March 04, 2015, 12:10:37 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 - KyleSTL

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 29
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 20, 2013, 01:12:59 PM »
When someone attacks a Canon body, you always resort to raw sales. That'S not very interesting.

The point of citing sales figures is that profit is the primary driver for publicly-traded companies like Canon and Nikon, and what they care about is developing products that will sell well and provide a return on investment, not products that will please a minority segment of the market that happens to be very vocal on internet forums. 

You may not find it interesting, but that's the reality of business...and the reality that determines what products are available to purchase (or in some cases, products that people have no intention of purchasing, but choose to complain about anyway).   

I'd also suggest that elaborating on a rational viewpoint is more interesting than a weak, one-line 'refutation'.
Exactly.  Same reasoning that Nikon's currently weak profitability has caused them to announce consolidation of camera lines to offer fewer products (in point and shoot lines) and focus on entry-level equipment (interchangable formats) to stengthen their financial situation:

Think the group of vocal Nikon enthusiasts asking for their D300s replacement will ever get it?

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 20, 2013, 11:16:57 AM »
... This camera will be Canon’s first foray into the high megapixel realm for a DSLR.
What is your definition of high megapixel?  Back in 2002 when the 1Ds was announced, 11MP was a lot compared to most other DSLRs at 6 or less, and most P&S cameras less than 5MP.  In 2005 16MP was considered 'high resolution' (1Ds Mark II).  Same with 21MP in 2007 with the 1Ds Mark III.

I completely understand what you are saying, but it's not like Canon has never been competitive on the MP front, as they have definitely worn the megapixel crown a few times.  Now in the modern era (since Sept 2009) they have constantly lagged behind Nikon and Sony with full frame cameras (21MP vs 24; 22 vs 36), but lead in the APS-C lines from Sept 2009 through August 2011 with the 18MP sensors, until being superceded by Sony's 24MP sensor in the A65 and A77.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Japan Teases a White Kiss
« on: November 11, 2013, 09:12:49 AM »
And here I thought that the Korean teaser was going to result in the SL X (SL1 body with 1D X sensor).  :P  Take note, Canon, a brilliant idea and perfect name.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 31, 2013, 11:26:40 AM »
I totally agree with Zv about starting off with just the 18-135 STM and becoming accustomed to using it and master it's operation.  At that point you'll know what your missing (lens too slow, need more telephoto, need wider angles, need macro lens, need more light).  At that point use Ruined's list as a guide for your next purchase.  None of us will know your style, shooting habits and therefore needs, so it would be a disservice to recommend another lens without knowing whether it is necessary for your needs.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 30, 2013, 10:34:34 AM »
Three other good lenses for indoors:

EF 35mm f/2 IS USM - $550
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM - $450
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM DC Art - $500

And the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM mentioned by Ruined ($500 currently).  Here's a good website for tracking current prices, deals etc:

Unfortunately Canon has not made an APS-C fast normal lens like Nikon (AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX - $200), so the Sigma prime is the only non-FF option (and isn't significantly cheaper than the Canon options, but does have a 2/3 stop advantage in aperture).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 05:28:54 PM »
I think the EOS would be a good budget choice, as long as you understand the limitations outlined by Mt Spokane.  I think the AF speed is improved based on what I've seen with the newer firmware 2.0.2 (although it is well short of DSLR speed for still, probably comparable to T4i/T5i for video).  EOS M has all the same PTvAvM modes as a DSLR, so yes, you will be able to set shutter speed, ISO and aperture.  I would suggest going to Best Buy or a camera store and play around with them, that might help you decide whether or not the design and 'feel' (focus speed especially) of the EOS M are acceptable.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 01:23:51 PM »
Unfortunately Canon has nothing even remotely comparable to the Sony RX100 II at the moment.
The G1X is not 'remotely comparable'?  While it is not in the same size/form factor it has several advantages over the RX100 II

Yes, you are right. "Remotely comparable". However, I'd take an RX100II any time over a G1X. Not only because of the smaller size, but also because I believe [not checked] that RX-100 II beats the G1X in image quality - despite the sensor size difference. At least at the most frequently used lower ISO settings.

As far as the S-120 or G16 are concerned: they are not even remotely comparable to the RX100-II.  :-)
Granted, the RX100 II has 20 MP (vs. 14MP for G1X and 12MP for S120/G16) so it will have better resolution at base ISO (~20% higher linear resolution all things being equal), but will that make much or any difference at higher ISOs, or printed < 30x40, or shared online?  Although, now that I'm thinking of it, the RX100 II will have a FL advantage over the G1X when cropped to 12MP (120mm vs. 112mm).

I agree that RX100 II is a significantly better camera than S120 or G16, but there are a few attributes that favor the latter that are worth consideration (priority will obviously be determined by the buyer/user).  The FL advantage disappears for the S120 when the Sony is cropped to 12MP (129mm), but the G16 still has a very slight advantage (140mm).

Overall, the RX100 II is a superior camera to the other three I've listed, but does not have an advantage in all specifications, so I made comparison to outline the Canon options that are available.

To the OP, it would be a shame for you to spend a lot of money on a camera (with instantaneous depreciation) and not be happy with the results (especially in regards to video AF performance).  I would suggest looking up reviews and/or demonstrations that highlight AF performance in video (DP Review, The Camera Store, etc) for the various cameras you are considering (ideally all using the same lens).  If you go the DSLR route I think all of us can agree that STM lenses are a must (since you're planning on using the video function), with the 70D being ideal, followed by the 100D (SL1), then the 650D (T4i) and 700D (T5i).  And remember, no camera you're thinking about is as expensive as buying two if you're unhappy with the results produced by the first purchase.  I'm not trying to up-sell you or anything, I just want to give you all the information I have so you end up with a camera that you're happy with.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 11:25:16 AM »
Unfortunately Canon has nothing even remotely comparable to the Sony RX100 II at the moment.
The G1X is not 'remotely comparable'?  While it is not in the same size/form factor it has several advantages over the RX100 II (which is an outstanding camera in its segment):

- Larger sensor (almost APS-C size)
- Slightly longer zoom (112mm vs. 100mm)
- Fully articulated screen
- Slower lens, but equivalent DOF control compared to RX100 II (slightly worse on wide end, and better on long end) because of larger sensor - see below

Heck even the G16 or S120 could be thrown into the mix with a couple of advantages over the RX100 II (at the compromise of a much smaller sensor):
- S120 gains 24mm wide end and goes longer to 120mm (although slower lens at the long end by ~1/3 stop)
- G16 has very fast lens (f/1.8-2.8) and goes to 140mm on the long end (and has very comparable DOF control - see charts above)
- G16 can do 12.2 fps for 6 shots and 9.3 fps for 522 shots and S120 can do 12.1 fps for 6 shots and 9.4 fps for 635 shots (RX100 II does 10 fps for 14 shots then slows to 2 fps)
- Better video compression with Digic 6 processor and more frame rate options (1080p60, 1080p30, 720p30, 480p30), whereas the Sony only does 1080p60 and 480p30

Obvious disadvantages for S120 and G16 are bad high ISO performance, lack of tilting screen, and S120 has significant disadvantage in DOF control compared to RX100 II.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 28, 2013, 03:27:28 PM »
I would say the 70D would be a good fit if you are going to be doing a lot of videos.  The highly advanced dual-pixel AF allows the user to focus on composition and movement more than pulling focus.  Get STM lenses (18-55 STM, 40 STM, 18-135 STM, 55-250 STM) and you basically have the most advanced camcorder on the market.  You might be happy with the other AF-C capable cameras in movie mode, but you can't do better than the 70D in the Canon lineup (or arguably in anyone's lineup).  As long as it isn't breaking the bank, 70D is the way to go in my opinion.

Lenses / Re: Image of the New 100-400?
« on: October 25, 2013, 11:25:23 AM »
It's an adapted Minolta 80-200 f/2.8 as seen here:
The flange distance for Konica-Minolta is only 0.5mm longer than EF.  No chance of mount adapter for that without losing infinity focus.  You could change out the mount itself to EF, but it would still be a manual focus lens with no aperture control (wide-open only).  I can't see anyone with a press pass to photograph the World Series doing that.


Another suggestion from a man who knows everything about lenses.  He thinks it’s a “28-300 with filter barrel removed”.
So Roger think it's a modified 28-300mm.  Any pictures online of such a beast?  Any reason given for why one would modify it as such?

Game 2 picture from the gigapan - same guy (hard to tell since his face is obscured, but he's in the same area as Game 1)?  If so, he's a Canon shooter, as that is the 200-400mm f/4L.

Lenses / Re: Image of the New 100-400?
« on: October 24, 2013, 11:13:08 AM »
No red ring....this is nothing.....

Plus...seems too small for the 100-400L....

a99 + 70-200mm seems almost definitely the combo (although a3000 or a58 could be possibilities since they are the only other two Sony cameras with white 'a' logos on the front - although that's probably unlikely):

Especially considering the small orange-red glow to the right of the lens mount in the OP (either the alignment dot or the orange lens mount in the case of the a99).

Lenses / Re: Image of the New 100-400?
« on: October 24, 2013, 08:51:20 AM »
This may help:

On the first base line, just above the middle sign that says "" in a red jacket.

At $250 you're crazy for passing it up.  They typically go for $500-700 nowadays.  At the least you could make some money in a flip if it is still in good, working condition.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Removal of IR Highpass filter
« on: October 16, 2013, 01:21:55 PM »
Really good DIY step-by-step (with excellent pictures):

I have removed the IR filter from an XSi that was damaged beyond repair (the sensor was still in good shape).  The removal was not as easy as most tutorials indicate (the glass cracked multiple times as I was prying it out of the dust removal frame).  Have not put it into an operable camera yet to see what the results look like, yet.  I should be done fixing another XSi in the next couple of weeks and I'd like to throw it in there to see what results I get.

Canon General / Re: Irritating photography advice
« on: October 08, 2013, 01:27:46 PM »
You sink 2000$ in a small odd shaped lens and all the picture it takes comes blurry  - My wife 

 tilt shift?  I still don't understand tilt shifts,  but maybe I'll borrow one one day and figure out the draw.
I think he's talking about the 85L (narrow depth of field with very blurred background).  But I do take issue with calling it odd-shaped (the 17mm TS-E and 8-15mm take that crown), even if it is a chunky little monster.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 29