February 01, 2015, 08:33:51 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 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 84
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 06:09:39 PM »

you know this no wifi thing has got me pondering a bit.  If the rumor is true that multiple 7DII can sync time with each other, it would seem that they have to have some kind of wifi going there to make that happen.  One could assume that a GPS enabled camera could get it's time from the GPS sats and all should be within 50 ms of each other.  However it was specifically mentioned that the cameras can sync time together.  That to me means some kind of wireless communication is going on.  Wifi would be the easiest way to do that with current tech.

I'd lean more towards the camera having a built in radio commander that can act as a wireless trigger than a true wi-fi setup.

I'd lean more towards you needing to buy a WFT-E7 II for each camera on which you want to sync the time.  I know you think I'm probably joking, I wish I could say that I was...

You beat me, just wanted to reply with the same "suspicion", Neuro. This is Canon, after all. :-)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 05:04:42 PM »
What's the benefit of using CF and SD in the same camera?

none. Camera body is more than fat enough to house dual CF slot.

It just causes hits to shooting speed due to a slow SD card slot in many settings (eg. RAW to CF, JPG to SD).
Mixed CF/SD slots are likely to cause similar issues as on 5D III.
SD is only UHS I, not UHS II (which is implemented on Fuji X-T1 for example).

EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:59:00 PM »
no WiFi, no NFC, no RT-wireless flash commander built in. Seriously crippled in the communications department, ouch. But GPS which sucks much more battery power and is not needed as often by most users.

Why oh why?  ::)

AF looks promising, everything else is ... ok, but nothing more than minimum to be expected.

PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 13, 2014, 04:51:51 PM »
well, no winner. too late. Should have come out with that thing 2 years ago instead of stupid Powershot S 100/110/120 and instead of also stupid G1 X/II 

at least a 1" sensor
fast lens, useful focal length range
built in fill flash
WiFi + NFC built in ... but not in much bigger 7D II ... so incredibly and utterly ridiculous!
Control Ring ... yes, yes yes (if fully user assignable)
Touch LCD

no APS-C sensor
no top-notch EVF
price (whatever it is, it will be way too high)
not Retina/hi Res LCD, only 640x480

no buy, as far as I am concerned

EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
« on: September 12, 2014, 05:15:29 AM »
it makes me feel ... "i told you so".
Another fairly minimal iteration of a mirrorslapper. So little progress after 5 years. Not even WiFi built in.  ::)

You call that "Another fairly minimal iteration of a mirrorslapper" ?

I wonder what kinda camera you shooting with?

I think he's still using the 7D and M.

Sold the 7D some time ago, along with some Canon EF-S and EF lenses.
Bought the 7D on the first day of availabity 09/2009 as upgrade to my 40D. Never needed and still don't need the fps, but finally wanted a decent AF system and responsiveness in a decent, universal camera with better features and build/sealing than rebels and xxD models. 7D fully delivered to that.

BUT ... I do shoot quite a bit in fairly dark environments (e.g. concerts, events) and am looking to get SIGNIFICANTLY better IQ. Both noise/banding at ISOs 800 to 6400 AND better DR at base ISO.  Therefore my next camera system will likely be FF-sensored. A 7D II with only marginally better IQ [which is what I currently expect] is of no interest to me.

I was hoping there would be a number of (!) good high-end FF mirrorless camera systems with compact bodies and native lenses [yes, I know FF puts some limit to size of lenses] by end of 2014 ... including a serious Sony A7R competitor from Canon. I do prefer Canon's user interface and ergonomics over any other maker.

Currently I only have and use the EOS M. IQ is (technically) slightly better than the 7D and it is a much smaller and lighter package to travel with. OTOH, lack of viewfinder and AF-performance (especially in low light!] are a major pain to me. Touchscreen is a plus, especially for tripod-based work.

Sony A7R is so damn close to what I really want, but just not fully there yet ... AF preformance, vibration-inducing shutter, dismal battery charge, unattractive lens situation ... either too expensive [fixed focals] or not good enough [zooms] plus the fact it comes from Sony.

So I may be forced to buy yet another "hopefully last" mirrorslapper. Canon 5D III or Nikon D810 being the only candidates. 1D-X/D4s  not needed and way too much money, 6D/D610/D750 too crippled. Did not sell my EF 70-200 II yet, but would need to buy 16-35/4 and 24-70/2.8 II ... which is more money than I really want to sink into a soon obsolete mirrored camera system just for use until "my" FF MILC system finally arrives (1 year? 2 yaers?). I would not mind spending 10k on a "really right", totally compelling FF mirrorless system + some good native lenses. But ... not quite here yet.  :P

EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
« on: September 11, 2014, 02:28:19 PM »
it makes me feel ... "i told you so".
Another fairly minimal iteration of a mirrorslapper. So little progress after 5 years. Not even WiFi built in.  ::)

Lenses / Re: When will we see a replacement for the 100-400?
« on: September 10, 2014, 05:35:55 AM »
looks like "when hell freezes over".  :P
It won't matter any longer to me though, since it will be long after the day I've moved to a great mirrorless system and don't need no big EF mirrorslapper lenses any more.   ;D 8)

Exactly! :-)

The only real question is:  Will mirrorless kill Canon dSLRs before Canon's sup-par sensor technology kills Canon dSLRs? 

 ::) ::) ::)


Of course power drain is higher with a display always on. Therefore, MILCs should come with stronger batteries, not with smaller ones with less charge/capacity.

Specifically I am referring to the EOS-M. Making the handgrip slightly larger would have provided a better grip and allowed use of a regular LP-E6 battery (7.2V, 1800mAh -> 12.96 Wh] rather than the wimpy LP-E12 [7.2V, 875 mAh -> 6.3 Wh], doubling number of shots to something like 400, which would approach reasonable in my book. Size and weight difference is much smaller, than difference in  charge. Handgrip would still stick out a lot less than smallest EF-M (22/20) attached, so no problem. 

Sony A7/R/S -> exactly the same problem. Wimpy NPFW50 [7.2 V, 1080 mAh -> 7.8 Wh, approx. 270 shots] instead of using the regular Alpha (SLT) battery [7.2V, 1650 mAh ->  11.9 Wh] ... would have likely been good for 500 shots/charge and would also have fit the body without making it overly bulky or heavy.

It's really beyond me, why camera makers take decisions like these. Especially in the case of the Sony A7. EOS-M and M2 primary design goal was to make them as small as possible, so Canon is "half-excused" on that one. :-)

Of course they could also source better batteries with higher energy density. After all the regular battery types like Canon LP-E6 have been around a good number of years. I'd expect that there was some technological progress in the field of rechargable batteries in the meantime. 

* battery charge - not equal, partly due to higjher power requirement from EVF/LCD
Party? Putting a differently shaped DSLR battery into a MILC doesn't negate the large power drawn by backlit displays.

there will be a switch.

just like digital cameras totally replaced analogue cameras ... except for very few people [I'd guess less than 1 for every 1000 digital image takers]
just like CDs totally replaced vinyl LPs and cassette taps ... except for very few people ...
just like DVDs replaced video tapes ... no except here :-)
just like "the cloud" and streaming audio and video replaced CDs and DVDs alike ... except for a few people ...

It is just SO obvious and has been for at least 2 years. Just some forum participants and CaNikon management refuse to look the facts in the eye.

Fact is: MILCs currently are not yet as capable in all areas compared to high end DLSRs. This is not at all for technical reasons, but simply because the two leading manufacturers have not (yet) been willing to make it happen. The longer they wait, the more other players are making it happen.

* Sensor/IQ - equal
* AF performance - not yet, but AF performance like a 1D-X in a MILC is just a matter of some smart algorithms and enough CPU ooomph ...
* battery charge - not equal, partly due to higjher power requirement from EVF/LCD, but in equal parts because manufacturers are sticking freakin' wimpy batteries into MILC bodies that could just as well hold regular DSLR batteries if only the handgrip was made ever so slightly larger
* EVF ... in bright daylight not as good yet as a really good EVF ... better than rebel mirror-viewfinders. In really poor light better than any DSLR viewfinder
Really not much work left to do to draw even at least with 1DX performance.

And from there it is all upside potential: fully electronic shutter - enabling actuations free of vibrations and noise. fps as high as wanted, once the necessary algorithms and sufficient CPU ooomph are installed. Improved AF-performance including tracking of anything and everything that has been unimaginable up to now. Native convergence of video and stiills (for those who clamor for it). and and and ... a MILC really is an immeasurably better image capturing platform than any mirrorslapper.

NExt stop? 10 years out, "traditional MILCs"  ;D  may be succeeded by solid state lightfield imaging devices capturing an additional dimension of image data ... storing it on holographic memory cards. That technology may also just as well eliminate the need for heavy and expensive ground/polished glass lenses.  Regular MILC users will be in shock and denial. :-)

EOS-M / Re: Anything new on EOS-M3? How it may compare to A6000?
« on: September 08, 2014, 10:44:24 AM »
definitely fake. :-)

But it shows really well, how freakin' easy it would be to build a worthwhile EOS M3.

@Canon: stick the darn 70D innards except mirror and OVF into an EOS-M2 body, add a great EVF on top, slap on a nice fully articulated LCD to the back and make the handgrip so much larger, that it will fit a regular LP-E6 battery for 500+ shots a charge. Sell @ 699 body only and 799 with kit lens and still make more profit per unit compared to any Rebel and 70D, since it is so much cheaper to build than even an SL-1 mirrorslapper. Significantly less labor cost, since many steps in assembly, calibration and QC are eliminated from the manufacturing process, once the fickle mechanical moving parts and separate phase AF and viewfinder prism are gone.

The main reason, why mirrorless systems have not been even more successful in replacing DSLRs is the unwillingness of canon and nikon to make them. Meaning highly capable APS-C and FF sensored models plus native lenses at reasonable price/value points.

As soon as fully competitive offerings to fuji X-T1, X-E2 and sony A7/R/S are available from canon and nikon, the market will turn within 2 years and DSLRs will be relegated to small specialist niches - mainly fields of photography where large lenses are needed (Superteles) to capture fast action - wildlife, birds, sports.

The transition is well underway and CaNikons ability to to sell one or two more generations of boring iterations of their fat old mirroslappers to their more conservative clients is rapidly coming to a close.

I can see the generation gap everywhere i go. Best seen with amateurs/enthusiasts. At the last wedding i attended (as guest, sans camera) the pro aged 50+ was using his classic 2 DSLR setup (nikon D4/D4s) one guest aged 50+ had a nikon D800 along and turned out to be a pro. And to my surprise 3 fuji X cameras were present, all owned by well-off amateurs aged 25 to 35. plus of course all the mobile devices. Compact digicams only used by pne of the grannies and some not so tech-savvy looking uncles/aunties aged 65+ ...hehehe

The switch to mirrorless is not 10 years away, it is happening now. Solid state digital cameras are replacing mechanical mirrorslappers just like streamed music has replaced CDs after these had replaced vinyl LPs.

Lenses / Re: Is there a need for a 50mm?
« on: September 07, 2014, 07:37:05 AM »
If you don't use it and don't need it as light, compact and fast "emergency backup" ... Then sell it.

I would not buy the current canon 50/1.4 or 50/1.2 L instead. Neither are really worth the money. Maybe canon will come up with a really good and priceworthy 50/1.8 IS sometome soon. In line with 24, 28 / 2.8 is and 35/2 IS.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 03, 2014, 09:53:50 AM »
ranked in order of usefulness/desirability to me:

* Exe Control AF -> v2 ... improved to today's standards ... in conjunction with a top notch AF-system and a class-leading EVF on a FF mirrorless cam ... would be willing to pay up to $/€ 500 extra for this feature

* 1/500 or shorter X-sync ... implemented by means of a fully electronic shutter ... would only pay a little extra for it, since it is cheaper than mech shutter unit

*  freely assignable Multi-Function ring around mount base on camera body ... default = aperture setting. As in Powershot S95/100 etc. Would be willing to pay up to €/$ 50 extra, since a hardware change is involved.

* Fully functional Auto-ISO including EV +/- compensation in "M" ... in any Canon EOS. I'd be willing to pay up to €/$  25 extra, since no research / only a minor firmware change is needed

* A-DEP mode -> automatic depth of field. I would want the 3-step method [as implemented e.g. in EOS 3], not the latter 1-step procedure [as e.g. in 40D, 50D]. I'd be willing to pay up to 25 €/$ extra for that feature, since it reuqires a minor firmware change only. http://www.vad1.com/photo/autodof.html

* Focus trap ->  automatic shutter release, as soon a moving object gets into [pre-set] focus. To my knowledge, this feature was never implemented in a Canon EOS - but on some/many Nikon DSLRs. I'd be willing to pay up to 25 €/$ extra since it requires only a minor firmware change only.

... lots of money to be made for Canon, if they build me a body with the desired features.  Or even better ... Canon could leave out all video recording capability/features [except live view feed] on my camera and give me the above listed features instead, at no extra charge.  8)

Lenses / Re: Canon Price Drops on L Lenses
« on: September 02, 2014, 04:44:47 PM »
Sigma/art is hurting canon lens sales.
Refusal to buy new lenses unless canon releases new bodies first also hurts canon lens sales.
People switching to Sony a7/r/s hurt canon lens sales.
People switching to mirrorless fuji x system hurt canon lens sales.
People like myself refusing to buy anything new from canon until they deliver a fully competitive ff mirrorless system .. Hurt canon lens sales...

Enough so to force 10% Price cuts across major parts of the lens lineup. Hehe. Just love it. No more aggressive price hikes in order to boost profits despite falling number of units sold. Canon clearly in the defense due to their strategy to try to only offer fat old mirrorslappers instead of groundbreaking, truly dihital mirroless interchanheable lens cameras and native lenses for them. Hehe. Just love it. Hehehe!

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 84