September 16, 2014, 09:37:52 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 949
1
...no difference at all after so many Sensor generations.

Well, assuming the 7DII sensor is basically similar to that in the 70D (minor tweaks), you're talking about one generation.  One. 

2
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: Today at 07:32:58 PM »
Far easier to fit a Sony RX100 III into a pocket than a Canon G7X

WTF??

Sony RX100-III:   4.0 x 2.3 x 1.6" / 101.6 x 58.1 x 41.0 mm
PowerShot G7 X:  4.1 x 2.4 x 1.6" / 104.1 x 61.0 x 40.6 mm

Far easier?  Care to share whatever it is you're smoking/drinking/injecting that makes you think 2.5mm more width, 1.9mm more height, and 0.4mm less depth makes any sort of significant difference that would mean it's far easier to fit the RX100-III into a pocket than the G7 X?

3

Someone that many would call a competent photographer posts a series of images, of which a substantial fraction are out of focus and criticising the camera is baseless trolling?

So what would you like to blame for the focus problems:
* The camera
* The model
* The lens
* The photographer

Why speculate at all?  For all we know, people milling about around him kept bumping into him at awkward moments, or the model kept moving, or....  What's odd isn't so much that some of the photos are duds as that anyone should have thought the bad ones worth publishing in the first place.

In other words he shouldn't have tried to take and post sample pictures.

Part of what's important about higher ISO is the tradeoff between detail and NR. Without 100% crops that are carefully done, it's not possible to make significant judgements.

...and yet, based on that same paltry number of not carefully done shots, you judged the 7DII's AF system is incapable of focusing on a relatively stable subject:

So that new AF system in the 7DII ... so advanced that it can't deal with a model that's relatively stationary...

As I stated, more baseless trolling from you. 

4
Lenses / Re: 100-400mm and more DO lenses confirmed
« on: Today at 06:50:29 PM »
Dolina I think the conflation was directed to s rock's comment as you separated the propositions with a conjunction.

The conjunction was a correction of the corrigendum, as the conflation was contained in the communique at its creation.   

 ;D

5
Lenses / Re: 100-400mm and more DO lenses confirmed
« on: Today at 03:26:13 PM »
Replacement 100-400.  More DO lenses.  Independent statements.   Your conclusion is a conflation.  :)

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 01:09:15 PM »
What do you guys think of the quoted battery life -  670 shots... you could theoretically run a battery dry in well under 2 minutes. When you take into account that you have a jpeg buffer of 1090, you'll run out of battery/CF-memory before the camera slows down. For some reason I predict a spike in Canon battery grip sales come November.

Battery life is according to CIPA standards.  I don't know about the specific parameters, but they're conservative.  That's particularly true if you shoot bursts.  My 1D X is rated for ~1100 shots, when shooting bursts I have taken >2000 shots and had 65-70% remaining battery capacity.

7
What should I think about the opinion of somebody who posts anonymously as a "guest" here? How's that even possible?

That's how a username shows up after the user deleted their account.

8
canon and nikon are not the lonely leaders in camera technology anymore.

That would be unfortunate for them if being the leader in technology was their goal.  But from a business standpoint, that's a nice to have.  Sony's Betamax was the best consumer videocassette technology...until it's inability to compete in the market killed it.

on the other side being a market leader did not help nokia, sony TV, kodak or sun.

i think you have to be agressive too and push into new territory.

In most cases, the examples you cite are cases of a paradigm shift in technology.  Samsung cameras...aren't. 

9
...there are a lot of people on this forum who seem to have invested themselves in championing/desiring Canon failures and must bend backwards to find something wrong with anything that could undermine their position.

Indeed.  And just think what a field day those folks will have after DxO's BS comes out.


And DPP 4 can most likely handle anyone's 7D2 RAW file.

Unlikely without a minor version update.  Historically, each new RAW-capable has required an updated version of DPP.  Often, those updates are initially via the optical disc included in the box, and only later available online.  DPP v3.9 added unsharp mask, but for several weeks that version was only available to those (like me) who had bought the PowerShot S95.

10
If those pictures from the trade show are meant to earn applause for high ISO then why can't they earn criticism for focus issues?

One involves a dynamic interaction between photographer, camera, multiple settings, model, motion and timing...and the other is picking a number and pushing a button.

11
Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II
« on: Today at 11:46:36 AM »
Perhaps lack of sales has brought them back to sensibility!?

Or the falling value of the yen vs. other currencies.   ::)

12
canon and nikon are not the lonely leaders in camera technology anymore.

That would be unfortunate for them if being the leader in technology was their goal.  But from a business standpoint, that's a nice to have.  Sony's Betamax was the best consumer videocassette technology...until it's inability to compete in the market killed it. 

13
So there's this thing called "single shot autofocus", it sets the focus and waits for you to fully press the shutter button. Sometimes the subject moves between setting the focus and you pushing the button.

The focus in these pictures says absolutely nothing about the performance of the system.

Don't you get it?   If any 7DII, anywhere, misses a single shot then the camera model sucks.  Even if it never misses a shot, Nikon has better DR, Samsung has higher fps, Sony has spiffy names for AF functions, and Pentax has colored LEDs on the outside, and so the 7DII still sucks.  Just like every Canon camera.  To be fair and impartial, Canon does have a couple of okay lenses.  But that doesn't make up for anything.

Try to think like a troll for once, will you??   ;)

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 11:31:14 AM »
I guess things that are important to you aren't important to everyone,

no doubt about that.

but when cheap cameras offer these features and it would make MORE people happy.... what keeps canon from including them?

Unnecessary feature clutter.  Additional development costs and time.  Increased complexity of writing and maintaining firmware. 

One trivial example...orientation linked AF point, nice feature.  Present on several cameras before the 1D X.  Somehow on the 1D X initial firmware, enabling that setting 'broke' AFMA (caused it to fail to recognize previously AFMA'd lenses), a relatively unrelated function.

The more stuff you put in, the more stuff you have to test.  Or...should test.  Canon does a good job of supporting their cameras after release, including some major feature upgrades via free firmware, something not all manufacturers do.

15
You are, of course, speaking of a few individuals here.  To some, specs tell the whole story.  But the top line never does.  For example, it was pointed out on another thread where people were touting the NX1's 15 fps vs. the 7DII's 10 fps, that continuous shooting on the NX1 delivers 12-bit RAW files instead of 14-bits.  So even with the specs, the devil is in the details.  And all of that says zippo about images the camera system (lenses, flashes, etc.) can produce.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 949