September 20, 2014, 01:58:00 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 - Old Sarge

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 19, 2014, 06:47:21 AM »

I'm just wondering how many of us who wanted a stills camera, would've purchased a tricked out, videographer's dream Canon 7Dii at $2799.
That price point would have probably moved me to a FF camera, probably the 5D Mk III.

Reviews / Re: Scott Kelby's Promo Videos
« on: September 19, 2014, 06:42:35 AM »

I started using Canon when I picked up a used AE1.
I got started with Canon the same way.  Bought a used AE1 from an individual who needed money.  Moved on with a A1 and then a couple of F1s.  Eyes started to did the rest of my went to an EOS AF camera.  And am still with Canon, the latest being a pre-ordered 7D II.  Too old to change.   :)

I like the way Kelby writes in his Photoshop books.  Easy enough for this old man to understand.

EOS-M / Re: EOS M The positive experience
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:24:33 AM »

Lenses / Re: Hands-on With the Canon EF 400 f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 17, 2014, 10:56:21 AM »
Am I the only one that thinks making the tripod foot non-removable almost totally defeats the purpose of this lens, which is to make it very light and easily handholdable?  If I were in the market for a lens like this, this one simple thing would be a show-stopper for me.  I keep the tripod ring off my 70-200/2.8 and 100-400L unless I'm actually using it on a tripod for exactly this reason - handholding comfort.  It even looks really uncomfortable to hold in the video with the foot in his palm.

Hmm...good call Lee Jay...I didn't notice that either...yeah...the ring looks like it is part of the lens... So maybe it will not remove like the tripod support ring on my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. ....but I attached a looks like the foot is removable ...but I do not know if that is a part of the design for actual use.  What about the old is that set up????

...but the Ring may just loosen and slide off the back of the lens...

You can always turn the foot sideways, maybe even upwards (IDK about prism/foot conflict). With my 70-200/2.8, I always keep the foot upside down, so I can support the lens with my hand as well as use it as a handle :) By the way, this lens is just as heavy (or light) as 70-200/2.8, that's quite manageable actually!

Looking at the MK I, and reading the manual, the foot is removable.  Looking at the MK II I am doubtful if it is removable.  I came to this conclusion after seeing that the Canon badge (medal plate with information about the model lens, etc.) would come off with the foot if it was removed.  It also doesn't have the release screw/knob in the foot area as the MK I does.  Also the Canon badge, on the MK I, is just ahead of the foot and doesn't come off with it.  I could be wrong but I don't believe you can remove this foot completely.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII No Wifi
« on: September 16, 2014, 02:53:20 PM »
Consequently, i can't think of one occasion where GPS would have been of any use to me at all.

I admit I find the built-in gps unexpectedly useful because it doesn't add bulk, uses little battery, is always there and you don't need to have a dedicated tracker and add the gps data in postprocessing. Sorting in LR with but map is very nice if all your shots are tagged.

GPS and WiFi were/are not necessarily deal breakers for me.  I actually would/will probably use the GPS more than WiFi thought I could see its usefulness.  I already use the Canon GP-E2, primarily as a logger since I didn't like having to plug it in to the camera, and like having the data available.  But your phrase, "uses little battery", got me to thinking.  Could the built in GPS be the reason that the "estimated" number of exposures has dropped on the 7DII even though the battery is more powerful?  What do you think?

Reviews / Re: Tony Northrup - Canon 7D MK2 Preview
« on: September 16, 2014, 06:01:02 AM »

have not watched it... please let me know what he says. ;)

i think his reviews suck... but it would be posted here anyway.

I think someone posted it yesterday....or I found it yesterday.  I watched more than half of it when I decided I was tired of the Nikon commercial.

Site Information / Re: Noisy obtrusive ads
« on: September 15, 2014, 01:12:07 PM »
I am generally opposed to the whole shift towards video content.  I hate how many news articles are available as video only,  I can process information so much faster as text, I don't want to spend 3-4 minutes to learn what I could read through in less than one.

I have been trying to find a good text only news site.  I too hate the imbedding of video in news stories.  I suppose I am one of the few considerate people who want to get news without bothering the people around me?
I am in concurrence with both of you.  Lord knows that written news accounts are poorly done in today's world but video is even worse.  Neither contain enough real information in my opinion.

Site Information / Re: Noisy obtrusive ads
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:23:34 AM »
If you are using Firefox you can use AdBlock plug-in to avoid ads altogether.  Not sure about IE since I rarely use it.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How do you say Nikon
« on: September 11, 2014, 11:18:02 AM »
You have to really elongate the 'i' and the 'o' is shortened...  "Niiiiiiiiiii-cone."   

Of course, that pronunciation only applies if you're singing about a popular brand of color reversal film that makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah.


But they took it away....after I asked them politely not to...

EOS Bodies / Re: New Sensor Tech in EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: September 09, 2014, 07:42:53 PM »
Yeah, but this is a third-hand rumor, probably translated multiple times from the original ancient Greek!

Even back then they were waiting for a 7D II?   :o

I hear that they found rumoured specs for a 7D2 in hieroglyphics in a pyramid in Egypt.........

I heard they were found in a tablet fragment of early Sumarian Cuneiform...

Don't trust that one.  I wrote it.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: And what does Canon do?
« on: September 05, 2014, 08:02:03 PM »
Speaking of poor exposures, I well remember the film days in the 1950's or 1940's when the box cameras with fixed f/8 lenses and fixed 1/125 shutter speeds had exposure corrected by the processing lab.  In our case, the processing lab was Wrights Service Station, Grocery Store, Radio Repair, and Photo Processing. (Elmer was a great guy, I was fascinated by his technical gadgets when I was a kid). 
Are you sure the shutter speed was that fast?  Just eyeballing my first camera (a Brownie Hawkeye) and my mother's camera that I used before that (forget which model that was sort of neat, had two "f/ stops", not marked as for sunny and one for cloudy) I would have pegged the shutter at close to 1/50th.  But I could be wrong.  If I remember the film we used was about ASA 80.  The first rolls I used were orthochromatic then later they were panchromatic.  Does that sound right to you?

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 05, 2014, 07:06:49 AM »
LOL!  I love it.   ;D

Reminds me of the assumptions people used to make about the color cast lens coatings imparted back in the Old Film Days.

<really bad joke> Every print with a greenish tint is automatically a Nikon shot? </really bad joke>

Sorry, couldn't resist :)

Reminds me of my high school days. I worked for a camera store in San Pedro, California.  Friday nights (the night we stayed open until 9 p.m.) the boss would send me to the donut shop for donuts while he started a big pot of coffee.  A group of older men (they were older to me then, now they would be young middle age men) would gather with cameras, prints, lenses, etc.  And one of the subjects, on many nights, was lens coatings and their effect.  It was much like this forum but more congenial.  BTW, in the group would be Leica, Nikon, Canon, Exakta, and larger camera factions.  And, much like I do on this forum, I kept silent in the face of all that wisdom but was proud to be there.

EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: September 04, 2014, 07:44:56 AM »
Nikon and Sony, with all their faults, have released cameras that impressed me one way or the other.

You can laugh at Nikon for the DF.
But at least this Company is taking risks.

I didn't laugh at the DF.  It reminded me of my youth, much of it spent working in a camera store.  Too bad it wasn't a better camera.  If canon did something retro like that I might be tempted to buy it.  Last night my wife was watching a Hallmark movie and I swear that camera appeared in one scene. 

Very interesting chart.  Since this is a shipping chart the peaks in mirrorless, and in a lesser degree to DSLR, shipments is just in time for Christmas giving.  DSLR also seems to have some peaks around release dates (mirrorless may have the same but I haven't been as aware of their release dates).  I do think the drop may be related to DSLR technology maturing and it takes more to get the consumer to part with his dollars. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 24, 2014, 05:54:48 PM »
New Battery – LP-E6N

I haven't kept up with the battery changes.  Are the current varients interchangeable and just have different capacities or are they genuinely different?  Is Canon just trying to keep people buying their batteries and away from third parties?

I have, and intend to continue to have, both full frame (5D) and crop bodies but will absolutely demand that they use the same batteries and chargers like my current two do.

This one bugs me.  I am hoping that the E6N designations means that it is interchangeable with the E6, otherwise I will have to carry BP-511 (for 40D...wife's 30D will be given to my son), LP-E6 for 7D, and LP-E6N for the 7DII/X  if I decide to purchase it.  Not a deal breaker....but annoying.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7