July 25, 2014, 12:21:55 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 ... 433 434 [435] 436 437 ... 893
6511
However, I'd neither call the 600mm lens hand holdable...

The 600 II is approximately the same weight as the 500/4 MkI, which is generally considered to be a handholdable lens.  So, may I ask, on what experience are you basing that statement?  FYI, when I stated, "Show me someone else's 600mm f/4 lens that I can handhold," I was not speaking in generic terms. I own a 600mm f/4L IS II, and I assure you that I can handhold it.

To your other points -- by limiting the market to FF you are essentially defining the market place in Canon's terms (only Nikon and Canon make FF SLRs) Nikon, like Canon have had integrated off camera flash for years. If you're trying to argue that Radio control is new, Pocket Wizard and other third party providers have been doing that for years. Maybe the AF points would qualify.

However the kind of thing I'm thinking of are major technological steps -- things like Fuji's hybrid viewfinder, and their new sensor array design. Magic lantern like firmware features. Mirrorless cameras (something where Canon's entry is too little too late). Sony's SLT technology (which allows phase detect in video mode).  Leica's technology which lets them use full frame wide angle lenses with a short flange distance.  Usable AF in video mode.

My point on the flash is that integrated radio control is new. Sure, it was possible with 3rd party products (but I'm still waiting for my PWs to be fully compatible with my 1D X, whereas I'd be fine with the Canon RF system out if the box). 

There are many types of innovation.  By your definition of 'transformative' innovation, Nikon isn't innovating, either.  That's not unexpected - very few large corporations at the top of their field (or near the top, in Nikon's case) do much innovation, the risk:reward ratio is high, and they don't need to take the risk. Rather, they allow others to shoulder that risk, then in-license from or outright acquire the smaller, more innovative company.

6512
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Body Rumors for 2013
« on: January 01, 2013, 01:00:36 PM »
The specs on the D70 does NOT say 3fps. It says "3.0-inch Variable Angle LCD"

Thanks for the clarification!

6513
Lenses / Re: Football (soccer) lens
« on: January 01, 2013, 12:53:04 PM »
The 70-200 II is great for portraits and general family use, IMO. It's my second most-used lens (after the 24-105L). I primarily use the 100-400 for birds/wildlife.

6514
Lenses / Re: Football (soccer) lens
« on: January 01, 2013, 11:47:37 AM »
The IQ of the 100-400mm is slightly better than the 70-200/2.8L IS II + 2xIII - the difference is there if you look, but you have to look really hard.  I have both, but if you already have the 70-200 II, the 2xIII is a good way to go. 

6515
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Body Rumors for 2013
« on: January 01, 2013, 11:32:49 AM »
I love my 60D.  And the 70D as listed isn't an adequate upgrade... I really don't want to pay for a 5d mkiii, but it looks like that is what my upgrade path will be.

That seems to fit with Canon's strategy.  The 60D was an upgrade path for Rebel/xxxD owners, and for 50D owners, the 60D wasn't an upgrade - the 7D was a better choice.  These specs are consistent with the same: xxxD -> 70Dor 6D, 60D -> 7DII or 5DIII.

6516
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Body Rumors for 2013
« on: January 01, 2013, 11:23:44 AM »
24 MP sensors, it seems.  So with a Digic 5 (not 5+) in the 70D, 3 fps makes sense (technically, not sure it makes sense from a marketing standpoint).

6517
Technical Support / Re: CANON 5D MK II problem
« on: January 01, 2013, 11:13:13 AM »
Do those images look that way on the camera LCD?

6518
Technical Support / Re: CANON 5D MK II problem
« on: January 01, 2013, 10:54:36 AM »
I'd suspect a bad CF card, unless it happens with several different CF cards...

6519
What is far more important, are whether or not they continue (or begin perhaps ?) to innovate...

Begin to innovate?  Show me someone else's 600mm f/4 lens that I can handhold.  Show me someone else with even one, let alone five, high-precision AF points with the greater accuracy of an f/2.8 baseline.  Show me 12 fps with a FF sensor/mirror.  Who else has an integrated radio-controlled flash system?  Maybe these innovations are irrelevant to you, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

Until Canon delivered its most recent radio controlled flash system, the Nikon flash system was considered to be superior. It is highly likely that Nikon will update their system...

So, we agree that Canon innovated, and now Nikon has to innovate better, to catch up to Canon...

How many focus points on Canon's gear works at f/8? 11? No? Oh, that's right, none at launch of its most recent cameras and with the firmware hack 4 + 1 x-type. Yup, Canon truly showed how innovative it was there by removing a very well used feature. Aren't you happy at how Canon's R&D delivers such innovation with the launch of its new cameras by removing features?

How many people need AF with an f/8 combo, vs. how many people benefit from highly accurate AF with f/2.8 or faster lenses?  What about all those f/4 crosses?  There are a heck of a lot more people out there with f/4 and f/2.8 zooms than with supertele lenses.  Even for me, probably 5% or less of my shots are with the 600 II, and only a subset of those is with the 2xIII. So while I'm happy about f/8 AF support being added, I personally derive a lot more benefit from the innovative and unmatched by the competition 20 f/4 cross-type points and 5 f/2.8 dual-crosses. 

6520
Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K
« on: January 01, 2013, 10:21:06 AM »
How did this thread go from 500 vs. 600 to cropped sensor vs. FF?  He already have a 1DX and is not asking about 7D vs. 1DX plus 1.4X.

Because fundamentally, that's a question only the OP can answer for himself.  What else is there to say?   :P

6521
Lenses / Re: 500 x $10K or 600 x$13K
« on: January 01, 2013, 09:04:39 AM »
I did a 'quick-and-dirty' test (static scene, not my ISO 12233-type chart) soon after getting the 600 II, comparing the 7D vs. 1D X + 1.4x.  The 1D X + TC was a little better at ISO 100 and a lot better at ISO 3200.

The original test was with the 100L, no extender. The point was to simply compare the crop sensor vs. cropping the FF image to match FoV.

6522
I so so so so frequently have to boost exposure in pp by 1/2 stop if I've decided to shoot auto iso in "m".

As I said, you can correct it with an AE microadjustment, which basically sets the zero point for the camera's meter where you want it.

6523
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1D X firmware poblem?
« on: December 31, 2012, 11:26:59 PM »
I recall something about needing to disable silent shooting in live view with TS-E lenses, but I thought the new ones (17 and 24 II) were exempt, so that's probably not it...

Even though restoring defaults fixes it, it could certainly be a firmware bug. For example, the AFMA bug that was fixed with firmware 1.0.6 was triggered by enabling the orientation-linked AF point setting.  If you can reproduce the behavior based on a single setting, that will help Canon (and the rest of us, eventually).  If not, you might still contact Canon and offer to email your settings file to them for testing.

6524
FWIW, the autoexposure on my 1D X is also spot on.

6525
If the 1D X autoexposure is consistently off, you can use AE Microadjustment (up to 1 stop in 1/8-stop increments). 

Pages: 1 ... 433 434 [435] 436 437 ... 893