February 27, 2015, 09:28:40 PM

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 ... 88
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 14, 2014, 04:51:50 AM »
a viewfinder is one of the most valuable features on any camera to me (and others). Adding a good EVF also is significantly more costly than the difference between a touch LCD + user interface and a non-touch LCD.

As far as I am concerned, an EVF might be worth paying something extra. 250 would be a little high, compared to overall camera price. I'd imagine Canon can source those little EVF-screens for less than 50 from Epson or Sony ... depending on number of units  ;D

Anything more than $550 isn't worth the money.  Better value on the RX100 II or III.

The RX100 M3 is selling for $800. While G7X has touch screen, the RX100 M3 has EVF. Is the EVF worth $250? Not to me.

PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 13, 2014, 09:47:18 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

G1X II is not stupid. It is let down by poor sensor. It is incomprehensible how a small RX100 MK3 sensor can perform better.

Let us hope the G7X has a better sensor

The G1 X I and II are stupid. Because Canon did not stick the best APS-C sensor available at production time into them, but chose a weirdo 4:3 format sensor instead. Or otherwise use a 1" sensor and make the damn thing smaller, rather than waiting more than 2 years until they finally come up with a response to the Sony RX-100.

Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 13, 2014, 09:38:47 PM »
I can tell from the replies that you are suggesting manual settings - I will need to play with that - in my sample shot I selected landscape so I could not set ISO, shutter speed or aperature.  Those variables were input by the camera.  I will need to learn more about all of those I suppose and I suppose it is my fault for trying to use this as a point and shoot and then complaining about the results.  Thanks for the information - I did try to move some of those settings around before I followed the  landscape shot advice and I could tell it would be too dark for any lower ISO or increased shutter speed - I did not try to move the aperature setting. 

Is there a general rule of thumb as to what settings I should use - I can try another shot tonight using the same conditions but probably cannot duplicate the distance because I did not measure it.  Thanks -Tom

you could try mode "P" for a start. The camera will still set exposure automatically, but using the command wheel in the back you can change the aperture/shutter speed combination.

I find your sample picture actually quite OK for ISO 6400 and weak/difficult lighting. The closer corner of the printer is sharp, for the sharpness to extend further to the back, a higher aperture number would have been required, but this was not possible due to the given amount of light available in the scene.

You can also limit the maximum ISO value for Auto-ISO to something lower than 6400 ... eg 1600 -> hit the Q-button and tap "ISO" to get to this settings screen http://3.static.img-dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-m/screens/canon/auto-iso-limit.jpg?v=2953 .. however that may result in blurry pictures, because then the camera needs to use a slower shutter speed in order to get a correctly exposed (not too dark) image.

Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 13, 2014, 06:16:37 PM »
f/5.6 indoors is tough. Even at ISO6400 the camera needs to slow down to 1/15. That's slow enough shutter to introduce a lot of hand-held shake.

IS is on, right? That should help a little bit. But most of all, you might need more/better light than you have for that example shot.

yes, f/5.6 indoors and red stage light is tough. I got 1/20s @ ISO 1600 and f/5.0 with my M + 18-55 here:

In decent light my 18-55 is really sharp and an excellent performer. Here at 1/30s, 45mm, f 5.0. 

EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 13, 2014, 06:14:03 PM »
This is not a troll attempt, i really would like to hear people's thoughts on the upcoming 7D Mark II when put up against the new Nikon D750.

Technically, the 7DII and the D750 are not supposed to be compared, as one is FF and the one is crop.
The two cameras will be close in price, though. So, they will both be under consideration for enthusiasts looking to step up from their current gear.
And to me at least, the D750 is much more appealing than the 7DII.

When Canon and Nikon announced their entry-level FF cameras, I was underwhelmed.
Despite the 'entry-level' moniker, these are still premium, expensive cameras.
And yet, except for the FF sensors, their specs are somewhat modest (especially the 6D).

The D750 fully addresses my concerns.
With a modern FF sensor and an advanced AF system, it's a camera that can last me for years.
Thus, the higher prices tag becomes justifiable for me.

I can't say the same thing about the 7DII.
I'm still a crop user and I was hoping that the 7DII would have an updated sensor.
From the rumored specs, though, the sensor doesn't promise to be a meaningful improvement.
So, despite the great specs, its appeal as an upgrade option for me is limited.

Not that I'll be switching to Nikon right away.
But it's very nice to know that  there's a very appealing FF camera out there with specs that are tailored to my needs, basically.
And whenever I get the urge to switch to FF, I can do it without a second thought 8).

I agree with you. 7D II really looks more like a specialized solution for focal length limited, good light action shooters (sports, wildlife, birds, etc.). Nikon 750D looks like the most affordable, decently capable, UNIVERSAL digital camera. While in Canon land, the "cheapest" such solution currently is a 5D III. Both 6D and D610 unfortunately are too crippled as serious, longer-term useful, UNIVERSAL cameras - if moving subjects and challenging lighting conditions are also encountered shooting scenarios.

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. :-)

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 88