April 19, 2014, 09:34:47 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 - J.R.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 96
286
EOS Bodies / Is Canon about to pull the plug on the 60D?
« on: November 18, 2013, 12:06:03 PM »
Two members of my local photoclub (in India) have been trying to buy the 60D for the past month or so. They have tried buying online but the 60D is being reported to be out of stock / backordered from Canon. The local dealers are also citing that the 60D is short in supply. The dealers and online retailers are trying to push through the 70D citing the shortage of the 60D.

The last time I checked on B&H, the 60D is available so this might just be an India centric problem but is there any news that Canon is going to pull the plug on the 60D? Or is the 60D shortage being cited simply to push the sale of the more expensive 70D? Or maybe I've missed something ...

287
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 18, 2013, 11:55:10 AM »
Yeah. What lunatic continues to buy gear they hate?

you have not read, what he wrote. He is using multiple Canon bodies for stills and video. Out in the wild.
The last thing I'd want out there is a body from another manufaturer, with different user interface, different sensor characteristics, different batteries, etc. ... how about you?

If my livelihood depended on it, I would.

I might still do that in part (even though I do this for a hobby). I did not like the WA lenses of Canon so I might just pick up a used D800 (sell quite cheap these days) and the 14-24.

It's such a common perception that pros NEED the best cameras. In most cases they don't, infact they get by using quite humble equipment. The things which amatures prize, are not the same things which pros need or desire. MP count is typically very low on our lists. Reliability and build generally are they highest factors. A client usually doesn't care if a quality image is 18mp or 36mp, as long as it's the image they want, it's sharp and clean.

I don't think you read the posts carefully enough. The question here was not if a PRO needs the best camera. AvTvM's question was that why would you buy into a different system? My view is, why not? Learning a new system is by far a better option than buying gear you hate and rant about in internet forums.

Coming to your post, it all depends on what you shoot. Maybe a wedding shooter can get by with the previous generation equipment but wildlife / bird shooters do usually buy the best and the latest equipment to come out with standout photos, or do you mean to suggest that a 1DX with a 600mm f/4 offers no improvement at all?

BTW, isn't it funny how some Pros come out citing humble equipment when they themselves  -

use a 35mm f1.4 L, 24mm f1.4 II L and 16-35IIL day in day out professionally and have for many years.

:D

288
Lenses / Re: Comparing 16-35 to Nikon 14-24 and Zeiss/Leica primes
« on: November 15, 2013, 11:45:24 AM »
Haha ... As always take Ken Rockwell's opinions with a rather larger fist of salt  ;D

289
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 15, 2013, 11:40:48 AM »
Yeah. What lunatic continues to buy gear they hate?

you have not read, what he wrote. He is using multiple Canon bodies for stills and video. Out in the wild.
The last thing I'd want out there is a body from another manufaturer, with different user interface, different sensor characteristics, different batteries, etc. ... how about you?

If my livelihood depended on it, I would.

I might still do that in part (even though I do this for a hobby). I did not like the WA lenses of Canon so I might just pick up a used D800 (sell quite cheap these days) and the 14-24.

290
Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 15, 2013, 11:09:42 AM »
In my limited usage of Canon's products, I've come to notice that Canon is loathe to release an update that doesn't make sense to them despite their customers clamoring for it. See the people wanting more MP, more DR, an update to the 100-400L, 135L, 800L, etc.

With Canon, it's water off a duck's back. It will only be released if it makes economical sense to Canon, not because folks like you and me want it.

If Canon consistently failed to deliver what their customers were clamoring for, they would have been out of business already. 

That exactly is my point. Like any other efficiently run business, Canon releases updates to its products only if it makes commercial sense, not because an upcoming feature is fancied by people. For the sake of the current post, they didn't release an IS version of the 24-70 2.8 despite the fact that people wanted it.

Canon has access to more marketing research and data than what we at this forum can think of, so basically whatever is ranted here by most people doesn't affect Canon or its bottom line. I've seen some posters here who claim to be going the whole hog on the mirrorless offerings of Sony. They probably don't realise that what Sony was able to come up with in a year, Canon will be able to come up with someone similar if not better in an extremely short period of time if there was a big enough market for it.

While I don't like the crippled products Canon sometimes pushes out, I'm glad that they don't listen to each and every demand made by people or else they would become the new Sony.

291
1. How many times did you hit the kids with your 1D X + 24-70 and 70-300? ;D

And

2. How many advil did you take after that trip? ;D

I would go that route if there is no other choices. Here we have some options to choose, why not use that as our advantage.

None and none.  I don't have any problems with my coordination, and I've spent so much time carrying my kids around as they're growing up that even my 1D X + 600/4L IS II doesn't seem like that much of a load...

Choices are good, but we make them based on priorities. Sometimes small size is most important, but often with kids I prioritize AF, frame rate, and high ISO performance. 

Also, are the Sony cameras weather sealed?  Beyond water rides at amusement parks, I live in New England.  We have this stuff here called weather (well, they call it weathaaah, but since I was born in California and lived there for over 30 years, I know how to use the letter 'R'), that you don't get in CA.  ;)  A sunny, 85° day can turn quickly to a 'wicked bad downpoaaah', you're a target in a snowball fight whether or not you're holding a camera, etc.

Yes, they are fully weather sealed.

With the adapter and a third party lens mounted?

292
Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 15, 2013, 07:20:14 AM »

In theory you might say keep the IS lens for when you need it, but in practice you'll probably never have it with you when you need it.  ;)

Yes ... with overlapping focal lengths, invariably the 24-105 is left at home (who needs to carry additional weight?)  ;).

That said, I've had more than one occasion where the light was fading and I ended up cursing "why didn't I bring a tripod!" but I don't remember complaining that I didn't have my 24-105! 

BTW, I carry a tripod more often than not, being the old-school type shooter  :)

293
Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 15, 2013, 06:58:17 AM »

Thus, if we are looking at financials and discussing whether to sell 24-105 for a 24-70 f/2.8 II, one must look at the future value of the f/2.8 II if you think you might want to upgrade to that IS version in the future.  And my thought is, the value will drop dramatically when an IS version is announced because people will be climbing over each other to get the IS version - look at all the recurrent threads and posts building demand for the IS version!  The only way this won't happen is if Canon keeps the f/2.8 II where it is and makes the 24-70 f/2.8 IS significantly more money, though that would be unprecedented cost wise for the focal length compared to past offerings.  All of those people upgrading will then dump their f/2.8 II on the used market which will greatly lower used value.

So, while you could say f/2.8 II is the only option NOW, it might also be worth considering waiting for 2014's big lens announcements as many were disappointed that the II did not have IS.  I'm sure Canon would love to resell an IS version to those who bought the II, and it might be worth holding out with a lesser lens just a bit longer.

Of course if you need f/2.8 24-70 today, you need it today. But then there really isn't much to debate :)

Guessing Canon's next move is next to impossible, unless one has any inside information of course.

In my limited usage of Canon's products, I've come to notice that Canon is loathe to release an update that doesn't make sense to them despite their customers clamoring for it. See the people wanting more MP, more DR, an update to the 100-400L, 135L, 800L, etc.

With Canon, it's water off a duck's back. It will only be released if it makes economical sense to Canon, not because folks like you and me want it.

294
Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 15, 2013, 05:55:13 AM »
Now there are other lenses, but these are the most crucial IMO: (I have / or have had, all these lenses)

Canon EF 14 2.8 L II (2007) has bad IQ, lot's of CA/coma in the corners, beaten well by the Zoom lens 14-24 2.8 Nikon, as well as the Samyang 14mm.
Canon EF 16-35 2.8 L II (2007) has bad IQ,, lot's of CA/coma and soft in the corners. It has it's strengths in weight and portability but need an IQ upgrade.
Canon EF 24 1.4 L II (2008) has REALLY BAD IQ!! CA and so much coma in the corners that it basically useless in low lit sutations wide open. Beaten well by Samyang 24 1.4! Wake up Canon!!
Canon EF 35 1.4 L II (1998) has bad IQ, lot's of CA/coma/soft in the corners. An old lens well beaten by Samyang 35 1.4 and Sigma 35 1.4, needs an upgrade, but IMO 24 1.4 is more important to prioritize!
Canon EF 50 1.8 II, (1990), the oldest 50mm is the best 50mm Canon has. Corner sharpness is bad, but still beets all other 50mm from Canon, still this lens suffers from CA and is beaten well by the Nikon 50 1.8 and Sigma 50 1.4.
Canon EF 50 1.4 (1993) is suffering from severe CA wide open, well beaten by the Nikon 50 1.8 / Sigma 50 1.4.

Canon need to pull their finger out of wherever they are currently (the Cinema division) and respect and prioritize the DSLR customers which have put Canon where they are.


Have you even tried these lenses or are you chart watching? Your comments are extream and very irritating to those of us who actually use these items in a professional guise....which the L lenses were created. They weren't designed for web trolls who claim knowledge, but their experiance seems to come from looking at web reviews. I use a 35mm f1.4 L, 24mm f1.4 II L and 16-35IIL day in day out professionally and have for many years. If you think those lenses are junk because of a few minor aberations...then you really need to get a grip. No lens is perfect, end of subject. All of the lenses above, I use wide open and I have produced great photos which sell and sell. A fast prime shot a f1.2 or f1.4 is a remarkable thing and a lens which is delivered to the customer with pro build, AF and great optics for around £1200 is quite remarkable. These lenses are astonishing and can produce amazing photographs in the right hands. If you pass over these gems because of some crazy elitest attitude...it really is your loss....but please don't come on here and spout your views as verbatim...as you will be challenged!
Consider this, most of the best photographs ever taken were taken on quite lowly kit...Steve McCurry, Cartier Bresson...to name a few. Perhapse we should be more critical of our photographs than our lenses? I suspaect that 99% of modern lenses and cameras out perform their users.

Can you read?? I wrote that I have or have had all the mentioned lenses.

Frankly I find your comment quite rude!

I  have spent the last 10 years as a professional nature/landscape/astro-photographer, and I have countless hours out in the dark in the cold, waiting for the right moment light and moment. I produce HQ quality photos for print/sale and 4K+ timelapse and film footage for professional productions. I spent thousands-of-thousand-of-thousands of dollars on Canon. Currently  I have the 1DX, the 5D3 and 2 x 5D2, 4 x T3. - And I find it totally unacceptable to come home after a long and tiresome trip out in the cold, to find out that the corners of those photos are soft and suffering from CA/Coma, or that the stars in a dark nightsky looks like bananas, which are impossible to recover! - TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!

It is disrespectful of Canon to their DSLR customers, to produce the 1DX and the 5D3 and not provide any decent wide angle lens to go along with it! Currently I shoot with the Nikon 14-24 (with adapter) and the Samyang 14, since they are WAY WAY better than anything Canon has to offer. Not to mention that I can get almost 2 x Nikon 14-24 for the price of 1 x Canon EF 14mm 2.8 L II. Canon are sucking the blood out of you!

I am sorry if I hurt your Canon-feelings, but what I say is true! And Canon knows it! (If not Canon need to start check out the pictures online, user experiences, reviews, and the growing number of people using the Nikon 14-24 on their Canon bodies)

And yes I read reviews, and yes I do pixel-peep. I am a CPS platinum memeber, and after having committed the way I have to Canon, I expect nothing but respect and top- notch quality back in return. The least Canon could do is to MATCH the competition.

You should never, NEVER, let brand loyalty blind you, or prevent you from critizizing. I mostly love my Canon bodies, and my Canon Tele-lenses are superb (EF 600 2.8 L IS, EF 300 2.8 L IS USM II, EF 70-200 2.8 L IS USM II), but Canon are seriously lagging behind the competition in the wide angle department!

If you have been payin attention you know that Canon have prioritized the Cinema production line, with lenses, neglecting us DSLR users who have been buying their new full frame bodies (wide angle lenses).
It seems you really need to find a different supplier, at least for wide angel!

Exactly ... why not take up the D800 and the 14-24 from Nikon for your WA work? Why suffer if you feel so strongly about it? 

295
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: November 14, 2013, 11:17:06 PM »
Here are three owls: an Eastern Screech Owl, a Great Horned Owl, and a Barred Owl.

Great owl shots - are they all wild?  If so, I'm extremely impressed.  If not, they are still beautiful photos, but I will know you, too, are a mere mortal.  I love owls, but they are so freaking hard to find out in the wild!  Here's my best owl shot to date - a very noisy little Barred Owl:



Great shot!

In India there is a common insult dished out with the phrase "Ullu ke Patthe", the literal translation of which works out to "Owl's disciple". Owls are considered pretty dumb birds and the phrase "Ullu ke Patthe" is used to call someone an "Idiot". Most average Indians use this phrase a fair few times in a day!

Very few Indians can look at an owl shot without a chuckle.   

Cheers ... J.R.

296
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: November 14, 2013, 11:01:59 PM »
another one ... 5d3 @ 400mm

297
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: November 14, 2013, 11:00:54 PM »
5d3 @ 400mm

298
Animal Kingdom / Re: An incredible photo op with a wild Red-tailed Hawk.
« on: November 14, 2013, 03:09:15 AM »
Beautiful pics!

299
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: November 14, 2013, 03:07:33 AM »
As Don would say, just another Heron...  :)
GBH...
1/200s
ISO 800
f/13
350mm

Yes ... just another Heron and just as nice!  :)

300
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: November 14, 2013, 03:05:56 AM »
Here are three owls: an Eastern Screech Owl, a Great Horned Owl, and a Barred Owl.

Beautiful

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 96