September 21, 2014, 02:34:53 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 - zim

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 48
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 11, 2014, 07:33:15 AM »
EOS iTR Autofocus and RGB + IR Photometry Sensor has got my attention.

Wonder if the iTR Autofocus is straight out of the 1Dx or it's an increment. Would/will spot metering be linked to it?

Surprised that the 65pnt AF has been confirmed was expecting 41pnt, nice.

What's not to like, looks like a great camera (ducks) my only gripe would be new grip, hardly surprising though.

Regards

17
reply to this thread with the city that you reside in

I'm from Berlin - the big Berlin in Germany as my Fritz-style English writing attempts suggest.

Btw interesting voting option there: "UK / Europe" ... last time I looked, the UK is part of Europe, though it may not be in the EU for long and get a bit smaller when Scotland leaves next week. I 've just read the new name will be "RUK" as in "Rest of UK" :->

I think your being a bit previous with that statement Marsu  ;)

18
EOS Bodies / Re: The day of the anti-climatic announcement
« on: September 06, 2014, 11:11:27 AM »
If you all feel so bad why not go to photokina and tell them to their face how S___ there products are?
While your at it take a placard or two!

Personally I'm struggling to process a backlog of pics cos my computer is by far the weakest link in my chain, that's the only upgrade with real benefit for me, couldn't give a rats arse about sensors right now  >:(

You pay them the flight ticket

Actually that's an interesting point, I wonder if any regular here is actually going to the show? Anyone?

Get real!

Exactly, that's my point


And do you know who stands on those booths?
I could tell it to my dog with the same effect.

They are Canon reps, not dogs

But Canon could make a website where users can post their complains, wishes and ideas... how about that?

Apparently that already exists its called CR

Oh and Canon should hire a few people who actually read it.

Ah ya got me there  ;D


Regards
PS my comments weren't really directed at you

19
EOS Bodies / Re: The day of the anti-climatic announcement
« on: September 06, 2014, 05:40:53 AM »
If you all feel so bad why not go to photokina and tell them to their face how S___ there products are?
While your at it take a placard or two!

Personally I'm struggling to process a backlog of pics cos my computer is by far the weakest link in my chain, that's the only upgrade with real benefit for me, couldn't give a rats arse about sensors right now  >:(

20
Canon General / Re: Canon Celebrates 80th Anniversary of Kwanon
« on: September 02, 2014, 08:25:27 AM »
wow now that was when Canon were innovative.... FF mirrorless with interchangeable sensors, brilliant  :P

21
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 28, 2014, 08:50:38 AM »
I will release what we have in our possession

So, someone sent you a pre-production sample?

Yip, there is a photo of it on the home page, hiding in plain sight all along  8)

22
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: August 28, 2014, 08:07:08 AM »
What our information doesn’t specify is whether or not it’s the identical sensor to the EOS 70D.</p>
<p>If what we posted turns out not to be true, it will be the greatest hoax of specs that I have seen in the 6 years we’ve been around.

But it could still be 20.2 and be a new improved sensor (not identical), what you've posted still true and for you not to have been hoaxed though, no?

23
Sports / Re: FutBall / Soccer / Football
« on: August 27, 2014, 07:56:59 AM »
At least get the order correct

Football / FutBall / .................................................................................................Soccer

 :P

24
On the basis that every time I post anything on this site I'm always wrong I say No chance  :-X

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 04:15:26 PM »
............. Or maybe this is all just a double bluff from Canon  ;D ;D ;D

26
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 04:12:07 PM »
70D native top iso 12800
7D - 16000

If correct doesn't sound like 'just' a 70D with AA removed to me??

There really isn't anything special about moving up to 16000 "native", especially if it's the same sensor as the 70D. It won't be any better than a digital push...its going to be using the downstream analog amp anyway for that, which is really no better.

If Canon doubled Q.E., then high ISO would be better for sure...but I would be surprised if Q.E. on this thing is over 50%.


mmmm I thought that native meant before digital push hay ho my misunderstand.
To be honest this is still much closer to what I was expecting - 7D build/ergo, 70D sensor and a couple of genuinely impressive head-liner specs (fps/af), price probably just north of the original 7D price I'd imagine.
Still a heck of a camera

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 22, 2014, 03:52:31 PM »
70D native top iso 12800
7D - 16000

If correct doesn't sound like 'just' a 70D with AA removed to me??

28
R1-7D, reading through this reminded me of a previous thread

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=17619.0

maybe worth a read if you haven't already

regards

29
Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 02:53:25 PM »
This website has truly jumped the shark.

You mean the shark-nado;D

Now your talkin, non of that  Stanley Kubrik amature hour stuff there  ;)

30
EOS Bodies / Re: Exmor vs DualISO
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:24:55 AM »
First off, to raptor3x - good article and great comparisons!

Doesn't this show in real world terms just how easy, without changing any sensor tech, it would be for Canon to improve one of the most complained about aspects of their current sensor design?

Complained about by who? Geeks arguing on forums? (No offense intended, I am a geek arguing on a forum.)

Even when you do have to push Canon shadows a little hard...shove the color NR slider over, all the way to the right if you have to, and give it some luminance NR. They're still not as good as Exmor shadows. But the difference is much smaller in a large print or stretched across a large monitor, and completely gone at average print and viewing sizes. The difference is never as large as it is while pixel peeping with minimal or no NR.

Just last night I was revisiting a Canon 7D landscape file with pushed shadows, not quite as hard as this test but hard enough. Pixel peeping on screen I can see the noise and it annoys me a bit. Printed to an Epson Ultra Premium Luster 17x22 sheet for one of my portfolio albums? I can't find any of that noise with my nose on the print.

Speaking of landscapes...high end professional landscape work is not produced by pushing Exmor shadows 4-5 stops. Landscape photographers bracket and HDR. Compare a HDR image to a heavily pushed image, even from Exmor, and the difference in tonality and fine detail will jump off the print at you. With AEB you can easily hand hold a 3 frame bracket.

All that said...I do find it puzzling that Canon went through the effort to make this possible in the sensor hardware but then never exploited it in the firmware. Are they afraid that it might be confusing to users, especially with the HTP mode option? Just add an Extended Dynamic Range (EDR) mode for RAW only and clearly state it's for pro users who are going to manipulate the tone curve in RAW.

It's dumb for Canon not to do this. But it is a much smaller issue, with far less impact on their bottom line, then any of us seem to realize.

Yes I did actually mean this form, no offence taken  ;D

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 48