April 21, 2014, 05:05:26 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 - DarkKnightNine

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
31
EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: How much $$$ will the high-mp eos cost?
« on: October 04, 2012, 07:55:14 PM »
Canon's high MP / high DR body does not have to be insanely expensive. Just cripple the FPS, give it 16 point AF and native ISO up to 12800. It won't touch the 5D3 sales, nor the 1DX.

This camera is ment to compete with the D800 / D800E, and therefore  the price tag should not exceed 4K.

But then again, it is Canon we are talking about here. The camera will probably be overpriced.  :(


Don't talk about or mention the word "Cripple", I think Canon has been a doing too much of that lately. We don't want to give them any more bad ideas or make them think we're OK with it. They just need to try and give us the best camera they can. I'm sure the overpriced 5D Mark III is going to more than pay for the R&D they put into that AF. Now they just need to put it in every body they can (within reason).

32
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D Outed by B&H Photo [CR0]
« on: October 04, 2012, 07:48:20 PM »
I really hope it is a hoax!

I don't want this camera to be elephant sized.  :-\


Elephant sized?
Have you ever held a 1DX?
The thing just fits into your hand (or at least mine) like it was molded for it. It's a perfect fit. It was one of the reasons why when I first starting shooting professionally 6 years ago that I chose Canon over Nikon. The 1 series Canons just felt right in my hand.
By contrast, my 5D Mark III feels small and gives me fatigue because the bottom part of my palm has no place to rest.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 04, 2012, 07:41:15 PM »
Oh yeah it is:
Canon 6D Preview - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly, & The Competition Small | Large



I'm calling it crap (yes I know it hasn't been released yet and I don't care).
After using the 5D Mark III and know what it is and isn't capable of, I know that they've stripped waaay to much off this camera to make it worth the asking price especially in comparison to the competition. The reason why I'm calling it crap is not because it's performance, it's because Canon DID NOT have to strip this camera down this much and could have provided more of a robust camera at this price point. The 6D could have truly been something awesome. It was stupidity and arrogance the lead to the decisions made on this camera, nothing more. I for one, feel insulted. Now all of you Canon fanboys are welcome to flame me but you are not helping yourself or Canon by defending their arrogance. You should be fanning your flames toward Canon and perhaps they will get the message that we aren't going to stand for this anymore. I love my Canon gear but enough is enough.

34
Not sure about the 7D or the 5D Mk II, but I've done an entire two photoshoot in pouring rain with my 5D Mk III with no problems whatsoever (at least none that I can tell).


I truly hope your cameras will be OK, I know it would really such to lose such a large investment.
Good luck to you Sir.

35
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-M Begins Shipping
« on: October 02, 2012, 06:08:04 PM »
If size is an issue....

Size wasn't the issue.  The issue was a market segment in which Canon had no presence, meaning potential lost revenue.

But I do hate that they didn't make it EF default.

They couldn't, realistically, since the EF mount requires a 44mm flange to sensor distance, vs. the 18mm of the EF-M mount, meaning the EOS-M would need to be a full 1" thicker.




Exactly! This is just another money opportunity for Canon. I don't think they put much thought or R&D into this camera. When it was announced, it was already behind the rest of the market segment meaning it was just meant to be a cash cow in a segment that Canon didn't have a presence. If they really cared about this segment, they would have examined what the competition was already doing and offered a better alternative at a competing price. That's how you enter a market you truly care to win. The evidence is strong that Canon does not. But we'll have to wait and see if they wise up. I hope for their sake that they do.


Canon's decisions of late have been based on arrogance that they can just stamp the Canon logo on any product and the masses will come. Why even bother with innovation? Perhaps with a few flops under their belt, it may force them to get off their high horse and start giving us truly brilliant products at reasonable prices that we all know they are capable of.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1D MKIV VS 1DX Cameras
« on: September 27, 2012, 10:12:00 PM »
I shoot with both and the 1DX whips the crap out of the 1D4, IN LOW LIGHT.  At low ISO's, not really much difference in real life.  Since I have sufficient glass, the extra reach isn't a huge concern but it helps.  I put either a 300 or 400 on the 1DX and the 70-200 on the 1D4 and is fantastic combo.  The 1D4 cannot be useable above ISO 5000 in my opinion whereas I had keepers at a soccer match of ISO 16000.  I didn't really notice any real difference in AF accuracy to tell you the truth.  I had just as many misses with both cameras in the low light.  However, the IQ is different beginning about ISO 1600 and above.  Overall, the 1DX is better, with the 1D4 coming in a close second.  The differences exaggerated on spec sheets aren't realized in real life in my opinion and that's exactly why I keep both cameras with me at sporting events.  Just evaluate where you'll be shooting.  If there isn't much light, like indoor sports or night field sports, the 1DX is superior.


I took the plunge and sold my Mk IV for the 1DX. I shoot some sports but more fashion runway type stuff. I agree that the ISO performance of the 1DX is superior but I have yet to get the most out of the new AF system. I'm still experimenting with tweaking it. Especially AI Servo doesn't seem to lock on reliably. I'm mainly shooting One Shot 90% of the time because I can't trust AI Servo for paid jobs yet. Would you mind sharing what settings (Case) you use and/or if you even use AI Servo? Thanks.

37
EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?
« on: September 27, 2012, 10:00:42 PM »
DKN, you are diverting discussion from your original claim that Canon's claim the 6D has good low light AF is 'bull'. I can't see why you doubt it.


I'm not diverting anything. There are many discussions about this camera and I'm just commenting where I feel I have something to say. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, but I'm entitled to my opinion.


In reply to you, all I can say is that if you examine the rest of their marketing hype about the 6D, it only seems logical that its low light capabilities are equally exaggerated. Besides no machine ever manufactured performs up to the standards advertised by the company that manufactures it. None! I'm sorry to say, but to believe a Single cross point AF system will have great low light performance is just naive. I own both the 5D Mark III and the 1DX and use them both daily in various lighting conditions. Even with their outstanding AF and multiple cross type AF points, they sometimes struggle to lock focus in low light situations. Realistically, I can't imagine the 6D with it's single point fairing any better. Otherwise I would just sell both of those cameras and buy two 6Ds. Especially since (according to Canon) it's ready for high speed capture with it's 4.5fps continuous burst. Guess my 1DX is just huge overkill. lol

38
EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?
« on: September 27, 2012, 09:32:01 PM »
I think some people are just too cheap to admit that the camera they want is a bit more than they would like to spend.

And there's the rub. Do you bend over and help them stick it in or do you turn around and slap their face! Is it more than you would like to spend or is it more than it's really worth? And if it's more than it's worth, do you "...take up arms against a sea of troubles..."?

"...a bit more than they would like to spend" is pathetically passive. And "just too cheap" is what a whore says when she gets insulted when you only offer her a quarter.

Most consumers have become like this guy -- they think a seller sets the price and they can either afford it or not. If they have the money, they just hand it over for what they want. The idea that the price may not be worth the value never enters their mind. What -- I don't get what I want because it costs too much???

Best example is the 5D3. I'd own one today if I thought it was worth $3500. It has nothing to do with what I'd "like to spend." I could spend that, even though I don't want to, but it's far more important to me to say to Canon, "I like your product, but I won't pay that much for it." So I don't pay that much for it. [The Adorama ebay sale last weekend revealed that it can be sold for $2750, so when the opportunity comes along again, I'll pay that for what is probably the best overall, mass market, full frame camera available.] Frankly, all the bendovers, who gladly handed over $3500 haven't helped send any message to Canon in the only language they truly comprehend.

Funny thing, as much as I think the 6D is an abortion of a camera, the price does not seem out of line. It's going to put a lot of Spielberg wannabes and center-pointers in hog heaven. And it's going to sell a lot of glass for Canon.

And now, if you'll pardon me, I have pictures to make. Good day one and all, even you pathetically passive consumers.


Very well said. I totally agree with you. I was one the first people in Japan to get my hands on a 5D Mark III. I bought it from a Pro shop and they hugely discounted it for me because I have been a loyal customer for years. Otherwise I would have never considered the purchase. It's a fine camera, just NOT at the price that Canon is arrogantly asking.

39
EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?
« on: September 27, 2012, 08:57:44 PM »
It was about the fact that their website does not disclose any RRPs...


The best way of getting your message across to Canon is for them to see all of their 6Ds gathering dust on the shelf while the D600 sells like hotcakes.


Exactly. I hope the 6D is a huge flop so as to send a message to Canon to start innovating and stop putting out products for profit. Anyone with even the slightest amount of common sense should be able to see that this camera was just put out to encourage enthusiasts not to buy the D600. Things like GPS and Wireless transfer should have been included in the 5D Mark III at slightly above the price of the 6D. That would have shown real innovation and the damn things would have flown off the shelves faster than Canon could make them. The D800 nor the D600 wouldn't have stood a chance. Instead, we get a overpriced 5D Mark III and a crippled AF 6D.

I'm basically locked into the Canon system because of my lens collection, but when any of my friends just starting out ask what camera they should buy, I will recommend to them Nikon or Sony.


40
EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?
« on: September 27, 2012, 08:37:44 PM »
with all the complains about canons 6D autofocus why is no website, that cares about canon in one way or the other, writing an open letter to canon... demanding a statement?

i mean.... dpreview wrote it´s a rather dissapointing camera and i have yet to read a preview that is not puzzled by the low-tech AF.

if we complain here in a forum .. canon cares a sh*t.

but if a popular and frequented website writes something and is not afraid to tell the truth... maybe canon will take notice and feel obligated to react?

or maybe it´s to late here and im just bored and tired.....

The 6D is supposed to excel at low-light autofocus.  If you don't need that, then it probably wasn't built for you but rather for users who need that.  If you have different needs for AF, Canon offers the 5D3 and 1DX.  If none of those meet your needs, there are Nikon and Sony and others.  Why complain that Canon isn't making the exact camera you want at the price you want at the time that you want it?  No manufacturer can satisfy everyone.  If Canon builds the exact camera that you want, then other potential buyers can rightfully "demand a statement" as to why Canon didn't build the camera that they wanted at the price that they wanted at the time that they wanted it.  There would be no end to such statements.  Besides, who has tested the 6D's AF and found it lacking?  People are complaining before they can even try the camera.

You can't be serious?!
"Excel at Low Light performance"?
You actually believe that marketing bull***t?
Have you read what else Canon has to say about the 6D on their website?
They actually say stuff like, "with continuous shooting up to 4.5fps, you are ready to capture fast action".
That line was actually taken from their description:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_6d
Unless "fast action" is a Seniors' Walk-a-Thon, the 6D is not ready to capture jack.

My point is the talk about "excelling at Low Light performance" is most likely equally fabricated marketing hype.

And as far as the guy complaining about it, he is well within his right to do so if he is to plunck down his money for one. It always amazes me how people run to Canon's (or any other major company's) rescue when others complain about their subpar efforts. The guy has every right to complain about the 6D because in this day and age, it is a crap effort from a company that should know better. And as long as people just sit their and say nothing, Canon will continue to put out subpar equipment at overflated prices backed overhyped marketing. Every Canon camera put out this year was good but could have been a hell of a lot better for what they are charging. But the 6D is just plain crap. Period.

Wow ... what an ultra-cynical point of view!  You haven't even tried the camera and you're calling it "crap" and worse.  Canon has released an ultra-low-light autofocus spec for the 6D and there is no reason to disbelieve it.  Why would you disbelieve it -- other than having an ultra-cynical point of view?

And why don't you wait to try it before slamming the camera and the company that makes it?  Oh yes, ... that would require just an ounce of fairness, which you can't seem to muster.

Of course, the 6D isn't going to please everybody.  No camera can.  If multi-cross-type autofocus is someone's priority, Canon offers it!  You just have to pay for it.  They're not obligated to put every feature they make in every camera they make.

Why do people feel entitled to the exact camera that they personally envision at the price that they want to pay?  The fact that a camera does not meet your personal photographic needs at this moment does not mean it is "sub-par".  Can you just imagine that it might be very well designed to meet someone else's photographic priorities, perhaps someone with a different photographic style or different subject matter?  And if another company offers you the camera you need, then by all means buy it!



Talk about cynical, I wasn't slamming the camera, I was slamming the false advertising of it. When a company writes ready for high speed capture when referring to 4.5fps it gives me good reason to believe the rest of what they say about it is equally misleading. Why don't you try not being such a fanboy and having a open mind that Canon screws over it's customers and people like you only make it worse because you defend them despite of it. You're not helping Canon or yourself.

41
EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?
« on: September 25, 2012, 11:53:51 PM »
with all the complains about canons 6D autofocus why is no website, that cares about canon in one way or the other, writing an open letter to canon... demanding a statement?

i mean.... dpreview wrote it´s a rather dissapointing camera and i have yet to read a preview that is not puzzled by the low-tech AF.

if we complain here in a forum .. canon cares a sh*t.

but if a popular and frequented website writes something and is not afraid to tell the truth... maybe canon will take notice and feel obligated to react?

or maybe it´s to late here and im just bored and tired.....

The 6D is supposed to excel at low-light autofocus.  If you don't need that, then it probably wasn't built for you but rather for users who need that.  If you have different needs for AF, Canon offers the 5D3 and 1DX.  If none of those meet your needs, there are Nikon and Sony and others.  Why complain that Canon isn't making the exact camera you want at the price you want at the time that you want it?  No manufacturer can satisfy everyone.  If Canon builds the exact camera that you want, then other potential buyers can rightfully "demand a statement" as to why Canon didn't build the camera that they wanted at the price that they wanted at the time that they wanted it.  There would be no end to such statements.  Besides, who has tested the 6D's AF and found it lacking?  People are complaining before they can even try the camera.





You can't be serious?!
"Excel at Low Light performance"?
You actually believe that marketing bull***t?
Have you read what else Canon has to say about the 6D on their website?
They actually say stuff like, "with continuous shooting up to 4.5fps, you are ready to capture fast action".
That line was actually taken from their description:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_6d
Unless "fast action" is a Seniors' Walk-a-Thon, the 6D is not ready to capture jack.


My point is the talk about "excelling at Low Light performance" is most likely equally fabricated marketing hype.


And as far as the guy complaining about it, he is well within his right to do so if he is to plunck down his money for one. It always amazes me how people run to Canon's (or any other major company's) rescue when others complain about their subpar efforts. The guy has every right to complain about the 6D because in this day and age, it is a crap effort from a company that should know better. And as long as people just sit their and say nothing, Canon will continue to put out subpar equipment at overflated prices backed overhyped marketing. Every Canon camera put out this year was good but could have been a hell of a lot better for what they are charging. But the 6D is just plain crap. Period.






42
EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 11:25:27 PM »
This would be an awesome studio camera if true, but I bet Canon screws it up again by overpricing it. I own both the 5D Mark III and the 1DX as well as several 600EX-RTs and I'm not happy about the prices I paid for any of it. I feel completely violated. Canon have become nothing short of rip-off artists. They need to get back to making great equipment at reasonable prices and real technology innovation. This camera could be a huge step in the right direction if they don't let the marketing team frak up the pricing, because at $10,000 I rather have a Leica S2.


Let's hope Canon learns their lesson from the soon to be 1D-C flop. $15,000 for a camera with features they could have and should have included in the 1DX?!!! Bahahaha. Yeah right Canon. Good luck with that. There are professional video cameras at that price point without all of the DSLR video drawbacks that shoot much more beautiful 4K video. Why would anyone in their right mind pay $15,000 for something that will give them headaches and force workarounds when there are much better options on the market dedicated to that format? Stupidity and arrogance at it's best from the people at Canon.

43
Lenses / Re: Photozone's review of the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is up
« on: September 25, 2012, 02:04:25 PM »


I struggle to believe there is that much sample variation.  My hunch tells me that maybe one of the reviewers may be off the mark with their testing.   I think I will reserve judgement until the next set of reviews come through.

 
Here is a video from a few years back about Canon manufacturing a 500mm f/4 lens.  You get a idea about whats involved.  THere are three parts, this links to part 1.  You can easily find the others.
 
Canon Lens Production 1



Looking at this video, there seems to be a lot of instances where impurities can creep into the manufacturing process. I don't know if you posted this video in support of Canon or against them. My take is that I wasn't very impressed. The factory doesn't look very purified or dust free.

44
EOS Bodies / Re: Describe the 6D in one word...
« on: September 18, 2012, 09:39:04 PM »
Below is from 6D preview summary page from dpreview  :-\ :

Overall, though, it's difficult to shake the feeling that the EOS 6D simply lacks the 'wow' factor of its main rival. Whereas Nikon seems to have taken the approach of taking away as little as possible from D800 when creating the D600, Canon appears almost to have gone the other way, removing as much as it thinks it can get away with at the price. The result is the kind of conservative, slightly unimaginative design that's become the company's hallmark. It's still bound to be a very good camera, of course; just perhaps not quite as good as it could be.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-6d/6



Couldn't have said it better. Canon of late seems to be trying to get away with giving us as little as possible. I really don't understand it. If I were in charge of Canon I would be trying to tack on as much as possible to keep my customers happy within all price ranges.

45
EOS Bodies / Re: Describe the 6D in one word...
« on: September 17, 2012, 12:41:38 AM »
As an owner of the 5D Mark III and 1DX, this camera with it's shiny new built-in Wifi and GPS just feels like a giant kick it the balls. At the very least Canon should have built-in the wireless radio transmitter for firing the new flashes into the 1D series bodies. That would have proven that they had their customers needs in mind over lining their pockets with huge profit margins. Yes they would have made less profit than selling it as a separate unit but still won out in mind share (which leads to larger profits in the long run). As long as we just keep forking over our hard earned money without complaint, Canon has no reason to ever consider changing. It's time we get pissed off over their ridiculous corporate greed of late and voice it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12