October 22, 2014, 05:42:38 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 - AvTvM

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to argue crop vs. FF
« on: Today at 04:12:09 AM »
It's a stop and a third, of noise performance and DOF control (assuming you can keep constant framing through either a change in focal length at the same f-stop or a change in subject distance).  You pay for that just like you do with lenses.


It is a matter of how much photographic possibilities, capabilities and image quality you need or want and are willing and able to pay for. 

Also, while FF cameras and lenses are larger, heavier and more expensive than APS-C gear, the relation is certainly not proportional to sensor size. In real life, FF with more than 200% of Canon APS-C imaging area comes with a 0% [e.g. Sony A7/R, and all tele lenses>135 mm] to max. 50% size, weight, price "penalty".
mFT and 1" sensored gear scales even less proportionately against FF in terms of capabilities, size, weight and cost. :-) 

There is another plus of the crop sensors, which unfortunately is lost in Canon because Canon does not make good lenses for their crop cameras.  Crop sensors don't require all that glass.

Even as a very critical Canon client, I think you are mistaken. Canon has the best APS-C lens range in the market from 10mm to 250mm focal range with a sufficient number of *excellent and affordable* EF-S lenses. IQ-wise, some of these are optically right up there with the best L lenses and most of them are actually "dirt cheap" relative to their performance and competitive offerings ... Fuji X, Sony E including the "Zeiss"-labeled stuff and any and all Nikon DX lenses.

Unless you belong to those, who prefer to buy a 56/1.2 lens for a grand for use on an APS-C sensor only, rather than putting that grand towards an FF-sensored camera and much cheaper f/1.4 or f/1.8 glass for even better IQ, DOF, bokeh and photographic capability.  8)

And if those EF-S lenses are not good enough for you ... well guess what, all EF lenses, L and Non-L work absolutely flawlessly on any Canon EOS DSLR, including those with APS-C sensors.   

Specifically I would like to mention the following winners in the EF-S range:

excellent  8)
* EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS
* EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5
* EF-S 60/2.8 Macro
* EF-S 24/2.8 STM pancake [probably, not used it myself yet]

very good  8)
* EF-S 18-135/3.5-5.6 IS STM
* EF-S 55-250/4.5-5.6 IS STM   
* EF-S 15-85/3.5-5.6 IS
* EF-S 10-18/4.5-5.6 IS STM

best APS-C kit lens on the market at rock bottom price 8)
* EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM

The only thing lacking in the Canon APS-C department for some years now is a sensor as good as or better than competitive offerings. Unfortunately 7D II disappoints in terms of IQ improvements, otherwise I'd buy one. :P

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: LP-E6N Backwards Compatible
« on: October 21, 2014, 09:33:40 AM »
Yes. http://www.canon-asia.com/snapshot/eos-7dmk2-579/
Q: Can we continue to make use of the existing battery model
A:“Yes.” The new LP-E6N (1,865mAh) has a larger capacity, while maintaining the same shape as the LP-E6 (1,800mAh). The existing battery charger also remains usable, so equipment that you have purchased for the EOS 7D will not go to waste.

as far as "50 or 100 more shots" are concerned .. forget it. At least with the 7D II.
Battery performance is poor compared to e.g. Nikon D750 [1200+ shots/CIPA] and D810 - using same sized,  1900mAh EN-El15A.

Q: What is the maximum number of shots that can be taken when the battery is fully charged?
A:“During viewfinder shooting at a temperature of 23°C and at AE 100%, the maximum number of shots is 800. When using 50% of the built-in flash, the maximum number is 670 shots. Under the same conditions during Live View shooting, the maximum numbers are 270 and 250 shots at AE 100% and flash 50% respectively.” These are the numbers when the LP-E6N battery is used.
Obviously Canon is doing something very wrong regarding battery drain. 

And lastly: LP-E6 sell at about 55 Euro a piece, LP-E6N sell at 100+ Euro.
Any more questions?   ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 19, 2014, 01:46:32 PM »
Not much wrong with the 6D. Except pricing. It is basically a FF Rebel. It should come at 999 USD/Euro. It would have sold like hotcakes. Most basic, but lowest cost ff dslr.

The way it is, i am not interested. Way to crippled for the price. And way bigger than similarly priced sony A7.

EOS-M / Re: EOS M Owners Post Your Pictures
« on: October 15, 2014, 08:55:06 AM »
absolutely fabulous series, just love it. congrats!  8)

Some night snapshot with my EOS M and 22mm f:2 STM

ISO 6400

Photography Technique / Re: Yellowstone in Winter - what to take?
« on: October 12, 2014, 03:20:59 PM »
Dont forget to take 2 extra Sherpas along to carry all that gear. :-)

EOS Bodies / Re: Wifi on 5D MK IV?
« on: October 12, 2014, 04:25:18 AM »
eye-fi cards working well and with good reach within a canon 5d iii metal body demonstrate very well just how lame  canons lame excuse is.

There is no technical issue whatsoever, to include perfectly implemented, easy to set up and use wifi in all and any canon eos camera from tiny eos m2 ;-) to behemoth 1d-x ... Full or partial metal body shell or not.

Wasn't the G1X the first?

the first what? Oddball-sensored (4:3), too large-bodied, too slow-lensed, too highly priced, tunnel-viewfindered, pseudo compact camera that hardly anyone bought?  :P

Had Canon stuck the regular APS-C 18 MP sensor into the G1X back in 01/2012 ... and sold that beast at exactly the same price as the then cheapest Rebel [T3/1100D] with kitlens ... who knows, it might just have been successful and Sony's RX-100 with the smaller 1" sensor might not have become such a huge success.  :-)

"large sensor" means ... 1"
big zoom ... 10x or more
= RX10 / FZ1000 competitor. Just like the G7X is an RX100 (II, III) competitor.

Sony innovates. Canon follows ... years later.

EOS Bodies / Re: Wifi on 5D MK IV?
« on: October 09, 2014, 07:19:55 AM »
the extremely poor WiFi implementation in the (consumer grade) 6D should definitely not serve as an excuse for Canon to finally put wireless communciations [WiFi plus GPS plus RT-flash commander) INSIDE the 5D IV.

Plus truly kick-ass Android and iOS Apps to go with it. Current CamRanger functionality should mark the lower limit.

Nobody wants extra bricks or flash-shoe accessories, when it could all be neatly built in. As far as battery charge is concerned there are two measures for Canon to take: 1. make all those radio modules easy to switch on/off when and as required and 2. deliver better "original" batteries for the massive prices asked.

btw. up to now there seem to be no specs available for the new LP-E6N batteries (for 7D II). Exactly how much (more) charge do these hold? Specific *guaranteed minimum* mAh / Watt hrs please, no marketing fluff!  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Wifi on 5D MK IV?
« on: October 09, 2014, 04:47:15 AM »

After 7D II without WiFi I consider it quite possible that Canon is also going to withhold WiFi on 5D IV. They seem to believe they can get away telling us to just shut up and buy their ridiculously expensive and ultra-clunky WTF bricks.  http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17858967-lg.jpg

Check this out. A cheap substitute. ;-)

Cheap and clunky.  Nobody wants to carry cables around with them if they don't have to.  Cables should stay behind in the hotel room.  I'd bring an SD card reader for my phone long before I'd use something like that setup, but even that means extra crap to have to carry around, all to save what, three or four bucks on the BOM cost?

Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 08:19:50 PM »
I am drone and proud.  :)

F*cking Canon. Stupid enough to tease about their future advertising rather than working full tilt on their sub-par sensors.

And speaking of the "feel in the air around here these days".  That about sums it up.

Lol. I'd rather be a digital rebel ;-) than being unfocused or on canon's payroll. Must feel really shirty right now.

More light! More DR, Sire! :-)

Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 07:52:43 PM »
I am drone and proud.  :)

F*cking Canon. Stupid enough to tease about their future advertising rather than working full tilt on their sub-par sensors.

Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 01:14:30 PM »
Wow, first look at CR today -- and 24 pages of comments on this. It must really be something!!!

I've got some comment reading to do.

don't bother. It really is nothing. Not even hot air. Canon USA marketing has farted on the net, that's all.

Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 08:30:15 AM »

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68