December 20, 2014, 01:59:21 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 - pj1974

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 26
106
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 24, 2013, 10:06:57 PM »
The IS has nothing to do with stills.  Looks like another "video lens."  Oh well, if it's better than all the current 50's, I'll get it.

Wrong, actually.

IS also is very applicable for still photography.

A number of us have written that in our posts on this thread (pls read page 1).

While I've taken thousands of photos on tripods, I've taken hundreds of thousands of photos without a tripod, and believe me - in many situations using, bringing or even having a tripod (or monopod) just isn't practical (or allowed in some scenarios).

Many professional photographers use IS to get shots they otherwise couldn't have.  I'm not a pro, (though plenty of my photographs have been sold) - and my photographic technique does at times benefit from IS.

Paul

Sighhhhhhhhhh.  No, I meant that that's WHY Canon made this lens.
Same thing for the 24-70 f/4 IS lens.  Clearly aimed toward video more so than stills photographers.

f4?  Seriously...  wide max aperture is best for video, generally shutter would be at 1/50th, so the more flexible the lens can be the better as you effectively have one less paramater to play with.

Would you have paid the money Canon would have charged for a 24-70 f/2.8 IS lens?  Didn't think so.

Nope.  Nor will I pay the money for an f4 for a focal length that makes no sense on aps-c or s35.

The full frame users, perhaps those video shooters most concerned with shallow dof aren't going to flock to an f4 either.

Just a thought.

Well I'm glad both Pauls (me and Paul Walnut) are on the same page and seem to understand each other.

bdunbar79, I've appreciated a number of your posts in CR for some time - but it seems here you do not appreciate that the style of photography of some people is different to yours, and some people (like me) are hugely benefitted by IS in certain situations.

While you might not use it in stills photography and think that optical stabilisation is mainly, or purely for video - while even that is debatable, read chosenbydestiny's post, for example - the truth is that many pros and many non-pros use IS with great effect in certain photography scenarios. Not in all situations, but in some!

There are just SO many scenarios that I have shot in, and I have been alongside professional photographers too - where you just can not take or use a tripod (even a $1000 lightweight, compact carbon fibre one). 

Consider just these 2 applications A and B.

A
I have shot with the 50mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8, and even at ISO3200, shots were at the limit of shake. Being able to take a photo at 50mm in low light situations without risk of image shake, is of HUGE advantage.
Just 2 egs:
1) Christmas tree decorations being lit up by other fairy lights (tripod wouldn't fit on any side of the tree) as it was in a small apartment, near a bed and wall, and I wanted to get the shot without disturbing others who were sitting nearby
2) children relaxing by a campfire at a hike that I've been a leader at (fancy being 1 of a few adult leaders trekking 10 days, already carrying all the necessary gear eg food, tents, first-aid, cooking utensils, clothing, etc - and then also taking along a cumbersome tripod and setting it up while caring for a dozen children?)  No?? I didn't think so either!IS is great!
I could easily provide a much longer list....

Yes I do use my good tripod often, but I use IS more. And I also do use my IS lenses with IS turned off in situations too! (eg HDR, panning, some sports, BIF, etc)

B
Then, secondly there is another application- as I have already described previously - photos taken at smaller apertures, eg f/4 to f/11 (to obtain greater depth of field) ... and having IS helps to steady the shot (saying 'just use a larger aperture',  as this would ruin the shot, ie in some situations I do not want a super narrow dof eg f/1.4-f/2.

I could easily provide a long list of examples here, but I trust one's imagination and photographic experience help here, realising that one can't always take a tripod along, or the time to set one up and compose with a tripod (which even on the quickest set/ release types - is far from as quick as 'purely in one's hand').

This 2nd application is why some users (including some pros) of FF have skipped the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 v1 and v2 and instead gone to Canon's 24-105 f/4 IS or Canon's 24-70mm f/4 IS, OR to Tamron's 24-70mm f/2.8 VR.  I know many pros and non-pros who own both larger aperture non-IS lenses and also a mix of IS lenses (often covering the same focal length).

So, if your photographic style doesn't need IS, fine... don't use it (or turn it off).

I know some people think IS adds lots of money to each lens, though it's not as much as many people think. Most of the cost is not IS, it's optics (to obtain high IQ), solid build, and focusing mechanisms, etc.  eg a version of Canon's 24-70 f/4 without IS wouldn't cost $500, as compared to the current higher price with IS.  A Canon 24/70 f/4 without IS would cost a few hundred dollars less than the IS version. I'm willing to pay that for IS.

Same for any new 50mm prime.

While I genuinely feel it's a pity for folks who don't need IS (or don't think they ever need IS) - to pay that extra amount, please don't say IS is useless - when for many people it's actually both very useful or even necessary!

I hope my post is helpful in highlighting the value of IS, and also exposing what a lot of people don't realise about IS.

Regards

Paul  :)

107
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - How much will it cost?
« on: July 24, 2013, 09:21:38 PM »
I was one of the early adopters of the 7D, paying $2300 AUD for it (with Canon spare battery and 16GB CF card, plus warranty). I have not looked back since, though - worth every cent.

When the 7DmkII comes out, if it has following features, I'll happily pay around same price ($2300 AUD) for the body only:
 - cleaner sensor (at both low ISO and high ISO)
 - improved frame rate - to 10fps
 - improved AF (more points, slightly better accuracy, speed is good)
 - the new dual pixel live view AF / video AF
 - lower banding
 - somewhat more DR (if possible)

Above I wrote "when... released" - I realise I could have written "if... released" but I'm hoping it's a when... and soon!

I'm very happy with the 7D, the only real improvement I'd really like to see is the sensor. Otherwise I'll just buy another 7D!

Paul

108
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 24, 2013, 02:04:35 AM »
like someone else said- i could give a crap what kind of 50 they make, but for the love of god, let the damn thing focus properly.

hands down the worst canon lens ive ever used in terms of AF. It actually is usable as a manual only lens...because i dotn have a choice at this point.


ps- these "why IS?" arguments is think is ludicrous. IS helps. THAT IS ALL.

Yes, agree with you on both points.

I owned 2 copies of the 50mm, and the AF of it was terrible (better on my 7D than my 350D, and yes I've also used on FF) - but in all copies of the 50mm lenses, each was generally slow, inconsistent, inaccurate, hunting in poor light.  That's not what I want a fast prime for! I need it to nail focus.

There were other non 50mm - lenses that I have used with AF (eg f/1.8 with USM) - which nailed focus consistently. So it's not me being unable to use a shallow depth of field.  The 50mm occasionally would nail focus, but most of the time focus was not good enough. And trying to use the lens MF doesn't work well enough for my critical needs (focus ring = terrible).

And as per my other posts, yes - IS does help.  I may buy a new Canon 50mm without IS if it's good and they release it indicating there won't be an IS version, if it meets all my other needs. (I won't need IS in most situations, but certainly would take IS over a non-IS version, as at times IS will allow me to get the shot I want).

I may even consider Canon's 35mm f/2 IS over the 50mm non IS is released.  Just I know that I prefer the 50mm focal length for my style of photography rather than a 35mm. Just none of the current 50mm lenses from any manufacturer meets what I need.

Let's see!! C'mon Canon, please please please give us a great 50mm f/1.8 (or even f/2) with IS, USM and great IQ wide open! Eventual pirce under $1000 AUD. Pretty please.

Paul

109
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 24, 2013, 01:54:20 AM »
The IS has nothing to do with stills.  Looks like another "video lens."  Oh well, if it's better than all the current 50's, I'll get it.

Wrong, actually.

IS also is very applicable for still photography.

A number of us have written that in our posts on this thread (pls read page 1).

While I've taken thousands of photos on tripods, I've taken hundreds of thousands of photos without a tripod, and believe me - in many situations using, bringing or even having a tripod (or monopod) just isn't practical (or allowed in some scenarios).

Many professional photographers use IS to get shots they otherwise couldn't have.  I'm not a pro, (though plenty of my photographs have been sold) - and my photographic technique does at times benefit from IS.

Paul

110
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 23, 2013, 10:35:53 PM »
IS on a 50mm? Why?

Because it'll let you shoot static scenes down to probably 1/13 or so. Two stops of extra exposure is a huge deal in low-light situations.

PLUS... there are also times when you may wish to shoot at other than wide open (eg f/4) - as you WANT a greater depth of field (dof) - in lower light - and not have (or be unable to use) a tripod.

So the IS will allow a tripod-less (or 'tripod-restricted') photographer a sharp, 'steady' photo in such a (somewhat darker) situation, which a non-IS lens won't get you.   8)

I don't use IS all the time (I have both zoom and prime lenses that don't have IS). But my main lenses have IS. Generally I appreciate IS if it doesn't degrade overall image quality (and there are many recent lens releases that have shown IS doesn't have to degrade quality).

For the huge variety of photos I take, I'm willing to pay a few hundred Aussie dollars for IS, also in a 50mm. And yes, 50mm is useful on both FF and APS-C bodies. ;)

Paul

111
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 23, 2013, 09:44:40 PM »
While I do have some understanding about patents, I'm not currently too clued up on the details. 

With a filing date of January 2012, and a publication date of July 2013, does any of this indicate when a lens might be in production / release?  Or is this just a 'prototype'?

I'm in the market for a good 50mm, preferably Canon, ideal with IS.  Any aperture between f/1.4 and f/2.  My core requirements are great IQ wide open: sharp, great bokeh, low CA, strong contrast, USM focussing.

If Canon bring a new 50mm lens to the market similar to the recently released EF 35mm f/2 USM IS, I'll be very happy! Let's see what this will bring.

Looking forward to any insights folks on this forum can give about time-frame and possibility of actual production.

Paul

112
Canon General / Re: Compact camera for travel/everyday use
« on: July 23, 2013, 08:26:25 PM »
After a lot of research I bought my fiancee the Sony RX-100 recently, and she took it along on a week's holiday (I joined in the 2nd half - ie the last 4 days of the holiday).

I have 2 Canon DSLRs, but I know that my fiancee, Ali, wouldn't want to have a big camera for most of her purposes (though she has used my DSLRs time to time). It is very compact and good body quality.

The Sony RX-100 is an impressive compact... bigger sensor than any other camera in that body size, and images are very usable at ISO1600, and reasonable at 3200, and still ok (if really required) at 6400.

Don't expect to match a FF in terms of DOF control or pure IQ, but compared to any other compact P&S cameras, it's very good. Each of the 20MP are sharp (good lens, great sensor).

It has plenty of customisation - and for Ali to play around with / learn settings, etc. The only gripe I would say is that macro is at wide angle only (ie it does great macro at wide, but can't focus close when the lens is zoomed in... bit of a shame, but still, we captured some excellent wildflower and even insect photos.

I prefer optical view finder - but then again, the Sony RX-100 is very capable, and has a good screen. The Sony Rx-100 vII has just been announced, with some minor improvements, but 95% of it is the same. 

I'm very happy with my purchase, and Ali is thankful with her present. I trust my contribution helps.

Paul

113
EOS Bodies / Re: How good is 70D AF system compared to 50D?
« on: July 11, 2013, 07:22:46 PM »
Sounds familiar... Which movie?

Hint: male lead was an Australian actor, first name 'toffee candy bar', last name 'book to record monetary transactions'.

 ;)

Extra hint: I'm an Australian, but it wasn't me! [Process of elimination.... only 21 million people to go]

114
EOS-M / Re: Canon EOS M II
« on: July 11, 2013, 07:18:10 PM »
I personally think that we do not need a new M body that urgent.  What we need is a more comprehensive M system – more lenses and accessories available.  The EOS M should not be only a backup camera for the EOS DSLR.  It is nice that I can put the L lenses to my M body once in a while, but I prefer to use it with more choice of smaller lenses as my daily camera.

+1 on the need for more lenses.  In that regard, Canon USA's decision not to launch the one recently announced lens (11-22mm) completely baffles me.

I can see that the EOS-M is a great back-up / 'small portable, yet quality' camera for many people.  For me, the EOS-M size with the kit zoom lens (18-55mm) doesn't make it as convenient as I want. The 11-22mmmm UWA would work for many people as a landscape / 'hiking' combination too. But again, that lens is not 'ultra thin'.  However with the 22mm f/2 pancake prime, the size of the EOS-M is smaller - so that's great in theory - but I do like to have zoom for my 'small, travel camera'.   

A few weeks ago I bought a Sony RX-100 for my fiancee - she loves it. The size is just perfect for her (eg to place in her bag, and take everywhere). The EOS-M with 18-55mm is quite a lot larger. I 'tested' the RX-100 before I gave it to her, to check whether it operated well - (eg if I needed to return it). I was impressed with the image quality - though it doesn't match a DSLR (and thus doesn't quite have the DOF control as an EOS-M either).

My question is - while the recent EOS-M packages (22mm prime and 18-55mm) were on special in B&H (and Adorama / Amazon too if I remember correctly) - and 'made available' to US customers, surely this could have been bought by non-US customers too, right? (just paying an addition for postage eg about $60 shipping to here, Australia?)

And in the same manner, can't US customers obtain the EOS-M 11-22mm UWA zoom by either ordering from online retailers (not based in US - but who are willing to ship to the US)... or have a friend buy for them outside the US and ship (eg insured) to US?

I am, like Neuro, also baffled why the 11-22mm EOS-M lens isn't for sale directly in US.  It appears that lens IS available here in Australia (http://www.canon.com.au/en-AU/Personal/Products/Cameras-and-Accessories/Compact-System-Cameras/EF-M-11-22mm-f4-56-IS-STM)

I look forward to hearing from people about obtaining camera equipment from other countries, when either that equipment, OR a particular deal isn't available in other locations directly. I I could see the market is easily flooded with more grey imports that way, right?

[By the way, the EOS-M lenses so far tested on www.SLRgear.com appear to have very good IQ. That bodes good things for the future!... eg what the EOS-M II and EOS-M III will be as a package... I hope that Dual Pixel live view AF will soon be Canon's standard for all digital cameras!]

Paul

115
EOS Bodies / Re: How good is 70D AF system compared to 50D?
« on: July 11, 2013, 05:00:59 PM »
Neuro, surely with some of us here on CR, we could set up a new camera manufacturing company within a few months and by the end of this year produce a DSLR with all our needs perfectly met... eg a FF 20fps, 500 AF points, clean ISO from ISO25-ISO512,000 (H option up to ISO 5million)? And if we packaged it with this kit lens (50gr pancake, 10-1000 f/0.75 10 stop IS, Super-duper USM) and set the RRP at $298 as a kit to undercut the EOS-M ... well that would work, right?  Anyone?.....

Cameron: But we don't have any money.

Michael: Yeah, well, what we need is a backer.

Cameron: What's that?

Michael: Someone with money who's stupid.


</obscure movie reference>

 :D    ;D    Love it!

116
EOS Bodies / Re: How good is 70D AF system compared to 50D?
« on: July 10, 2013, 10:38:54 PM »
However it does have spot metering... which at least is better than nothing - I do realise metering and AF are totally different.

The Rebel/xxxD bodies have spot metering, too. Just sayin'.  ;)  Now, if that spot metering could be linked to the selected AF point...

True... thanks for the note, Neuro :)  Well.. except for the 'older' Rebels like my trusty 350D (XT) - which didn't have that 'advanced feature' back in the day ;)

I agree... I SO much want spot metering linked to the selected AF point... please Canon, are you listening to us?! (Maybe with the 7DmkII????)  So important for many applications... eg BIF.

Neuro, surely with some of us here on CR, we could set up a new camera manufacturing company within a few months and by the end of this year produce a DSLR with all our needs perfectly met... eg a FF 20fps, 500 AF points, clean ISO from ISO25-ISO512,000 (H option up to ISO 5million)? And if we packaged it with this kit lens (50gr pancake, 10-1000 f/0.75 10 stop IS, Super-duper USM) and set the RRP at $298 as a kit to undercut the EOS-M ... well that would work, right?  Anyone?.....

PJ   8)

117
EOS Bodies / Re: How good is 70D AF system compared to 50D?
« on: July 10, 2013, 08:34:23 PM »
Much better at servo tracking. Similar with one shot (too bad the 70D seemingly won't have Spot AF).

Correct. The manual indicates that the 70D does not have spot AF (not point expansion, which I do use on my 7D for some scenarios of moving subjects).

However it does have spot metering... which at least is better than nothing - I do realise metering and AF are totally different.

There are areas where the 7D (and I expect the 7DmkII) have advanced functionality over the 70D... so that's why I might consider the 7DmkII.

Hopefully the 7D's AF (both optical and LiveView) - will be even improved over the 70D's..... but I do think that now Canon have got it right with the xxD range getting the very good 19pt all cross-type AF system (those who learn how to use it can capture great photos!)

Paul

118
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 10, 2013, 08:06:17 PM »
3. As I've said for YEARS: APS-H is dead. Please don't keep resurrecting it.   ::) APS-H is now an unnecessary 'half way house' between APS-C and FF.  The 6D particularly demonstrates that.  Leave it to RIP, please!
 - APS-C for budget sensor, on camera flash, 'reach' (ie pixel density for certain applications - eg birding, some sports), and to make use of the wonderful array of EF-S lenses (many of which are L class in terms of image quality.
 - FF for more depth of field (DOF) control and per pixel sharpness, lower noise, and possibly in the (near) future, an overall much higher resolution photo - already competing with Medium Format.

Maybe you're right, APS-H is an unnecessary compromise between FF and APS-C.
If you're right, we can consider G15 is an unnecessary compromise between standard point&shoot cameras and EOS M.
And maybe APS-C sensor is an unnecessary compromise between P&Ss and FF.
And maybe P&Ss are unnecessary compromises between smartphones and FF.
And ...
 
 
Well, I think that a few compromises deserve to survive.

The comparison you're drawing between target marketing and product lines within the DSLR realm and the non-DSLR (let's call them 'P&S') realm is flawed, based on both market dynamics as well as the business / technology spectrum.

Canon produces a whole lot more P&S cameras than DSLR bodies. Many more models, and sell more P&S than DSLRs (though DSLRs have increased as a proportion of P&S in the past 10 years in particular).

There is a lot more market latitude for models like the G15 and even the EOS-M (above the standard small P&S) than for an APS-H between APS-C and FF.  Also, if one looks carefully at DSLR lenses, most are best suited to either an APS-C (EF-S) OR FF (EF).  EF lenses on APS-H can of course 'work' - but often they are better on either a FF or APS-C depending on the required application.

Similarly, a comparison of P&S between smart phone and DSLR isn't quite justified... though certainly the market will segment with an increasing number of smart phone cameras, as some of them have decent cameras included in recent times.

I do appreciate that there are some compromises between A and Z which do deserve to survive. That's where I see APS-C sitting (though even that I concede in the future may disappear... not in the near future, but possibly who knows what will happen in 20 years?!)  20 years ago the thought of a (FF) digital DSLR was a very 'futuristic' idea, let alone one with Live-View that could record movies. :)

Cheers

Paul

119
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 09, 2013, 11:59:10 PM »
3. As I've said for YEARS: APS-H is dead. Please don't keep resurrecting it.   ::) APS-H is now an unnecessary 'half way house' between APS-C and FF.  The 6D particularly demonstrates that.  Leave it to RIP, please!
 - APS-C for budget sensor, on camera flash, 'reach' (ie pixel density for certain applications - eg birding, some sports), and to make use of the wonderful array of EF-S lenses (many of which are L class in terms of image quality.
 - FF for more depth of field (DOF) control and per pixel sharpness, lower noise, and possibly in the (near) future, an overall much higher resolution photo - already competing with Medium Format.

You can proclaim whatever you want as much as you want. However, that won't change the fact that many of us, myself included, liked the APS-H format! Unlike you, many of us prefer to think of it as a useful half-way house between APS-C and FF. Not everyone wants FF for everything. Don't forget that there is a specific value to a cropped sensor: reach! When reach is one of the most significant factors, yet you want a balance between the often too small/too noisy pixels of APS-C, and the lack of reach of FF...well, APS-H once offered an ideal alternative that offered excellent IQ, superior IQ even, for a middle-ground price point (at least as far as professional-grade equipment goes).

I don't believe that APS-H should be brought back in the 7D II. On the contrary, I like the 7D line's positioning as the professional-grade APS-C part. I would, however, very much like to see something in the $3500-$4000 range bring back the APS-H sensor. Preferably in a 180nm part with something around 4µm pixels, and all the fancy bells ans whistles of the 5D III. The 3D?

Sorry, but I have no interest in letting APS-H rest in peace. I want the zombie back!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAAA!

:D  Ha ha... you want the zombie back... oh dear... some people have watched too many scary movies... and it's transforming DSLR bodies to 'the walking dead' bodies!! :)

I appreciate many of your posts on CR, jrista... including what you've written earlier in this thread about 7D resolution compared to an older and lower MP 1D.

So while I believe the APS-H is long in the ground - buried... and only to be resurrected via 'zombie power' - I can sympathise & understand that for some photographers, APS-H is their preferred blend / mix.

Having 1 body to cover what you want (or closely what you want) is often more practical than having bodies (2 or more) of both APS-C and FF.

APS-C is what works best for me currently.  Maybe one day APS-C will die....  I'll aim to have enough 'bodies' in my 'cool room' to create enough Frankensteins ... to 'live' for a long time into the future... lol    ;D

Paul


120
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 09, 2013, 11:54:14 PM »
1. I have a marketing degree and background, and agree with kimvette that Canon & Nikon (& Sony) do not 'release a DLSR camera' to match what the competition has put out a month or two before.  Research & Development and then prototype and production for specific significant new technology changes (and incorporating this into any new body) takes huge lengths of time (often years). 

My background is electronics and I work in a R/D centre. most of the projects that I have worked on are in the 3 to 5 year timeframe. I can assure you that putting out a camera in a month is laughable. It would take that long to get the boxes made and print the manuals.

Canon will be working on the next model before the previous one gets to market and will have a study group defining the model after that. They will already be working on the  80D, the 7D3, the 6D2, the 5D4 and 1D? are probably in prototype and they are working on the 5D5 and 1D??

Hi Don

Thanks for posting, also with your experience.

I take it you wrote that to confirm that we agree?! :)  Because we do..... (just wasn't sure if you misunderstood what I posted). 

I also agree - that Canon will already have been working on that list of 'future' cameras: 6DmkII, 80D, 7DmkIII, 5DmkIV

PJ  8)

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 26