January 31, 2015, 08:13:11 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 - preppyak

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 56
Lenses / Re: new ziess 55mm, redefining?
« on: September 07, 2012, 09:23:47 AM »
Can someone give me a good reason why Zeiss has never adopted AF?  Always wondered.
Because when you try to make a lens design timeless, and you don't have the Canon AF contacts direct from them, its difficult to complete that mission. We've already seen issues with certain third-party lenses and extenders on the new Canon bodies, and some of those lenses are <10yrs old. The reason is you have to lie to the camera and tell it that its an L lens, not a Zeiss lens. Then when Canon rolls out a new feature (lens profile corrections, for example) it can cause major issues.

Besides, most 3rd party lenses are known for being slower to AF, or having tons of focus issues (focus shift, front/back focus), so why even bother going down that road if you don't have to

EOS Bodies / Re: Pre digital days, please shed some light for me
« on: September 06, 2012, 06:59:55 PM »
So what your telling me is there is no reason why we actually need different sensors other than marketing purposes.  Cause like I said before with old camera's the features not sensors is what made them unique.
I would argue that cost is a huge part of marketing, so, technically yes marketing is why, but, only in a roundabout way.
So even though FF sensors cost more, if they sold 100K rebel FF's a year I think you could spread R&D costs around and prob make a profit.
Except if they can drive 50% of the profit margin of a 5D with the Ti series, and yet sell 50x as many, they'll make a hell of a lot more money. The biggest thing APS-C (and now mirrorless) is lower the entry barrier to better photography

Honestly evaluate the average DSLR buyer. They have no idea the difference between APS-C and Full-Frame in terms of how it impacts pictures, and so they probably aren't going to see the benefit of paying 5x as much for a 5dIII over a T3i. So Canon would be losing hundreds of thousands of sales if they only offered a full-frame entry camera at say, $1500.

Sensor size can be marketing, but, it also has many, many practical applications for why its bigger on some cameras and smaller on others. Most entry DSLR users would be frustrated by missing focus with the shallow DOF of full-frame, or by their pictures looking softer because their cheap lenses don't match the image circle. Not to mention, good full-frame lenses are heavy and expensive to make. APS-C is a way to cover those flaws yet still provide much better IQ than a P+S at a reasonable price.

But I'm pretty sure if it's refurbished then the shutter count is going to be zero.  I would think that refurbishing a camera would involve replacing the shutter.

Nope, in fact, I've yet to see anyone report that they got a shutter count of 0. I know my 60D had a shutter count of around 90 or so. Why replace the shutter on a camera rated to 150k if it wasn't what was wrong with the camera? Refurbished means it had an error that was fixed (or that it didn't sell), not that it's brand new

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcements Before Photokina
« on: September 05, 2012, 07:18:31 PM »
What happened to the 6D in October?
It's not October yet

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcements Before Photokina
« on: September 05, 2012, 09:38:56 AM »
Their midrange SLR range is starting to get tired and old with both the 60D and 7D badly needing replacing.
How do they badly need replacing? An update with better AF in both (and AFMA back in the 60D) would be nice, as well as an extra ISO stop, but, they are both perfectly fine cameras. Neither is crushed by their Nikon equivalent, or other competitors for that matter, and both are much better than a mirrorless alternative.

I think one thing people are forgetting is that for a year after a body is released, its price is very high...like, 50% higher than they sell for right now. Do you really believe the new 7D is going to be worth $17-1800+ for the body when the current one can be had for $1100?

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: September 05, 2012, 09:08:56 AM »
Two from this past weekend

Cheoah Dam

Bear Creek Falls

EOS Bodies / Re: The ultimate Photokina bet poll...
« on: September 04, 2012, 03:43:44 PM »
Why does that not count for anything, but the D800 vs. 5D3 bullS___ still rages on?  What about 1DX whipping everything?
To play devils advocate here, it's not that it doesn't count for anything...it's just, I can have one of each of the 5dIII and D800 for the price of the 1DX. There's a reason the $3000 cameras get argued more than the $7000 camera...more users. Likewise its the same reason why the D600 v whatever Canon puts out will be debated twice as much as the D800 v 5dIII was; more people can afford it.

Film kills digital. Canon being the worst of all.
Of course, Canon's decade old sensor is probably the least competitive.
Are you dense?
Learn something before pretending to know http://www.lfexaminer.com/formats.htm

You must have a lot of fun trolling the Canon forums. Seeing as your post history shows that is all you are here to do: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=20859

EOS Bodies / Re: The ultimate Photokina bet poll...
« on: September 04, 2012, 01:03:38 PM »
I think we'll see the 5dII successor simply for them to try and one-up the D600. We might see the new 70D, but, it'll basically be the old 7D with the new sensor AF and a weaker body

EOS Bodies / Re: 3D X and 7D Mark II at Photokina?
« on: September 04, 2012, 01:00:45 PM »
Their source is CR!!!!! LOL
Yep, they are using the two CR1 posts from this site (that were also sourced from NL) to say what will "be announced". Very, very silly, considering what CR1 means. Interestingly, they didn't bother to mention the 100-400, new 400mm, new 35mm, new 50mm, new 45mm and 90mm T/S, new 70D, new cheap full-frame, or any of the other items (new 430ex, etc) that have been CR1 in the same time frame. Kind of lazy/bad for credibility to put them in the "what to expect" category

Here is what the Photorumors link goes to: http://photorumors.com/2012/08/22/rumored-high-megapixels-canon-eos-3d-x-and-eos-7d-mark-ii-cameras/

Has it increased proportional to the cost of my gear, no, but, that's when you put a specific monetary value on it. I've definitely gotten better over time, but I could have also improved with the specific gear I had originally. Though, adding a wide angle lens definitely gets me shots I never could have.

Is the improvement proportional to the cost of my gear?  No, it's far greater.  I can put a price on the gear (and I have to, for insurance coverage).  The memories captured are priceless.
I love this take on it and I completely agree. While I don't have kids, its impossible to put value on how much fun I've had trying to capture a bunch of different shots and the places its taken me. And how much more fun it is than sitting in my living room in a weekend.

edit: Yeah, as i've spent more Ive definitely invested more time as well.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: rumor: D600 gets 16 Bit processing
« on: August 30, 2012, 08:46:28 AM »
it´s an entry level fullframe. not really a competition to the 5D MK3 other then sensor size and MP.
Well, 39pt AF, 5fps, etc. Granted, the ISO levels and SD cards are a big difference that would keep pro's away.

But, since there are plenty of hobbyists who would rather pay <$2000 for the 5dII over the 5dIII, I'd be a little worried if I was Canon. Because if they release that camera at $1500, and Canon doesn't have a response right away, the price of switching becomes very, very easy to justify when there is a $1500 price difference, and when Canon's entry full frame (5dII currently) is significantly under-spec'd.

Lenses / Re: Canon 24 f/1.4L and 24mmL TS-E ii
« on: August 30, 2012, 08:34:15 AM »
The only use where I would think of 24mm 1.4L II would be astrophotography.
Yep, I had the same thought. AF would be a non-issue for me for landscape and architectural work, as I'd be manual focusing most of the time anyway.

The 24 T/S is going to be better in every regard than the 24L, except in AF and low-light. So, if you'll use the 24L to shoot people or other scenese where you need AF a decent amount of the time, then you'd have to get that. Otherwise, I think the T/S opens up more possibilities.

This review has comparisons of all the lenses in that range (both 24mm T/S, the 24L, 16-35, etc). If you compare them at f/3.5, the TS is noticeably sharper and has much less CA. That's wide open v a lens stopped down 3 stops. The same is generally true at f/4-f/11...it's just sharper across the frame because of the nature of how it works. And of course, there's the ability to do pano's, etc


Lenses / Re: Lenses for 1DC?
« on: August 29, 2012, 03:51:35 PM »
except those zoom lenses that have been said to not work at 4k on this model
Well, these zooms are designed for an APS-C image circle, thus why you have to change to Super 35 mode. If you're in an APS-H mode using a lens designed for an APS-C image circle, you're going to get an ugly vignette. My guess is they were designed for the APS-C image circle to keep them lighter (thus the headline, "lightweight compact zooms" on the CR page)

EF lenses, being designed for a full-frame image circle, would presumably not have this issue

Lenses / Re: 100mm F2.8 macro vs 100mm F.28L IS macro
« on: August 29, 2012, 02:16:50 PM »
No lens has "portrait" written on it, but the 100L certainly is usable for this application, and for a wedding is more versatile than the 100/2 because you can close-up shots without changing lenses. The "real" flexible portrait lens for weddings is the 70-200/2.8 if you are willing to carry that around.
True, but, if you're going with a prime, one of the 100mm macro's is a nice combo to have so you don't have to keep changing lenses to get detail shots.

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 56