September 22, 2014, 04:13:06 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 ... 418 419 [420] 421 422 ... 953
6286
I have spent alot of time on the autofocus micro adjustment, and thought I had it spot on, but compared to the Mark ii - it still sucked.

Spent time how?  Have you compared phase detect AF to live view AF to 10x manual focusing in live view?  If live you gets you sharper images then phase detect, then AF adjustment is most likely the problem.  If the images are equally soft with all focusing methods, I'd suggest contacting Canon.

6287
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 09, 2013, 07:51:57 AM »
But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.


Now imagine what would happen if we "infinitesimal fraction of the market" stopped supporting Canon. Marketshare is directly related to mindshare. It doesn't matter what the actual facts are, only what people perceive are the facts (Marketing 101). Ask Apple about the Final Cut Pro X fiasco. When enough pros (who equally represented a small portion of Apple's market share) bashed the new editing software, everyone else abandoned it as well as they assumed the pros must know what they are talking about. Canon like any other company need professionals to shoot great images with their gear to market the possibilities to non-professionals. If enough pros start complaining, even those not knowledgable about it will start to echo those complaints creating a snowball affect.

How long ago did you take Marketing 101, and how well did you do in the class?   :P

I understand what you're saying, but you fail to understand they're NOT releasing the same camera over and over, they're reusing a good sensor in the same way automakers use the same already fuel-efficient and sufficiently powerful engine for multiple model years and across trim levels. 

Let's take your analogy - did the Final Cut Pro X fiasco affect sales of iPods and iPhones?  No.  This 'sensor stagnation' is something for forum posters to bitch about, but it won't affect people picking up a Rebel from the shelf at Best Buy.  Also, every time someone tunes their TV to a major sporting event, they'll see lots of pros with Canon white lenses (even if none of them bought them personally).  The 5DII outsold the D700 and the 5DIII is outselling the D800...so odds are, the next wedding someone goes to, they'll see a pro using Canon. Etc.

I'm not saying Canon shouldn't improve their sensors – they should!  But the idea that there will be dire consequences at the corporate level if those improvements are merely marginal is simply foolish.

6288
I'd say the Sigma 35/1.4 has better IQ.  But, if it can't focus where you need it to, a blurry shot isn't 'better'.

6289
Lenses / Re: 24-105L or 70-200L f/2.8?
« on: April 08, 2013, 07:26:06 PM »
A 70-200 is a useful lens, but generally a standard zoom is more useful.  What do you mean by 'automotive photography'? 

One option might be the 70-200 plus the 40mm pancake as a normal lens.

6290
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Maybe I need to relearn how to focus
« on: April 08, 2013, 07:17:25 PM »
Have you checked the AFMA?  If you're tweaking focus with the viewfinder, is your diopter set properly for your vision?

6291
TDP mentions servo issues with the new Tamron 24-70, seems to be a common issue with 3rd party lenses.  My 35L does very well in servo mode, old though the design is...

6292
No personal experience, but reviews suggest the Sigma's IQ isn't as good as the Canon prime.

6293
Only at 15 mm

Incorrect.

The 8-15mm is a fisheye lens at all focal lengths.  At 14-15mm on FF, it's a 'full frame fisheye' meaning the FoV fills the frame (you're getting an AoV of ~175°).  At 8mm on FF, it's a 'circular fisheye' meaning a circular 180° AoV inset in the rectangle (black borders).



If you want rectilinear from the 8-15mm fisheye, you must de-fish in post (at the cost of corner sharpness). 

The widest rectilinear Canon lens is the 14mm prime, Sigma has a rectilinear zoom that goes to 12mm.

6294
Macro / Re: Reverse a lens for macro.
« on: April 08, 2013, 11:34:17 AM »
Not that the MP-E 65 is especially easy to use...but a reversed lens (mounted direct or to another lens) is even more challenging.  IQ is not going to be stellar usually - it depends on the lens(es) used.

6295
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 08, 2013, 09:19:30 AM »
Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?

It's been a little sad to watch the evolutionary descent from human to troll. 

6296
Software & Accessories / Re: Ballhead for a RRS TVC33
« on: April 08, 2013, 09:04:15 AM »
The main reason I chose the -33 over the -34L is that I don't need the height. I'm 5'7" (on a good day), so for normal use, I've got 8-10" to spare (I gain ~1" with the clamping leveling base).  The other day, I had fully extended the legs and put the 600 II on the gimbal, pointed up about 30-degrees, so the VF was well below horizontal...standing on tip-toes I could barely look through it.

Secondarily, a 3-section tripod is faster to set up and collapse than a 4-section one - 1/3 fewer leg locks.

6297
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 07, 2013, 10:13:39 PM »
But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

And last week one of them came to me for advice on which camera to buy, saying all their friends had Canon. My recommendation? Nikon, followed by showing him DxO's evaluation of the Canon vs Nikon cameras and telling him to visit some stores and try them both. He bought Nikon. I just can't in all honesty recommend Canon DSLRs to anyone.

Did you call Canon and tell them your story?   I'm sure it would have a profound impact on their corporate strategy.   ::)

FWIW (which, frankly, is just about the same as your story is worth), I can in all honesty recommend Canon dSLRs to people, because 1) there's much more to camera performance than DxO measures, 2) lenses are far more important than bodies and Canon has the upper hand there.

6298
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 07, 2013, 09:46:33 PM »
But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

6299
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« on: April 07, 2013, 08:14:29 PM »
long story short
nice that you have seen what I have tried to explain about read noise and banding  since I started as a member here

Not really.......................................................

No one (at least, no one with a shred of objectivity) has denied that Sony/Nikon sensors have more DR than Canon sensors. But jrista is correct - the suggestion that DR at low ISO is the be-all-end-all of what matters for camera performance - for every photographer - is ludicrous and absurd.  Yet...that is exactly how the repeated Mikael/ankorwatt/etc. posts came off. That was the problem with the former persona, and I sincerely hope we don't go down that road again.

your opinion, not mine.

The suggestion that DR at low ISO is the be-all-end-all of what matters for camera performance - for every photographer - IS ludicrous and absurd.  Granted, it's my opinion that that's how your posts sounded - and clearly I'm not alone in that opinion.  But maybe that's not what you meant...

6300
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« on: April 07, 2013, 07:22:08 PM »
long story short
nice that you have seen what I have tried to explain about read noise and banding  since I started as a member here

Not really.......................................................

No one (at least, no one with a shred of objectivity) has denied that Sony/Nikon sensors have more DR than Canon sensors. But jrista is correct - the suggestion that DR at low ISO is the be-all-end-all of what matters for camera performance - for every photographer - is ludicrous and absurd.  Yet...that is exactly how the repeated Mikael/ankorwatt/etc. posts came off. That was the problem with the former persona, and I sincerely hope we don't go down that road again.

Pages: 1 ... 418 419 [420] 421 422 ... 953