December 19, 2014, 11:10:28 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 ... 79
1
I use mostly rechargable Panasonic Eneloop AA (NiMH).
However, in some instances I also use non-rechargable Lithium 1.2V AA cells - Energizer Lithium or Varta (which may well be identical except for branding). they are considerably lighter and hold their charge longer, especially  in cold environments. So for randonee ski-touring in winter I use non-rechargable LithiumIon AA's mostly ... for anything from 1. avalanche beacon, 2. headlamp, torch to cameras, speedlites and other electronic gear - and do not need to take along a charger.

I've had absolutely no issues with (non-rechargable) 1.2V LiIon AA cells up to now and will continue to use them in the future, no matter what Canon thinks or advises.    :)

2
Perhaps Canon is considering marketing their own brand of batteries?   ;D
They have for years...
http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/batteries-and-chargers/batteries-and-chargers/powershot-batteries-chargers/battery-pack-nb4-300

however, according to the compatibility list in the product link above, these Canon AA batteries are not compatible with Canon speedlites.  Probably one needs to buy more expensive ones ...  ;D ;)

3
unfortunately we do not have the full-sized image from the starting post. So it cannot be proven or demonstrated evidently, how much better the chosen Sony camera was to capture taht picture rather than any Canon DSLR. I remain convinced, that the picture from that Sony sensor tzurnes out quite noticeably "better" - especially in shadow noise + texture & detail, than it would have from a current Canon sensor.

And I knmow for sure, the Canon pic woult d have at best 60% of the megapixels in it.  ;D

4
you must be joking ...  +2.5 EV is a HUGE problem for Canon sensors, and most definitely for the 7D and all other APS-C sensors.

I've got hundreds and hundreds of 7D images which have shadows lifted by at least this amount - it's easy.

When you know how...

And I can get up close to 5 stops with my 70D and 7D Mk II.

That you can't do it is the take-away message here - not that it can't be done. You're projecting your lack of ability onto the gear, a fact which is painfully obvious to those of us who have the skills.

(Off you go - complain to Admin again about the nasty man...)

While you may have far superior postprocessing skills to mine, the real difference seems to be a different standard, when it comes to final image quality. No problem with this. Now, go off and lift those shadows on your Canon sensor images.  ;D

5
Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 05:19:19 AM »
Canon USA, UK, etc are their own P&L centres. Why should they cross subsidise via way of a warranty an item bought from another country. 

Simple answer: ONE company. ONE world. ONE global economy. Not only for Canon, companies, makers, sellers of products. But also for us, buyers, customers.  8)

We don't tell Canon in what countries to manufacture their products. Canon is in no position to tell us, their customers, where to buy their products - as long as they come from their factories. They should be grateful when we spend our money on their products rather than on those from competitors. It would be in Canon's own best interest to keep us, their customers as happy as they possibly can. That includes the very best aftersales service they can possible pony up and offer to us. For all their products, for all their customers, no matter where we live, work and purchase Canon products.

Fair is fair.

6
Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 16, 2014, 08:28:52 PM »
Multinational corporations would be well advised to embrace the globalized economy in all aspects. If they want to peddle their wares globally they better respect their customers right to purchase those products at the lowest possible price available. Wherever that may be ... globally. They should be grateful, we buy anything from them.

So ... up yours, Canon!

7
http://nikonrumors.com/2014/12/16/apperently-there-are-fake-nikon-d800e-cameras-out-there.aspx/
https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/63056

That's what happens, if a company charges 1000 Euros more for a product variation with a modification that does not cost a lot and then simply adds an "E" behind the product name.

All it takes, is to paint or laser-etch that missing "E" behind the "D800" moniker on top of the camera ...   

8
Canon General / Re: 7D Mark II LP-E6 or LP-E6N?
« on: December 14, 2014, 01:24:25 AM »
In my experience, third party batteries and chargers have always turned out "not to be worth it" in the end. As much as i think Canon (like nikon and others) are really gouging us on battery prices ...

With third party batteries i've aleays had issues. Not one of them had better than 80% of the original battery capacity, once they had been in real use for more than a few weeks. Not one third party battery was still usable after 4 years, wheras all of my canon batteries (various types) were - maybe down to "only 1 red dot"-health status, but still good to go.

I've had all sorts of compatibility issues - both mechanically (including battery nearly stuck in camera slot) and electrically (third party battery overheating in original canon charger on 1st charge, etc.)

Especially when a new type of canon battery comes out like LP-E6N, i'd definitely be extra careful with third party batteries. The chinese manufacturers may not have really completed their reverse engineering exercise yet.

But ... YMMV.

9
Canon General / Re: 7D Mark II LP-E6 or LP-E6N?
« on: December 14, 2014, 01:03:59 AM »
Got no experience with the new LP-E6N yet.

It's a tough call. The nominal increase in capacity is tiny and certainly does not appear to justify the price differential. But most likely Canon also changed electronics/chip inside. This may bring real benefits to users that are not immediately obvious but still worth it. Or they might just be intended to reduce compatibility with third party gear like chargers and or previous generation cameras. Or it was just dictated by some legislation re. Battery safety etc. In Japan or elsewhere. Or all of these ... hard to tell.

LP-E6N street prices will come down, but again, hard to predict how quickly, how much.

When 7d II is the only (canon) camera body in use, I'd probably buy LP-E6N ... but only absolute minimum number  needed right now. More later, once cheaper ...

When 7d II is added to existing setup with one or more "older", LP-E6 cameras like 7D, 6D, 5D II, 5D III, 60D, 70D and chargers + batteries are used "mix 'n match", I'd probably not buy additional LP-E6N's yet. First check in regular use, whether the one from 7D II and the new charger play nicely with the previous generation gear.

10
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: December 13, 2014, 02:38:48 AM »
Really? Which 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4 were you planning on using with your Samsung? Or did you mean things you couldn't reach with the included zoom kit lens?
Samsung 300/2.8 for starters. -:)
Maybe followed by a 2x Extender next.
 ;D
So you imagine that an NX1, with an untested and unreleased 300 2.8 plus 2x extender, is going to outperform a 7D2 with a native Canon 600 f4 IS ii. Zoiks.
Not even mentioning that you can add a 2x to the Canon 600. You do realize that these posts are public and that people can read them?  Man you need to get out and get some fresh air.  :o

No, i don't think and I did not write that a 300/2.8 + 2x will be equal in iq to a native 600/4. Yes, nobody knows yet, how good or not that samsung 300/3.8 is going to be. But considering how the NX-1 apparently matches and in some respects even beats the 7D II capabilities, we might just be in for yet another nice surprise. :)




11
IMO EOSHD has it right in that the intersection of photo and video in SLR's was largely accidental. The two markets have different needs and one body can't be the choice for both best.

I enjoy occasionally shooting "pretty good" video with my Canon DSLR's, but if I was a serious video shooter I'd expect to buy a dedicated video camera with an EVF or at least a camera that was preferentially a video camera like the GH4. XD and XXD OVF DSLR's are designed primarily for shooting stills. Canon has it's Cinema line for video. Doesn't seem too complicated. My understanding is that the video quality of the Cinema series is excellent.

+1 full ACK

I really hope this "video stuff must be in every stills camera"-mania is dead soon.  8)

12
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: December 12, 2014, 04:52:51 PM »
Really? Which 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4 were you planning on using with your Samsung? Or did you mean things you couldn't reach with the included zoom kit lens?

Samsung 300/2.8 for starters. -:)
Maybe followed by a 2x Extender next.
 ;D

13
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: December 12, 2014, 02:25:57 PM »
hehe, only silver.

Quote
Its dynamic range and video quality fall behind some of its top-performing peers, but its performance is class-leading.

Looks like the the DpReview DRones will be as popular here as the DXO fellas.  ;D

Quote
Canon has added lots of tools to the Mark II, but one deserves special mention. Dual-Pixel autofocus may be one of the most important, and yet under-appreciated, technologies introduced to digital cameras in a long time. It's significant that Canon now includes this technology on their Cinema EOS cameras. Canon still seems to be dialing in the optimal implementation for the technology, but it will be exciting to see how it evolves.

Exactly. All that DPAF stuff is in it, but it does not really deliver the goods: live view AF as fast as that lowly Sony A6000 or better.

Quote
The Mark II is more evolutionary than revolutionary when it comes to image quality. Its 20.2 MP resolution sensor is a minor increase over the 7D, and not terribly noticeable on its own. It's certainly not a reason to upgrade from a 7D in and of itself.

Canon has been busy under the hood, however. Jpeg processing has seen a big improvement, and Jpeg files are capable of holding down noise and maintaining color and contrast for an extra stop (and sometimes more) compared to the 7D. Raw noise is slightly better, but Canon's real improvement in this area is the elimination of banding commonly found in dark shadow areas on other EOS cameras.


yea ... minor iteration. Better jpg engine. Less banding. RAW minimally improved, DR basically unchanged. Not good enough. Not at all.

Overall I consider both rating and conclusions are balanced and fair. 7D II would have been REALLY GREAT, had it come in spring 2013, but now it is very late to the party really only interesting for those, who have not moved to FF yet and/or are in the rather small niche of action/tele reach-oriented users. And even those may soon discover, that mirrorless cameras like Samsung NX1 are better suited for reach-limited, action-oriented captures.  :)

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 11, 2014, 10:57:44 AM »
nice pics. But I don't think the subjects in either of the 2 images would have behaved differently had you taken the camera to the eye to capture the image.  ;D

And even when a digital camera does has a viewfinder, there is no obligation to use it for every capture. One can still stick with LCD and "stretched-out arms snapshooter salute".  ;)

15
Landscape / Re: Mountains, Lakes and Rivers
« on: December 11, 2014, 04:18:46 AM »
Standing on frozen dam is so much fun, you never know if if will cracks a hole and consume you to wet feet. Superb sunset among the horizon, shame that I am not at higher ground but otherwise I'm happy with this.
taking the risk has paid off nicely here!  :)
Outstanding image, just love it! Chapeau!
Thanks for showing!

Btw: where is it?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 79