November 23, 2014, 06:09:55 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 45
61
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. 

62
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!

63
Canon General / Re: Canon Announces the PowerShot G1 X Mark II
« on: February 12, 2014, 07:14:19 PM »

64
Pricewatch Deals / Re: New Canon EOS, PowerShot & Ring Lite Preorders
« on: February 12, 2014, 07:05:33 AM »
There were four main faults with the G1X:

  • Slow AF
  • Slow lens
  • Poor optical viewfinder
  • Size and bulk

The G1X Mk. II looks like it might have fixed the first two of the problems, but there are two issues to which we still don't have definitive answers: how quick is the new AF system? How quick does the lens maximum aperture start to lose speed? I suspect the answer to both questions will be "very"!  ;)

As for the other two problems, it seems that Canon has "solved" both problems by gelding the G1X of any sort of viewfinder other than the LCD. I suppose that what they have done is a solution, it's just not the one most customers would have suggested. It's a shame, because how much better would have the reception been if it had a built-in EVF?

65
PowerShot / Re: More Images of the PowerShot G1 X Mark II
« on: February 11, 2014, 06:53:43 AM »
It looks to me like Canon are targeting the same market as the Panasonic GM1, but in a slightly different way by offering a fixed lens with a larger focal length range and faster aperture. It's not a bad idea, but it would have been nice to have a front control dial and an EVF.

66
PowerShot / Re: Updated PowerShot G1 X II Specs
« on: February 11, 2014, 05:47:26 AM »
If the pictures on PR are correct, this is an incredibly disappointing downgrade in terms of user interface. One dial plus a mode dial? Seriously? That's entry level compact camera controls. I suppose that if the rings on the lens were programmable (assuming they are control rings), you could use them, but I still think that at least one of the "holy trinity" of settings would need to be allocated to that cheap and nasty rear control dial. It is also incredibly disappointing that this camera does not have a decent EVF and that the rear LCD takes up so much real estate for its screen size; let's hope it has the Sony/Olympus style hinge rather than the side mounted Panasonic/current Canon style.

67
PowerShot / Re: Updated PowerShot G1 X II Specs
« on: February 10, 2014, 12:34:05 PM »
"It looks like Canon is really trying to create a market for this camera based on the spec sheet."

Unusual levels of sarcasm from CR...   ;)

68
PowerShot / Re: More Product Confirmations for CP+
« on: February 10, 2014, 10:04:52 AM »
"Powershot G1 X II" -could naming get any worse? I guessing it won't be called that.

As for the "EVF-DC1 (External Viewfinder)", I feel like I've entered some sort of timewarp and ended up in 2009, when people may have given a hoot.

[Sorry, seems I'm on a grumpy day today >:(]

69
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS
« on: February 10, 2014, 04:08:02 AM »
I'm not sure that this isn't just a possibility that Canon patented when it was designing full-frame macro capable standard zooms; it seems to me that what we actually got was the 24-70 f/4 IS.

Does Canon need a lower price kit lens? That depends upon the price of the camera body; it seems that kit lenses tend to fall into the "cost ~25-33% of camera body price" bracket. Currently the 24-105 is selling for $1100/£650, which is fine for the $3200/£2300 5D Mk3, but a bit high for the $1750/£1350 6D.

Canon are also deeply Nikon focused (and vice-versa), Nikon have a cheaper kit option with their new 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR at $2296. Whilst the 6D has the better lens, for the uninitiated $2450/£1925 is still more expensive than the Nikon kit. On top of this, I'd be willing to bet that Canon is making a lower profit margin on its 6D kit than Nikon is on their D610 kit. This would leave them vulnerable to any price cutting promotion from Nikon, so there is probably some justification for a cheaper kit lens option, however boring to forum members!

70
Canon General / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Image
« on: February 07, 2014, 05:34:46 PM »
Hi All

EVF =Deal breaker not bothered by lack of flash.
EVF isn't a deal breaker, it's the fact that it looks like it's an optional extra on top of the steep price tab that breaks the deal for me.

71
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 07, 2014, 03:12:53 PM »
Dare one ask the question 7D vs 70D vs D7100: which has better image quality?

Worth considering because the D7100 is cheaper than the 70D.

That's a dangerous question to pose on this forum without starting a flame war, but I'll do my best!

If people were honest, they'd admit that the D7100 has the image quality advantage; it is superior on most metrics. The point of argument would be how much better it is and how important the image quality advantage is compared to other features. I would say that the D7100 is the better all round stills camera, with its weakness being buffer depth, plus a bit of build quality compared to the 7D. That being said, one doesn't buy a camera body in isolation, but as part of a system. I wouldn't say that anything that Nikon has to offer is compelling enough to offset the changeover costs, if one has a decent collection of EF mount glass. If one doesn't own any glass from either manufacturer, then deciding which lenses one is likely to need is a factor. To be honest, unless you're into wildlife or sports, I'm not sure that either manufacturer has the most compelling lens line-up for their APS-C cameras and I might be tempted to look elsewhere (e.g. m4/3rds or Fuji).

Im not sure how this thread ven got to three pages.

7d's problems are detailed and noted across the internets. It is simply not a good buy. The Af has problems & the iso is bay far the worst of any canon camera i have seen sicne the 450d. I HAD to dispose of my 7d. i loved the body.

Well documented by whom? I've not come across huge amounts of material substantiating this claim. There was a bit of a hoo-ha when it first came out, partly because of the "crazy megapixel number" (note how when Nikon went to 24 megapixels, no one batted an eyelid) and partly caused by a review from Darwin Wiggett that found the 7D to produce a very soft output. To be honest, I respect Darwin and regularly read his blog, but his was the only comparison I've seen where the 7D's file looks that soft compared to other cameras; I haven't seen anyone else find this result.

Trust me, im going through the same with a SECOND 6d, and its the most frustrating thing in the world. I have yet another canon body that i cant use to to Af issues. softie images and af misses at f4...enough of this mess already.

I just joined CPS gold so hopefully they can help. If not, im scraping for a 5dmk3.

Plenty of people find the AF system of 6D fine, if used within its capabilities. The 5D Mk3 is very good, but I'm not sure really how necessary such a sophisticated AF system is for non-sports/wildlife specialists (myself included).  I'm wondering whether I'd have been as well served by a 6D and saved the extra money; heck, even a 70D might have sufficed most of the time as all the 5D Mk3 seems to have done is made me more fussy about noise!

72
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« on: February 07, 2014, 12:39:56 PM »
Dare one ask the question 7D vs 70D vs D7100: which has better image quality?

Worth considering because the D7100 is cheaper than the 70D.

That's a dangerous question to pose on this forum without starting a flame war, but I'll do my best!

If people were honest, they'd admit that the D7100 has the image quality advantage; it is superior on most metrics. The point of argument would be how much better it is and how important the image quality advantage is compared to other features. I would say that the D7100 is the better all round stills camera, with its weakness being buffer depth, plus a bit of build quality compared to the 7D. That being said, one doesn't buy a camera body in isolation, but as part of a system. I wouldn't say that anything that Nikon has to offer is compelling enough to offset the changeover costs, if one has a decent collection of EF mount glass. If one doesn't own any glass from either manufacturer, then deciding which lenses one is likely to need is a factor. To be honest, unless you're into wildlife or sports, I'm not sure that either manufacturer has the most compelling lens line-up for their APS-C cameras and I might be tempted to look elsewhere (e.g. m4/3rds or Fuji).

73
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/2.8 L II front coating peeling off?
« on: February 06, 2014, 01:46:43 PM »
UPDATE: I've just heard back from my friend, the technician at the service centre told him that it is very unusual for the lens coating to peel in this way after such a sort period of time. Usually they would expect to see signs of very heavy usage on the body of the lens in these cases. The service centre have been instructed to replace the front element under warranty and send the damaged front element back to Canon for further investigation. Meanwhile it looks like my friend will have his repaired lens back tomorrow.
I'd say this might be a case of an isolated manufacturing defect. I don't think it's anything to worry about if you own this lens, but worth knowing in case it does happen to you.


That is a good, responsible  reaction from the manufacturer.... S___ happens, they can either learn from it or deny it... looks like they chose to learn.

+1 -which is why I wanted to update the thread when I heard of the outcome: credit where credit is due.

74
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/2.8 L II front coating peeling off?
« on: February 06, 2014, 01:43:01 PM »
UPDATE: I've just heard back from my friend, the technician at the service centre told him that it is very unusual for the lens coating to peel in this way after such a sort period of time. Usually they would expect to see signs of very heavy usage on the body of the lens in these cases. The service centre have been instructed to replace the front element under warranty and send the damaged front element back to Canon for further investigation. Meanwhile it looks like my friend will have his repaired lens back tomorrow.
I'd say this might be a case of an isolated manufacturing defect. I don't think it's anything to worry about if you own this lens, but worth knowing in case it does happen to you.
They do a large batch of them at once.  It is a very critical process, but its hard to understand why it would not affect a whole production run, or at least a whole tray of them, unless someone happened to somehow get just one lens dirty, or the cleaning process missed one lens.
 
You can get some info about the process here;
 
http://youtu.be/qzpt49qq6v4

Even with the most thorough quality control, there is always variability which can mean that a defective unit slips through inspection. This is especially so when you are using statistical process control to ensure that correct standards are being achieved. This might be the case when there are a large number of units and it is uneconomic to inspect them all (although, as the video link clearly shows - Canon are claiming 100% sampling for lens element QC checks at the grinding stage), or when a particular check requires a unit to be destroyed (e.g. you wouldn't want to crash test every car you made!). This could possibly be the case (I'm speculating here) with lens coating resilience: you could test a statistically significant percentage, but if the testing process is damaging to the lens element or takes a long time (e.g. an accelerated ageing simulation), you couldn't test them all. Japanese companies tend to lead the way in process control and I'm sure that Canon has well developed procedures and tight tolerance limits for its processes, but even these cannot guarantee that no faulty unit will reach the customer. I'm guessing that given the opinion of the repair centre technician that it is not caused by misuse, is why Canon have expressed an interest in investigating the problem further: this is the sort of problem that technocratic Japanese managers like to deal with.

75
Lenses / Re: 24-70 f/2.8 L II front coating peeling off?
« on: February 06, 2014, 10:39:25 AM »
UPDATE: I've just heard back from my friend, the technician at the service centre told him that it is very unusual for the lens coating to peel in this way after such a sort period of time. Usually they would expect to see signs of very heavy usage on the body of the lens in these cases. The service centre have been instructed to replace the front element under warranty and send the damaged front element back to Canon for further investigation. Meanwhile it looks like my friend will have his repaired lens back tomorrow.
I'd say this might be a case of an isolated manufacturing defect. I don't think it's anything to worry about if you own this lens, but worth knowing in case it does happen to you.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 45