April 18, 2014, 11:34:50 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 - Meh

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 46
61
Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...
« on: April 22, 2013, 09:09:16 AM »
I really have no comment on this particular case since we don't know all the details and haven't see all the photos that were delivered, etc.

But here's a question for the wedding togs... have you ever shot a wedding and the bride, groom, wedding party, guests were not co-operative and/or wouldn't make time for the shots you normally set up?  What was the outcome?

62
Software & Accessories / Re: Looks like we'll actually get it soon!
« on: April 17, 2013, 05:14:35 PM »
I wonder how it compares to dedicated de-convolving software (topaz, etc).

Same.  This is new feature to Photoshop but not a new technology.  Deconvolution techniques work very well for a single type of known movement such as a camera translation on one axis.  It works less well for complex (i.e. real world) camera movements. (according to my understanding, which could be flawed).

63
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: What size Softbox
« on: April 08, 2013, 12:29:42 AM »
bigger the better

Almost always true!

64
Flagship. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.  ::)

 ;D

65
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced
« on: February 21, 2013, 06:08:09 PM »
Neuroanatomist,

I usually agree with the majority of your posts on here, but with this one I have to vehemently disagree.

Vehemently disagree?  That's pretty serious man!


Definition of VEHEMENT

: marked by forceful energy : powerful <a vehement wind>: as

a : intensely emotional : impassioned, fervid <vehement patriotism>

b (1) : deeply felt <a vehement suspicion> (2) : forcibly expressed <vehement denunciations>

c : bitterly antagonistic <a vehement debate>

66
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced
« on: February 21, 2013, 04:00:05 PM »
I can't understand anyone who buys Canon products and then says they are "crap" etc. What kind of consumer are they if they buy stuff they don't like. Everybody makes a few mistakes, but for the most part, I like the stuff I buy. I wouldn't buy it if I didn't.

In general the votes that count the most are the ones we make with our money.  On the other hand, although rarely, people might with full awareness buy something they don't like if they have some other reason to do so... best available, can't afford what they do like, needs to be compatible with another product, etc.

Finally, I don't understand all the Nikon vs. Canon hate stuff – both the self-haters who buy Canon gear and participate in a Canon forum and then constantly complain about Canon. Nor do I understand those who act like Nikon is the worst thing ever and get all upset when Nikon produces a good quality product at a good price.

The answer to this is that it's not really hate just Internet whining, a need to justify one's own choices, they are trolls who just want to stir it up for fun, etc.

67
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced
« on: February 21, 2013, 12:22:13 PM »
The sad thing is that Nikon is basically dominating all matchups(definitely on the lower end), at least in terms of specs, public perception(I understand pros love Canon for a reason, etc, i'm just saying.)

So, you're saying that "public perception" is that Nikon is "dominating" the matchups?  Is your definition of "public" taken to mean, "People who frequent internet forums devoted to Nikon cameras and people who frequent internet forums devoted to Canon cameras for the primary purpose of trolling?" 

Because the "public" who actually buy dSLRs, as opposed to those who just write about them on the internet, seem to buy a lot more Canon dSLRs than Nikon dSLRs, which is why Canon has been and, as of the latest available data, still is "dominating" the market.

I'm just saying...   ::)

Again with your rational, logical, and fact-based analysis... please, that has no place on the Internet.
Was my initial post really that off the mark?
I have all the respect for Neuro in the world. He is obviously one of the most intelligent people on any internet forum.
But, he is also a GIANT Canon fanboy and it never seems as though price is a consideration for him.
He IS rational, but it doesn't mean that my opinions are irrational.
Price IS an issue for me, and based on ALL factors regarding cameras, i haven't been too thrilled with Canon's releases.
Lets face it, the D7100 destroys an incrementally upgraded 60D, and I'm pretty sure I remember the 7DII's rumored price to be around $2K.
I sincerely hope(as other's have said) that Canon comes back swinging and really offers something fantastic, competetion is good for everyone.

I wasn't really addressing your statements, rather I was poking some fun at Neuro but since you asked I will answer since that is the polite thing to do when asked a question  ;D

Without meaning it as an attack on you, actually yes, your statement about "public perception" was irrational because it is not supported by factual evidence only by your perception of what the public perceives which is really only based on what you read on the Internet or from some friends neither of which represent of the general public.

Unfortunately, what people say can not be trusted, particularly on the Internet, and is not as important as what they do.  The only vote that really counts is the one we make with our dollar bills.  There are many reasons to believe that certain characteristics of Nikon bodies are superior to Canon... but certainly not in ALL characteristics and some of that depends on your choice of "matchups"... do you line them up by price and compare features, or do you line up the most comparable bodies and compare price?  Are we only comparing bodies or should we take lenses into consideration?

In your later post you say you were just stating your opinion.  Ah, the classic "it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it" argument.  Yes you are entitled to your opinion.  But your statement wasn't really an opinion...

You wrote "The sad thing is that Nikon is basically dominating all matchups(definitely on the lower end), at least in terms of specs, public perception".

Not really an opinion and even if that's what you believe it's still a factual statement, not an opinion, and the ascription to public perception isn't support by facts, for example sales.

If your opinion is that you "like Nikon better than Canon" you are welcome to that view and it's not debatable.  If you state "Nikon is better than Canon" that's not really an opinion although people commonly might restate it as "I believe Nikon is better than Canon" and claim it's an opinion to deflect argument but that's a logical fallacy because regardless of your "belief" the statement is still debatable and, in fact, isn't even defensible because it's too vague and no basis of comparison has been defined.  Your statement "Nikon basically dominates all matchups" falls into that category... it's over-stated, overly broad, and not well defined... and that is what tends to start the flame wars in forums because that is the stuff of fanboism.  That, and people getting defensive about their unsupported claims and being overly sensitive to dissenting views.

Now, to call Neuro a GIANT fanboi is not accurate at all.  I don't recall Neuro ever making over-stated, general claims that Canon is better in any respect where the facts don't support his position.  His preference and choice of Canon gear is well documented but to my knowledge but that does not make him a fanboi.

68
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 7100 has been anounced
« on: February 21, 2013, 09:11:52 AM »
The sad thing is that Nikon is basically dominating all matchups(definitely on the lower end), at least in terms of specs, public perception(I understand pros love Canon for a reason, etc, i'm just saying.)

So, you're saying that "public perception" is that Nikon is "dominating" the matchups?  Is your definition of "public" taken to mean, "People who frequent internet forums devoted to Nikon cameras and people who frequent internet forums devoted to Canon cameras for the primary purpose of trolling?" 

Because the "public" who actually buy dSLRs, as opposed to those who just write about them on the internet, seem to buy a lot more Canon dSLRs than Nikon dSLRs, which is why Canon has been and, as of the latest available data, still is "dominating" the market.

I'm just saying...   ::)

Again with your rational, logical, and fact-based analysis... please, that has no place on the Internet.

69
Lenses / Re: Is your midrange gear insured?
« on: February 14, 2013, 06:49:36 PM »
I assure you, I always ensure my gear is insured.

70
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method
« on: February 13, 2013, 11:27:11 PM »
As for the accuracy and precision of the viewfinder confirmation system, I've actually found it to be extremely accurate on both the Nikon and Canon bodies I tried. But it takes patience, diligence, and some practice work through the nuances of its feedback.

What "nuances of it's feedback"?  The light either comes on, or it doesn't.

71
I am more partial to the updated 135L and 400/5.6L

And the sky is blue and water is wet.  What does your desire for Canon to update those lenses have to do with this thread?

72
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method
« on: February 11, 2013, 09:49:20 AM »
Hmmmm....  I suspect we'll see an official word from FoCal why this method doesn't work so good and we will all read it and collectively say "nice try, bye bye".
Sorry to be cynical, but we live in a day and age where people and companies with any kind of commercial interest are known to tell a lot of lies and even defend them in court if it means that they can, well, maximise profit. They might of course really have something, but anything they say will have to be double checked. And although I'll have to do some more tests, as I wrote above, double checking this new method the other day indicated that it was spot on for me.

That was in fact my point... that Focal will issue a explanation of why this DotTune doesn't work but we will say "nice try" to them.  You hit the nail on the head... in order to protect their business they will come up with a reason even if it isn't quite true or if it overstates the advantage of their method.

73
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method
« on: February 10, 2013, 07:37:55 PM »
Well, this makes FoCal and LensAlign obsolete... or does it?  Could there still be any advantage to a FoCal type method and, if so, how much better might it be? 

The points made about being able to achieve critical/perfect/best (or whatever you might call it) focus using CD are valid, but I think it's a reasonable assumption that manual focus at 10x live view can get real darn close to perfect focus...  anyone have any experience with that?

But, maybe perfect focus or repeatability don't matter so much... even using a theoretically "perfect" method only gets a theoretically "perfect AMFA setting" at one distance.  If we accept that the AFMA setting can not be perfect anyway for all subject distances and focal lengths (for a zoom lens) and all we are trying to do is identify substantial systematic PD focus error and adjust to get closer to the centre of the focus variability then this method may do the job quite well.

Are we sure the focus confirmation dot in the viewfinder works exactly how we think it does?  Does testing for the range of focus confirmation while in MF mode actually give us the centre of the focus variability when PDAF is functioning normally?

Hmmmm....  I suspect we'll see an official word from FoCal why this method doesn't work so good and we will all read it and collectively say "nice try, bye bye".


74
Canon can not be equal with theirs old  sensor lay out and and  and signal  path way.
Thera are no indications that Canon has gone from the   old 180nm  tech to Sonys, Panasonic Aptina, Toshiba tech which are down at 65nm


http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

Canon is at 500nm.

Nikon 350nm & 250nm

Sony at 250nm & 180nm (though technically the 180 is in the Nikon D800)

Where are you getting 65nm from?


then read again

I said Sony and others are down at 65nm, the Sony  APS etc are made at 90nm, canon are still at 180nm


Read what again?  Do you have a reference for the numbers you gave?

75
Which lens is good enough for a 7D?  All of them, any of them.  A lens does not have to be perfect to be magical.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 46