August 01, 2014, 11:02:12 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 - Lee Jay

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 46
226
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 15, 2014, 06:47:10 PM »
Modern cameras have much better night vision (ISO well above 1000).

What?  You're eyes can go up to the equivalent of on the order of 1 million ISO.  Oh, EVFs ruin your dark adaptation.

227
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 15, 2014, 08:45:22 AM »
One question: am I right in perceiving that mirrorless is more about the buzzword than about function?   I know that mirrors can be noisy, slow, and bulky.  Still, I get the feeling that a large group of people have just decided that it's what they want, regardless of whether they will get better photos for the size or price.

In a mirrorless system the sensor is active all the time, so you can leverage that to do stuff you cannot do with a DSLR (in mirrored mode), like subject tracking using face recognition, and metering using the light that actually falls on the sensor (no more using the histogram to determine critical exposure), and heaps more because the camera can now effectively "see" what's going on. Obviously all this can be done in LiveView mode, but getting rid of the mirror permanently just simplifies the process.

This also causes a drastic loss of battery life, and the resulting information overload is distracting.  I turn it all of in my EVF cameras and the EVF is lousy in every way compared to an OVF.  There are only two reasons I want a hybrid viewfinder - video and focus assist when using my telescope.

228
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 14, 2014, 10:53:10 PM »
I'm curious if the successor to the SX-50 will have dual-pixel technologies and what the zoom will be.

Very unlikely.  The pixels are too small to be divided in half, at least by Canon with their current fabrication technologies.

229
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 14, 2014, 10:52:00 PM »
When it comes to base ISO (where most people shoot most of their photos),....

?????

16.9% of my SLR shots are at base ISO, 3% fewer than are at ISO 1600.

230
Pricewatch Deals / Re: New Canon EOS, PowerShot & Ring Lite Preorders
« on: February 12, 2014, 09:21:36 PM »
#2 - Ring flash, what size lens does this fit? I know the old one needed an adapter to fit on the 100L... will this?


Maybe this can help you.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/product/accessories/mr_14ex_ii_macro_ring_lite.do

231
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 10:33:07 PM »
I'm always amazed that people care about how a camera looks.  It doesn't take pictures of itself.

I could see an ugly man, robot, or senior citizen not caring about how his camera looks, but I'm sure any young, good looking, senstive man wants his camera to be as sexy as he is. lol

How good a product looks plays a big role in what most people buy.  I'm no different and expect my camera and lenses to pretty sexy and modern looking.  Not becuase I think other people will have any sort of appreciation for the contraption in my hand, but becuase I have an eye and appreciate beauty, so natually I buy stuff I am attracted too. 

I am amazed there are people who either have no visual attraction to what they spend their money on, or spend their money on things they are not visually attracted to.  lol

I think anyone that thinks a camera can be beautiful hasn't seen anything beautiful before.

232
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 07:04:10 PM »
Ugly camera - not because its "look" - but because it looks a huge step backward in usability compared to the G1X. No dials and a touch screen?

It has two front control dials.  My guess is that at least one, if not both are programmable.

233
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 11:14:41 AM »
From the pics, it is 12.5mm at its widest. If this were 24mm, then we are looking at a crop factor of 1.92.

Working backwards, you will get the following sensor dimensions:

Diag: 22.5 mm
WxH: 18mm x 13.5mm
Area: 243mm2

This means this sensor is halfway between the old 1.5" and the m43 sensor. i.e. It has about 8% smaller surface area than 1.5" and about 8% bigger area than the m43.

This matches the mpx count as well. The G1X sensor was 14.3mpx. The mark II is about 8% less at about 13.2mpx.

I think it's the same 18.7mm x 14mm sensor, just used as 18.7mm x 12.5mm in 3:2 mode and as a little narrower in 4:3 mode.  So, you're always cropping a few sensor pixels.

234
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 11:12:44 AM »
This camera is horrendous looking but what is the sync speed?

I'm always amazed that people care about how a camera looks.  It doesn't take pictures of itself.

If you like ugly looking expensive niche market P&S slow lensed cameras, be my guest. Just don't expect everyone will agree with you.

It's f/2 at the wide end, which isn't exactly slow, and how does any of this relate to the one topic I mentioned - it's looks?  I just don't see why anyone cares at all for how a camera looks!

235
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 10:59:33 AM »
This camera is horrendous looking but what is the sync speed?

I'm always amazed that people care about how a camera looks.  It doesn't take pictures of itself.

236
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 10:58:22 AM »
So the same size sensor - 1.5" - but slightly lower resolution compared to the Mk I ?

Probably the same sensor with a slightly smaller imaging circle (something Panasonic used to advertise as a multi-aspect-ratio sensor, trying to claim a fault as a feature).

237
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 10:20:02 AM »
I'd love to see the dimensions.  This camera is far more interesting to me than the G1X was.

238
PowerShot / Re: More Images of the PowerShot G1 X Mark II
« on: February 11, 2014, 10:04:14 AM »
Actually, how about this.

The original G1X sensor is 18.7mm x 14mm, which is 4:3 aspect ratio.  What if this one is 18.7mm x 12.5mm for 2:3 aspect ratio.  The horizontal crop factor is 36mm/18.7mm = 1.925.

1.925*12.5mm = 24mm
1.925*62.5mm = 120mm

So, I'm guessing the sensor is the same horizontal dimension as the G1X, but 3:2, making this camera specified at 24-120mm equivalent.

Someone on DPReview found a spec sheet that essentially says both are true - it's a 4:3 sensor but the lens image circle doesn't cover the whole thing.  So, in 3:2 mode, it's actually as I said above.  In 4:3 mode, it's narrower and taller.

This is one way to make the lens smaller and faster - give it a smaller image circle.

EDIT:  And now the final specs posted confirm this.

239
PowerShot / Re: More Images of the PowerShot G1 X Mark II
« on: February 11, 2014, 09:51:32 AM »
Actually, how about this.

The original G1X sensor is 18.7mm x 14mm, which is 4:3 aspect ratio.  What if this one is 18.7mm x 12.5mm for 2:3 aspect ratio.  The horizontal crop factor is 36mm/18.7mm = 1.925.

1.925*12.5mm = 24mm
1.925*62.5mm = 120mm

So, I'm guessing the sensor is the same horizontal dimension as the G1X, but 3:2, making this camera specified at 24-120mm equivalent.

240
PowerShot / Re: More Images of the PowerShot G1 X Mark II
« on: February 11, 2014, 09:44:49 AM »
The sensor is smaller than the original G1X, ....
I don't think so.
If the sensor is not smaller than the G1X original, so the lens is 12.5 mm ultra wide angle. That would be unlikely. I bet the sensor is 4/3 as Olympus and Panasonic.

The original sensor was 1.85 crop as specified by Canon.  If this one is the same, that's about 23mm at the wide end.  The S120 is 24mm, as are many other compacts.  I agree with what was said above - Canon will probably call this 24-120, just like the S120.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 46