July 25, 2014, 07:51:54 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 - Stu_bert

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14
31
Agree with Distant Star


@GuyF - nope they stopped that a while back, but then you have to be pretty damned unlucky for an L to go wrong within a year, as I think that's all the warranty you get. Any UK company even if they import have to provide the warranty themselves e.g. ProCamera have to cover any faults...

There are some things I prefer to shop in person, predominantly where I do need to either try the goods for size, or get some understanding of the materials used, but eventually it will all go the same way. Where I used to live, there are just charity shops and coffee shops - it is sad to see people's lives affected through job losses...

@OP - use either Procamera or Hdew - they indeed take the hassle out of importing and it's easier to return to a company based in the UK if there are any problems....

Finally, looking at the Canadian price for the same lens, some £600 cheaper, if you were feeling adventurous you could fly to Canada off-season, pick up the lens and cover 1/4 your holiday cost  ;D

32
Lenses / Re: Lee Filters for Wideangel
« on: July 15, 2013, 07:12:39 AM »
Just one addition, if you use the CPL from Lee with their filter adapter, then you get significant vignetting at about 19-20mm on a FF camera. To date, they alas have no solution  :(

Putting it before may work - I prefer the flexibility of the Lee method, with the aforementioned limitation - but just make sure you check if you go the "attach to lens" route as some of the CPL with threads can also cause vignetting

33
Technical Support / Re: Hyperfocal Focusing Painlessly?
« on: June 29, 2013, 08:48:17 PM »
Use OptimumCS on the iphone, Liveview, Manual Focus and you should be good. OptimumCS calculates the minimum aperture required to get the close & far distances you plug into it, kind of like the Depth mode did on Canon Film cameras back in the day  :D

Liveview & manually focusing is how I prefer to focus on the position I'm provided and then you can do a quick preview on the first few to gain confidence in what you are doing....

Happy shooting - the colorado plateau is one of my all time favourite places for landscapes  :)


34
EOS Bodies / Re: A Big Megapixel Discussion
« on: June 16, 2013, 05:45:24 AM »
Canon wanted to upgrade its glass before releasing the higher MP bodies, and now they have filled out some of the line (never going to keep everyone happy) then they have a complete env. for photographers. Releasing the body before releasing the better lenses doesn't make sense and I would guess does not need the same investment as a new sensor line. Investing in lenses means you get a better return as it appeals to all sorts of shooters, so you've got a larger addressable market than the high mp body will have

Meanwhile develop the next sensor tech to support them for perhaps the next 7 to 10 years (given previous cycles), and also watch and see how the market responds to the d800 - this in itself takes a reasonable time before you can reasonably assess the impact. And while you wait that new sensor tech is still useful for the whole of your product line.

It will be a pro body as I said earlier, and a body in between this and the 5d. Finally it will be in the 7d ii but perhaps a higher pixel density. Interesting times...
And the right   translation would mybe  be: Canon can not with its sensor technology increase the number of pixels without using the sensor line from the  compact sensor line , they can not use the old sensor lines as these are to course / rough. This means new sensors line which there are no indications that Canon have invest in, a investments of several billion dollars as for example Sony has done, or they can use the compact sensor line and stitch together an APS or 24x36mm sensor with a high cost
WE WILL soon  SE WHAT CANON HAVE IN THEIRS SLEAVES, the market outside Canon = Omnivision, Toshiba, Sony, Renesas, Aptina etc are not standing still in theirs own developments of new sensors tech from mobile sensors  up to 24x36mm sensors
When the annual meetings are  regarding  the new  sensor technology  Canon are not involved  in this  meetings, tell me what are the odds that at Canon would come with a new sensor technology before others as Toshiba, Panasonic, Sony etc?
Then they can say that they are improving the  lenses or what ever in the mean time.
Well I agree with the "maybe", as this is just guessing on all of our parts...  :D

But I was suggesting that there's more to development of a big MP camera than just the sensor, and given the amount of money involved, then it makes sense to develop the whole ecosystem and choosing where you get best return on your money, especially as new sensor tech as you state costs billions of dollars.

Everyone wants Canon need to do is improve their sensor tech - they know that, and they know that other companies aggressively develop their own further. But of those you mention, except for Sony, I don't believe the others make full cameras (so less revenue streams, more dependency on 1 line). Of course it means other (camera) companies can use their sensors, but again I'm reminded of Tom Hogan who when asked about the 1DX, 5D III, D4 and D800 essentially stated that you can take very good pictures with any of them.

Ultimately, as you say, we'll have to see what they release. But for me personally, it's still about the whole ecosystem (AF, Sensor, Ergonomics, Lens Range, Lens Quality, Build, SW Support). Your and other peoples' mileage may differ....

35
EOS Bodies / Re: A Big Megapixel Discussion
« on: June 15, 2013, 10:46:08 AM »
Canon wanted to upgrade its glass before releasing the higher MP bodies, and now they have filled out some of the line (never going to keep everyone happy) then they have a complete env. for photographers. Releasing the body before releasing the better lenses doesn't make sense and I would guess does not need the same investment as a new sensor line. Investing in lenses means you get a better return as it appeals to all sorts of shooters, so you've got a larger addressable market than the high mp body will have

Meanwhile develop the next sensor tech to support them for perhaps the next 7 to 10 years (given previous cycles), and also watch and see how the market responds to the d800 - this in itself takes a reasonable time before you can reasonably assess the impact. And while you wait that new sensor tech is still useful for the whole of your product line.

It will be a pro body as I said earlier, and a body in between this and the 5d. Finally it will be in the 7d ii but perhaps a higher pixel density. Interesting times...

36
EOS Bodies / Re: A Big Megapixel Discussion
« on: June 13, 2013, 12:18:35 PM »
The new MP camera will compete with the new D4x and will use the same sensor tech as the 7D mk ii but tweaked for the pro end. I'd love Canon to address low iso along with dr etc if they're aiming for landscape photographers

And I think they'll consider a body in between the 1d and 5d - the infamous 3D - to appeal to prosumers as this can be legitimately released without alienating 5d III owners...

Just my 2p :)

37
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: May 06, 2013, 08:16:51 PM »
on the current interview with Tom Hogerty via Engadget with Scott Kelby, where he mentions LR running on a tablet being in the works, I thought they mentioned a rental cost of 20 bucks per month for Photoshop - not sure if that included LR or not.

Given that an average Photoshop upgrade costs around 200 bucks / pounds, and comes out about every 18-24 months, then if they included LR into those costs, 20 dollars a month would not be completely out of sync, plus you get more regular updates on the programs.

Might not be soo bad if they can pitch the right pricing. Well, not too bad for anyone in North America :)

38
Lenses / Re: Calumet 300mm & 400mm f/2.8 pricing
« on: March 29, 2013, 05:45:13 AM »
Just got the latest Calumet mag with the 300 & 400mm MkII lenses pricing is jaw dropping!
EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS II USM   Â£7499
EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS II USM   Â£11499

Not many enthusiast photographers going to be buying these, and as for pros well you'd need to making a substantial income to be able to justify either of these.

Those prices seem accurate. Same as B&H.

Canon has already sold a lot of those lens, but of course they are mainly aimed at pros, especially those that shoot sports.
For UK resellers as opposed to grey imports, I would recommend using camerapricebuster.co.uk

300mm f/2.8 mk II - £4999
400mm f/2.8 mk II - £8199

so Calumet appear to be indeed over inflating prices significantly.

If you don't mind the risk of grey import, then I just picked up the 300mm mk II (it's literally in transit) for £4577. If OP wants details look at my other posts or message me otherwise I sound like a sales person  :D

39
Its about time Canon responded to the Nikon D800 and D800E. This fixation with high ISO, low DR, and high noise needs to stop. We need a quality camera to bring back the 1Ds range, a camera that is best in class.

For whatever reason Canon have been asleep at the wheel for a while now and its time they woke up. I have no wish for ISO extremes, nor do I shoot video at all, but I do shoot landscapes, so want a camera that has a minimum of noise and world beating DR. Maybe removal of the anti-aliassing filter?

It's a valid fixation.  There are many more sports and wedding photographers than landscape photographers.  Hence why Canon has dominated the market.

High ISO if clean is great for landscape shots when movement is not desirable - for instance freezing stars without wishing to get star trails. If you're taking shots from a moving plane, then faster speeds are essential (>1/1000th is ideal). Add in the desire to shoot in the golden hour, and suddenly higher iso is useful. Finally, as has been mentioned, not having to take a tripod everywhere opens up flexibility - although I appreciate that may be negated by the higher resolution.

1Dx bodies are also perhaps better in harsher conditions - be that cold, wet or sand, all often encountered by landscape photographers.

I thought as mentioned in other threads, Canon's latest L glass is not sensor limited. And certainly not by a 40MP sensor.

Finally, as also mentioned elsewhere, higher MP resolves the subject detail better.

Cropping is useful, even for landscapes, where you can't change your position or zoom - for a variety of reasons.

The simple conclusion is of course, everyone has different needs. And sure, eventually, Canon will try and satisfy them all, but they're never gonna keep everyone happy...

But then if they did, these forums would be a lot quieter  ;D

That's great!  However, it doesn't have anything to do with why Canon has neglected a high MP body.  The reason is plain and simple.  High ISO/high shutter/super AF goes to sports and wedding photogs.  Not landscape photogs.  Take all the shooters, especially pros.  What would you guess?  98% wedding/sports, 2% other?  That's all great that everyone has different needs, but is beside the point.

I don't think that's the whole story.  You can say that high MP/DR sensor is also for status symbol, bragging rights.  If you really want to be the market leader, you need to prove that you have the best or at least will compete with the best, no matter the arena.  Sometimes, it's all about reputation.  Yes, for most of us, that's not how we see it since some things are really trivial and there are other things that are more important but on the business side for Canon, there's a reputation they must maintain.

Reputation?  You mean the one they have supported by numbers, money, and sales?  Oh that one!

"If you really want to be the market leader..." you say.  Well, guess what.  They are!

You can never rest on your laurels... That's what I'm saying.  Clear?

No not really, but ok.  If you think producing a super high MP camera that only about 1-2% of the DSLR users will purchase is "stepping it up" then that's cool.  However, the majority of camera users are NOT asking for a high MP camera.  I think it will be produced in small quantities, be produced for a short time, and won't be updated for an even longer time after that.  Also, like the 1Ds Mark III, there won't be many units sold.  Look at the sales of 5D Mark II vs. 1Ds Mark III.  Even most of the pros I knew bought the 5D2 over the 1Ds 3.  Too pricy for not noticeable enough features over the other.

Guess I bucked that trend instead, bought my 1Ds MK III second hand and never looked back in comparison to the 5D II  :D

As for high MP - sure the market for MF style resolution is far lower than for "traditional resolution" dSLR, but again, I'd be interested to know how good / bad the D800 has sold for Nikon as this is perhaps the best barometer...

Given the sensor density for high MP is not significantly different from that of the current APS-C sensors, then frankly, why not? You get better resolving power and in a FF format

Again, everyone's mileage is different....

40
Its about time Canon responded to the Nikon D800 and D800E. This fixation with high ISO, low DR, and high noise needs to stop. We need a quality camera to bring back the 1Ds range, a camera that is best in class.

For whatever reason Canon have been asleep at the wheel for a while now and its time they woke up. I have no wish for ISO extremes, nor do I shoot video at all, but I do shoot landscapes, so want a camera that has a minimum of noise and world beating DR. Maybe removal of the anti-aliassing filter?

It's a valid fixation.  There are many more sports and wedding photographers than landscape photographers.  Hence why Canon has dominated the market.

High ISO if clean is great for landscape shots when movement is not desirable - for instance freezing stars without wishing to get star trails. If you're taking shots from a moving plane, then faster speeds are essential (>1/1000th is ideal). Add in the desire to shoot in the golden hour, and suddenly higher iso is useful. Finally, as has been mentioned, not having to take a tripod everywhere opens up flexibility - although I appreciate that may be negated by the higher resolution.

1Dx bodies are also perhaps better in harsher conditions - be that cold, wet or sand, all often encountered by landscape photographers.

I thought as mentioned in other threads, Canon's latest L glass is not sensor limited. And certainly not by a 40MP sensor.

Finally, as also mentioned elsewhere, higher MP resolves the subject detail better.

Cropping is useful, even for landscapes, where you can't change your position or zoom - for a variety of reasons.

The simple conclusion is of course, everyone has different needs. And sure, eventually, Canon will try and satisfy them all, but they're never gonna keep everyone happy...

But then if they did, these forums would be a lot quieter  ;D

That's great!  However, it doesn't have anything to do with why Canon has neglected a high MP body.  The reason is plain and simple.  High ISO/high shutter/super AF goes to sports and wedding photogs.  Not landscape photogs.  Take all the shooters, especially pros.  What would you guess?  98% wedding/sports, 2% other?  That's all great that everyone has different needs, but is beside the point.

Sorry, I appreciate for you, High ISO / High shutter may not be a requirement for your style of landscape photography, but for me, as I tried to outline, it does have benefits from time to time. So that is *exactly* why I said everyone has different needs. Perhaps you might respect that others are not like you....

41
Lenses / Re: Which supertele?
« on: March 26, 2013, 03:01:40 AM »
Hey,

Since you have the 70-200 f2.8 , I would def. go for the 500mm f4 !

The 300 is superb off course, but it is pretty close to your 70-200 in reach.

The 500 is still hand holdable and since you use full frame cameras the choice of going for 500 for sports / wildlife is even easier ! (in my view)

I briefly had the 300f2.8 IS and 500 f4 IS, but got rid of the 300 f2.8
I found 300mm not long enough (even with 1.3 crop body)

I haven't checked this but i can imagine the appearance of a subject size between lenses (ratio) can be expressed as

500^2/300^2 = 2.777 times bigger (same distance a subject would appear 2.8 times bigger)

200 vs 300 = 2.5 bigger
200 vs 500 = 6.25 bigger

bigger meaning surface area of subject ( ratio's again)
Sorry if that logic is flawed, but i think it should be pretty solid since it's a 2 dimensional problem:P
Hope it is helpful

The logic is flawed, unfortunately - the resolving power depends on the focal length of the lens, not the length squared as it is a 1 D problem.  Two lines can be resolved if the image on the sensor has them separated by two pixels.  The size of the image depends on the focal length of the lens. So, a 300mm lens gives you 50% more reach than a 200mm, a 400mm 33% more than a 300mm, and a 700mm 16.6% than a 600mm, all things being equal.
But does not the reach expand your subject in both axis/dimensions, therefore if you are talking surface area or % of the sensor covered, then what apop says is correct? Agreed, reach, but not % of sensor...

42
Its about time Canon responded to the Nikon D800 and D800E. This fixation with high ISO, low DR, and high noise needs to stop. We need a quality camera to bring back the 1Ds range, a camera that is best in class.

For whatever reason Canon have been asleep at the wheel for a while now and its time they woke up. I have no wish for ISO extremes, nor do I shoot video at all, but I do shoot landscapes, so want a camera that has a minimum of noise and world beating DR. Maybe removal of the anti-aliassing filter?

It's a valid fixation.  There are many more sports and wedding photographers than landscape photographers.  Hence why Canon has dominated the market.

High ISO if clean is great for landscape shots when movement is not desirable - for instance freezing stars without wishing to get star trails. If you're taking shots from a moving plane, then faster speeds are essential (>1/1000th is ideal). Add in the desire to shoot in the golden hour, and suddenly higher iso is useful. Finally, as has been mentioned, not having to take a tripod everywhere opens up flexibility - although I appreciate that may be negated by the higher resolution.

1Dx bodies are also perhaps better in harsher conditions - be that cold, wet or sand, all often encountered by landscape photographers.

I thought as mentioned in other threads, Canon's latest L glass is not sensor limited. And certainly not by a 40MP sensor.

Finally, as also mentioned elsewhere, higher MP resolves the subject detail better.

Cropping is useful, even for landscapes, where you can't change your position or zoom - for a variety of reasons.

The simple conclusion is of course, everyone has different needs. And sure, eventually, Canon will try and satisfy them all, but they're never gonna keep everyone happy...

But then if they did, these forums would be a lot quieter  ;D

43
The lag between announcement and delivery is based on manufacturing ramp up time for FF using a modified process and the fact that Nikon will produce theirs first. Let's remember we still want Canon to be in business, so yes they will pre-announce...

SATA III drives max out at around 400-500MBps (real-world) not Mbps, so I don't think the i/o subsystem is a bottleneck  :D

Exmor is equivalent to Digic, not the sensor....

I agree with the other post and have said before - Canon released updated glass first as they can get revenue ahead of the sensor improvements on both the 7D II and 1DxL :D

USB 3 / thunderbolt - I've only ever used USB to control the camera - do others prefer to use these i/f to offload pictures etc? The Ethernet on the 1Dx is faster than the CF card, as would be the USB 3 and Thunderbolt, so not sure the benefit of adding a faster i/o ports without faster CF, unless you are tethered....

Photographers asked for better high iso, and the way Canon chose to do it, presumably based on sensor limitations was to reduce the MP slightly. They're a business and thus want to respond as best as they can with the tech they have to retain you. Pretty normal IMHO....

Overall, when I read these threads I am reminded on Tom Hogan who normally calls it correctly when he said with the current cameras from Nikon & Canon you really can't blame the camera on making bad pictures, only the photographer.... :D

44
Canon General / Re: your scariest photography moment?
« on: March 11, 2013, 01:38:01 PM »
Some great stories, thanks to all...

Silliest moment - aside from the normal misreading the tides and getting "stranded" on the english coast, my best to date would be diving/slipping into a stream with 1Ds and 17-40mm attached with tripod. Photographer and equipment fully immersed and not an underwater housing kit to be seen! :-[ Left everything for 24hrs drying and it was all fine...

For scariest, they're all animal related...

I've had a herd of springbok get suddenly spooked and dart towards the car and one hit the rear but shook his head somewhat dazed and ran away...

What always scares the beejezus out of me is self-drive, narrow roads, herds of elephants in close proximity. I was in Kruger a couple of years back, heading down a backroad. Came across a bull. Normally if I approach slowly but consistently, the elephants will ignore me. Not this bull. He proceeded towards me. I paused, perhaps that was my mistake, but then I went forward again. Like a game of chicken, he keeps coming, I advance slowly. When he shakes his head a little, it was time to retreat. 500 yds back to the T junction I wait, deciding I could either go backwards with a quick u-turn, or floor it forwards if he continues.

Then out of my left field of vision comes another elephant and the penny dropped. He was in musth and not interested in me. I watched him court the female with his demonstrations of destruction, and after about 5 minutes she turns and trotts off and he follows at a pace. I decide to go back to where I was heading and leave them in peace....

For the rest of that holiday, whenever I came across a herd, especially on the narrow roads where literally the brush almost touched the side of the vehicle, I could always feel my throat, the adrenaline and the stomach acid  :-[ Funny on how I spent half the time considering where I could quickly throw the vehicle into reverse if I needed to get away from a charger  ;)

By contrast, driving through a herd of buffalo at 5:45 in the morning, because a hundred of them decided to block the road was a lot easier... I drove slowly but surely, and they parted without issue. So long as they are not frightened, then it's normally all good....

Oh and finally, never back away from a warthog... I did that when walking to a water hole hide, and he decided that meant he had the upper hand. Fortunately there were some decent size stones near by and i had my monopod. Neither was required, just a bit of patience and his lost interest  :D

45
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: March 08, 2013, 05:24:45 AM »
If the lens motor was receiving the same power from a 1D X and a 7D, then the AF speed for the lens would be the same with both bodies.  But it's not, it's faster with the 1D X.

Could it be firmware trickery on the part of Canon, the 7D delivers the same power as the 1D X, but the 7D just tells the lens to AF slower?  Possible, I suppose...but that seems a little too cynical, even for me.   :P

This is something that has puzzled me about saying the lens is doing the AF. The lens does not have the AF points and it does not see the image, so how can "the lens" be doing AF.
As far as I can understand this, the camera is doing the AF and is telling the lens motor to rotate the lens to bring the image into focus. If I am wrong, please point me at something that explains it. I have read the generic description of the AF process, just nothing that would correspond to the notion that the lens is doing the AF.

Focus is achieved by the movement of element group(s) within the lens.  Canon EF lenses have a motor within the lens that moves the focusing group.  The 1-series bodies are able to drive that motor faster. The camera tells the motor in the lens how far and which direction to move.

So that was always my understanding until I read this in the 400mm mk ii review over at TDP

Quote:

The 400 f/2.8 IS II has received some AF upgrades from the 400 f/2.8 IS I - new dedicated AF algorithms and a new high-speed CPU. How well they work is of course what is important.


So does this not indicate more intelligence in the lens. Anyone know for sure??

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14