July 28, 2014, 06:21:18 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 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 60
376
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: October 28, 2013, 05:55:41 AM »
No video mode?  Did they rip out live view as well?
If not it's only a magic lantern hack away.

Not if Nikon really does as promised in video teaser #3 "No clutter. No distractions".

Fairly easy to cut the video clutter on a DSLR
* no microphone built in
* no microphone jack
* no headphone jack
* no HDMI connector, just USB 2.0
* no red "record-video" button
* hardware incapable to pipe through uncompressed video, only low-quality stream for live view
* proprietary hardware and software that ML or others cannot hack for another 10 years

I'd salute them for that. Would be the frist DSLR in a long time witghout threads from video-guys demanding audio levels and zebars and this and that. What a relief. :-)

377
It's so obvoius... Don't you guys see it?

• Canikon get punished for making uninnovative market-differentiated, crippled ever-so-boring dslrs and crappy milcs (canon: too sluggish, nikon: speedy enough but midget-sensored)
• oly and mFT get punished for using quarter-sized sensors in full-sized bodies and trying to charge APS-C price for it. Plus all the retro-styling crap. Thats limits their market to a smaller than necessary segment.
• fuji is not doing as well as they could. They have painted themselves into the retro corner as well. And limit themselves to exotic APS-c transx sensors. Plus crop lenses at prices that will get you decent ff lenses as well.
• sony is in a mess, with all a-lenses, e-lenses and bodies, everything in aps-c and in ff. And while they are to be commended for bringing ff-milcs, they are coming up just a bit shy of a home run. Ibis, better af, better battery - and they would have scored really big time.

And, read my lips: i no fanboy for any brand. I will post here as long as i please. And i will not spend my money on any inadequate camera system. And neither should you. :-)


378
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 27, 2013, 09:51:21 AM »
IS in the camera itself is a great concept but suffer from inherent limitations as well. The lenses need to have a bigger imaging circle which can take into account the sensor movement range. With telephoto lenses, the sensor needs more room to move - now think in terms of super-tele focal lengths ... improbable at 800mm. Ever wondered why the new mirrorless EVFs don't have IS built into the camera? The small form factor will be thrown out of the window.

Of course there are limits to evrything. :-)

No problem to continue use of in-lens IS on long (Super)tele lenses. IBIS-Camera either switches to lens-IS when detected or camera makers eventually get both IS implementations to work in tandem for even greater effectiveness. After all, its just just a matter of the right sensors, algorithms, and processing power.

379
"Nikon MILCs" ... of course Nikon gets punished. Because their ill-fated dwarf-sensored 1-system does not sell any longer. Even japanese schoolgirls have stopped buying them, despite pink and gold painting.
Truth is simply: end of 2013
* Nikon has not a single MILC worth buying. Only boring me-too consumer-level APSC DSLRs (e.g. D5300). One  marketing-crippled FF-DSLR (D610) plus expensive lenses to go with it. D800 is excellent, but most people wanting one, got one by now.
* Canon .. exactly the same. Just insert "EOS-M", "Rebel XXS", "EOD 6D" and "5D III". 
 Too liittle innovation. Too much drip-feed iteration. Too high prices (for what it is).

Therefore CaNikon are both receiving their well-deserved punishment.

380
it is very simple. Canon and Nikon are being punished for not having brought to market DSLRs that are both affordable and interesting to regular-income photo enthusiasts. Lack of  interesting products ... less sales. 1 Million less incrementally boring DSLR-iterations ... hahaha, I love it. Customers are king, after all.

Two years ago (late 2012) Canon and Nikon missed the boat. No compelling and affordable APS-C DSLRs. No D400. No 7D II. Pricing closer to USD 1000 than to 2000. Of course with built- in GPS, Wifi, and in Canon's case EX-RT radio flash trigger. And fully articulated LCD (not just tilt!). For Canon the old 45-point 1 AF system plus a kick-ass 24MP APS-C sensor, half a notch better DR and Hi-ISO than the Nikon D7100 sensor. Nikon would have easily gotten away with the D7100 sensor and AF system (Multicam 3500DX).

And today, CaNikon are missing the boat again, because they have no mirrorless FF MILCs ready now and it looks they will not even have one ready within the year.

These days, only a few budget-restricted, conservative die-hards insisting on OVF are willing to swallow marketing-crippled FF DSLRs (6D, D610) still priced at more than 1500. All others are buying Fuji APS-C instead and/or are will be buying innovative and more affordable FF-mirrorless cams.

CaNikon are in for a lot of punishment. Well deserved.

381
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 27, 2013, 06:10:20 AM »
... It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system.

con we agree that in practice camera shake can and will occur "in any direction, sideways and rotational - in all three axes of our three-dimensional world (x, y, z) and even in any combination therof? 

Yes, number of axes stabilized does not tell us anything about an IS system's effectiveness (how well it stabilizes ... 0, 1,2,3,4,+ stops - and under what conditions?). But offering stabilization in more/all directions is essential to build a dramatically better IS system than one working "in 2 directions (x,y - angular) only.

And as for in-lens IS "being specialized for each lens" this really is a marketing joke. Of course it has to be "specialized" and "built to order" for each lens, because of the differences in optical design. After all in-lens IS introduces an additional, moveable lens element/group in the light-path, which would otherwise not necessarily be needed to yield the desired imaging capabilities.

At the sensor level however, shake is shake. It has direction/s, frequency and amplitude. Amplitude will be larger, the narrower the FOV of the mounted lens, that's all. For teh system to work well, it does not have to be tailored to each lens. It just has to be effective in quickly moving the sensor exactly in the right direction/s by the required amount of travel. Irrespectively of whether a lens with 10mm lens or 800mm focal length is mounted, and what optical lyout is used in that lens.

The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ... at a fraction pof the cost. Since it is needed only once per body, not once in every single lens. The only inherent advantage of in-lens IS systems is the ability to stabilize the viewfinder image in a DSLR. In mirrorless cameras with EVF, this is not needed, since the viewfinder image comes directly from the sensor and will automatically be stabilized. No matter what lens, as long as the amplitude of the camera shake is within working limits of the IS system. :-)   

382
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 26, 2013, 11:17:34 PM »
So Canon's 'last century' system compensates for the types of motion that account for the vast majority of 'shake' except at macro distances, and for the latter scenario, they have the 'this century' Hybrid IS than compensates for translational motion in addition to angular.


yes. As I said.  Canon has "2-axis" stabilizer (angular moves) and "4-axis" stabilizer in 100mm Macro. Oly has 5-axis stabilizer (but only) in their latest camera bodies (OMD5 and 1).  I'd imaginge that (micro-) camera shake can really occur in any of the 6 possible axes. Translational along the z-axis (optical axis of the system) is  probably really only relevant in very shallow DOF situations and macro.

Short overview of the 5-axis in Oly IBIS:
OLYMPUS OM-D E-M1 - 5-AXIS IMAGE STABILIZATION VIDEO (English) Small | Large

 
Especially in mirrorless ILCs with short-flange distance, in-body IS is a major asset, since it will also work with any non-IS lens mounted via adapter. Unfortunately Sony has not built their IBIS ("2-axis") into the A7/R - where it would matter most [exacting 36 MP sensor and so far only the 2 native zooms [28-70, 24-70) will have in-lens OSS, but not the 800 Euro 35/2.8 nor the 1000 USD  55/1.8, not to mention any of the other Sony A and E lenses. This is one of the reasons, why I'll probably pass on the A7/R.

383
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 26, 2013, 08:24:39 PM »
I don't see axis counting as any feasible way of comparison here.  ??? It must be obvious that from a development standpoint a vendor will run into limitations trying to cater to a broad selection of lens usage scenarios or do you really believe that at Olympus they work miracles instead of engineering?  :o

I think in-Body stabilization is preferrable for any lens up to 100mm focal length. Beyond that, in-lens-IS is preferable in DSLRs with OVFs as the viewfinder image is also stabilized. As mirrorless cams with EVF will replace DSLRs, sensor-stabilization will be the way to go, since it makes lenses somewhat sharper, lighter, more robust and less expensive and the viewfinder image will also be stabilized then.

In-body sensor stabilization for 6 "axes" - or rather "lateral shift along" plus "rotation around" all 3 axes (x, y, z) - will probably come soon - i.e. including back/forward movement of sensor, which is currently still missing in any manufacturers implementation. Compared to that, Canon's 2-axis "angle-movement" IS looks rather "last century".   

Heck, along with 6-axes Sensor-IS we may even get user-controllable, ultra-high-precision sensor shift and rotation in all 3 axes = tilt/shift with any lens. At least to some degree. ;-)

And yes, Olympus and to a lesser extent also Sony engineers do have a headstart over Canon (and Nikon) when it comes to in-body sensor-shift IS. :-)

384
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 26, 2013, 02:07:15 PM »
g
You are certainly correct regarding optical stabilizers. Having a stabilizer in the camera body will obviously lead to at least some optimization limitations as the vendor cannot fully optimize for specialized lenses (for example for big whites) and in addition it kills off any opportunity to come out with something like the 100mm L macro's IS system.

Hahaha ..  Really funny! Canon is 2 axes and hybrid af in 100mm L IS macro stabilizes movement in 4 axes. Olympus IBIS is 5 axes. ;-)

I am looking forward to a mirrorless FF-body - maybe sony a9r - with 5 axes in-body is, so i dint't have to buy  in-lens is in a 24/2.8 or 28/2.8. and when a big white with in-lens is is attached, the ibis will automatically be switched off. In one word: Best of all worlds. :-)


385
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 24, 2013, 09:02:44 AM »
But the joke is that Canon need not change the EOS/EF/EF-S system in any way. Nothing in the laws of physics dictate that mirrorless must be small and with a miniscule flange distance. Keep the size of the cameras, keep the current flange distance ... just make the dang things mirrorless.

I agree on most of your post. And yes, mirrorless cameras could also be built with the current EF/EF-S system's flange distance. 

BUT ... I want to get the entire "digital dividend" = 100% electronic cameras with capabilitis that exceed anything possible with a mirror-slapping DSLR. PLUS smaller body AND lower price. Why should electronic devices be any larger than they absolutely need to be? Smartphones do not contain large pockets of thin air either. :-)

Canon may not have to go all the way down to only 18mm flange distance like Sony did with its E-mount ...  but something around 21mm [=approx. half of FF diagonal] might be the ideal choice. Less restrictions in designing lenses [telecentricity, corner IQ], but still very slim camera bodies.

Also, Canon sholud take the plunge and move to a new lens mount soon, as they did in 1987. This time the pain will be far less, sicne flange distance  will be shorter and  all EF-lenses will remain usable via simple optics-free adapters. And over time - and spurred along by decent marketing and discounting - the entire user-base will purchase a new set of lenses (again), in addition to buying new mirrorless camera bodies - sooner than they might have replaced their existing DSLRs with yet another uninspiring, only marginally better iteration of DSLR.

Now, what's not to like in this scenario - from Canon' s business perspective? Plus: invested customers could not "escape" by switching to another brand either, because that would require at least the same investment.    ;)

386
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: October 24, 2013, 04:44:05 AM »
Nikon - Pure Photography #1 Small | Large


"in my hands again" .. oO  :P

reminds me of the Oly Pen clips 3 years ago, with Kevin Spacey - "don't be a tourist". ;-)

387
Canon General / Re: Benefits of a mirrorless FF?
« on: October 23, 2013, 08:51:40 AM »
yes, Sony has priced the A7/R deliberately low, hoping to lure in buyers into their new "FE" eco-system in order to - hopefully - reach "critical mass" and market share.

However, I do not believe Sony is losing money on the A7/R evven at these prices. I rather believe they are still making a healthy profit even at these prieces. Of course, they need ot sell a certain number of units,  to recoup all deveoepment costs etc.] 

While I don't care that much for Sony's financial well-being, I am thankful for their competition. They have clearly demonstrated to all of us  - the entire market -  that reasonably well-equipped FF-sensored mirrorless cameras cameras can be made today and  be sold at "reasonable" prices, rather than north of € 4000 - which would have been and possibly may even be CaNikons future price level, once they are "willing and able" to offer similar products.  :-)

388
Canon General / Re: Benefits of a mirrorless FF?
« on: October 23, 2013, 07:13:55 AM »
+1. Many of these mirrorless advantages are speculation about what is possible with the system rather what is available and working now.  I think eventually mirrorless will be able to achieve most of these benefits, but it might take years.

I do not buy the smaller/lighter/less conspicuous argument unless a pancake prime is mounted.  An A7 with a zoom lens mounted is still going to be somewhat bulky.

Looking at the A7/R we are not quite there yet, but every well on the way.
Starting "very soon" we can get get 2 cameras that are significantly smaller than any Canon DSLR with either a sensor (and presumably IQ) that tops anything available from Canon [36 MP - A7R] or with on-sensor hybrid CD-PD-AF which is not (yet) available from Canon on an FF sensor [A7R], WiFI (and NFC) built-in, which is only  currently only available in one Canon FF DSLR (6D). And best of all, these cameras can be ordered at launch for only USD 1698 and 2199. If Canon had something comparable, it would definitely cost more than USD 4000 [A7R] and well north of USD 3000 [A7].  :o

Lens availability is limited at launch, but both the SonyZeiss 35/2.8 and the 55/1.8 are very expensive but apparently very high-specced and very compact lenses. So it is possible to go "small, light and high-quality" if desired.   Even with one of the two zoom lenses 28-70 kit and Sony Zeiss 24-70/4.0 the camera an A7/R will be a lot smaller, lighter and less conspicuous than even a 5D III with the EF 24-70 on it. Not to mention a 1-series body.

Yes, not all of the mirroless FF goodness is here today, but some of it is. :-)

389
Canon General / Re: Benefits of a mirrorless FF?
« on: October 23, 2013, 04:45:52 AM »
Benefits of a mirrorless FF?

+ all IQ benefits of FF sensor = technically better images in any shooting situation (except Macro); more appealing pictures when shallow DOF is advantageous (e.g. often in portraiture)
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = easier to take along and to travel = more pictures at interesting places
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = less conspicuos = more and better images in any "non-staged" shooting situation
+ significantly cheaper to produce and service than any DSLR = = more profit for manufacturer and/or lower cost to customers
+ no mirror slap, less or no vibration = more sharp keepers, especially in tough shooting conditions/low light
+ no mirror = shorter / no viewfinder blackout possible
+ silent operation at full speed possible (with silent shutter; unfortunately not A7R) = huge advantage in noise-sensitive shooting conditions
+ no hard-to-clean oil-debris-splatter on sensor from flapping mirror mechanism (-> Nikon D600)
+ EVF better than any OVF (soon to come) - all shooting relevant information overlayed, camera can stay on eye and image displayed exactly as it will be captured = better images, more often capture "at decisive moment"
+ shorter flange back = use of almost any previous lens via adapter possible (but not always with good results)
+ AF performance inclduing tracking moving subjects will surpass capabilities of today's best DSLRs (soon), because no mirror in lightpath = more keeper action shots

Disadvantages:
- new lenses needed for optimal image quality and system performance, with less bulk and weight
- operation with 600/4 lens still requires sturdy tripod for optimal results
:-)

390
EOS Bodies / Re: New 1DX Firmware Version 2
« on: October 22, 2013, 08:05:52 AM »
Am I going crazy, or are they finally giving us a true Auto-ISO in M with exposure compensation?!?!?
That's a pleasant surprise!


yep. Finally. Now that Canon has understood, what tehir customers want in AUto-ISO functionality I hope they implement it as a firmware for 5D III, 6D and 7D as well. :-)

Quote
Expanded Minimum Shutter Speed in Auto ISO – In response to user feedback, this improved functionality in Auto ISO enables photographers to select a minimum shutter speed as high as 1/8000th of a second to freeze moving subjects.

Exposure Compensation in Auto ISO with Manual Mode Set – This new function enables photographers to manually set a desired shutter speed and aperture, use Auto ISO to control the exposure, and use Exposure Compensation to adjust the exposure for challenging lighting conditions (e.g., a very dark or very bright background). This new function can be activated through the Quick Control Dial or by using the Main Dial while pressing the SET button.

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 60