December 18, 2014, 08:50:47 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 - Rocky

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 44
46
EOS-M / Re: More EF-M lenses in the future
« on: September 17, 2014, 01:58:55 AM »
A 50mm "M" lens would solve all of my problems.
What propblems?? 50mm is too long for general use and too short  for portrait. How does it solve your problem??

47
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:49:48 AM »
Dimension of G7X: 103 x 60 x 40 mm (4.06 x 2.36 x 1.57″)
Dimension o fLX100: 115 x 66 x 55mm
That makes the LX100 even less pocketable than the EOS-M with 22mm lens.

48
PowerShot / Re: Official: Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 15, 2014, 01:03:09 PM »
The body looks about the same width as the EOS-M. It is a tad taller than the EOS-M. With the lens retracted, It will definitely be  thinner than the EOS-M with the 22mm. That make it a lot more pocketable
I can see this camera will be a good compliment for the EOS=M, not necessarily a replacement.
Let us see some review on IQ and AF speed. Also let see how well balance will it be in actual use. The Sony RX100 is "lens heavy" and you have to hold it tight. Otherwise the camera may fall due to the heavy lens.

49
Lenses / Re: The New Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: September 14, 2014, 03:51:09 PM »
It seems the problem here is that most don't want pancake lenses. What I see a demand for is Ef-s primes with fast apertures and not that much emphasis on size.

Isn't the advantage of EF-S that lenses can be designed to be smaller?

What is the point of EF-S primes, why not just use EF primes, if size is not a consideration?
Due to the smaller image size and the shorter flange distance, a shorter focal length(35 or shorter) EF-S prime makes sense: easier to deign, optimize for APS-C picture area, smaller size ( not necessarily a "pencake")

50
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 14, 2014, 02:31:28 PM »
I'm not a fan of these things being labled 1" Sensors... I hope everyone considering this thing is aware it's much smaller than an inch and only around 15.9mm measured diagonally!
Camera makers use the "non-standard" inch, where everthing is inflated 1.5x.  The concept gets a surprising amount of real world use.
That size system is a carry over from the vacuum tube image senser in the old days.

51
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Accessory question
« on: September 14, 2014, 12:43:15 PM »
For me, the whole idea of having an EOS-M is to make a small (hopefully light weight) travel kit. I fit the following into a Lowepro Micro case (as the name implies, it is small, 5'X6"X7", external):EOS-M with strap and 22mm lens(all in an old Rollie P&S pouch that can be attached to the belt), 18-55 zoom with hood, optical view finder for the 22mm, 90ex flash, 2 spare batteries, 2 spare AAA, lens cleaning stuff, one SPARE cap for each lens( the center push cap falls off easily) and a 35 f 2.0 Summicron  with M to EOS-M adapter( 2" x 1 3/4" combined). If the need arrives, I can switch the Elmer 90 f4 or the Elmer 50 F2.8 for the Summicron 35 f2 before the bag leaves home. No EF to EOS-M adapter or EF lens due the the relatively large size.

52
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Accessory question
« on: September 14, 2014, 12:08:42 PM »
Can anyone help me find the viewfinder accessory????   :P

https://www.cameraquest.com/inventor.htm
You need to scroll the list to find the finder that you want.

http://www.flipbac.com/angle-viewfinder-about.htm


53
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 14, 2014, 02:55:05 AM »
If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket.
Yeah, has it? Compared to S120 -- the sensor is bigger, the lens it faster, the screen is articulated. As much as I'd like to believe the S series form factor and size -- is this possible?
If I can put the EOS-M with 22mm lens in my jacket pocket and even my dress pant pocket, I cannot see why the G7 X cannot be put in the same way.

54
Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 14, 2014, 12:26:06 AM »
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
There is a mis-communication here. When I suggested "landscape", I mean "landsacpe" in picture style. that is the sharpest setting. Not the "landscape" in scene. I would highly suggest you to read through the manual that comes with the camera. Also go to the Canon web site to download the complete manual and read it through the 370 pages.  You can have a lot of control and being creative even you try to use use it as a point and shoot. First you need to understand what you can do with the camera.

55
Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 13, 2014, 05:32:20 PM »


Forgot this one too.
ISO6400,1/15sec.  Both will not give you sharp picture. ISO6400 will give you too much noise. 1/15 sec will have potential shaking of the camera. Have the lens wide opened will make it worst also. The picture being partially blur is due  to shallow depth of field.  In other word, you have almost everything that will prevent you to get a sharp picture.

56
Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 13, 2014, 12:03:22 PM »
One more thing, Check the ISO setting and noise reduction setting of the "not sharp picture". There is a "BIG" difference in sharpness between ISO 6400 and ISO 100. Also the noise reduction will decrease the sharpness of the picture.

57
Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: September 13, 2014, 12:07:17 AM »
The Canon Camera Museum tech report for the EOS-M 55-200mm lens shows 5 lens in the family.  http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/report/2014/08/
The first one on the left is a EF to EF-M adapter. Therefore there are only 4 EF-M mount lens.

58
Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 12, 2014, 11:48:06 PM »
Based on what you said, I  like to make the following suggestion: 1. set the scene mode to Landscape, reguardless what type of picture that your are taking. 2. Make sure that the IS for the lens is on. 3. Look at the shooting information and see what is the shutter speed. If it is 1/60 second or more, then all bets are off.

59
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Dual Motor For Autofocus on STM Lenses
« on: September 12, 2014, 07:55:21 PM »
The pattern is for aperture control (closing and opening). Not for auto focusing.

60
PowerShot / Re: Three New PowerShot Cameras Coming Shortly
« on: September 12, 2014, 01:06:00 PM »
" PowerShot G7 X, which will have a 1″ sensor and be about the size of an S series camera."
I do not expect the lens to be faster than 2.0 at wide end and(4.0 or slower at long end)  and the zoom range hopefully will be 24-75mm(equivalent). Any higher expectation will lead to disappointment.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 44