March 05, 2015, 01:36:51 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 - caruser

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX ITR AF Feature
« on: February 08, 2013, 02:33:55 PM »
It's face-detection with phase AF.  I find that it works pretty for tracking a person moving through a group.  I have a Servo setting for 'people/events' and I use iTR for that, but not for my wildlife/birds setting.  Note that for iTR to work, you've got to be in 61-point auto selection more for the AF point selection.

Is it ok to have only cross-type points selectable?

EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX - The Workhorse?
« on: February 05, 2013, 02:07:01 AM »
I just went from the 5D2 to a 1DX. Once you stop fretting over the 3MP difference you'll be a happy camper (until something with more MPs from Canon arrives, perhaps even longer). I'd say the overall image quality is definitely not worse.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Technical Report
« on: January 18, 2013, 01:04:22 PM »
Any update on this subject?

It's not supported at this point, although the only problem it causes is with metering (physically, it fits).  Chuck Westfall told me that it's apparently something Canon could fix in firmware, if they choose to.

Hm, thanks for the info, I'll try to let them know that some people would like this.

(And I'll let them know that it took me about 2 hours to install EOS Utility on my Mac, using tools like dtruss to skip the stage that always got stuck - Canon's Mac software is still as crappy as ever).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Technical Report
« on: January 18, 2013, 10:00:12 AM »
A list of accepted focussing screens is given, but the Ec-S high-precision one is not among them.

If it has been desupported, that would be a real step backwards. Users of fast manual-focus lenses in particular would have a problem; with back-button autofocus set, you'd need to hold the AF button down to get focus confirmation. Users of lenses via unchipped adaptors would be in real trouble.

Hmmm... "The EOS-1D X supports the Ec-A, B, D, H, I, and L focusing screens."

Still, I wouldn't panic quite yet - the technical report lists only 6 screens, but the Canon CPN spec page states, Focusing Screen: Interchangeable (12 types, optional). Standard Focusing Screen Ec-CV.   So, I suspect the 1D X will take the Ec-S, or Canon will come out with a 1D X-compatible equivalent.

Any update on this subject?

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 17, 2013, 02:39:13 PM »
It's done, just ordered the 1DX. Just read the manual, many unexpected things and details, all of them positive with one exception, just as I had put an Eg-S in the 5D2 I wanted to put the equivalent Ec-S into the 1DX but it doesn't seem to be properly supported; what do other people use, one of the split-prism screens or just install the Ec-S and work around the supposed exposure issues?

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 15, 2013, 11:19:59 AM »
Thanks Neuro, there goes one of my last reasons against the 1DX ;-)

I used a 5Dc with the EG-s screen for years! and it was perfect but I dont miss it with the 5D3 AF. Granted, I'd like to have both the EG-S and the 5D3 AF. Even the Focus confirmation is 10x more accurate with manual lenses on all AF points.
Yeah, I was wondering whether the AF was good enough to make up for the lack of an EG-S equivalent, but...
As for reach, Just get an new M-III tele-converter but canon is lacking in the wide department but If you that serious to buy a 2000$ 14-24, why not look into the Zeiss 15mm?
I am seriously considering the Zeiss 21mm, but I might get a 17-40 first in order to determine which focal length I like best.
If your in M mode, I don't see a need for Expo-comp because there must be a particular reason for the person selecting they're aperture or shutter speed. The Auto ISO works great on my 5D3 In M mode. Granted, I would appreciate a zoom histogram.
The expo-comp in manual with auto iso would bias the automatically selected iso and leave the time and aperture alone.
But you must appreciate that canon DOES have a 100-400mm, canon DOES have the 600EX-RT, and canon DOES have the Best AF on the Market, The fact that canon DOES allow you to even change focusing screens in the first place and so many things that make this platform unique.
Oh yes, I've got my personal prime trinity 35L, 100L, 135L and am very happy them, plus some more stuff that works great, too! If all I had was a 28-135, and I didn't care about the 135L, which is my favorite lens, I might already have a D800e, because what I don't really care for are anti-aliasing filters.

Speaking of AA filters, put that on the list of things for Canon to improve, i.e. optionally get rid of...

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 15, 2013, 10:50:57 AM »
erwinwang, thanks for the beautiful shots and sharing your views. As a user of 50L and 50f1.4, I can't agree more to your views.

Does that mean you have both of them? And, if yes, any deeper reason than simply not (yet) having sold the old one after upgrading?

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 15, 2013, 10:32:47 AM »
I did the 7D + 5DII thing for a couple of years, which is a lot like the 6D + 7DII scenario - the 5DII for landscapes and portraits, the 7D for birds/wildlife.  The thing is, the 1D X is a really nice 'bag'.  It's a lot more robust than the lesser bodies, that great AF and fast frame rate comes in handy for portraits (basically, each shot is a 'double-tap' so there's almost never a lost shot due to a blink, etc.).  As for reach, it's artificial unless you're printing large - a 1D X image cropped to the FoV of the 7D gives a 7 MP image that still has (slightly) better IQ, and if you don't need to crop, the IQ is much better.

Interesting, did you miss the 3 MP difference when going from the 5D2 to the 1DX? (And, if not, because the images are cleaner to make up the difference or because you never print in the square meter range?)

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 15, 2013, 08:01:37 AM »
While I can see some of the points the original poster made I don't share the immense disappointment. Someone said it's a swiss army knife, not far off. Everything is a compromise.

The train of thoughts was something like "the 5D2 is very nice, but with what I'm shooting recently I need a more capable AF, so the 5D3 should be a good match, except that it doesn't improve on the IQ in ways that I would like to see in my next purchase (given that the competition does it), I can't add the MF-optimised focus screen, and it still doesn't give me AF-point linked spot-metering, so what can I buy?" That's when I started thinking about the 1DX, except that I would like more mega-pixels, too; I often crop landscapes to a 3x1 format, that leaves 9 MP which isn't terribly much for 1 square meter prints...

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 15, 2013, 03:41:29 AM »
I'm with the OP... Canon does seem to be making too many compromises lately and not delivering products people really want.

I can't recall a single product announcement in the last year that wasn't met with some level of disappointment in capability and dropped jaws on price.

To be fair, the 1DX does seem to be a very good camera, the main criticism being that it doesn't quite improve on the 1Ds3 for areas like studio and landscape. I think I'd be perfectly happy with a 32MP version of the 1DX (and proportionally slower frame rate).

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 15, 2013, 03:26:46 AM »
You obviously haven't tried the 5D3, learn to shoot and the shadow 'noise' won't be a problem.

My comment wasn't about shadow noise, and I have briefly tried a 5D3. Even if I ignore the lack of low-iso improvement over the 5D2 and the fact that it has a bloody strong AA filter to cater to the video people while I would prefer none at all, what disturbs me about the 5D3 is that I can't change the focus screen, and that in many situations that I shoot in the additional "good" focus points are pretty useless since I can't link spot-metering to the AF point like the 1DX and previous 1D models can. But please go on, if you manage to convince me that the 5D3 is good enough I won't have to save for a 1DX!

Canon General / Re: Hey Canon, I've got cash to burn, but...
« on: January 15, 2013, 01:09:31 AM »
Hm, you are right, the 6D has interchangeable focus screens, that's unexpected, I had read somewhere that it doesn't... However I would appreciate the 5D3/1DX AF system, too.

Uninformed rant, then?

Also note the 5D3 screen is a major upgrade, so 99% of buyers will reap the benefits while the 1% who want to use short manual lenses with large glass (invariably not made by Canon, hello Zeiss) can get a 6D 'cos they won't need the rapid-fire super AF systems of the 5D3. Or keep it simple and upgrade to EOS! (Zeiss is sooo 60's tech).  ;D

I have various use cases for the camera, some of them need a better AF than what I've got now on the 5D2, both in terms of tracking speed and spread of "good" AF points, and some which require a "good" MF focus screen for lenses like the 35L shot with a candle or two providing the light.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: EOS-1D X for $5936 via eBay
« on: January 14, 2013, 10:34:29 AM »

EUR 4629 for a 1DX? It doesn't seem probable that they manage to be 1500 cheaper than stores with a reputation, and nearly 1000 cheaper than other "grey" looking stores? Or if they really are professional and so cheap I need to order one straight away ;-)

Edit: Ok, it's without VAT, but still several 100 cheaper than stores with a reputation.

Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: January 11, 2013, 07:54:55 AM »
Is the 16-35 ii good sharp at edges at F8 at 16? I'd be surprised.

I've been using one for 4 years now....have you tried one? I hope you aren't basing your opinions on forum chatter. Please take a look at my flickr page and see if there are any landscapes where the 16-35IIL is found to be lacking...then again, I never found the 17-40L particularly lacking either. Both are excellent lenses.

Now you might be right, but a couple of low-resolution images on flickr are unable to show the technical merits of the lens (I like the photos though) because nearly everything looks sharp down-sized so much...

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9