September 15, 2014, 11:03:24 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 - foobar

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
EOS Bodies / Re: First Round of EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: November 26, 2012, 07:20:21 PM »
There is one thing that would get me to upgrade from my 7D to a potential 7D Mark II: A massively improved sensor.
To be more specific: Better noise performance and dynamic range.

Even at very low ISO settings, skies can sometimes be slightly grainy and there's almost no information to pull out of the shadows. And what makes it even worse is that this is an area, where older Canon APS-C sensors were actually better at.

I don't care about the resolution of the sensor, as long as the image quality improvements are there. If they aren't, I'll happily keep my current 7D because overall, it's still an awesome camera.

Actually, I'm sometimes surprised at how well some of the high-ISO pictures turn out (I've had some great keepers which were shot at ISO5000), but of course any improvement here would be highly welcome as well.

Another thing I'd love to have would be an adjustable minimum shutter speed, but I think it's pretty safe to assume that it will be there (at least in the same way the 5D3 supports it).

2
Lenses / Re: sigma 30mm f1.4... anyone used?
« on: July 21, 2012, 09:49:19 AM »
I have it and while the corners are nothing to rave about (bad, but not as bad as Fleetie's copy), in the image center, it's one of the sharpest lenses I've ever encountered.

It does have it's share of problems (soft corners, CA, high distortion for a prime lens), but overall, I wouldn't call it a bad lens - not for that price. As I said, apart from the corners, it's very sharp (at least my copy), the bokeh is okay, the build quality is good for the price (feels solid, has a metal mount, a non-rotating front element and an ultrasonic motor) and let's not forget: it's the only f/1.4 lens in that focal- and price range.

3
Site Information / Re: In Sympathy for CR Guy
« on: July 17, 2012, 07:22:02 PM »
Sorry to hear about this. Condolences to you and your family.

4
Lenses / Re: A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]
« on: July 07, 2012, 01:29:14 PM »
Please remind me - what is that lottery about: front/backfocussing, unreliable or uprecise af? I'd like to know because if I'd get a 50mm, it'd be the Sigma.
Mine had front/backfocus issues, which are now fixed.
I also have a 30mm which was spot on right from the start.

5
Lenses / Re: A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]
« on: July 07, 2012, 12:33:41 PM »
I also got the Sigma a while ago for the exact reasons stated above: None of Canon's 50mm offerings was really compelling.

I have to say: Overall, the Sigma is a great lens but it too has downsides:
- It's big and heavy for a 50mm f/1.4 – therefore it's not a lens I take with me all the time
- You get to play the infamous Sigma autofocus lottery: Had to send in my copy twice until they got it right – it's okay now but still not as reliable as my Canon lenses in that regard

One of the strongest points of this lens is the way it renders bokeh - just looks fantastic.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D full frame
« on: May 25, 2012, 04:49:19 AM »
Canon already released a full-frame 7D. It's called the 5D Mark III.

No, it's called 1dx if you want to leave the price tag out of the equation since it's got 18mp and fast fps like the 7d. Or, if you really see the 5d3 as the 7d successor, Canon is even beyond their "double the price" policy this time.
I didn't say "successor", just "full-frame version".
And no, I don't see the 1D-X having anything to do with either of them, since it's a completely different beast alltogether.

As for the 7D2, I think it will be an evolutionary upgrade (bringing some of the 5D3's features the original 7D didn't have back to the line) and, of course, will still be a high-framerate APS-C camera.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D full frame
« on: May 24, 2012, 08:22:58 PM »
Canon already released a full-frame 7D. It's called the 5D Mark III.

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Leica M10 HD video @ photokina...
« on: May 11, 2012, 01:46:23 PM »
It's definitely not necessary, but on the other hand: It's just a software feature, so why not?
As long as they don't compromise on the typical Leica qualities, I would be okay with it.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras
« on: April 27, 2012, 09:56:22 AM »
Of course it's inevitable that we'll have 40+ megapixel, 10+ FPS full-frame pro bodies in the not too distant future. But even then, it will take many, many years for the prices of those cameras to come down to the levels of current top-of-the-line APS-C cameras (which of course, by then, will have become cheaper and better as well).

Too bad Karma is dead. I'd be giving some big time positive to Foobar. Excellent, well-reasoned and informed posts.

Unfortunately it probably won't make a lot of difference but I still commend you for trying to set things straight.
Thanks! :)

10
EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras
« on: April 26, 2012, 08:41:03 PM »
Given the virtual certainty APS-H will vanish after the final 1D4 is sold, I'll be hoping for a comprehensively upgraded 7DII to fill the gap as a practical working companion to the 1DX when it finally ships.
I really hope Canon gets it's sensor tech up to scratch with the 7D Mark II. Apart from that, I think we'll mostly see an APS-C version of what the 5D3 brought to the table (since the 5D3's body already seems to be an evolution of the original 7D).


Is that important if a aps-c is 1 dollar and a ff is 2 dollars?
We are far, far away from those prices. And unlike other silicon chips (which get cheaper because of reduced chip size), the only time camera sensors get a major drop in manufacturing price is when wafer sizes increase, which only happens every couple of years because the factories need to be completely retooled for that.

Not a lot smaller - and not everyone wants miniature featherweight bodies like the NEX5
Of course not everyone, but the mass market is moving towards smaller cameras, and that's where the money is. Different people have different needs, that's why Sony is also offering a bazillion other camera models besides the Nex series.

and be expensive as Canon wont be able support economies of scale
Canon sells a lot more APS-C cameras and lenses than it does FF bodies and lenses.

That is why they are moving to larger sensors and aps-c then?
There is a market for larger sensors and it's profitable. It's not a mass market compared to APS-C, though. And currently, Canon is consolidating it's pro lineup from two sensor formats (APS-H and 35mm FF) to a single one (the 35mm FF format people have known and used for years).

So you think 1.6 aps-c is obsolete because they are only used by a single manufacturer (Canon).
If you want to be nitpicking, 1.6x crop is indeed only used by a single manufacturer because all others are using a very slightly larger sensor. Well played. If you want to be even more precise, you could even say that Canon is using a whole lot of different "about APS-C sized" sensor formats, since their individual APS-C sensor models actually differ by fractions of millimeters.

Does this nitpicking help this discussion? I don't think so. For the majority of photographers, there are two common sensor formats: Cropped sensors, meaning 1,5~1,6x crop factor and FF, which means the classical 35mm format to most people.

What on earth is a 'standard' zoom? If you are talking about a 70-200 - then why isn't there an aps-c crop-factor-adjusted lens? If you are talking about the 18-55 then the 24-70 is very very close to 1.3 adjusted
A zoom lens in the "moderate wide-angle to slight telephoto" range is commonly refered to as a "standard zoom".
And if you think that the 31mm-equivalent field of view you get at the wide end of a 24-105mm is about equal to the real 24mm you get on a FF camera (or the 15mm you get with the 15-85mm on a crop camera), well... okay. That's your opinion.



Anyway, I don't know what the bashing is all about. I don't dislike APS-H, I'm just saying that Canon hasn't shown much interest in the format over the years.
Besides, I really liked the statement at the end of your previous posting:

Quote from: briansquibb
I think we should move away from thinking crop or ff and start thinking of IQ - because that is what sells the images not the sensor type

I'm totally with you on that. I just wanted to shed some light on the economic side of things in my posting. I can't predict what we'll have in 50 years, but for the time being, it simply looks that APS-C will continue to be the primary sensor format for DSLRs in terms of volume. In the pro sector, I believe that we'll see a few more FF models in the coming years (the 5D3 and D800 have become so advanced that there's now room for more entry-level FF models). Still, I don't think we'll see a sub-$1000 FF DSLR (used market excluded ;) ) in the next couple of years.

And to come back to the original topic: Even if Canon managed to release a $1500 entry-level FF camera next to a (potential) $1500 7D Mark II, the FF camera would be more or less a large sensor/body rebel while the 7D Mark II would be almost a small sensor/body 1-series in comparison.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras
« on: April 26, 2012, 07:51:08 PM »
APC-C is not obsolete, and even if it becomes obsolete some day, it won't be because everyone is moving to FF.

- An APS-C sensor will always cost a fraction of what a FF sensor costs (read Canons FF whitepaper if you want to know why that is)
- APS-C cameras can be built smaller, lighter and cheaper than their FF counterparts
- Lenses designed for APS-C can be built smaller, lighter and cheaper (especially in the non-tele focal ranges) than their FF counterparts

Even disregarding the cost of the sensor, there are enough other reasons why smaller sensor formats make sense. Just think about why mirrorless cameras have become so popular: Mainly because they offer DSLR-like quality in a much smaller form factor. To a lot of people, this is important (probably not to the majority of people on this site, though).


If there's a sensor format that's obsolete, it's APS-H. Born out of technical circumstances, used only by a single manufacturer (Canon) on a single, relatively low volume line of cameras (the 1D series) and never having a wide-angle or even just a standard zoom with crop-factor-adjusted focal lengths for it. I still don't get why people think this is the future, while on the other hand, Canon (and other manufacturers) have built complete lineups of cameras, lenses and accessories for FF and APS-C.
Of course the APS-H cameras themselves were/are brilliant, but they were for people who knew why they needed them.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: New Extensive Firmware for the Canon EOS 7D? [CR1]
« on: April 20, 2012, 01:47:08 PM »
Configurable Auto-ISO and especially minimum shutter speed, please! ;)
Exposure compensation in M-Mode w/ Auto-ISO would be nice as well.

Don't think this will happen, though.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 650D - sensor size?
« on: April 20, 2012, 08:23:32 AM »
You will be lucky to see a 7D2. Im guessing that it will be bumped down to a 70D sooner rather than later. Leaving the xD series as all Full Frame cameras only.
And what sense would that make? The 7D is a very successful camera (and while Canon doesn't provide numbers, I wouldn't be surprised if Canon sold more 7Ds than 1-series and 5-series cameras combined). It is widely used by professionals who simply need the added tele range.

I know it hurts some tech-nerd's feelings that Canon positioned a camera with a "lesser" sensor in their professional lineup but apart from that, I see no argument against it. Quite the opposite: Given the huge price gap between the 60D and the 5D Mark III (as well as the growing competition), I guess that the 7D2 will move even more into "pro" territory than the original. All in all it will probably still be an evolutionary upgrade, though (I'm not expecting any revolutions from Canon at this point).

My guess is that the 7D Mark II will be based on the 5D Mark III body, but with an APS-C sensor and an integrated flash commander (aka popup flash). Going that route would save them a lot of R&D costs and pro users would appreciate having similar controls and button layouts on both cameras. The elephant in the room is the sensor, though: Noise at low/medium ISOs and low dynamic range (especially in the shadow areas) are the main problems of the original 7D and I really hope they adress them.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 650D - sensor size?
« on: April 20, 2012, 07:00:30 AM »
What Canon needs is a new APS-C sensor with lower noise (especially at low to medium ISO) and higher dynamic range. I don't care how they achieve it and how many megapixels it will have, as long as they get the image quality right.

15
Thanks for the comparison. It clearly shows my main gripe with the 7D: Lots of shadow noise even at ISO 100. It's almost impossible to get something useful out of the darker areas of an image because of all the noise. From my experience, this wasn't as much of a problem with older Canon APS-C Sensors.

Too bad that the 5D2 doesn't fare much better in that regard.
In overall noise performance, the 5D2 beats the 7D by ~1,5 stops, though.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8