October 30, 2014, 08:04:05 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 - traveller

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 44
46
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 19, 2014, 12:06:49 PM »
Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D.

Canon is shrewd when it comes to milking profits from sensors.  Consider that the T5i/700D did not get the latest version of the 18 MP APS-C sensor.  The T5i's sensor has Hybrid CMOS AF (same sensor as the T4i and the EOS M), whereas the sensor used in the SL1/100D and the EOS M2 has Hybrid CMOS II AF (where the phase AF area covers 80% of the frame vs. just the central portion).  That allows Canon to release another T#i-series body with a 'new' (to the line) sensor (but not the 70D's sensor).  Put Digic 6 in there, and they're good to go with the T6i/750D.

I was being factious because of my frustration with Canon.  In truth I think 2014 will be a good year for new hardware.  I know that Canon has cited the 5DIII as one of their current success stories so I don't expect much there.  This might be the 1DX going to 24MP or it might finally be the first of the new sensors.
 I'm probably wrong but I think that the Nikon 800e caught Canon flat footed.  Their sensors ruled the roost for a long time and the 800 was  the point where they knew their current sensors could not continue to compete with the Sony's. Perhaps they were working a new line for a while but the Nikon's with Sony sensors really got their attention.  I'm sure that it takes years and years before a sensor goes from design to profitable production.  Hopefully, Canon is near then end of that cycle and we will see some significant new sensor technology.  Canon has made real improvements everywhere but in sensors. Fortunately, they have held their market share but that can't last forever.  Sony probably has another generation in the pipeline already.

Canon's sensor advantage came from their early adoption of the CMOS type sensor; they have fallen behind as other manufacturers also adopted this technology. Canon fabricate their own (large) sensors, which represents a considerable capital investment, and are therefore understandably keen to recapture the maximum value back from this. I think that Sony has an advantage here, because they sell so many sensors to other camera manufacturers, they can afford to move their sensors forward a fabrication generation more often than Canon. As much as I understand Canon's reluctance to invest in new fabrication technology at a time of recession and market contraction, I think that they've reached the end of the road with what they can squeeze out of their current technology. Either they will have to change their fabrication foundries over to newer sub-0.18 micron (or even sub-0.11 micron) process generation architectures, or they'll have to start subcontracting the manufacture of their sensor out to a third party foundry partner.

Sony does seem to have established itself as the dominant player in CMOS sensors at the moment, but it doesn't have the field all to itself; apart from Canon, Aptina have shown they can produce and Toshiba sensors have found their way into the Nikon line-up. Even the vaunted Olympus EM1, which everyone thought had a Sony sensor, turns out to be using a Panasonic sensor -another manufacturer that people were starting to question.

47
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: February 17, 2014, 06:07:49 PM »
In any case, I'm not keen on Tamrons and Tokinas because their rings tend to rotate the Nikon way round, which I find annoying when combined with a bag of Canon lenses!

If you look at the photo  you can see the zoom ring rotates in the Canon convention.  Maybe they'll have the different mounts rotate in different directions for consistency with the OEM lenses.

I stand corrected, it's just Tamron (should have looked twice at the photo in the post!).

I still can't see the point of this lens unless it has an ultrasonic motor. All the other major manufacturers have moved on (except for Zeiss and Leica, obviously) from this eighties arrangement. Who cares if it's built like a tank, I don't intend to use it to invade another country  ;D.

48
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 10:54:23 AM »
Why do people insist on posting images of bookshelves to demonstrate how "sharp" a lens is? There was not one detail in those images that was resolved differently by either lens, mainly due to the dearth of any high frequency detail that might show up resolution differences. If it wasn't for the distortion differences, I might have actually thought that they were samples from the same lens.

I think I'll wait for the results from Roger Cicala to decide whether the Sigma is a worthwhile upgrade. I would recommend that in future, you either do reviews properly or stop publishing this rubbish as CR's "official" review.

Out of 23 "reviews" this is the first and *only* time we posted photos of my dusty bookshelves. I certainly don't insist on it, or like it, but it does show difference of detail in the corners, vignetting and other real-world variables.

Roger is an incredible technical reviewer with all the right tools to measure and analyze lenses and I too look forward to his reviews and articles. I just pay less attention to the charts and more to how it works for me professionally. The final image is what matters to me and my clients.  I'm also open to hearing your take on what entails a "proper" review for my future rubbish.

Please accept my apologies for my last comment, it was harsh and rude; I appreciate anyone who takes the time to post a review and take the flak for it!

I wouldn't expect anyone who isn't properly set up for it to attempt quantitative testing, nor given the number of technical review sites available, would I feel the need for it. I would prefer to see you use large crops from photos taken in your professional style, like the photos that you used to illustrate the review, to demonstrate your points.

I won't mention the name of the website that uses the "bookshelf-of-doom" to "show" lens "sharpness", suffice to say that I don't put any credence in their reviews!

49
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 24-105mm f/4 OS
« on: February 17, 2014, 09:37:46 AM »
Why do people insist on posting images of bookshelves to demonstrate how "sharp" a lens is? There was not one detail in those images that was resolved differently by either lens, mainly due to the dearth of any high frequency detail that might show up resolution differences. If it wasn't for the distortion differences, I might have actually thought that they were samples from the same lens.

I think I'll wait for the results from Roger Cicala to decide whether the Sigma is a worthwhile upgrade. I would recommend that in future, you either do reviews properly or stop publishing this rubbish as CR's "official" review.

50
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
« on: February 17, 2014, 08:33:31 AM »
This lens would need to have excellent optics combined with a low price to compete against the current offerings, given that it looks like retains an out of date DC motor and clutch mechanism. I might be wrong, they could have incorporated an ultrasonic motor and retained a clutch type mode switch for retro appeal. In any case, I'm not keen on Tamrons and Tokinas because their rings tend to rotate the Nikon way round, which I find annoying when combined with a bag of Canon lenses!

51
Lenses / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Thoughts from CP+
« on: February 14, 2014, 01:11:35 PM »
After owning the s90 I stopped believing there's such a thing as a pocketable compact.

Even that camera was not comfortable to walk around with or store along with anything else in a pocket. I can't imagine what it's like to walk around with the RX100 in your pant pocket.

The G12 was far worse, even in my jacket pocket it felt like I was carrying a brick.

On a different note, I was watching one of the Canon preview videos and it looks like the G1X MkII retains the same crappy menu structure as the rest of the G-series; why can't they bring the high end Powershots into line with EOS, so we wouldn't have to learn a whole new system?

52
Lenses / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Thoughts from CP+
« on: February 14, 2014, 11:16:11 AM »
The G1X-II looks to me to be a collossal waste of time and money for Canon development.  If they had wanted to
hit a home run, they should have used M lenses, priced it at $499.00 and pushed it as a new mirrorless system.
Now they just have two turkeys on their hands and will have a hard time selling either.

Really? I think that if you took the lens off this camera, it would be pretty ordinary. What would be the advantages over the current EOS M2? (assuming you can get your hands on one!)

53
Lenses / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Thoughts from CP+
« on: February 14, 2014, 11:06:12 AM »
The point of owning an RX100 is its "pocketability"; that's not to say that the G1X II won't fit in a pocket, just that the size of the pocket will need to be larger.

Yeah - I don't really consider something to be 'pocketable' if I'm required to wear a coat or cargo pants to have a sufficiently large pocket.  By that definition, in at least one of my coats the 1D X + 40/2.8 is also 'pocketable'.

I've never come across a coat that would comfortably be able to fit a 1D-series in its pocket; I'm sure they exist, depending on your definition of "comfortable". My old G12 felt very big and bulky in my coat pocket and the G1X II is even bigger; at least it is far more capable camera. Besides, if you lived in Britain you'd find that you were pretty much "required" to wear a coat for 90% of the year anyway.  :P

54
Lenses / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Thoughts from CP+
« on: February 14, 2014, 09:34:33 AM »
The point of owning an RX100 is its "pocketability"; that's not to say that the G1X II won't fit in a pocket, just that the size of the pocket will need to be larger. The G1X II is actually larger than the full frame RX1 in most dimensions, though it is slightly shallower over the lens (the body itself is a bit chunkier).

55
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 14, 2014, 06:12:52 AM »
Can people on these forums kindly make up their minds on what kit I should buy, because I'm getting sick of the constant opinion changes.

First I lost thousands switching from Canon to Nikon, just to find that Sony is the new "must have". At least I can get further use of my Nikkors until Sony actually manages to release more than a handful of FE lenses.

Lest you think that things have been easier with my mirrorless system, I was quite happy with my Panasonic until Sony NEX came out and everyone said the APS-C sensor stuffed micro-4/3rds. I'd nearly assembled a full kit of E-mount lenses, when Sony suddenly stopped making them and everyone told me that I should buy Olympus! Then Fuji released their X-mount cameras, which was really tempting until the A7R came along and everyone said that anything less than full frame was useless.

I'm now divorced and totally broke, I can't afford a holiday or put fuel in the car. Consequently, my current photographic exploits consist of taking pictures of the outside of my house on a sunny day, then pulling the shadows indoors to show how much dynamic range my camera has. When I get bored of that, I shoot some test charts and wander down to my local cafe to take pictures of the froth on other peoples lattes.   

;D  ;D  ;D


56
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D II looks like its going to be a disappointment.
« on: February 13, 2014, 06:48:58 PM »
Just to add my vote to the "no chance" camp! 

The question is whether there is room in the line-up for a 7D MkII. I can't see the point of making a 7D that's so similar in specifications to the 70D; how much of a price premium could 1fps, a metal body and a slightly larger viewfinder possibly command? Then again, this is a company which will soon have six entry level DSLR bodies on sale...  ::)

57
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel Kiss X70 Specs
« on: February 13, 2014, 06:47:07 AM »
So Canon now have four similarly specified 18MP "Rebel" (out of date name, btw) on sale? I can see the marketing logic: confuse the customer and leave them at the mercy of the camera store retailer! Trouble is that I think they're all too confused now; I had to explain to one lady looking at Canon DSLRs in the shop window, the reason that she couldn't find the 550D she was looking for, was because it had been superseded three times and most stores were now out of stock. She seemed baffled and asked me what the difference between all the new models was; I couldn't answer off the top of my head!   ::)

58
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/2.8 L II front coating peeling off?
« on: February 13, 2014, 06:27:22 AM »
I'm sad to hear that this issue has raised its ugly head again; I sympathise with your situation shhooter.

You'll notice from my earlier posts that Canon (like JustMeOregon) accused him of over cleaning. I would suggest sticking to your guns over this; whilst it is impossible to tell the condition of your lens from the photo you posted, unless it is a total knacker, I think that the onus is on Canon to prove misuse. Whilst I wouldn't want to be the one to have to issue a court summons against a global corporation, I think the law (in Britain, at least) would be sympathetic. In the UK, under the Sale of Goods Act 1979, "goods must be as described, of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose". Canon's UK website states: 

"The EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM is robust enough for daily professional use. Weather sealing protects against dust and moisture, while a fluorine-coated front and rear elements are easy to clean."

I would argue that the front coating peeling off a lens that is otherwise in good condition and under two years old (release date: February 2012), doesn't fit within that description. 

59
Lenses / Re: Advice on Canon lenses
« on: February 13, 2014, 05:11:14 AM »
The best way to know what you need to buy, is to know the limitations of your current kit; what is it about your current kit that you don't like? Don't just say "image quality", be specific: the 50D is capable of making stunning images and whilst the 18-200 doesn't have the best reputation, it isn't a total dog at all focal length-aperture combinations.

I am not writing this to make the old clichéd suggestion like "Ansel Adams could make a masterpiece with a box-brownie", but rather to get you to think about where the weaknesses of your current kit lie. If you are annoyed that your images at focal length xx are soft, then you know that this is an area that is important to you and that you should spend money to cover. If you complain that the 50D produces noisy images, this suggests that you are working at the limits of your camera ISO range and lens aperture: the 5D Mk.III will obviously help, but you'll benefit just as much from faster lenses; likewise, if you are struggling to get shallow depth of field. If you want 22MP to help you crop images, perhaps you need longer lenses.

I'm sorry if you were looking for a "just buy the xx-xx and xx-xxx" type of reply. If that's the case, then I'd suggest that you already know what you want and that you should just go ahead and buy it! All the lenses suggested on this thread vary from very good to excellent and I doubt any will truly disappoint. Just be aware that the more lenses you own, the more you'll end up carrying; I wouldn't want your photography to move from being fun to becoming a chore!

60
Canon General / Re: Canon Announces the PowerShot G1 X Mark II
« on: February 12, 2014, 07:14:19 PM »

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 44