December 20, 2014, 11:14:35 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1004
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: Today at 10:22:54 AM »
i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for  $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too.  Because that would be just so feasible...   ::)

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

 to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

Sorry, but you're being rather naïve.  A FF sensor is bigger...a lot bigger.  That means a bigger mirror assembly.  A bigger sensor means a bigger AF sensor, a bigger pentaprism, a bigger metering sensor, etc.  Oh, you still want 10 fps?  Ok, that's the 1D X's mirror assembly.  Willing to have a somewhat lower frame rate, say...6 fps?  That's the 5DIII.  But you want it for $1800? 

Me dear ol' dad, who hailed from the Emerald Isle (by way of Chicago) used to say, "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up fastest." 

Oh, and by the way what you call greed, Canon would call trying to generate the maximum value for shareholders – and that's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.

i am not being naive. i know exactly what canon is doing. not every company practices this way. mesa boogie is  a good example. they put out the best product they can make and sell it at a reasonable price. i don't agree with the business strategy of artificially inflating the price of a product just because they can. i understand it is their choice to do so but i don't have to agree with or defend that choice.

Well, I had meant the naïve part in reference to your suggestion that Canon 'just pop the 6D sensor into the 7DII body' like it was no big deal and basically cost-neutral. 

But apparently you're a bit naïve as far as business acumen, as well.  Mesa Boogie is a privately held company, not legally accountable to shareholders.  If they want to give their products away for free, that's their choice. 

2
Yes, it's the color temp of the lights changing (flicker).  Enter the anti-flicker feature of the 7DII...
Or use slower shutter speeds such as 1/125.

Yes, that would work great for couches and walls, and people posing for shots.  Not so good for kids running around. 

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: Today at 09:38:46 AM »
i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for  $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too.  Because that would be just so feasible...   ::)

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

 to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

Sorry, but you're being rather naïve.  A FF sensor is bigger...a lot bigger.  That means a bigger mirror assembly.  A bigger sensor means a bigger AF sensor, a bigger pentaprism, a bigger metering sensor, etc.  Oh, you still want 10 fps?  Ok, that's the 1D X's mirror assembly.  Willing to have a somewhat lower frame rate, say...6 fps?  That's the 5DIII.  But you want it for $1800? 

Me dear ol' dad, who hailed from the Emerald Isle (by way of Chicago) used to say, "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up fastest." 

Oh, and by the way what you call greed, Canon would call trying to generate the maximum value for shareholders – and that's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: Today at 08:25:21 AM »
i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for  $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too.  Because that would be just so feasible...   ::)

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: Today at 07:23:22 AM »
@Tuglea - I want a cup of coffee and the 7DII won't brew one for me.  Therefore, it fails to meet MY needs and it's a crappy camera.  So I guess we agree.

 ::) ::) ::)

6
Yes, it's the color temp of the lights changing (flicker).  Enter the anti-flicker feature of the 7DII...

7
Canon General / Re: Thanks Adorama and Helen Oster !
« on: December 19, 2014, 08:35:22 PM »
I've never had one lost, but I did have one B&H order go awry.  UPS ground from their NY warehouse to Boston is overnight, but I watched the tracking updates as the package went from New York to Deleware to Philadelphia.  Last I checked, Boston was in the opposite direction.

I called B&H, they sent another shipment that I received the next day.   :)

8
Software & Accessories / Re: What head with 055cxPro3?
« on: December 19, 2014, 08:04:44 PM »
(The Manfrotto MH055MO-Q6 is arca compatible)

Yes, it's fully compatible...with Manfrotto's own 'Arca-style' plates.  It's just not compatible with anyone else's Arca plates, L-brackets, macro rails, etc.  Manfrotto makes one excellent ballhead...the 468MG, worth getting as long as you get the clamp-less version and put a Wimberley C-12 or Kirk/RRS clamp on it.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: December 19, 2014, 07:30:08 PM »
Good point Neuro.  I didn't pick up on the subtlety of that.

I dunno.  Maybe he's quite reasonable.  After all, the 7D sucked – probably because it started getting noisy above ISO 800.  Many of his test shots are at ISO 6400.  Maybe expecting less noise at 3-stops more gain is perfectly reasonable.  Then again...maybe not.  ::)

As for the 'reach' argument, that's sort of a red herring IMO, the only thing a smaller sensor gets you is more MP, which isn't needed unless you're printing large.  Still, he probably has the answer for that as well – to go along with your more expensive body, replace your 300-400mm lenses with 500-600mm lenses.  But since ISO 6400 is so important, an f/6.3 lens won't work, you'd need f/4.  What's $10K between friends?   ::) ::)

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« on: December 19, 2014, 06:59:21 PM »
Key statement from his review:

Quote from: Ron Martinsen
Now if you thought the 50D, 60D or 7D was a good camera then you’ll love the 7D Mark II. However, if you are like me and thought they weren’t worth owning if someone gave you one for free, then I have to advise that you stay away from the 7D Mark II – despite how fantastic the body features and technical specifications are.

Seems he's expecting FF high ISO performance from a sensor with <40% of the light gathering capability.  Maybe a tad unrealistic...just a tad. 

11
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 19, 2014, 06:26:48 PM »
That's an expensive habit you've got there.  Is there a twelve step plan available? :D

Yes.

Although...it's up to 14 steps, now.   ;)
Eek!  That's way too rich for my blood... think I'd better stick with my Samyang 14mm! :D

I have four MF lenses – three from Canon (17+24 TS-E and the MP-E 65), and the Samyang 14/2.8 (which I use for astro, and it's great).

So far, I've avoided being bitten by the Zeiss lens bug.  Well...for my personal photography, at any rate.  I've bought ~$2MM in Zeiss research equipment (not my money, of course), of which close to ~$200K was for 'lenses' (microscope objectives).

12
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]
« on: December 19, 2014, 05:26:35 PM »
That's an expensive habit you've got there.  Is there a twelve step plan available? :D

Yes.

Although...it's up to 14 steps, now.   ;)

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Vertical curtain velocity
« on: December 19, 2014, 05:06:52 PM »
CCD will reappear very soon in top-level bodies and lens',

What will be the function of CCDs in lenses?  The mind boggles.....

14
Canon General / Re: Thanks Adorama and Helen Oster !
« on: December 19, 2014, 05:03:44 PM »
UPS has missed 2/3 of their delivery dates in the past 3 weeks, I'd have thought they would have learned last year.  Most of my deliveries are routine, so its no problem.

This holiday season, 'Brown' is smelling like something else that's brown (or greenish-brown, says Mr. Hankey).  They've missed over half of my scheduled deliveries, including one that was a perishable birthday gift for a family member that was 1.5 days late.

15
Lenses / Re: 400mm DO II
« on: December 19, 2014, 04:53:33 PM »
I think the only way this lens is going to sell really well is if it proves to be essentially a 400mm version of the 300mm 2.8 II; that is, a lens with just legendary sharpness.   Otherwise, I don't know how you justify the almost $5000.00 difference between it and the new 100-400.   

How do you justify the 200/2L IS, when there's the excellent 70-200/2.8L IS II and the relatively inexpensive but still excellent 200/2.8L II?  Twice as much light.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1004