March 04, 2015, 10:26:40 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 ... 88
316
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 05, 2014, 04:04:20 PM »
Direct Print Button will be re-introduced on all Canon EOS models.  ;D

317
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 03, 2014, 01:59:13 PM »
Canon released a new EF-s lens this year - the 10-18IS STM.  They released two new EF-s lenses in 2013, the 18-55IS STM and the 55-250IS STM.

So, from March 21st, 2013 to now, they've released three lenses that cover a 16mm to 400mm equivalent zoom range for the EF-s mount.

You forgot the EF-S 24 / 2.8 pancake.
On the other hand i would not count iterations of the kit zoom or the 55-250 as "new lenses".

318
Lenses / Re: HERE COMES THE BRAND NEW EF 50mm f/1.4
« on: October 03, 2014, 09:59:46 AM »
Shame they can't copy some nice Nikon lenses instead and make them in Canon mount.  I could do with a range of decent 1.8 primes.

hehe ... I'd definitely consider a Yongnuo exact copy of the Nikon 14-24/2.8  with EF mount priced at 299 USD.  ;D

319
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 03, 2014, 09:50:36 AM »
Basically Canon has three possible ways to design "a Digital Rebel with OVF".

1. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, fixed (pellicle) mirror, EVF [or hybrid VF] and EF-S mount
This concept has failed already 2 times ... first Canon Pellix, later Sony SLTs ... similar to e.g. Alpha 57 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9545765927/sony-slt-a57-hvl-le1

2. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, mirrorless, EVF and EF-S mount
This concept has failed also ... see Pentax K01 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/products/pentax/slrs/pentax_k01

3. Mirrorless, EVF, EF-M mount = EOS M3
Concept has half-failed first time round. Not for technical reasons, but for shortsighted Canon product crippling combined with Canon greed (way too high price). 


In reality Canon does not have a choice but to take route #3. Which is perfectly fine with me. :-)

And if they are smart, it will be sold body only and in 4 kits:
A) Body with EF-M 18-55 STM and
B) Body plus dual zoom kit .. EF-M 18-55 and EF-M 55-200
C) Body with EF/EF-S adapter
D) Body with EF-M 18-55 and EF/EFS adapter

While I do agree with your analysis, at the same type I hope you're wrong... mostly because I dislike using adaptors.
People seem to be ok with adaptors, but they do increase the risk of mechanical misalignments and make the whole system more cumbersome.

I guess I am not the target audience for this type of product but I do hope they keep the EF mount around

Well, I only have experience using the (original Canon) EF/EF-M adaptor on my EOS-M. And for me I have no issues whatsoever .. it works like a charm.

If I am out only with EF-S/EF glass, I leave the adapter attached to the camera body ... a little extension of the body, a small nozzle ... and change lenses as on any DSLR ... one move. 

If I am out with EF-M glass and only have one EF lens [typically 40/2.8] or EF-S lens [often 55-250 STM or 60 Macro] along, I leave the adapter attached to that lens and mount it, whenever needed, in just the one, usual movement .. exactly as on a DSLR.

ANd yes, in theory an adapter introduces one more coupling between lens and camera. One more joint were something can go wrong. In my practice however, I have not experienced any issues long thos lines. Everything is very solidly held in place and connected. There is no flex or mechanical instability.

At the end of the day, people will migrate to native short flange-distance lenses for mirrorless cameras, of course. But those little adapters will tide us over for as long as we want or for as long as we may have to wait for the right native lens to come along. 

320
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 05:47:44 PM »
And when is the last time you had trouble with a mechanical aperture?

Never. But I want "better and smaller". 100% mechanics-free. Electronic apertures are a necessary part for future Solid State Cameras with functionality that far surpasses the hybrid-half-mechanical machines of yesterday and today. At least until we really move on to lightfield imaging devices.   :-)

321
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 05:37:16 PM »
Oh boy.  I've had exactly two viewfinders die in my life.  One was an EVF, one was an LCD.

An electrochromic aperture isn't an aperture, it's an ND filter.  You can reduce light that way but you can't stop down to change DOF.

of course you can. it just needs to be engineered to make the translucent portion perfectly round and variable in size.

like here, for example: http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2014/06/future-smartphone-cameras-may-use-a-micro-electrochromic-iris-made-from-smart-glass-eliminating-the-use-of-actuators.html

I don't care, HOW they make it. I just want it to be perfectly round, 100% mechanics and vibration-free, small, light and designed for 10 million actuations. :-)


322
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 02, 2014, 05:35:30 PM »
Thanks, great posting!

It looks like the D750 has hit a sweet spot in performance, size and price for many amateurs and pros. Well done to Nikon, but this does not mean anyone should be unhappy with the 5D III if it does what they need it to.

However, this does depend on what you shoot and how you work. Some of the DR obsessives could not take a good photo to save their lives, but some of the Canon fanboys are no different. As a long-time Canon user and owner of an A7 and A7R, I am weary of people trying to tell me that the only reason why 'people like me' are eager for Canon to improve banding issues and DR can only be because I cannot expose properly. I pity those making such comments for they inhabit a delusional world.

Most of the time the 5D III is all the camera I would ever see myself needing, but when you hit the wall with respect to banding and DR, then it is a pain in the butt. I would not have invested in Nik Dfine for no reason. It is because it allowed me to get numerous prints into portfolios, exhibition and sold. This is fact and no amount of bleating from those twits harping on about how 11.7 stop of DR is all you will ever need changes that.

If Canon sorts out the banding with the 5D IV and perhaps increases DR to 13+ stops, I think they will have pretty well all the bases covered, but I have a feeling they won't. I'm not sure they are ready.

The 5D III remains great and I have no intention of selling up now, but if the 5D IV does not make significant leaps in DR and banding then I will. Why? Because I want to be able to work in the same way with all my cameras as I can the A7 and A7R. It has been such a pleasure to work on the files. I have a far greater safety net with respect to DR, there is no banding to speak of and don't have to mess around with Dfine with tricky images that pushed the 5D III too far.

If you shoot city nightscapes in London, for example, the banding and DR of the 5D III will be acutely felt in perhaps 50% of sessions, precise subject depending. This is a fact and it has nothing whatsoever to do with exposure deficiencies. A good friend standing next to me shooting the same scenes had fantastic files to play with from his D600, where mine needed far more expertise and time to work on (exposure blending etc). Some were only fit for the trash. Think moonlit evenings over the Thames, with deep shade, artificial light sources etc. Sure this is testing stuff, but its real and what I need to shoot!

A few months ago, your choice was either a flawed D800 or a D600/610 with either oil on the sensor or crappy AF, build etc. Now, well, Nikon have two very refined products that will tackle extreme brightness range subjects better than a 5D III. Noticeably better. Less stress better. Better print better. And without the flaws of their predecessors. So lets not pretend it is not the case....

Canon's 5D IV will impress, but I am not convinced it will match the Nikons for DR or banding. If it closes the gap half way, that will probably be enough for most of us and I will be darned confident that the 5D IV will be more 'finished', tougher, more reliable and a truly outstanding camera in every other parameter. Canon still leads the way in terms of producing 'sorted cameras' for sure.

The D750 is a great success, assuming it is has no gremlins lurking for the consumers. Knocking it will achieve nothing.

323
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 02, 2014, 05:27:34 PM »
hehehe ... glad to see DR. took some Drone-DRool-inducing pictures of that DReamlike DXO museum! ;D 

But just a warning...Sadly, not everyone will appreciate your sense of humor.  For example, I posted a humorous depiction of Canon banding and Exmor perfection after a 10-stop push:


324
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 05:19:28 PM »
Mirrorless & no moving parts would make it difficult to wear out.  Image quality goes up when mirror bounce is removed. +++  I use live view for critical work- big difference.  If it will take all my big glass, I'd be very tempted to give it a try.  Also, the lack of moving parts would open the door to a higher frame rate. +++++++
It would be nice to be able to shoot video without holding the damn thing 2 feet out in front of you- especially with a "big white" attached.  Should be interesting.

exactly. I am looking forweard to SSCs .. solid stae cameras. 100% mechanics-free. Fully electronic, Global Shutter. No noise. No slapping. No flapping. No cocking. No springing. No vibration. YES!

Last element to get rid of will be mechanical apertures - replace with electro-translucent LCD or similar. Always perfectly circular at any f-stop. Smaller unit. And no miore mechanical focus gears and focus rings. Everything by wire. Makes .. smaller lenses. And better wheathersealed ones, too. Pancakes galore. Plus tiny f/4 zooms all the way to 135 mm. All of them dirt cheap like EF-M lenses. And optically more than "good enough". For me. And most enthusiasts. All the others may just go and buy Leica and Zeiss Otusses.   8)

325
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 02, 2014, 01:19:58 PM »
Here's an image comparing banding in the D800, 5D2 and 5D3:
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6215/7000528839_164d776954_b.jpg

LOL, Dilbert!!!  ;D

326
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 01:16:54 PM »
One of the things I want most out of a mirrorless full size EOS is the ability to make 24mm Pancake lenses that sit as much behind the flange as in front.
There isn't much space back there as is, it wouldn't be hard to keep the same EF mount and still have mirrorless lenses incompatible with mirrored bodies, the only thing you have to keep the same is the contacts, which are mostly out of the way sitting on the bottom, which wasn't a problem for EF-S either.
The real question is whether a 24mm pancake is really worth all the trouble, but if you're making a camera with no mirror anyway...
(and yes that an "EF" Full Frame 24mm Pancake that I'm talking about, not "EF-S", which is already coming)

Not needed. Exists already ... EF-M 22/2.0. Small pancake. Great lens. Excellent value. ;D

327
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 01:02:02 PM »
Basically Canon has three possible ways to design "a Digital Rebel with OVF".

1. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, fixed (pellicle) mirror, EVF [or hybrid VF] and EF-S mount
This concept has failed already 2 times ... first Canon Pellix, later Sony SLTs ... similar to e.g. Alpha 57 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9545765927/sony-slt-a57-hvl-le1

2. Rebel-style and size body, e.g. like SL-1, mirrorless, EVF and EF-S mount
This concept has failed also ... see Pentax K01 back in 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/products/pentax/slrs/pentax_k01

3. Mirrorless, EVF, EF-M mount = EOS M3
Concept has half-failed first time round. Not for technical reasons, but for shortsighted Canon product crippling combined with Canon greed (way too high price). 


In reality Canon does not have a choice but to take route #3. Which is perfectly fine with me. :-)

And if they are smart, it will be sold body only and in 4 kits:
A) Body with EF-M 18-55 STM and
B) Body plus dual zoom kit .. EF-M 18-55 and EF-M 55-200
C) Body with EF/EF-S adapter
D) Body with EF-M 18-55 and EF/EFS adapter

328
Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: October 01, 2014, 12:20:37 PM »
other. EF 16-35/4 L IS

329
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 01, 2014, 10:46:18 AM »
D750 really is what D600/D610 should have been from the very start.
And 5D III is only what the 5D II should have been from the very start.

Both D750 and 5DIII are just iterations of mid-level FF sensored mirrorslappers with finally a halfway decent AF system built in. Plus current day comms (WiFI, GPS) in case of the Nikon D750. 

Severly marketing crippled DSLRs like 6D and D610 should and will soon be available at € 999,- ... more than adeqaute for "digital ff rebels", nothing more. 

330
Yes. If i occasionally look at some of my older images taken since 2000 it almost makes me cry. Family memories in noisy, discomoured, DR-less 2MP images ... Shot on a Sony camcorder or on various 1/1.7 or 1/2.3 dwarf sensored powershots ... Later on with 350d, 450d, 40d. Technically really crappy and lozs and lots of mussed moments due to massive shutter lag and lots of unsharp omages due to poor AF-capabilities.
Almost as bad as in my analog/film days.

Good gear is as essential to good images as is creativity, skill and light(ing).

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 88