September 20, 2014, 10:12:44 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 - Lee Jay

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 09:24:24 AM »
Oh, I know John Fielder's work, I just don't find landscapes to be interesting, from anyone.  They're worth a 1 second glance and that's it for me.

I don't go hiking anywhere because I'm allergic to all grasses, all flowers and most trees.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 04:18:23 AM »
Lee Jay I can't imagine having a cellphone for 7 years!  :o  so curious, what kind is it??

All of them I've ever had, several brands.  I'm only 2 years into my Galaxy S3 at the moment.  Haven't considered upgrading.

I live in Colorado too, the "big landscape state".  I think I've taken about 5 landscapes in my life, and only one of them in Colorado.  That was a big panorama taken with a state of the art camera, a Nikon Coolpix 950!

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 12:07:19 AM »
I work in a national laboratory with a bunch of engineers like myself.  Few people I know are upgraders.  Most drive older cars, few have DSLRs, most keep computers longer than I do.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 11:40:34 PM »
Quote from: Lee Jay link=7.msg442238#msg442238 date=1411134654
I don't think that most enthisiasts, semi-pros, or pros are going to sit on a camera body for ten years. I think your average consumer tends to churn through cameras at a pretty fast rate as well, although there are certainly some who stick with what they've got as long as they can to get the most for their money.

The vast majority of dSLR purchasers never buy another one.  Only pros and genuine enthusiasts do.  Of all the people I know that have dSLRs, almost all of them still use the first one they ever bought.  I'll provide a list of people I know, aside from me - 10D, D70, 5DII, Rebel XT, 300D, T2i, T4i.  In fact, of everyone I know, only one person aside from me has ever "upgraded" and that was to move from Canon (40D) to Nikon (D200 - still using that one).  And my upgrade was from 10D to 5D when the 5D first came out.

This next path (looking like 20D+5D to 7D2+6D) will be my first body upgrade since 2005.  I've cycled through a great many lens changes since my first DSLR purchase (17-40L, 28-135IS, 75-300IS, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/2, 35/1.4L, Sigma 20/1.8, Sigma 15mm fisheye, 100/2, 85/1.8, 24-105L, 70-200/2.8L IS, 70-200/2.8L IS II, Tamron 1.4x, Tamron 2x, Kenko Pro 1.4x, Canon 1.4x II Canon 2x III, Meade ETX-125PE, Celestron Edge HD 11).

I'm with Jrista on this one based on my experience and living in Japan where buying a new camera every 6 months seems to be the norm. My 5D2 feels very outdated amongst the multitude of 6D and 5D3's out there (some of them are definitely not pro). Perhaps in the past people held on to their gear for longer but (mainly thanks to Sony) things are changing rapidly so naturally folk want to keep up. I can't imagine keeping my 5D2 (which I bought 2 years ago) for any longer than another year, simply because by then it will be really hard to sell.

Also camera's have come down in price considerably so it's easier to justify a new purchase. I went through 3 bodies in 4 years, not even including my EOS M. And I consider that conservative. It's like PCs and laptops now. Who keeps a laptop for 10 years? Yeah it works but why burden yourself with slow ass gear when you can buy the latest for a few hundred bucks?

My longest kept electronic device is a hi-fi that my dad bought me about 20 years ago. Still works (but the speakers gave way ages ago). I only kept it for sentimental reasons. The thing is giant and a first generation iPod could easily outperform it! So in that respect I get why someone might keep a camera for ages.

I generally keep computers for 7 years, and I don't buy low end junk for a few hundred bucks.  I bought my stereo in 1989 and have replaced a component here and there over time.  It will still blow the doors off 99% of the sound systems in modern theaters. I just bought a set of binoculars I intend to keep for the rest of my life (Canon 10x42L IS - highly recommended).  I've had my model airplane fleet for 28 years basically in all original condition until last year when I finally upgraded to state of the art propultion and radio systems. I generally keep cell phones for 5-7 years.  Until a few weeks ago, my three cars were an 88, 01 and 04.

Upgrading for the sake of upgrading is painful and expensive.  I only upgrade to gain a major new capability that I didn'thave before and that I will use  all the time.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 19, 2014, 08:00:53 PM »
I seriously doubt that anyone is going to buy the 7D2 as a serious hybrid video shooter over competing products. That is not to say that people won't use it for that purpose because they happen to have the camera, but these days no one who is informed is going to buy one if that application is part of their purchasing criteria. No one.

Think so, huh?

Just had a pro videographer here for a paid shoot.  He came from out-of state with tens of thousands of dollars in camera equipment, lights, props, etc.  He was here for a full week shoot with, guess what?  A 7D.  He had, I'd say, 25-30 lenses for the 7D, not to mention tons and tons of video accessories for it (screens, recorders, rails, external batteries, etc.).  He also uses 5Ds, but was using the 7D that week because the 5Ds were off at Canon.

I really can't envision a guy like that switching systems.  Asked him, and he really had no interest whatsoever in even looking at other manufacturers.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 19, 2014, 02:30:53 PM »
It's pretty obvious that the 7D2 is for fast action stills shooters first and foremost...not cinematographers.

With that said, this camera finally gives fast action still shooters the ability to capture video (that isn't constantly out of focus) using the dual pixel AF capabilities.   

This camera is great for sport/action photographers that want to add some quality video to their coverage of a game/event....and this is all it's supposed to be.   Go elsewhere if you're a dedicated video shooter.

And if they'd included, or especially added to the 3x digital video crop mode that's already in the 70D, it would have been even better for sports and wildlife videos.

The lack of it has me considering whether I want this camera for the speed and focusing or the 70D for its video features and WiFi (which I'd use for camera control).

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 10:18:27 AM »
7D2 sensor = 70D sensor

The performance is similar (I'd call it a 1/3 stop advantage or so), the sensors are different.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 09:50:54 AM »
I don't think that most enthisiasts, semi-pros, or pros are going to sit on a camera body for ten years. I think your average consumer tends to churn through cameras at a pretty fast rate as well, although there are certainly some who stick with what they've got as long as they can to get the most for their money.

The vast majority of dSLR purchasers never buy another one.  Only pros and genuine enthusiasts do.  Of all the people I know that have dSLRs, almost all of them still use the first one they ever bought.  I'll provide a list of people I know, aside from me - 10D, D70, 5DII, Rebel XT, 300D, T2i, T4i.  In fact, of everyone I know, only one person aside from me has ever "upgraded" and that was to move from Canon (40D) to Nikon (D200 - still using that one).  And my upgrade was from 10D to 5D when the 5D first came out.

This next path (looking like 20D+5D to 7D2+6D) will be my first body upgrade since 2005.  I've cycled through a great many lens changes since my first DSLR purchase (17-40L, 28-135IS, 75-300IS, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/2, 35/1.4L, Sigma 20/1.8, Sigma 15mm fisheye, 100/2, 85/1.8, 24-105L, 70-200/2.8L IS, 70-200/2.8L IS II, Tamron 1.4x, Tamron 2x, Kenko Pro 1.4x, Canon 1.4x II Canon 2x III, Meade ETX-125PE, Celestron Edge HD 11).

9
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:09:45 PM »
70-400/4-5.6L IS
15-28/2.8 fisheye
24-85/2.8L IS

10
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:08:01 PM »
Watching a documentary in a true large format IMAX theater is impressive visually.  For most everything else, whether it's on the big screen or on my SDTV makes essentially no difference to me.

I find the difference between ML raw video and native 5D3 video to be entirely immaterial.

Wow.

No difference seen in detail and texture between waxy 5D3 native video and richly textured ML RAW and no difference in blown highlights and crushed black detail between the two?

No difference between 4k and 1080i and 480i even for nature?

I guess people sure see things differently. To me the difference is almost unimagineably great.

Im baffled by "photographers" who care so much about the quality of their still pictures but don't appreciate the quality of moving pictures.

Well, that's probably me.  I stopped going to the movies years ago and prefer to watch them at home on my CRT TV.  You know why?  The audio quality at most theaters is horrible, and that annoys me far more than a small, low resolution screen.  The audio quality I have at home is far superior to that at most theaters.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:04:32 PM »
Oh I see the differences, and I have 20/13 vision once corrected.  I just find those differences mostly immaterial to the use or enjoyment of video.  Not so with stills.

I was just looking at some video I shot last weekend.  It was of a favorite subject of mine, aiplanes.  I had some shot at 500mm and some at 50mm.  Really, the difference wasn't a big deal.  I could clearly see what was going on with both, and the what was going on part is what mattered, not the imagery itself.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:54:11 PM »
Watching a documentary in a true large format IMAX theater is impressive visually.  For most everything else, whether it's on the big screen or on my SDTV makes essentially no difference to me.

I find the difference between ML raw video and native 5D3 video to be entirely immaterial.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D and 7D II Combo or 5D III?
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:14:06 PM »
I'm going for the combo.  I've loved shooting with my 20D and 5D, and I don't expect that to change.  I'll use the 7D2 in good light for action, and the 6D in poor light for slower subjects.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Video Tested By Gizmodo
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:11:42 PM »
Let me be frank.  Image quality matters much, much less for videos than for stills.  Videos have many more frames, audio, and all of it in time sequence to provide more information than the viewer of a single still can get from a single still frame.

The reason I wanted 4k, even if it was low end 4k, was for stabilization in post, which can cost you 3/4 of your pixels in some cases.  The reason I want digital zoom is so I can get more zoom range out of a cheaper and better narrower zoom lens (18-135 versus 18-300, for example).

But, for properly framed shots, this performance is more than acceptable.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Chuck Westfall Talks Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:42:00 AM »
I sure wish someone would ask Canon about the 3x movie digital zoom mode from the 70D being in or out of the 7D2.  I was really hoping they would expand that to smooth continuous zoom from 1x to 3x, but it appears they went the other way and got rid of it entirely.

It would also be nice to know if it reads the whole sensor or still line skips in video mode.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64