October 25, 2014, 04:05:01 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 - kphoto99

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
EOS-M / Re: Adapters + legacy lenses on the EOS M: any advice?
« on: October 22, 2014, 01:51:23 PM »
Which lens is better: KONICA 135MM F/3.2 HEXANON AR or PENTAX 135MM F/2.5 SMC TAKUMAR M42.
Better, as in sharper for micro shots attached to the EOS-M with some extension tube and an adapter?

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 04:14:35 PM »
My point is that "pro" (or "pro-level" or "pro-targeted") is a characteristic of the camera and not the person using it. The user doesn't determine whether a camera is a "pro camera" any more than the camera determines whether the user is a pro. I think that we would all agree that a 1DX is a "pro camera",

I get your point; however, the reason I disagree with your conclusion is that there's no objective criteria to separate pro from non-pro.  At the extremes, e.g. 1DX vs Rebel, we will probably agree.  But what about in the middle?

In the end, it devolves into the famous Potter Stewart test.

Which camera would a professional choose today:
EOS-1D or Rebel T5i

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 09:52:59 AM »

The top end is aimed at people who are willing and able to pay the higher price.  "Pro" is purely a marketing distinction.

Nuro has hit the nail on the head. Adding anything else to this discussion is pointless.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:37:18 PM »

What I find perplexing is in a shrinking market, why is Canon not doing more to revitalize Consumer demand/excitement?  I go to social events, and in most cases I'm the only with a real camera.  Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones.  That has be an issue they are feeling!  So why not make it more tempting for a consumer to desire and spring for one of their bodies and in turn more Canon lenses?

As I've said before, times change and people change. Now-a-days not everyone wants/needs a "real camera." Many people wouldn't take a DSLR as a gift, because they don't want/need a DSLR. As you said: "Everyone else is happy to be shooting with their phones."

Some reasons.
1. A DSLR won't fit in your pocket/purse.
2. A DSLR won't post a photo to Instagram or Facebook.
3. A DSLR doesn't have apps like Snapseed or Perfectly Clear available.

Nothing can be done about 1, but there is no reason that a DSLR could not do 2 and 3.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:26:25 PM »
A pro camera is the one that has the P(ro) setting  ;D

6
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:56:30 AM »
So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750)

How so? Are you already assuming that a future 6DII will be uncompetitive when it debuts?

Also, I know many users of APS-C bodies that own one or more EF lenses (myself included) which provides a good incentive to remain with Canon.

It is a always a trade of. In my case I am looking at FF for improved IQ. Currently the 6D is the best balance of price/IQ. If the price of 6DII goes to the neighborhood of 5DIII then that is no longer a case. From what I have read the D750 has a better IQ then the 6D, currently 6D wins on price but looses on AF.
The few FF lenses that I have are more applicable to the 1.6 crop factor and they would not be so desirable on FF, this is why replacing them by changing brand would not be a big sacrifice.

The other part of my problem with Canon, and that has nothing to do with future price of 6D is why the control layout between different levels of cameras is so different. Somebody who starts with a xxxD and moves to xxD or xD will have to relearn muscle memory for controlling the camera. If you have to relearn all the layout then what is keeping you with a brand. I don't know if that is the same with other manufactures, but I think that is so stupid.
The 7DII is virtually identical to the 5DIII and that makes a lot of sense.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:39:19 AM »
We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D...
 
I seriously doubt if Canon has been disappointed with the sales of the 6D.  The 6D is almost certainly the best-selling full frame camera on the market today. Certainly has outsold the D600/610.

Either Canon has unrealistic expectations or whomever is "telling" CR guy that Canon is disappointed doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

That said, I can see Canon placing a new full-frame in the lineup between the current 6D and the 5DII. There is a lot of space in there for a D750 competitor. I wouldn't be surprised to see a 6DII that goes up in price, features and build to hit that $2,500 mark and then a new model that is closer in features to the original 6D (8D??) come in at around $1,500.

Feature and price creep is always a dilemma for any manufacturer. Look at cars. Manufacturers always start out with a budget car and then, in order make it "new" each season they have to add features and cost. Eventually, the budget car become a mid-level car and they have to start over with a new budget model.

The 6DII has to be better than the 6D, but that means it gets closer in features to the 5DIII. The 5DIV has to have better features than the 5DIII, but that encroaches on the 1DX. It's a never-ending battle to keep refreshing models while keeping the "budget" version available. It's further complicated now that the technology has matured and the pace of change is slowing down.

It's a myth to think that Canon would be concerned about a stripped-down full frame camera stealing sales from the 7DII (or a 7DII stealing sales from a stripped-down full frame camera). Two different cameras, two different markets and either way, Canon gets your money.

As a counter argument, look at the Rebel (t2i->t5i), features have been going up (not for image quality improvements), but the price has been creeping down.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 09:41:50 AM »
So basically Canon will tell it's crop users that want to move to FF to look at other brands (like the D750), since new lenses have to be bought anyways.
Great job Canon.

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 13, 2014, 07:03:38 PM »
One advantage of crop is that after buying the camera body you will have more money left over to but an excellent lens. The higher quality lens will have more effect on the quality of the image then the camera  :P

10
Is it safe to assume that it is manual focus only.

11
EOS-M / Re: More EF-M lenses in the future
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:28:32 AM »
Mirrorless, the absence of mirror.
Why call a camera system by the name of something that does not exist in the camera?

For the same reason the first cars were refered to as "horseless carriages."

The mirrorbox/horse is the established standard.

All carriages were pulled by horses (ignore other animals :-), but there are all kind of cameras, not just the ones with mirrors (P&S, rangefinder, view etc). Also nobody who made cars put in a name "horseless". This is why I think EOS-M is just wrong.

Quote
In time it may change.

Exactly, which is why they called them mirrorless, they wanted to distinguish themselves as a replacement for SLR cameras, so they focused on the one thing that made them most different, the mirror box. They were not meant to compete against P&S or rangefinder or TLR or whatever. It would be irrelevant to position itself against point and shoots or disposable film cameras because those are different markets with different purposes.

OK, to put it in other way, what other manufacturer of "mirrorless" cameras includes in the name of the camera the designation of "mirrorless"?

12
EOS-M / Re: More EF-M lenses in the future
« on: September 17, 2014, 06:19:19 PM »
Mirrorless, the absence of mirror.
Why call a camera system by the name of something that does not exist in the camera?

For the same reason the first cars were refered to as "horseless carriages."

The mirrorbox/horse is the established standard.

All carriages were pulled by horses (ignore other animals :-), but there are all kind of cameras, not just the ones with mirrors (P&S, rangefinder, view etc). Also nobody who made cars put in a name "horseless". This is why I think EOS-M is just wrong.

Quote
In time it may change.

13
EOS-M / Re: More EF-M lenses in the future
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:44:55 PM »
Mirrorless, the absence of mirror.
Why call a camera system by the name of something that does not exist in the camera?

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:58:22 PM »
I'm concerned that they have dropped the 70D's highly-useful 3x "digital zoom" mode for video.  It doesn't appear in the menu shown on the B&H preview.  That feature needs not only to be included, but improved.

Don't count on it. The t3i has digital zoom in video, but it is not in t4i and t5i. So Canon does remove features instead of adding them.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 14, 2014, 09:28:56 AM »
The 5D MK III had so much more detail and much sharper than the 70D.

Should not come as a surprise. Even low quality lenses like the 17-40 shine on the 5D3/6D but appear very bad when mounted on APS-C cameras. It's just a matter of pixel density.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?

Lens=687&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


Woody, I agree with you, I should have known.  Here are the photos I was referring to.


The top photo is focussed in front of the seated people. Look at the grass out front. I'd say it's front focussed by a couple of feet, leaving the subjects a little out of focus in behind

Hi Etienne,  I respect your attention to detail, but that is just not the case, I simply changed cameras and focused on my daughter and cropped it.

Just look at the fence, it is so much more out of focus in the top photo then in the bottom. Either you used different aperture or the focus point was not the same location.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5