Messages

211

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 23, 2012, 01:05:57 AM »

I would have to imagine that a 70D upgrade would follow the path of the 60D, otherwise a 7D replacement would have to place it "closer" (minus FF) to the 5D3, which wouldn't make much sence, unless it came with a higher MP sensor than 18. I only say that because of the fact that the 7D was placed too closely to the 50D in terms of "features", Canon had to "downgrade" the 60D to make the 7D seem more attractive for buyers and users. (Don't get me wrong, I like the 60D, it's a very good camera)

The 7D is one heck of a camera. It is loaded with features and is still "high-tech" even from today's standards. They would have to replace it with something that would make even the 5D3 stand up and take notice. I mean heck, they took the best of the 5D2 and the best of the 7D to make the 5D3!

18MP cannot be where Canon levels the playing field, even if it is an "upgraded" sensor. If the new 7D2 is 18MP, I cannot imagine too many features added that would justity upgrading my current 7D. (Even if it shoots 10 FPS, or more and dual digic 5) Now, IF the 7D2 came with a 24, 30, or higher MP sensor (ASP-H, or ASP-C) sensor and shot 8 or 10 FPS, then I might consider it. Or if it came with a FF sensor, but I wouldn't trade it for a "lesser" MP sensor (14, 16, or otherwise) for the current 7's speed. Now that being said, if the 7D2 was 16MP FF and shot 10 FPS, then I may look into it. Video is not something I care about (or use) so I don't worry about what features or not it has with video.

My opinions are based on a possible "entry" level of a cheaper FF camera (that is also rumored to be 18MP) from Canon. They need bodies to fill different price ranges and features. A return of the 70D to the status it had before (I.E. 40D, 50D...) would make the placement of any 7D upgrade a difficult one for Canon.

D

212

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Solar eclipse questions...???

« on: May 19, 2012, 12:15:51 AM »

Hey everyone! I live in Tucson, AZ and the solar eclipse this weekend will hopefully provide some awesome photos! However, since I have never photographed an eclipse, I need some advice.

I have filters at the ready, but when I Google the subject, some sources say to use filters and some say to not use them.

The ones that say to use them as the sun is "deadly" and will hurt my camera and my vision...

The others say that we take photographs of the sun all the time (I.E. during a sunset) and it will not "hurt" my eyes or my equipment.

I have 3 cameras that I plan on using during this event. One for a close up (for the flares), one for a "time-lapse" photo of the eclipse, and one hand held for random shots during the event.

One source tells me to use the filter for direct shots of the sun but to remove it during the total eclipse...

I have seen online of "time-lapse" photos of the eclipse that could not have been taken with a filter (unless it was photoshoppped first)...

Any thoughts? And my apologies if this subject has been addressed already.

Don

213

EOS Bodies / Re: Loss in Resale Value of 5D Mk3

« on: May 17, 2012, 12:12:35 AM »

Cameras, cars, computers... whatever. Anytime you buy a NEW product as soon as it is released, expect product fixes, recalls and updates. The 5D2 went through changes as well... The fact that Canon is willing to fix it solves the issue. That does not make your fixed 1 series 5D3 worth less than a "current" model.

D

214

EOS Bodies / Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?

« on: May 16, 2012, 11:42:45 PM »

If you really don't want to "waste money" on video, Leica, Hassleblad and others make some very good stills only cameras. They are not cheap but at least you won't "waste money on video"

The OP was a question of "Is video RAISING cost of bodies? Is it WASTED for many shooters?"

My posts have dealt with that and only that. It is a wasted fuction in my opinion and I feel that my camera would be better (dollar per dollar) if it did NOT come with video, that's all. I love Canon and want the features of the 7D and 5D2. I am sorry they shoot video, I for one will NEVER use it. Oh well...

215

EOS Bodies / Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?

« on: May 16, 2012, 12:28:58 AM »

Here is an easy way to explain how and WHY my camera loses performance/features BECAUSE of video.

Let's go and buy a car...

You have 10 grand to spend and car "X" is 10 grand.

Car "X" is perfect in every way exept the color, you want the color changed/upgraded.

The sales manager explains that they cannot upgrade the color because it has 2 grand worth of stereo equipment installed and the color you want costs 2 grand.

You do not wish to have said stereo and will NEVER use it. Sales manager wishes he could change it but ALL cars come with the 2 grand stereo outfit and because of it they cannot give you a better color.

So you accept this and try to live with the fact that you hate and will never use the stereo and are stuck wishing for a better color.

I WANT a better "color" for my camera. Get it? The R/D and electronics/programming for video takes AWAY from better/upgraded hardware/better features because those options cost money, nothing more, nothing less. Canon chose to spend part of my hard earned money on VIDEO and not better features/upgraded hardware, something I did not ask for.

I was VERY happy with my XTi and 40D that DID NOT have video. Awesome cameras. I would have bought my 7D and 5D2 even if they never shot video. And based on what I just posted, I believe that my newest cameras suffer in features/hardware because of video. Nothing personal but video COSTS MONEY! MY money that could have been spent on better features.

Again, Canon please leave the DSLR alone. Just make a good video camera and a good still camera. People WILL buy what they want/need.

D

216

EOS Bodies / Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?

« on: May 14, 2012, 12:16:32 AM »

Well as far as I am concerned, video on DSLR's is wasted and a waste of my camera's resources and my hard earned money.

 and I hate the fact it is even there.

I honestly don't understand that sentiment, could you try to explain it...

I'm not saying this is necessarily your concern, but it seems that this is not so much about unnecessary features and wasted money as it is a philosophical issue: some folks don't believe video is art in the same way as stills photography, and are resentful of being associated with a lesser craft.  On the other hand, we have video enthusiasts who consider DSLR video to be a toy.

If you have a minute I'd appreciate an explanation.  Why is it worth the emotional energy?

Thanks.

 I believe the majority of people that are posting here are avid photography enthusiasts not videography enthusiast.

I want the best camera my money can buy in a particular price range please make note - not a video camera. So if you wanna throw video in fine as long as you do not negatively impact my camera's functionality with video or start raising the price. I am not looking to purchase a video camera or a video system.

 Personally I see point and shoots as being the trade offs. I do not want to think my digital single lens reflex camera is a trade off.........  I want it to be the best camera (not the best video camera that I can get for the money I pay. Compromise negatively impacts my still photography which thus negates my reason for buying into this system to begin with.

I have a minute and the above answers your question. I bought a DSLR for stills, NOT video. I wonder how much better my camera would be if it wasn't drug down with unnecessary crap like video and it's support. Oh well...

D

217

EOS Bodies / Re: Is video raising cost of bodies? Is it wasted for many shooters?

« on: May 13, 2012, 10:12:04 PM »

Well as far as I am concerned, video on DSLR's is wasted and a waste of my camera's resources and my hard earned money. I mean honestly, what performance "upgrades" could my camera have if it wasn't trying to support video.

Canon, leave video to video cameras and leave DSLR's for stills. PLEASE???

I have not and will not shoot video on ANY of my DSLR's and I personally own three that can (5DII, T1i and 7D) and I hate the fact it is even there.

D

218

EOS Bodies / Re: T4i and 5D Mark III in February??

« on: January 29, 2012, 05:30:08 PM »

video... pfhhhhh

LOL....

I agree, I truly dislike the fact my T1i and 7D take video... never used it.

219

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon t4i = 7d price drop? videographers PoV

« on: January 24, 2012, 08:18:00 PM »

The 7D can be bought (body only) from some places (like B&H) for around $1350.00. That's a sweet deal on an awesome camera. I can't imagine a T4i causing that much of a price drop to a semi-pro camera. Maybe if/when the new 5D "X" comes out, prices will stabalize some, but I imagine that the 7D and 5D2 will remain strong selling cameras even after any new cameras come out.

D

220

EOS Bodies / Re: Whortwhile to go for 5D Mark II?

« on: January 12, 2012, 10:40:59 PM »

Sorry to burst everyones hopes, but I'm doubtful Canon will announce a 5d III until Oct. at Photokina.  And even then...it won't be available until well into 2013.  It will cost a hella lot more than the 1999.99 I paid for my 5D II last month with free 16GB Extreme III CF card and Lowepro bag. 

Canon announced the Pixma Pro 1 back in Oct. 2011.  They said they were on the ship heading for our shores...BS.  There is still no sign on when they will be available.  Same for the new 300mm, 400mm, 500mm and 600.   

If you all can wait until 2013 for a 5d III, you might as well wait for the 5d IV in 2016.  It will have dual digic VI processors ISO 819,200 and will have 10FPS and 105 zone metering.

Well said. I have always said to buy NOW what you can afford and learn it well and equip it with the best lenses you can. The 5D3 and 7D2 are great to dream about, but unless you can go buy one, they might as well be made of gold and given away for free!

D

221

EOS Bodies / Re: Whortwhile to go for 5D Mark II?

« on: January 12, 2012, 09:20:06 PM »

Prices are low on the 5D Mk II, probably because of speculation of an upcoming 5D Mark III.

Mmmm, perhaps. Prices are low right now for the 7D as well. I paid $1550.00 for mine about 2-3 months ago and now I can get it for almost 200 bucks less than that! (At B&H) I would imagine it is just the normal cost "droppage" of technology that has been around for a bit. Kind of like how cars get cheaper as the selling year comes to a close. Nothing wrong with the car, they just know that they need to make room for future models. Not the same thing, of course, but in principle it is. The 5D2 and 7D are the oldest cameras in the EOS lineup at this time. (3.5 years for the 5D2 and 2.5 for the 7D)

D

222

EOS Bodies / Re: Is "X" the new "L"?

« on: January 11, 2012, 08:59:01 PM »

The X was used by Canon to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Canon's Digital Lineup and/or the 10th generation of Canon cameras.

Somebody else also said that the X stood for the cross between 1D and 1Ds. However, this is not the case for the G1X. Unless you wanna argue that it is a semi-cross between the APS-C sensor DSLR and a point/shoot.

The G1 X interview with Chuck Westfall suggests that "...Canon emphasizes that the G1 X does not replace the G12, instead representing the apex of the line... it is indeed a departure..." and Chuck sort of agrees (Q&A page 1).

That sounds like Canon can't simply follow their naming convention due to some new products that are more like hybrid / crossover / extreme sort of thing and are not necessarily the successor of the anything in the current lineup.

Most people must have read translation of this interview with developers of 1D X.  But look at the bold word again "型番の“X”は何を意味しているのでしょうか? 吉開：まず統合機ということで「Crossover」のXですね。また今回は“1D”という名前を残していまして、従来のEOS-1Dからさらに進化して際だった商品ということで「Xtream」の意味も持たせました。それから、銀塩一眼レフカメラの「F-1」から数えてちょうど10世代目になるので10を表すXの意味もあります。銀塩の「EOS-1V」までが5世代、デジタルになってからは1Dと1Dsを同じ世代とカウントして5世代あり、合わせて10世代ということです。ただ、機種名の読みとしては「エックス」になります。"

And this one is rarely mentioned - "ちなみに「1D X」の「X」は「Extreme」の「X」と両モデルのを統合するクロスオーバー機としての「X」（クロス）の意味を持つとのことにょ。"

Hmmm... On the US Canon website they call the 1DX as the "ulitimate" EOS. Maybe ultimate means "X" in Japanese.

223

EOS Bodies / Re: Is "X" the new "L"?

« on: January 11, 2012, 08:49:51 PM »

Hmmm... Well... in the Rebels, it went from XT to XTi to XSi to T1i and so forth... is the "T" the important thing or is the "i"? (Or was the "X" the important thing at one time?)

Or maybe it is whatever the guys at Canon thought would be a good selling name... who knows.

D

224

PowerShot Cameras / Re: *UPDATE 3* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed

« on: January 11, 2012, 08:15:34 PM »

Try attaching a lens with similar focal length to the G1X to your Rebel, and see if you can find a pocket large enough to fit it in ...

Hmmm... would be interesting to do just that and compare the two images and see which one is better.

D

225

EOS Bodies / Re: Camera insurance recommendations?

« on: January 11, 2012, 08:09:45 PM »

I have personal property insurance for my cameras through State Farm. I had my 40D drop this past year as well as my wifes T1i with her 60mm macro lens on it. My 40D ended up being replaced with a 7D (They gave me $1100 for my 40D and I paid the diff for the 7D, about 500 bucks) and they replaced my wifes 60mm macro without batting and eye. I paid about 70 bucks for the year and even after 2 claims my policy only went up a few bucks for 2012. (About 85 bucks)

They told me (over the phone) that future claims could affect my insurance but so far so good. They have always treated me professionally and took care of each claim quickly. Hopefully I won't need to make another claim!

D