January 28, 2015, 11:48:10 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 83
iPhone 4S is always with me, but use it very rarely to take photos ... basically occasional snapshots or as a "sketchbook" ... when I see places/things I want to capture as "real pictures" using a "real camera". :-)

Smartphones/tablet cams will never deliver "good enough" in 4 aspects that are important to me:
1.) optical zoom/tele capability. Don't care for "everything in wide-angle only".
2.) viewfinder - prefer to take images with camera on my eye, rather than in stretched ourt hands
3.) image quality - especially when lighting is "less than ideal"
4.) good chance to get well-focused images of moving subjects, even in challenging capture situations

I sold my 7D and do not want to buy another DSLR. Currently I only use my EOS M set - which is ok, but also does not deliver on items #2 and #4 above. But it will tide me over until the smoke in the mirrorless area clears. It's going to be either Canon APS-C EOS M3 "Pro" or Canon FF mirrorless or Sony (A9). We'll see.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII AF Point Issue
« on: December 22, 2014, 05:31:42 AM »
... It's worth noting that the actual area of the AF point on the AF sensor is larger than the little box in the viewfinder.  Spot AF uses a smaller area of the AF point, but even that is slightly larger than the box in the VF (the main box, not the smaller inset box that indicates Spot AF).

This is something I have been loathe of forever! Why camera makers don't show AF-markings in the viewfinder (or on LCD)  that exactly correspond to the true size of the real AF-Sensors? Probably to cover up for all that misalignment inherent with the very design of mirrorslapper cameras. Moving mirrors and submirrors pl,us a number of separate planes ... AF-sensor, imaging-sensor, mattescreen, transmissive LCD, viewfinder image ... with a big fat prism (or a mirrored hollow space) in between.

But even in mirrorless cameras, I find AF-field markings WAY smaller than the actual AF-sensor. e.g. in the EOS-M. It irks me all the time, since it contributes to the blasted thing focusing on contrasty fecnces in the background rather than on soft faces in the foreground.  ::)

EOS Bodies / Re: A Real EOS M Replacement Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: December 19, 2014, 08:28:51 PM »
This is looking increasingly unlikely by the hour.

Why? It will lilely be announced in feb 2015.

For speedlites I normally use rechargable Panasonic Eneloop AA (NiMH).

However, in some instances I also use non-rechargable Lithium 1.2V AA cells, typically Energizer Lithium or Varta (which may well be identical except for branding). They are considerably lighter than NiMH cells and hold their charge longer in cold environments. Therefore they are my preferred choice for randonee ski-touring in winter - for anything from avalanche beacon, headlamp, torch to speedlites and other electronic gear. Sometimes I also carried along a vertical grip battery magazin loaded with 6xAA LiIon cells as "emergency power" for the camera. 

I've experienced absolutely no issues with (non-rechargable) 1.2V LiIon AA cells up to now and will continue to use them in the future as and when I see fit to do so, no matter what Canon thinks or advises.  :)

Perhaps Canon is considering marketing their own brand of batteries?   ;D
They have for years...

however, according to the compatibility list in the product link above, these Canon AA batteries are not compatible with Canon speedlites.  Probably one needs to buy more expensive ones ...  ;D ;)

unfortunately we do not have the full-sized image from the starting post. So it cannot be proven or demonstrated evidently, how much better the chosen Sony camera was to capture taht picture rather than any Canon DSLR. I remain convinced, that the picture from that Sony sensor tzurnes out quite noticeably "better" - especially in shadow noise + texture & detail, than it would have from a current Canon sensor.

And I knmow for sure, the Canon pic woult d have at best 60% of the megapixels in it.  ;D

you must be joking ...  +2.5 EV is a HUGE problem for Canon sensors, and most definitely for the 7D and all other APS-C sensors.

I've got hundreds and hundreds of 7D images which have shadows lifted by at least this amount - it's easy.

When you know how...

And I can get up close to 5 stops with my 70D and 7D Mk II.

That you can't do it is the take-away message here - not that it can't be done. You're projecting your lack of ability onto the gear, a fact which is painfully obvious to those of us who have the skills.

(Off you go - complain to Admin again about the nasty man...)

While you may have far superior postprocessing skills to mine, the real difference seems to be a different standard, when it comes to final image quality. No problem with this. Now, go off and lift those shadows on your Canon sensor images.  ;D

Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 05:19:19 AM »
Canon USA, UK, etc are their own P&L centres. Why should they cross subsidise via way of a warranty an item bought from another country. 

Simple answer: ONE company. ONE world. ONE global economy. Not only for Canon, companies, makers, sellers of products. But also for us, buyers, customers.  8)

We don't tell Canon in what countries to manufacture their products. Canon is in no position to tell us, their customers, where to buy their products - as long as they come from their factories. They should be grateful when we spend our money on their products rather than on those from competitors. It would be in Canon's own best interest to keep us, their customers as happy as they possibly can. That includes the very best aftersales service they can possible pony up and offer to us. For all their products, for all their customers, no matter where we live, work and purchase Canon products.

Fair is fair.

Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 16, 2014, 08:28:52 PM »
Multinational corporations would be well advised to embrace the globalized economy in all aspects. If they want to peddle their wares globally they better respect their customers right to purchase those products at the lowest possible price available. Wherever that may be ... globally. They should be grateful, we buy anything from them.

So ... up yours, Canon!


That's what happens, if a company charges 1000 Euros more for a product variation with a modification that does not cost a lot and then simply adds an "E" behind the product name.

All it takes, is to paint or laser-etch that missing "E" behind the "D800" moniker on top of the camera ...   

Canon General / Re: 7D Mark II LP-E6 or LP-E6N?
« on: December 14, 2014, 01:24:25 AM »
In my experience, third party batteries and chargers have always turned out "not to be worth it" in the end. As much as i think Canon (like nikon and others) are really gouging us on battery prices ...

With third party batteries i've aleays had issues. Not one of them had better than 80% of the original battery capacity, once they had been in real use for more than a few weeks. Not one third party battery was still usable after 4 years, wheras all of my canon batteries (various types) were - maybe down to "only 1 red dot"-health status, but still good to go.

I've had all sorts of compatibility issues - both mechanically (including battery nearly stuck in camera slot) and electrically (third party battery overheating in original canon charger on 1st charge, etc.)

Especially when a new type of canon battery comes out like LP-E6N, i'd definitely be extra careful with third party batteries. The chinese manufacturers may not have really completed their reverse engineering exercise yet.

But ... YMMV.

Canon General / Re: 7D Mark II LP-E6 or LP-E6N?
« on: December 14, 2014, 01:03:59 AM »
Got no experience with the new LP-E6N yet.

It's a tough call. The nominal increase in capacity is tiny and certainly does not appear to justify the price differential. But most likely Canon also changed electronics/chip inside. This may bring real benefits to users that are not immediately obvious but still worth it. Or they might just be intended to reduce compatibility with third party gear like chargers and or previous generation cameras. Or it was just dictated by some legislation re. Battery safety etc. In Japan or elsewhere. Or all of these ... hard to tell.

LP-E6N street prices will come down, but again, hard to predict how quickly, how much.

When 7d II is the only (canon) camera body in use, I'd probably buy LP-E6N ... but only absolute minimum number  needed right now. More later, once cheaper ...

When 7d II is added to existing setup with one or more "older", LP-E6 cameras like 7D, 6D, 5D II, 5D III, 60D, 70D and chargers + batteries are used "mix 'n match", I'd probably not buy additional LP-E6N's yet. First check in regular use, whether the one from 7D II and the new charger play nicely with the previous generation gear.

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: December 13, 2014, 02:38:48 AM »
Really? Which 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4 were you planning on using with your Samsung? Or did you mean things you couldn't reach with the included zoom kit lens?
Samsung 300/2.8 for starters. -:)
Maybe followed by a 2x Extender next.
So you imagine that an NX1, with an untested and unreleased 300 2.8 plus 2x extender, is going to outperform a 7D2 with a native Canon 600 f4 IS ii. Zoiks.
Not even mentioning that you can add a 2x to the Canon 600. You do realize that these posts are public and that people can read them?  Man you need to get out and get some fresh air.  :o

No, i don't think and I did not write that a 300/2.8 + 2x will be equal in iq to a native 600/4. Yes, nobody knows yet, how good or not that samsung 300/3.8 is going to be. But considering how the NX-1 apparently matches and in some respects even beats the 7D II capabilities, we might just be in for yet another nice surprise. :)

IMO EOSHD has it right in that the intersection of photo and video in SLR's was largely accidental. The two markets have different needs and one body can't be the choice for both best.

I enjoy occasionally shooting "pretty good" video with my Canon DSLR's, but if I was a serious video shooter I'd expect to buy a dedicated video camera with an EVF or at least a camera that was preferentially a video camera like the GH4. XD and XXD OVF DSLR's are designed primarily for shooting stills. Canon has it's Cinema line for video. Doesn't seem too complicated. My understanding is that the video quality of the Cinema series is excellent.

+1 full ACK

I really hope this "video stuff must be in every stills camera"-mania is dead soon.  8)

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: December 12, 2014, 04:52:51 PM »
Really? Which 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4 were you planning on using with your Samsung? Or did you mean things you couldn't reach with the included zoom kit lens?

Samsung 300/2.8 for starters. -:)
Maybe followed by a 2x Extender next.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 83