November 26, 2014, 06:29:02 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 ... 74
Well I guess almost all of us - with very few exceptions - want to see that Sony A9 as soon as possible.

If Sony A9 eliminates the current major weaknesses of A7/R:
1. AF speed/tracking capability,
2. shutter vibration  [A7R]
3. battery charge [all A7 incl. II]
4. "cooked"/11-bit RAWs 
* and comes with new, even better IQ sensor [30+ MP would be sufficient for my taste]
* and price is not much higher than € 2500 [=around 5D III]
then I'll get it. Along with 24-70/4, 16-35/4, 55/1.8 lenses. 8)

If not, I hope it will at least be "good enough" to further increase market pressure on Canon to bring higher end mirrorless models to market. Minimum a "worthwhile" EOS-M3 with 7D II sensor, good AF and EVF. And ideally also a fully competitive FF-sensored product line with new mount, short flange distance native lenses ["EF X"]. :) 

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: Today at 04:35:42 AM »
"Installed Base" of lenses in the market is large enough to keep mFT and leading APS-C mounts [Ca, Ni, Sony, Fuji] in the market for many years to come. Plus - most importantly - crop sensor cameras will always be less expensive than FF-sensored gear. 

Equally important: mirrorless cameras are significantly less costly to produce than DSLRs with mechanical components. "Solid state mirrorless" [fully electronic shutter, no mechanical parts whatsoever] cameras - both with crop  and FF sensors - will dominate the market soon, since they can be manufactured much more cost effectively and with less quality variances in automated fabs by robots without a lot of human labor. 

For conservative users who prefer optical viewfinderrs, there may be a selection of mirrorless cameras with "hybrid" optical/electronic viewfinders along the lines of some Fujifilm X-cameras [e.g. X-Pro 1; X-Pro 2 rumoured to be on its way].

Large, Pro-grade DSLRs [EOS 1D/s/X type] with mirrors and OVF will likely survive for another 10 years or so ... for specialized applications and conservative users. Very similar to analog 1D being the last film SLRs to be phased out about 10 years after DSLRs took over the market. :-)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: Today at 04:23:26 AM »
It certainly looks like the NX1 is a very capable mirrorless camera, thanks to both the advances in sensor tech [APS-C BSI sensor] and AF system and all other features/capabilities of that camera body. Also, the two f/2.8 zooms look like a really good match. 

Whether Samsung will be able to sell the NX1 / NX lineup well ... also outside of Korea/Asia ... remains to be seen. Will depend largely on pricing and availability in the respective markets.

It would certainly be good if Canon would also offer mirrorless products "at that level" ... maybe all this competition will lead to a similarly specced EOS M3 "Pro":P

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 25, 2014, 05:25:54 AM »
   Samsung strength is always their hardware, but their biggest weakness is their software (firmware in this case).
   Have a nice day.

could you be a bit more specific please - with regards to firmware-related issues of Samsung NX1?

Canon (and even more so Nikon) certainly got more than their fair share of software/firmware issues.
Especially Canon's inability and/or unwillingness to unlock and enable fairly basic and simple firmware features on their hardware (Cameras) is notorious. No focus peaking, no zebras, very poor Auto-ISO implementation in most of their DSLRs, no second curtain sync in their wireless ETTL protocol and many other software-/firmware related issues come to my mind. Just look at what Magic Lantern adds to Canon cameras that can be "hacked".

So before accepting any finger-pointing in the direction of other manufacturers, including Samsung - I'd really like to know very specifically what those issues may be in in what ways they are (even) worse than Canon's. 

Lighting / Re: R.I.P Metz Speedlites.
« on: November 25, 2014, 04:53:12 AM »
Nothing about RT-Controls - but i like RT with Flashes.

Slightly out of Topic - anyone knews an Remote Trigger for Canons RT - System, not on Cam, for any
Slave Flash - so i can use a Flash as a Slave triggered by 600 EX-RT / ST-E3RT ?
Grüße aus Wien.  :)

Unfortunately as of today I am not aware of any Canon [radio wireless ETTL] RT-compatible tranceiver. According to Chinese company Shanny seems to be working on one and possibly others too.

If Metz were to offer a fully compatible RT-transceiver at reasonable cost, it would be the first Metz I'd ever buy. In an instant. ANd more than one. Many other Canon RT users would probably do so as well.

It would allow us to integrate non-RT Canon speedlites [580/430] and compatible third party ETTL speedlites into an RT lighting setup - at least as slave flashes.   

However, it is probably highely unlikely that Canon would license the RT protocol to any third party manufacturer. And in Germany one cannot simply copy other companies protected designs or patents without being taken to court ... whereas in China that ain't necesarily so. Very unfair, and one of the unpleasant realities in the globalized economy.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 24, 2014, 10:45:33 AM »

Beats the Canon 7D II in fps, buffer depth and AF performance.

Fps, yes; buffer depth, yes; AF performance, how can you say that? A couple of vehicles traveling at constant speeds at distance has not been a test of any cameras AF for many years.

As far as AF is concerned, you are right ... my statement might be a bit premature. However, up to now I have not yet seen a 7D II AF test of a moving vehicle with 54 consecutive images perfectly in focus @ 150mm @f/2.8.  If you are aware of such a test, please kindly provide the link.

Even if 7D II AF phase AF turns out to be somewhat better in real use ... I still find it remarkable how well the Samsung NX1 hybrid (on sensor) AF system has focussed in those 2 tests.

And I'd definitely LOVE to see a Canon "EOS M3 Pro" with equally impressive AF performance. :-)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 24, 2014, 07:23:48 AM »
one more NX-1 AF test with an oncoming truck @50kph

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 07:14:16 AM »
On the mirrorless option am I the only person who doesn't like smaller cameras in general?

No definitely not. And there is plenty of Canon-DSLR-choice for all those, who like to hold chunky/beefy camera bodies in their large and strong hands. Plus one can add vertical grips to almost any Canon DSLR, making it even beefier and chunkier.

But ... there is also a good number of people who'd prefer significantly smaller & lighter gear. As their first, second or third camera (system). These people are currently not well served by Canon (and Nikon alike). All they want, is to also get some decent choice from Canon. Including high-performance, fully capable, competent, reliable mirrorless cameras, including some with full-frame sensors inside. Yes, some of those machines are available from other manufacturers. But they don't have Canon user interface on them, which is something most Canon users hold in high esteem ... that's why this group keeps asking for Canon offerings that are ... small, light, and good.  8)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 24, 2014, 06:16:33 AM »
There are other reports for the Continuous AF saying that it's not a keeper. Moving car in your direction is NOT ultimate AF test.
No charger for camera at that price is ridiculous. I was exited about NX1, but now I'm not that much.

yea, would be nice if the Bryan Carnahan would also test the NX-1 with the same horse/rider AF-test scene as the 7D II ... it is a tougher target than a moving truck. However, I would expect the NX-1 to do (even) better than the 7D II. fps and buffer are obviously clearly superior on the NX-1.

No external charger included: yes, it is a nuisance and totally unecessary. Similar to all Canon lenses (except L) still being sold without lens hood included. But it is a minor issue, since a separate charger is available for 50 bucks (?) or so. Again, very unecessary ... but for me no decivise factor to select/reject a camera system. 

And ... I'd LOVE to see Canon bringing an "EOS-M3 Pro" to market soon ... as capable and affordable as the Samsung NX-1. And those two Samsung f/2.8 IS zooms 16-50 and 50-150 ...  as EF-M lenses to go with the camera.  8)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 24, 2014, 05:28:57 AM »
I applaud the fact that the NX1 is a big middle finger to the camera industry establishment that says – get off your butts and stop dolling out new technology in dribs and drabs, because we've just shown you what's possible, and at a reasonable end-user price.

exactly how I would have worded it.  ;D

AF performance seems to be excellent: 
Though I don't shoot sports, I do occasionally shoot wildlife. High frame rates and focus tracking are therefore not high on my personal list of requirements. But, the claims from Samsung for the NX1 are so compelling: 205 phase detection point, 209 contrast detection points, 96% sensor coverage, 0.055 sec AF speed, and 15 FPS with AF for up to 70 frames, that I couldn't help by try a test.
I did a 65 frame burst ... 57 frames in other words, all shot in less than 5 seconds according to the displayed EXIF data.
I've looked at every frame and can say that each one in the sequence is sharp. I was at 150mm on the 50-150mm lens, and at f/2.8 the lens' widest opening so that there would be shallow DOF. Shutter speed was 1/4000 sec. I would estimate that the truck was moving at 90 km/h and the angle of attack changed from about 20 degrees at the beginning to 80 degrees near the end. Impressive performance!
Beats the Canon 7D II in fps, buffer depth and AF performance. And it is .. mirrorless! And has no dual-pixel AF sensor. Just hybrid in-sensor PD+CD-AF, some smart algorithms and a powerful enough CPU.  :)

My initial thought when seeing the NX1 at Photokina in September, 2014 was that this is a poor time to be entering the market. Camera sales are in a slump, and among consumers smartphones and tablets have taken over as the happy-snappers of choice for many people. But then, looking at the competitive marketplace it makes total sense. The big two, Canon and Nikon, have been asleep at the wheel when it comes to the so-called mirrorless revolution. Canon's M series was a token effort, and Nikon's 1 series is half-baked at best. Why? Because neither company wants to eat their golden goose – namely profitable DSLR sales. Instead, they're making a classic business school case-study mistake, and allowing erstwhile competators like Sony, Panasonic, Fujifilm and Olympus to land a beachhead and gain market share in the mirrorless segment, which is where the industry is inevitably heading whether Nikon and Canon want it to or not. Now, Samsung has also landed on the beach.

yes. Exactly as I see the situation.   :)

Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 24, 2014, 01:47:31 AM »
Despite Bryan's commentary, I'm with AvTvM on this. To my eyes, the noise comparison page (link below) shows minimal difference from the 70D at any ISO and certainly less than a stop (maybe 0.5 stop?) against the 7D, which seems to me a disappointing return for five years' progress. Along with a 6D, I still have a 7D but there's not enough here for me to feel the need to upgrade it. YMMV.

Yep, exactly what i see.

7d II IQ is visibly lower than sony A77 II and Pentax K-3 and even nikon D7100. And also behind sony A6000.
It just demonstrates Canon's ongoing sensor/readout weakness.

I don't want to be negative. Had a 7D from the first day in 10/2009 when it started to ship. Sold it in june 2014. Had the 7D II sebsor been fully competitive with any other APS-C camera on the market, I probably would have bought it, despite me looking for a more compact, preferably Ff-sensored mirrorless system. I am not going to do so for only a 0.5 EV improvement after 5 years. No way. Does not matter, how good the rest of the cam is. It is lacking in the most important discipline: image quality. A specializrd tool for reach-limited photographic applications, where there is not a lot of competition at currrnt due to nikon's fumble re. d300s successor and sony's lack of good long tele lenses.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 24, 2014, 01:33:10 AM »
I think there are 2 serious issues plaquing the Canon system:
a) sensor performance at low ISO
b) slow / inaccurate contrast based AF in their compact cameras e.g., G7X, EOS-M etc
Hopefully Canon can address these 2 problems.

These are just some of the symptoms. The underlying problem is, that Canon has not been willing to drive innovation full speed and/or has not been able to do so. They have switched to iterative small, purely marketing-driven steps. This has resulted in losing their towering technological dominance in digital cameras they had until about 2006, when many pros, semi-pros and enthusiasts bought their initial sets of canon digital slrs plus lenses plus flash. Today canon is an "ok" supplier and they still sell the most dslrs and they may be market leaders, but they are no longer the clear industry leader when it comes to digital imaging per se.

Canon is still an 800 pound gorilla, but it has gotten old, fat, tired, and complacent, unwilling to learn new tricks or to take any risks. They are now the supplier of choice to a) inexperienced brand believers shopping for a rebel plus kit lens (provided they still want to lug around any dslr) and b) professionals/semi pros with a large investment in the system who believe they need or really need cps service. But canon is loosing the most important segment fast: photo enthusiasts with some money to spend. They want the best cameras. Lenses and systems, they can afford. And they are doing their homework and know what those systems are. Unless one is bird/wildlife/outdoor sports oriented and into long tele lenses, it ai t canon these days. And it aint small iterations of clunky mirrorslappers.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 23, 2014, 04:26:27 PM »
Actually the great Canon RT radio wireless flash system is another example for Canon acting plain stupid.

Potentiallly one of Canon's strongest USPs, but their head honchos are NOT leveraging it ... out of pure greed. Still only selling the big fat expensive master-blaster 600EX-RT. And the ST-E3-RT cobntroller without AF-assist. Waiting until Yongnuo, Shanny, Phottix and all those other Chinese copycats are bringing copied versions at half price. Instead of building wireless RT Commanders into all of their new DSLRs ... should definitely have been in the 7D II.

Same story with the other potentially huge USP of Canon .. eye control focus (ECF) - the most intuitive way there is to select the desired AF-field. Simply abandoned instead of coming up with an improved version v.2.0. Canon asleep at the wheel ... until Sony will take up that feature and add it sometime soon to their cameras.

Ergonomics ... yes. BUT, why not use the excellent touch screen on the 7D II [and higher up cameras], why no fully articulated display? [for all of you "makes it weaker, it will break"-guys: you can turn that display around, flat against back of camera. There is NO better protection for the LCD than that. You don't have to fold it out, if you are afraid to).   

Service ... well, maybe in the US and Asia. In Europe, at least in smaller countries, CPS is a laughable joke. ANd if you're not eligible for CPS, service is AS BAD as it is for Nikon, Sony and all the others. Not a bit better.

Reviews / Re: Bryan Carnathan has completed his review of the 7D Mark II
« on: November 23, 2014, 04:12:55 PM »
Well written and comprehensive review. 

Conclusion: confirmation of what was already known ... IQ improvement vs. 70D minimal and even vs. 7D quite disappointing. Too bad. Really great DSLR otherwise, everything there, except built-in WiFi. 

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 23, 2014, 02:15:30 AM »

Thanks for posting, but totally incredible as far as specs go. No 5D iii successor will ever only have 98% viewfinder coverage. And first the "rumor" says 2x CF slot, while a little further down the page it says "weight with SD card". Mentioning a specific price point so long in advance immediately and utterly invalidates any rumor, as far as i an concerned.

That said, i do believe canon has to come up with a 5d iv mirrorslapper some time soon and it better has a spanking new higher res sensor ... Otherwise they dont have to bother at all. I also expect it to not have 4k video. At least not internally, because canon will cripple away that feature to "protect" 1d c and c500 etc. I could well imagine that canon jacks up launch price to 3799 ... And get bitten by that decision. It would basically price the camera totally out of the enthusiast/semi-pro sphere .. Which accounts for probably 80% of potential sales of such a mirrorslapper. Well, we will see.

Me ... Not really interested any longer, if sony a9 is a killer.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 74