September 01, 2014, 10:38:46 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 - moreorless

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41
1
A related question:  how many non-Nikon shooters go to Nikon forums to complain about Nikon?

From what I've seen, many of the most vocal complainers on CR don't use Canon gear.  Some of them used to shoot Canon.  So why are they here?

Have they 'found religion' and are here to 'convert' the great unwashed masses?

Do they have inner doubts about their choices, and coming here to complain about Canon helps them continue to justify their decisions?

Do they think they're being altruistic, devoting their time and energy to show us poor, deluded fools how bad we have it, and how good it could be if only we make the same choices they made?

Do they honestly want Canon to deliver products that would meet their own needs, however niche those needs are, and somehow believe that complaining here will help accomplish that?

Or...do they merely want to sow discord?

Frankly, the vast majority of CR forum members are here to request and provide information, share techniques and images, etc.  CR is a great community resource, and like nearly all successful Internet forums, it attracts a few incessant complainers.   Look on the bright side – they provide some entertainment on slow rumor days...

I wouldn't call myself a Canon complainer as I tend to find myself on the pro Canon side of most arguments that happen here dispite shooting Nikon but a big issue is that this is one of if not the best forums I'v found on the net for the technical side of things, far superior to say Nikon rumours.

A big issue I'd say is that Canon(and to a slightly lesser degree Nikon) is considered "the mainstream". On one hand that means If you had a legit reason for buying a something made by other companies your likely to explain why you didn't buy one of the more mainstream products. On the other though it means if your a gadget buyer/fanboy looking to define yourself by your purchases or net praise/criticism the mainstream is the obvious target.

That's really where a lot of the negativity around Canon and Nikon comes from with net media coverage as well. Users of Canon and Nikon products are generally after balanced opinion on them, users of other companies products are more often after gushing praise of those products and criticism of Canon and Nikon. Whats more as fanboys/gadget buyers spend a lot of time surfing output that gives them what they want gets good traffic.

When was the last time you saw review video with an attempt at comedy bashing a Sony, Fuji, Oly, etc product? I can't remember seeing one because those who might make them know it wouldn't get attension.

2
As a Nikon shooter the main complaints I see are...

1.Lack of replacement for action bodies besides the D4(no D400 or D700 mk2).

2.Issues with camera quality control.

3.Lack of new ASPC lenses.

3
Lenses / Re: Canon Price Drops on L Lenses
« on: August 31, 2014, 12:12:49 PM »
The price on the 24-70 f/4 should have been under $1K from the get-go. No way did it feel or perform like a $1500 lens.

Indeed although at this price I think it becomes a potentially significant lens, especially if your[sic] talking entry level FF sales.

Perhaps. The 35 f/2 IS came out at $800, but it wasn't until the price drop to $550 that I decided to pick one up. Decent lens, just overpriced (initially) for what it offers. Same with this new 24-70. I was interested in it but the price needed to come down. No way was it worth $1500, and I'm not even sure it's worth $1000. But pretty soon, used ones (or white box models) should be able to be picked up for $800 or less...now we're talking...

Looking at some of the HK importers I can see the 6D + 24-70mm package is only £500 more than the 6D alone.

As a 6D kit is really where I think it would do best, the macro mode isn't maybe ideal for insects but seems to make for a good flower lens, add in a good landscape/street focal length that's all in good quality and fairly fast and I think you've got a very nice one lens holiday setup.

4
Lenses / Re: Canon Price Drops on L Lenses
« on: August 31, 2014, 10:35:33 AM »
The price on the 24-70 f/4 should have been under $1K from the get-go. No way did it feel or perform like a $1500 lens.

Indeed although at this price I think it becomes a potentially significant lens, especially if your talking entry level FF sales.

5
Landscape / Re: Rural Landscapes
« on: August 31, 2014, 02:55:35 AM »



6
EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless vs DSLR Camera
« on: August 29, 2014, 11:55:09 AM »
Putting phase detect on the image sensor is on the way to solving the AF problem for mirrorless, and Canon's DPAF is another big step in that direction.  Contrast detect is slower because it's more iterative, phase detect determines direction and magnitude at the outset.

You're correct about the Leica rangefinders.  No one complained about the film versions, because film is not affected by the incident angle of incoming light.  No one complains about the digital versions, because Leica took sensor and lens design steps to compensate for the problem caused by high incident light angles with a short flange distance.

Speaking of rangefinders isn't a big issue with on sensor PDAF going to be that the light is spilt over a very short distance compared to a DSLR? rather like the difference between a rangefinder with a short and a long baselenght.

7
Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: August 28, 2014, 02:58:57 PM »

8
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: August 28, 2014, 08:21:45 AM »
If anyone does that my guess would be Pentax as they've got no FF sales to damage.

9
Lenses / Re: Help deciding on going full frame
« on: August 27, 2014, 07:12:47 PM »
Hi Rob,
Here is my advice: Unless you are ready to spend big bucks on full frame f/2.8 zoom lenses, stick with APS-C. 

While a EF 24-105mm f/4 at f/4 on Full Frame will give you much better low light performance than an EF-S 18-135 f/4-5.6, it won't give you *that* much better performance than a EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 at f/2.8 on APS-C.  It will still be better, but IMO not throw all your EF-S lenses away and all the hassle you will need to do to upgrade better.  You could use primes, but that does not sound like the flexibility you want.

If you really want to go full frame and want to use zooms, I would not do so until you can afford a 24-70mm f/2.8L II.  Now that is a zoom that will really shine in low light and make the full frame transition worthwhile.  The 24-105 f/4 on FF is an upgrade, but so is the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 on your current camera; I would explore the latter instead if you are not trying to break the bank.  Once you can afford 6D + 24-70 f/2.8L II - then upgrade to full frame.

I don't think he's really "wasting" FF here though, he might not get a great deal of low light advantage from a 6D + 24-105mm vs a 17-55mm F/2.8 on his current camera BUT he will get improved range so its give and take.

One alternative that might be worth considering is the Sigma 24-105mm OS, reviews I'v seen tend to point towards it correcting the Canon 24-105mm's weaker performance wide open at the tele end.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D MKII
« on: August 26, 2014, 07:21:35 AM »
Another factor maybe what Nikon does with the rumoured D750, its seemingly likely now that will have the same AF as the D810 which means a full spread of AF points. If that camera is also D810 sized it maybe less of an issue but rumours thus far point to it being smaller.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: August 26, 2014, 07:15:39 AM »
Any more news on this high megapixel full frame camera ?

What is expected resolution in MP ?

Is it likely to be announced at Photokina 2014 ?

If so, when will it realistically be available to buy ?

I've waited years to replace my Canon 1Ds3 with a significant upgrade and almost given up hope ... we have waited long enough surely !?! And i'm heavily invested into Canon glass so no i'm not jumping ship to Nikon (yet!)  ;)

Canon, please stop keeping us in the dark ...

I think the best you could hope for would be a development announcement rather than an actual release.

12
Lenses / Re: Would you buy the 35L now, or wait?
« on: August 25, 2014, 04:13:40 PM »
If I wanted one I'd get it now.

If a MkII comes out then it will be much more than you can get the MkI for so you have a different set of factors contributing to your purchasing decision.

Would you buy a MkII now for $2,200? Because even if they were available they wouldn't be selling for less than list, and wouldn't be for some time after release. Look after your MkI, keep the box and bag, receipt, warranty and paperwork and even if you want to upgrade in the future you won't lose that much.

Besides, lenses are for taking photos and imagine the images you will miss in the mean time.

If I wasn't in a rush I'd see what the rebates brought, but if you are not in a rush do you need it...............

Normally I'd agree but I wouldn't be shocked if the new 35mm 1.4 isn't sold at that big a premium due to the Sigma.

13
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: August 25, 2014, 03:58:14 PM »
Current list of Canon EF-M patents...

9-18mm f4.0-5.6
10-20mm f4.0-5.6
16-120mm f3.5-5.6
18-40mm f4.0-5.6 - Pancake
18-55mm f4.0-8.0 - Pancake
18-200mm f3.5-6.3
22-46mm f3.5-5.6 - Pancake

Some odd conflicting sizes here, what's missing are the primes

My guess is we'll only see one pancake see the light of day and that both the other UWA's were rejected in favour of the 11-22mm although I spose the 9-18mm might be a future higher end option.

The 16-120mm is interesting simply because that focal length range points to something large and expensive you'd expect to see a more advanced body released for.

14
Lenses / Re: Samyang 50mm F1.4... Anyone interested?
« on: August 25, 2014, 01:47:33 PM »
The issue will be I'd say that a manual 50mm lens will likely have higher optical expectations of it than a cheap AF nifty 50.

50mm seems to be a difficult focal length to please everyone as well, perhaps partly down to the technical side but also I'd say because it can have a number of different uses. With a 35mm lens for example sharpness across the frame is likely the main consideration for the majority, with an 85mm smooth bokeh maybe, with a 50mm a lot of people want both.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 23, 2014, 04:52:32 PM »
If rumors are right – it looks like a natural update of 7D. I.e. nice improvements in various areas + dual pixel AF, which is a very welcome feature. But it feels like it is not enough today. I think it is the time, when Wi-Fi and GPS should be built in. I look around me and see all my electronics Wi-Fi connected except for some kitchen stuff (like fridge or toaster) and... my DSLR cameras! It still can be done using additional gear (same with GPS) but such solutions seem to me as odd in 2014, as a car with hand-starter. They did implemented built-in Wi-Fi on their latest releases (6D and 70D) and it will be strange to omit on 7Dmk2. Lack of GPS is less bothering to me, as I see it only as nice to have feature, but today we have it even in cheapest almost-smartphone devices, so big and expensive DSLR could offer it too (and iirc 6D does). Well I hope it is just a wrong rumor.

If these specs are correct though this camera really isn't aimed at similar markets to the 6D and the 70D(or indeed even the original 7D) but rather pro's and specialised amateurs. In that respect I think that "eye catching" features are less important that bringing everything together in a package that suits sports/wildlife/action shooting.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41