October 21, 2014, 12:07:00 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 ... 509 510 [511] 512 513 ... 970
7651
Can you name a revolutionary move or two, by Canon or others, just for comparison?  I think the last 'revolutionary' releases were the Contax N Digital and the 1Ds, the very first full frame CCD and CMOS dSLRs.  Pretty much everything since then has been 'just plain ordinary' and 'market driven' incremental improvements.  A few more MP.  More AF points.  More cross-type AF points.  A couple more fps.  More metering zones.  Etc.

Uhmm .. D800.
a truckload more MP and DR to match, lots of AF ability, raw video, plenty of features, etc.

Yes, those are the exact sort of incremental improvements I was talking about.  Or, if you prefer, the 5D Mark II was just as revolutionary, or at least, as revolutionary as 20D with a FF sensor can be.  ::)

7652
Unless you have full-frame Canon lenses (non EF-S), it makes no sense to buy the 6D.

I'm guessing there are a lot of senseless people out there, then.

In the context of this thread, do you pay $2300 for a 36MP D800 that has second-to-none IQ or a $2100 6D that has by comparison rather average IQ?

That depends. I can get a high quality lens (24-105) with the 6D for an extra $600, $2700 total.  How much more than that do I need to spend to buy a high enough quality Nikkor FX lens so I don't handicap that high-resolution second-to-none IQ sensor?

Are you considering the whole package, including the price and quality of the lens(es) you'd use on the D800?  The Canon 24-105L is an excellent kit lens...neither the Nikkor 24-85 nor 24-120 are as good (unless you like CA and mushy corners on your FF images).  If you're going to get a 14-24/2.8 and shoot mostly landscapes, the D800 makes a lot of sense.  For general use, IMO, Canon offers better choices.

Wow, your 24-105L must be a lot different to mine 'cause while the center is good on the 24-105, the corners are rubbish at 24mm. Same with the 16-35 and 17-40.

It does sound like you may have a bad copy.  My 24-105L's (I've had two) have both been sharp in the corners, and even sharper in the center.  Not as sharp as my 70-200 II, of course, but plenty sharp.

7653
Lenses / Re: 24-85mm Lens?
« on: January 02, 2013, 06:59:08 PM »
Quote
I'm sure Canon will need to come out with better full frame options for zoom lenses that are not L (and are much less than $1000 MSRP) in order to compete in the entry-level FF market.

For sure! I bet a lot of people are turned off by the 6D because most of their lens options are 1K+. Canon won't be able to keep up with the D600 because of A) "non full frame" nikkor lenses can be used on full frame cameras. and B) canon doesn't have an affordable mid range zoom, among other ranges. I doubt canon will create a 17-40mm f/3.5-4.5L anytime soon, they aready make gobs of money from current version.

Did the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS cease to exist while I wasn't looking?

FYI, since we're talking about FF bodies, the 17-40mm is an ultrawide zoom, not a mid range zoom, unless you meant mid-range in terms of price, which describes the 28-135mm accurately.

7654
Unless you have full-frame Canon lenses (non EF-S), it makes no sense to buy the 6D.

I'm guessing there are a lot of senseless people out there, then.  Plus maybe a few sensible enough to know that the lens is the primary determinant of IQ, and that 24-105 kit lens is better than the 24-85 kit lens.

7655
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D Bg-E13 Discrepancies
« on: January 02, 2013, 06:34:57 PM »
Thanks for the clarification, aalbert.

Looks like Canon USA messed up and re-used the description from the 5DIII's BG-E11.  The 6D doesn't have a multicontroller on the body, I would not expect one on the grip...and the pics confirm that.

I emailed Canon and they confirmed that the grip DOES CURRENTLY HAVE both a multi controller, as well as a M.FN button.

The CSR that responded...

CSR = canned, stupid response.   :P

7656
I did not make such a claim


well ... but i answerd such a claim....  ::) 

Quote from: Sony
Nikon lenses arent as good as Canon's.

Fair enough - yes, that was an absurd claim. Sorry!

But I'd still say that Canon lenses are better than the Nikon counterpart more often than the reverse.  :P

7657
and there are enough tests that show that nikkors are often better then the equivalent canon.

Which ones?  24-70?  Canon wins (with the MkII, that is).  24-105?  Canon wins.  70-200/2.8?  Canon wins.  TS-E/PC-E 24mm?  Canon wins.  Pretty much the entire supertele lineup?  Canon wins.  UWA zoom?  Nikon wins.  Macro lenses?  Toss-up on quality, Canon wins on variety.  Fast primes?  About an even split.

So, where's the list of 'often better' Nikkors?

if i had so much time at hand as you seem to have i would copy a few reviews from magazines where nikkors where placed on no.1 and canon are behind them.

but the the claim that all nikon lenses are inferior is so wrong... im not wasting my time on such a stupid discussion.

I did not make such a claim, but I feel the same way about your claim that most Nikon lenses are better than the Canon equivalent.  Especially when that claim is completely unsubstantiated. 

"What I say is true."

"Can you back that up with some evidence?"

"I could if I wanted to, but I don't have time."


Thanks for that cogent and very convincing argument. I bet you were a real asset to your secondary school's debating team...   ::)

7658
6D is a safe move up introducing some new features... it is an incremental move...not a revolutionary move by any means...

Sometimes what they do is just plain ordinary or market driven and that's ok too.

Can you name a revolutionary move or two, by Canon or others, just for comparison?  I think the last 'revolutionary' releases were the Contax N Digital and the 1Ds, the very first full frame CCD and CMOS dSLRs.  Pretty much everything since then has been 'just plain ordinary' and 'market driven' incremental improvements.  A few more MP.  More AF points.  More cross-type AF points.  A couple more fps.  More metering zones.  Etc. 

7659
and there are enough tests that show that nikkors are often better then the equivalent canon.

Which ones?  24-70?  Canon wins (with the MkII, that is).  24-105?  Canon wins.  70-200/2.8?  Canon wins.  TS-E/PC-E 24mm?  Canon wins.  Pretty much the entire supertele lineup?  Canon wins.  UWA zoom?  Nikon wins.  Macro lenses?  Toss-up on quality, Canon wins on variety.  Fast primes?  About an even split.

So, where's the list of 'often better' Nikkors?

7660
Lenses / Re: Ipad app by Canon
« on: January 02, 2013, 12:03:17 PM »
I like it, and there's also a 3rd party iPhone app (also free) called Canon Lenses that lists the lenses with links to many of the reviews of each lens.  Quite useful.

7661
Though it makes F2.8 lenses essential to have cross-type AF points available when using the EOS body of 1D MK4, in final using it, almost every point can been used for accurate focusing.

This is really what it boils down to...the 1D X (and 5DIII) offers more cross-type points with slower lenses.  For many people, that's a significant advantage.

7662
I ask myself - why spend almost the same on the inferior 6d ? Why does canon seem to give less and charge more ?

Are you considering the whole package, including the price and quality of the lens(es) you'd use on the D800?  The Canon 24-105L is an excellent kit lens...neither the Nikkor 24-85 nor 24-120 are as good (unless you like CA and mushy corners on your FF images).  If you're going to get a 14-24/2.8 and shoot mostly landscapes, the D800 makes a lot of sense.  For general use, IMO, Canon offers better choices. 

7663
I just prefer the restriction of the two-axis head from RRS.  In fact I brought in a modified manfroto 234 head (name escapes me) and sent it right back and ordered the RRS -- which by the way I found to be expensive but wahoo does that piece ever perform on the gitzo.

I've got a RRS MH-02 head on their MC-34 monopod - a truly excellent setup!

7664
Lighting / Re: Yongnuo YN-622C and Canon 600 EX-RT Speedlite
« on: January 01, 2013, 10:21:44 PM »
You'd need another Yongnuo receiver.

7665
I have the Pro version, but the Plus would be fine for the 5DIII. I do like the additional tests with the Pro version (testing all the AF points, etc.).

Pages: 1 ... 509 510 [511] 512 513 ... 970