July 30, 2014, 08:12:18 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 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 44
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DIII will come
« on: November 19, 2011, 05:28:09 AM »
What market are we talking about here?  Is Canon really competing with Nikon or Sony at this level?  How many people jump into dSLR photography by buying a camera costing >$2K?  The 'competition' is in the P&S and entry-level dSLR arena.  At the higher levels, for the most part, buyers are already invested in a system. High profile 'defections' notwithstanding, there's a lot of inertia to changing brands when you have lenses, flashes, etc.  So, I contend that for a 5DIII, Canon's greatest need for differentiation is from their own lines, not Nikon/Sony/etc.  That's why the 5DII got the same AF as the 5D (given the alignment of release dates for 5DII and D700, Canon surely 'knew'.  That's why they had no problem eliminating f/8 AF from the 'awesome' AF system of the 1D X - no doubt they knew it would piss off a lot of current 1-series users, and they didn't care.  When they gift it back with a 1D X Mark II, the 'awesomer-ness' of the update will be another method of internal differentiation.

Put another way, Nikon has been offering more AF points in comparable bodies for years...and yet from 2007 to 2010, Canon went from 40% to 45% dSLR market share while Nikon fell from 41% to 30%.  Canon has no reason to change...so, they'll keep using AF for inter-line differentiation, and hobble the 5DIII's AF.

There's my organ grinding for the night...

I disagree that Canon are not competing with Nikon and Sony at this level, if that was the case then why on earth did Nikon bother to make the specifications of the D700 so good? They could have made themselves a higher margin by installing the 11 pt AF and metering systems from the DXX series.  Your right about inertia, owning many lenses and flashes for a system gives you a strong incentive to stay, but if your chosen brand keeps underperforming in key areas generation after generation then you will eventually consider switching (you're always saying how 'L' lenses hold their value).  If this were not the case then Nikon would still be the market leader for professionals and 'serious enthusiasts'. 

Nikon have been offering significantly more AF points on their 'below flagship' range for exactly one generation.  I don't think that it's safe for a company to extrapolate from three years of past data and use that as the basis of future strategy, especially when what is being measured is as coarse as overall DSLR sales.  Canon are really starting to look like they're no longer the best choice in the mid-market and now Nikon are starting to produce some very good entry level cameras (where I believe they have recently been weaker than Canon) and Sony are also fielding some interesting alternatives.  Actually, I hope that Canon do lose some market share, it might just stimulate them to do better...

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DIII will come
« on: November 18, 2011, 08:51:33 PM »
All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this...

The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system.  The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities.  The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition.  Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail.  If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"?  This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image. 

Canon must risk their 1D X sales by upping the specs of the 5D MkIII AF system, many people won't actually need it most of the time but that's not the point.  I live in the UK and my car (like most these days) has air conditioning, which is great for the few days a year I actually need it.  Try selling people anything other than a base model without A/C. 

Canon are competing in this market on a differentiation strategy, if their sensor isn't a lot better than the new Sony FF unit, what will Canon differentiate on? In my view, the 7D's AF system is the bare minimum for the 5D MkIII; let's not forget that the frame coverage of the AF points would be virtually the same as with the 5D MkII (just higher density).  If Canon are unwilling to go the whole hog and fit the new 61pt AF system to the 5D MkIII (and 7D MkII), they should develop a new AF system for these cameras; how about a 39 pt "low density reticular array".  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcements in January & February [CR2]
« on: November 18, 2011, 07:29:28 PM »
I think a formal announcement has to be made in order to qualify as vaporware.  Has Nikon said anything about the D800 yet?

I stand corrected.

I wouldn't be so confident about "knowing" what Canon is doing. I just watched a great presentation about Kodak (link can be found on another "rumors" site) and disruptive technology. I was struck by the parallels between what happened to film over the past 10-15 years and what is now happening to the camera market with cell phones.

I quite agree, not that I think that Canon are going to do anything too radical in 2012, they're far too big and conservative for that! All the camera makers (especially those without 'phone divisions) are desperately trying to figure out "what now" in the lower end of the market with cameraphones reaching the point where there will no longer be a market for seperate compact cameras .

Nikon's '1' system is an attempt to answer that question, but I'm struggling to see who they're trying to attract with that system because it's so expensive.  To be fair, who am I to question their decision, it's their money and they've obviously done the market research which must suggest that there are a lot of consumers who want a smaller interchangeable lens camera than either DSLRs or any of the previous 'compact system cameras' provided.
[Have we actually agreed an 'official' acronym for these cameras yet?!!!!]

Everyone's now waiting to see Canon's response; I'm not sure what we'll see -it could just be more (possibly smaller) 'Rebels'.  I think that this would be a mistake, not because I believe there is currently a huge market to be tapped for 'CSCs', but because I think that a lot of the technology incorporated in them is the future (for example: EVFs, on-chip phase detect AF); Canon needs to start getting more experience implementing these technologies in stills cameras.  The next Rebel may be the last of the old order as the whole of Canon's lower end line-up is starting to look a little under specified and compared to the competition. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcements in January & February [CR2]
« on: November 18, 2011, 02:33:27 PM »

I have also heard elsewhere that we won’t see anything DSLR related announced until March 2012.

So that would be the 650D then?   ;)

The last thing I was told, is we’d see a larger megapixel full frame camera available by the summer of 2012.

Hmm... Not specifically the 5D MkIII then... Could this mean that Canon are changing their minds and have decided to (or always intended to) produce a 1D Xs (or maybe a 1Ds X -for real Canon lovers!  ;D).  Or maybe they will split the 5D line...

Meanwhile there is great discuss on NR about the vapourware D800... Personally, I think that a lower megapixel D4 is more likely given the Olympics. 

EOS Bodies / Re: An Official Canon EOS-1D X AF Article & Cinema EOS FAQ
« on: November 11, 2011, 01:58:53 PM »
Re. 1D X AF Article; I actually found the article about the new metering sensor to be even more interesting:


Lenses / Re: Realistic wish lens
« on: November 10, 2011, 01:46:35 PM »
I've often wondered if an EF 35-105 f/2.8L (IS) would be a popular lens.  There are a lot of people who are upgrading from APS-C (and now will be moving from APS-H) to full frame; such a lens could give them the zoom range they're used to.  Also, there are some applications for which 35mm at the wide end is probably enough, but would appreciate the extra 35mm on the long end (press photographers maybe?).  A design starting at 35mm would probably not involve as many optical compromises as one starting at 24mm, so image quality would probably be improved.  The lens would probably be a lot more manageable in size than the 24-105 f/2.8L (IS) that a lot of people seem to dream of. 

Canon General / Re: New APS-C Camera in February?
« on: November 08, 2011, 05:06:30 PM »
Isn't one of the trade offs with CMOS based sensors the fact they require a higher proportion of their surface area to be dedicated to control and readout circuitry than with CCDs? With an ideal sensor (one with which each 'sensel' can gather light from 100% of its area) four smaller 'sensels' would gather exactly the same amount of light as one larger one.  At a given level of technology, can we assume that the circuitry required by a CMOS chip, whether it is (for example) 12MP or 24MP is roughly the same? If one accepts this and Meh's value of only 50% of each 'sensel' dedicated to gathering light, then four smaller 'sensels' will not be gathering the same amount of light as one larger 'sensel' because of the space wasted by the associated circuitry. 

DISCLAIMER: I present this only as a though experiment, I have no idea about the exact values involved as I have no background in the imaging electronics industry.  If someone with greater technical knowledge can provide with correct values, or refute the assumptions made then I would welcome the enlightenment. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Cinema EOS Development Opinion
« on: November 06, 2011, 07:02:03 PM »
IRT Jettatore:

No I don't believe that mirrorless is currently a game changer, but with convergent technologies such as on chip phase detect AF and high resolution EVFs, it is probably the direction that camera technology is going.  Once you don't need a mirror to provide an OVF and PDAF, why compromise your lens designs (particularly wide angle) to accomodate it? Canon needs a foothold in this market, or they'll end up in the position that Leica found themselves.  There is also the problem of what's going to happen to their compact camera business with the next couple of generations of mobile 'phones. 

People have been stating that digital cameras have reached a plateau for years; in the case of APS-C, I think they're correct.  Full frame can probably get to 30-40MP with a trade-off of increased (or perhaps I should say, not decreased) higher ISO noise, before it starts geting into trouble with diffraction.  If 21MP is good enough for you then great, stick with a 5D MkII (hope you're also fine with the two generation old AF and metering system), but I wouldn't make assumptions about other people's current or future output needs. 

Thanks for the lecture on wasteful consumer technology, this could easily be applied to 95% of the cr*p that we spend our hard earned money on.  If you're no longer interested in updating you gear because it meets all your needs and desires then that's great, just don't bleat about it on a camera rumours website. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Cinema EOS Development Opinion
« on: November 06, 2011, 07:52:17 AM »
Pedro wrote:
'"'Looking forward to it. Don't care if the 5Diii won't materialize in 2012. ""

Yeah same here.  I don't mind at all if the 5D III or renamed equivalent that I have been waiting for doesn't come out until late '12 or early/mid '13, I'm ready to buy it whenever it launches.

I disagree, 2012 looks like it will be an important year for the industry and Canon need to address weaknesses in its line-up, or risk losing further market share to Nikon and Sony.  The 1D X and this 'Cinema EOS' stuff is fine for the professionals, but now Canon needs to look at the enthusiast and mirrorless market. 

If the rumoured D800 really was delayed by the floods in Thailand, then Canon will need a strong 5D MkII repacement in 2012 not 2013, which addresses its predecessor's weaknesses without pricing itself out of the market (e.g. by trying to be a 1Ds series replacement). 

They also need to do something about mirrorless trend and it needs to be as strong and decisive as launching 'Cinema EOS'.   If they fail to provide this next year it will be Nikon and Sony's gain; people have waited to see Canon's hand, but they won't wait forever. 

Site Information / Re: A Note About The [CR] Rating
« on: November 06, 2011, 04:49:59 AM »
As long as the [CR] rating system means something then 3 'levels' seems sufficient.  I don't see the point in giving official announcements and news a [CR] rating, as they are not rumours.  Photo Rumors; Nikon Rumors; Mirrorless Rumors don't seem to bother with a rating system at all, while Sony Alpha Rumors; 4/3rds Rumors use a 5 tier system (incidently, what has happened to K-Rumors?).  Each approach seems to work in its own way, once people are used to it.  One difference that I've noticed is that some of the sites seem content to post any outlandish rumour floating around the web, whilst CR tends to be more reticent until Craig hears from his own sources.  This might explain why only 3 [CR] levels are required...

Just my observations!  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:51:59 PM »
We're running a way a bit here.  Couldn't the DSLR picture just be of the 1D X with a purple 'C' badge on it, to show that you can use the new cinema EF lenses on a regular EOS stills camera?

EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:47:13 PM »
Now, let's not all get too excited, but that definitely is a DSLR because it has a prism.  Whether they're just including a generic CGI render of how the C300 may impact on future video capable DSLRs, or whether this is an actual second, cheaper model is open to debate.  Remember what's been said before on this board: Canon's video and stills camera divisions are almost two seperate entities.  The video arm at this announcement seem to be at pains to point out that they develped the C300's sensor separately from the stills division (of course, that could just be marketing hype to distance it from the 5D MkII). 

EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:17:48 PM »
Very few replies here for an 'historic' Canon announcement!

Guess this means that everyone is disappointed, but I think that this announcement is really what most people expected.  Personally, I have no clue about what most of this means or its implications.  As far as I can see, Canon seems to have entered the bottom end of the mainstream film making industry market, with a camera system that's still very expensive for the indie crowd. 

Am I right, or wrong? Wonder if anyone will be interested in the new lenses for stills photography!

Lenses / Re: New Lenses Imminent? [CR1]
« on: November 03, 2011, 03:50:16 PM »

 I disagree with your statement regarding FF users and the cost of an FF setup. FF users are not much more likely to be rich than your average prosumer APS user these days: here in Canada, a 5D2 is $1999 and a 7D is $1449, which is not a huge difference. Also, used 5Dc's and 1Ds(II)'s can easily be had for less than $1500.

Your entitled to disagree, but don't forget that the 7D itself it quite an expensive camera that most photographers can't justify spending out on.  I take your point with used full frame, but I think the age of the cameras you mention is a put off.  Not only do they lack a lot of the features that even the Rebel line has these days, but I would also be concerned about spending a significant wad of cash on such a old camera; these days cameras are basically consumer electronics and as such, I would not trust their reliability long term versus a film camera (maybe that's just me).  By the way, a used 1Ds MkII still sells for more than a 7D, here in the UK at least. 

 Secondly, a 5D2 with a 35/2 provides better performance at a cheaper price than a 7D with 24L (my set up); similarly, said 5D with 50/1.4 is much cheaper and better than said 7D with 35L. You can pretty much go on forever with similar comparisons. A 5D2 with 24/2.8 isn't even comparable to APS, as an EF-S 15/1.8 doesn't exist and if it did, the price would be frightening.

Sure, but a 5D2 with a 35mm f/1.4L will perform even better; are you suggesting that you should shell out over £1500 for a camera and put a £220 lens on it (I'm sticking to my home currency here)? You're right when you state that there is no comparing the 5D2 with a 24mm lens to an APS-C camera, that's my point -Canon haven't bothered to produce a fast 24mm equivalent prime for APS-C.  You believe that a 15mm f/1.8 for APS-C would cost a fortune; I'm not sure that I'd agree, wide angles crop lenses require a lot less glass than for full frame, which is the whole point of EF-S  (but I think that a 15mm f/2 would be a better performance-price compromise). 

 If you look at it this way, you can see that your statement about a "decent" FF kit being expensive is quite wrong. One (myself included) might even say the opposite is true. I suppose that makes me look dumb, as I have a 7D/24L, but in my defense, they were purchased years apart, I need the 7D's features and my mkI 24L was way less than the new one is.

No need to defend yourself, your main camera requirements dictated that a 7D was the better choice of body for you.  The fact that you had to shell out for a 24mm f/1.4 to get a (roughly) 35mm equivalent fast prime demonstrates that there is a demand for dedicated EF-S lenses in this range.  How many people haven't bought a 24mm f/1.4L because it's too expensive for their budget, but would buy an EF-S 22mm f/1.8 (for example).  Now you are thinking about buying a 5D MkII in addition to your 7D to meet your ndesire to use fast wide angle primes (I'm guessing -am I correct?).  This would mean that you've covered all bases, but it's hardly an affordable option. 

 If you don't need high PD or the AF/FPS of a 7D, how exactly are your priorities wrong in buying a 5D2 with cheap glass? You get better performance for less $$$ and often end up with a lighter, smaller kit as well. There's no rule stating that FF users are stuck buying L glass and honestly, they need it less than us APS guys.

First, what if you do need both (like you?), buy a 7D and a 5D2? Second, how much do you think that a 5D2 be worth in ten years and how will your 24L be worth? Third, you keep insisting that it's a 5D2 or a 7D; most people shoot with Rebels and XXD cameras.   

 This is why I like the idea of Canon updating these non-L primes: they would benefit both APS and FF shooters. These lenses are mostly fine optically, all they need is USM, more aperture blades and maybe a tweak here and there. They should definitely be kept EF though, even if there is a small cost savings to make the wider ones APS, there's more than enough interest in them from FF users. Personally, I'm looking to add an FF body as soon as I can afford it and would definitely buy a 35/2.

If Canon could do this, it'd be ideal.  I just think that, especially with wide angle glass, there are quite a lot of cost savings to be made by going EF-S.  Compare the price of the Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8 G DX to the much poorer spec Canon EF 35mm f2.0; or the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 to the EF 16-35mm f/2.8. 

Lenses / Re: New Lenses Imminent? [CR1]
« on: November 02, 2011, 06:17:27 PM »
Canon badly need a decent 'normal' prime for APS-C users because the current offering all have significant weaknesses, as does the main third party alternative.  Beyond that, there is a need for some affordable wide angle primes.  To be honest, if it saves money they might as well make them EF-S, as anyone that can afford a full frame camera should really be able to afford 'L' glass (and if not, they've probably got their buying priorities wrong!).  I don't buy the argument that some people make that it's only full frame users who care about prime lenses.  A decent full frame setup will cost you many thousands of your local currency; it's a little insulting to suggest that only the rich can afford to be 'serious photographers'. 

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 44