January 26, 2015, 05:33:50 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 - traveller

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 45
1
Wow. I've been looking to get a 24" large format printer for a while. I keep looking at older models of Canon and Epson wide formats....but at less than $1300, the iPF670 is a steal. O_o
7
Are these geared for photo printing?

From the description in the announcement, it sounds like it's geared more toward office environments (i.e. not the best photo performance). The shorter model number (compared to, say, the IPF6400) and the lower price seem to indicate that it's not in the same class as Canon's wide format photo printers.

Anyone else wondering the same thing?

I'm not wondering. They are not photo printers.

I thought so... I'll keep saving for the real deal. :P

Make sure you read this article before you buy:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/stuff2/?p=2533

2
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 15, 2015, 02:08:14 PM »
RE: 11-24 f4

I would guess no IS because Canon wanted to go all in on sheer optics, and I know historically they have had some issues employing both (like the first 70-200 IS L)  Perhaps a field of view this wide created too big a a hurdle to overcome for an IS motor without having to sacrifice a bit of edge sharpness?  I'm just guessing, Dylan.  That said, the 16-35 f4 (FABULOUS glass, I own it) is such a great all around wide angle for the money.  But, for the high end pros who demand the utmost precision from corner to corner, methinks they are mostly shooting tripod/monopod anyway.  I know I shoot my 16-35 on tripod for landscape stuff as much as possible, negating the use of IS anyway.

This is for a different level of landscape shooting where obviously you're going to spend hundreds more on an expensive filter kit to buckle to the front of this light bulb anyway.

You are quoting the internet lore that the 70-200mm f/2.8L is sharper than the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS? I'm not sure that there is any real difference other than sample variation. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on the other hand is clearly superior to both its predecessors. That being said, there may be more issues with implementing IS on wide angle lenses; I'm sure someone on this forum will have a geeky answer!  ;)

You're right about the filter kit, but it isn't just the price that puts me off: the standard Lee filters are already big enough, how you go about carrying the monsters that are made for the bulbous-fronted lenses without a separate bag would be a challenge.


IS means higher prices?

IS means you make your shots, that's a heck of a lot more important. I really feel its a useless argument,  Canon will still price the lens however they want.  High end pros...heck, everyone uses thier hand for photos also hehe  ;D ;D ;D


The 70-200 2.8 is most definitely not sharper than the II IS version....where would that info even come from...its all in the readily available charts.

Neither of us wrote anything about the price of adding IS to lenses: the comments were about IS versus image quality. Price was mentioned only in relation to mounting filters on lenses with bulbous front elements

Where did I write that?

Perhaps English is not your first language, or in future, you should read posts more carefully before replying?

3
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 15, 2015, 11:23:31 AM »
RE: 11-24 f4

I would guess no IS because Canon wanted to go all in on sheer optics, and I know historically they have had some issues employing both (like the first 70-200 IS L)  Perhaps a field of view this wide created too big a a hurdle to overcome for an IS motor without having to sacrifice a bit of edge sharpness?  I'm just guessing, Dylan.  That said, the 16-35 f4 (FABULOUS glass, I own it) is such a great all around wide angle for the money.  But, for the high end pros who demand the utmost precision from corner to corner, methinks they are mostly shooting tripod/monopod anyway.  I know I shoot my 16-35 on tripod for landscape stuff as much as possible, negating the use of IS anyway.

This is for a different level of landscape shooting where obviously you're going to spend hundreds more on an expensive filter kit to buckle to the front of this light bulb anyway.

You are quoting the internet lore that the 70-200mm f/2.8L is sharper than the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS? I'm not sure that there is any real difference other than sample variation. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on the other hand is clearly superior to both its predecessors. That being said, there may be more issues with implementing IS on wide angle lenses; I'm sure someone on this forum will have a geeky answer!  ;)

You're right about the filter kit, but it isn't just the price that puts me off: the standard Lee filters are already big enough, how you go about carrying the monsters that are made for the bulbous-fronted lenses without a separate bag would be a challenge.

4
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 15, 2015, 11:15:45 AM »
excited about the new EOS xxxD, I hope they use the 7D af unit instead of that ancient 9point AF.

I would hope that it comes with no mirror and an EVF. That gets you around two problems: the outdated 9 point AF system (and realise the benefits of a dual pixel af sensor) and the tiny pentamirror viewfinder.

5
Thanks to everyone who answered,  especially those that stayed on topic  ;)

Apologies for not posting this earlier (I've been offline for over a week),  but for anyone still reading,  here is an update:

Based upon the advice here, availability in my local market and portability requirements,  I have just purchased a new 15" Macbook Pro (base model). Whilst I am grateful for the many alternative suggestions,  I simply couldn't find any available locally (importing isn't an easy option either).

Owning a Mac is a new experience for me, I've never used anything but Windows (unless one counts AmigaOS and Sinclair Basic, but we won't go there!  :D ). I plumped for the 15" model because whilst I'm away from home, I'm not really travelling around. I don't want to commit to an external monitor, but nor do I need to carry the laptop around every day. 16GB of RAM should help in future proofing too. 

Thanks again to everyone! 

6
EOS Bodies / Re: A Real EOS M Replacement Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: November 17, 2014, 11:48:48 AM »
It needs to be as good as an Olympus E-M1, a Panasonic GH4 or a Fuji X-T1. Anything less will not cause people to switch back to Canon.

I think that getting anyone who has bought into another mirrorless system to switch back to Canon is a big ask for a single camera at this stage. The best that Canon can hope for is to persuade the remaining fence sitters to try the EOS-M, probably those who already own a Canon DSLR.

It's going to be a tough slog for Canon to get back into the mirrorless game; not only are they're behind on just about every metric, but they've demonstrated only luke warm interest in the market so far. If you had to spend your hard earned cash on buying into a mirrorless system right now, what would pursuade you to get an EOS-M? The only sane argument is price; that's not a good place to be when you're a company that has built a reputation upon being the professional's choice.

The next EOS-M needs to be a great camera, because we all know that DXO will tear its sensor to shreds (unless Canon make the unlikely decision to debut new sensor technology in the EOS-M replacement, rather than the 7D Mk2). Some more interesting lens choices are not a just a nice-to-have, but a must-do-now.

7
Apologies for my lack of posts over the past few months, I've been living overseas and only have a tablet with me -the touch sceen interface is very frustrating for use on the CR Forum.

This leads me onto my next request: I am looking for a laptop, on which I can edit my photos. For the past few years I have used a Windows desktop, but I don't like Windows 8 (I know that Windows 10 is coming, but when?). I never thought I'd say it, but I am willing to consider a Macbook, as the price premium doesn't seem so high compared to desktop machines and the Apple laptops are so nice! (side note: can you transfer an Adobe CC licence from Windows to Mac OS?)

The difficulty where I am living is the lack of choice at the higher end of the laptop spectrum: I want a nice IPS screen, SSD (256MB should be enough with external HDD?), enough RAM and cpu speed to run Photoshop CC for the next few years (moving target, I know). I don't play games or edit video. My desktop is early 2013 Core i7 with 16gb Ram (no SSD) and I wouldn't want my laptop to be noticeably slower. My choices boil down to (what is available in the local market):

-Mackbook Pro 13" or 15"
-Dell XPS 13 or 15 (I believe that these may be older versions without the SSD)
-Lenovo Yoga 2
(-any other suggestions, but will depend on local availability)

Are the screen size differences really noticeable? And portability? Will 8gb RAM be enough? What about in 2-3 years time?

I would appreciate any advice that people have on the subject. I'm asking on this forum because I know that you guys know what I need better than non-photographers, who have never touched a RAW file.

(note - I am aware that I've just asked the computer equivalent of the Canon vs. Nikon question, but as this is not Macrumors.com or whatever, please could I not invoke a flame war?!)

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 05, 2014, 08:06:53 AM »
This thread is a perfect example of how discussions on CR (and most forums) degenerate into personal attacks.  ::)

The title of the thread is "Next Rebel going EVF"; everyone should frame their discussions within this context and stop dragging high-end DSLRs, cinema cameras and large format film cameras into the mix. The question is whether an EVF would be superior to a 0.5x pentamirror optical viewfinder for the majority of that camera's target market, not whether EVFs or OVFs are always superior. Not that our opinions are really that relevant, as for the most part, we are not the target demographic. 

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Medium Format Announcement a \
« on: August 12, 2014, 10:08:25 PM »
I've always struggled to see why talk of "their brand" introducing a medium format system gets certain users (thankfully,  not so many on this particular forum) so excited. Sure, if it offers something truly innovative in the field, be that size, performance or price, then all existing and potential MF users should be happy, no matter which brand. All we are hearing (except maybe from Sony) is vague "Canon/Nikon are plannng a new MF system" rumours. Great, but the key word here is "system" and any MF system would be more or less completely incompatible with any manufacturer's current 35mm systems,  so who cares about brand? Once you've decided to change format, you are a free agent again and no longer tied to a mount by years of spending on lenses etc. (I refuse to use the term "investment" ). Unless of course, you are total Canon or Nikon fanboy  ;D  ;D  ;D

10
Canon General / Re: Canada Post Thefts Halt Lens Rentals Canada Service
« on: August 01, 2014, 10:14:38 PM »
Sorry to hear about your problems.

I haven't trusted the Royal Mail in the UK for years: increasing competition has created a race to the bottom,  where Royal Mail and the private couriers have driven out costs by hiring temps and subcontracting deliveries. Like you state, it's about trust -but where's the trust between a company and staff that it won't even commit to employing?

11
Lenses / Lensrentals Canon UWA FF lens comparison
« on: July 30, 2014, 11:49:46 AM »
Roger Cicala does another short comparison  ;)

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]
« on: July 30, 2014, 10:10:39 AM »
If they were talking about a camera,  why would they state "Get your camera ready"? My guess -a new online photo sharing service  ;)

13
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 23, 2014, 11:05:38 AM »
This sort of machine translated verbal diarrhoea could mean anything; anyone speak Japanese? 

14
Lenses / Photozone review of EF-S 10-18mm is online
« on: June 08, 2014, 05:15:22 AM »

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/874-canon_1018_4556is

This has actually been online for two days, but doesn't seem to have its own thread yet (unless I've missed it,  in which case please accept my apologies), despite having been mentioned in at least one thread already. 

It looks like a great lens,  with vignetting and the plastic mount bayonet being the only real weaknesses. 

15
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: June 03, 2014, 08:08:42 PM »
It's too bad the EOS-M is doing as poorly as it is outside of its home market because I think it was Canon's attempt to do what you want:  create a small, mirrorless system that is affordable.  I jumped on the bandwagon during the US fire sale, and I'm impressed.  The 22 f/2 is a treat to use, and the 18-55 IS works well in good light.  M1 has slow AF, but the M-mount design philosophy is sound.  There is no reason why they could not have various M-bodies with various levels of controls and have them share a common mount and family of lenses.  If it had been sucessful, I could see Canon replacing the entire Rebel line in the future with the M system (with a similar system to Fuji).  Unfortunately, the idea has not caught on.

EOS-M is exactly what I didn't want to see, i.e. a proliferation of different lens mounts confusing potential customers and diluting resources (hello Sony  ::)). Whilst I've got nothing against EOS-M from a technological point of view (other than needing a more enthusiast specified body with an EVF -but that's another discussion), it is a bit of a distraction from the best-selling EF-S line. We've ended up with two new lens lines with an incomplete set of options in each.

I've ranted on getting further and further off topic for too long on this thread, so please accept my apologies. I would like to sign off on this matter by restating that in my view, lenses are Canon (and Nikon's) weakness on APS-C bodies as much as they are their core strength on full frame.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 45