The total amounted to just over £1000,, before VAT and Duties
Which gave me a sort of heart attack
Any advice?

Thanks

You're probably not going to be able to avoid the tax unfortunately.

Before you go with RRS, you should also consider the Induro carbon fibre tripods. You can purchase them via Amazon UK, they look pretty good and are more reasonably priced without appearing to compromise on quality and functionality.

InduroCarbon8xTripodC-413.mov	Small | Large

http://www.indurogear.com/main/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=sr_st?bbn=1104388&qid=1344818520&rh=n%3A560798%2Cn%3A!560800%2Cn%3A560834%2Cn%3A1104388%2Cp_4%3AInduro&sort=-price

12

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Is there a cheaper way to buy from "REALLY RIGHT STUFF"

« on: August 12, 2012, 09:07:43 PM »

Why do you need a $900 tripod? Please explain in detail, if you can. I want to know the rational behind such purchases. . . . nevermind the carbonfiber thingy, just tell why you have an urge to spend such for a tripod, unless you have a steady business that makes you hundreds a week or thousands a month, to even consider such a purchase where add-ons will cost you hundreds more.

Why is it necessary for him to explain himself and why exactly does he have to justify his purchases to you?  You don't have to own a business to want to purchase and use quality products. You often hear it said that a quality tripod will last you for life, but going the cheap route will only result in you having to buy a better tripod later.

In any case, one of my pet peeves with some of these photography forums is the barrage of posts one can typically expect asking individuals to justify their purchases when they want to spend a lot of money on products. Who the hell cares? It's their money, let people spend their own money as they choose to without harassing them and asking for an explanation.