March 02, 2015, 04:05:36 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 - Rocky

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 47
PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot S100 reviewed and compared to the S95
« on: November 10, 2011, 02:36:57 AM »
I'd love to buy a new camera for my lady.
She has a suuuuper old Pana/leica (dont recall the name) and she loves to take pictures but the DSLR route is not in thoughts because of weight and size. She wants quality yet pockability and versatility.
She had her eyes on a G12 some months ago but I kinda pushed her on the s95 way since it's a marvellous compact camera.
but today I saw a sale on the new olympus pen mini...ohhh boy, it's beautiful and I love olympus.
I thought of Pen EP3 or even the 2 but it's waaay to expensive and too big for her tastes.
Ssssso, what you guys suggest me?

(s95), s100, G12 or the new pen mini?????
s95 being in brackets because after this review I have no doubt about the 100.

Hope you can help me out guys

Cheers and thanks neuro for the review
I suggest you try out the cameras on casual portratit in day light.  My experience is that different manufacturer ( even camera from the same manufacturer)will give you different skin tone. Some are slightly pale and greyish for my taste.  For the small size, the S95 or the S100 difinitely wins hands down.

Lenses / Re: Realistic wish lens
« on: November 09, 2011, 05:31:51 PM »
50mm 0.75  ;D
Dream on!!! If Canon can make it, it may weight over 4 lbs, with a 110mm filter and sells for over $10,000. Would you like to have 6 to 7  pounds of camera plus lens hanging on your neck all day long???

Canon General / Re: New APS-C Camera in February?
« on: November 09, 2011, 12:14:09 PM »

The 1DX was designed and built for professional photographers and they have very specific needs that don't necessarily have anything to do with hobbyists, amateurs, advanced amateurs or just the general public.

In a perfect world Canon would market the next 7D for pros and leave the 70D and below to the hobbyists and amateurs. If they did (again in a perfect world) we would see a cropped version of the 1Dx sensor in the next 7D. This is my wish and it would be awesome! I remember when the 7D came out people were raving how it was a mini-1D, why not keep the tradition alive?

Why would that represent a perfect world? Why would a cropped version of the 1DX sensor necessitate marketing only to pros?

If Canon make a cropped version (APS-C) of the 1DX sensor, it will only have 6.84 MP. do you think either the 'pro" or  Amateur will buy it???
I would like to see canon apply the technology of 1DX sensor on the existing 18MP APS_C and also give us the "low Light" technique ( addition the explosure from 4 adjscent pixels )from the S95 and ends up with a 4.5MP picture. Then we will have the best of both world.

Canon General / Re: New APS-C Camera in February?
« on: November 07, 2011, 09:51:13 PM »
Hoe there there is micro adjustment for the AF. Canon shouild have make it as a standrd feature accross the entire DSLR line. With that, Canon can sell more fast lense.

Lenses / Re: Realistic wish lens
« on: November 04, 2011, 01:31:01 PM »
My dream lens is a 7-800mm f/1.2 IS that weighs 1/4 pound and has perfect sharpness all over and cost $20 US.  If they can make a little robot that flies to mars and drives around doing science experiments there is NO reason why my dream lens can't happen.

Sooner or later if humans don't extinct themselves first, optics will move into the field of organics and genetic engineering.  Think something like, a cloned eagle eye developed in a laboratory.  So sooner or later you'll likely get your wish, just maybe not in the form you originally had in mind.  Don't laugh, it's probably not even as far away as we might imagine, and it would probably lend itself better to a DIY project than grinding your own glass with a dremil.

It is highly doable if you want your sensor to be 2mm X 2mm or smaller

Canon General / Re: Birders don't use Canons?
« on: October 21, 2011, 02:35:11 AM »
Rear Window is another of my favourite "camera" movies with James Stewart showing his photographic prowess.  Just googled it and found it is an "Exakta" that he uses.  Product placement hasn't really helped LF camera sales or Exakta.  Do people pay much attention to it?

In the Rear "Rear Window", the Exakta name plate was covered up. So people do not know what it is unless you own one. Inthose days, movie maker do the opposite. They try the best not to show any name band to avoid law suite. Exakta is an "odd ball". Everything is left-handed.

Canon General / Re: Birders don't use Canons?
« on: October 20, 2011, 07:54:39 PM »
Okay, while everyone waits for the announcement (or possibly non-announcement) of a new DSLR, I thought I'd start a new topic for entertainment purposes.

New movie out in the U.S. "The Big Year" is a semi-comedy about competitive bird watching. I couldn't help but notice the incredible job of product placement done by Nikon. Basically, everyone in the movie (aside from one scene using an Olympus) was using a Nikon camera or Nikon binoculars usually with a Nikon-branded strap prominently displayed.

I didn't see a single Canon in the movie. Just a coincidence I'm sure. :)

I don't know what models of DSLRs they were using, but I was amazed at the pictures they all seemed to capture, especially since most of them seemed to be using kit lenses. I guess I must be doing something wrong.

So, let's have some fun. What's your favorite/most amusing/most preposterous film scene involving a camera? What clever photo product placements have you seen in the movies or on television recently?
Nowadays ,Moviemaker is doing "hiden Advertisement "also. The movie make show off the product  in the movie plot with pre-agreement thet the manufacture will pay a fee to the movie maker. As you examplesays , all binoculars and cameras are Nikon (except one sceene). If it is not prearranged, I cannot think of  any other reason.

EOS Bodies / Re: Up-sampling: Your thoughts?
« on: October 20, 2011, 12:37:21 PM »
Upsampling was do before by Fujicamera about 8 years ago. I cannot recall the model number. But I remember one of its advertisement says "body by Porche". may be you can look it up from Fuji's archive.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next?
« on: October 20, 2011, 01:15:52 AM »
Canon can do a $2000 FF DSLR if they want to. Just look at the price of 7D. The difference in FF sensor and APS-C is about $200.

That's the first time I've seen that figure. Can you document it?
I read couple articles in the web.  I was trying to find it for you. Unfortunately, I cannot find them. I am going to explain why I agree with their number based on my knowlege from wafer fab and cost of CMOS wafer. For 8 in wafer, the cost of a processed wafer is about $1000, throw in the micro lenses and AA fiter for extra $300 (my guestimate) So each wafer is $1300. My estimate is that there may be only 75 sites for the 8 inch wafer for APS-C sensor. Let us assume the yield for APS-C is 75 %, then we will have 56 sensor per wafer, $1300 per wafer, that will be $23 per sensor. There are 24 FF sensor site  for 8 in wafer. Assuming the yield for FF is 25% (1/3 of the yield  of APS-C, being pressimistic ). then each wafer will yield 6 FF sensor. that will be $210 per sensor.
So the difference between FF and APS-C is $193. I said about $200 is just a rough number in case my guestimate on the micro lens and AA filter is wrong.  IF Canon have moved the sensor production to 12 in (300mm) wafer, the difference is even smaller. However, Canon white paper mention that there are 200 site of APS-C sensor in a 8 in wafer. That is totally wrong. Anybody can prove it by drawing it out on a peice of paper.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next?
« on: October 19, 2011, 04:53:32 PM »
Contrary to what many on this forum wish for, I don't think we will see an under $2,000 full frame model. I'm not even sure it's possible to produce a full frame body at that price point.

Canon can do a $2000 FF DSLR if they want to. Just look at the price of 7D. The difference in FF sensor and APS-C is about $200. Throw in another $200 for larger body, penta prism etc. You have your $2000 FF. If you start with 60D, you can have a $1500 FF easily. However, Canon will do neither one of the above hyperthetical model. Canon wants to Keep FF as a more expensive model (read it  as higher profit).

Canon General / Re: Photography - Equipment or Skill ?
« on: October 18, 2011, 02:59:55 PM »
In my humble opinion, It will take ALL three: Talent, hardwork (skill) and equipment. There are a lot of good photographer. But not that many great photographer. I know I may start another contraversial discussion here. Give a medium range camera to the average people and teach them how to take picture. He or she can become a good photographer, if he or she will work hard enough. That is what I mean by hardwork and skill. However, in order to become a great photographer. He will need talent.  I known some posters here do not believe in talent is being burn with. I am a firm believer that talent is being born with. Our brain is just like any other part of the body. Every body have different physical appearence, height, eye color, hair color etc. Our brain is also different. So people will be born with different talent.
As for Equipment, It also play a very important role. Most of the time, it will determine if it is a good picture or a great picture. Also it need the right equipment to do the right job.
Ansel Adam will be a good example. No body will argue that he is not talented and not hard working. He use huge view camera. He needs the detail, almost zero gain for the picture. His equipment can never be used by any sport photographer. No matter how talented the sport photographer is.
So great photography is talent, skill and equipment, not necessarily in the exact order. They are just like the three legs of a three legged stool. Some poster may say that if you have talent, you will have skill. That is for another discussion.
However, to be a good photographer, you still need skill and equipment

EOS Bodies / Re: Leica M9 – A Second Opinion
« on: October 17, 2011, 02:16:28 AM »
Specifically, Carl Zeiss stated that Leica has changed the register distance on the M9. As I stated, if this was untrue then Leica would have filed suit against CZ. To my knowledge, they did not do so. If memory serves, the difference is about 20 microns
Can you provide supporting document for this??? If you do a search in the web, the web is full of test reports by well known Leica experts about Zeiss lenses used on M9.  Most of them are very favorable.  If the Zeiss lens does not work on the M9,  are all of them are just telling lies???  If the Zeiss lens will not work on the M9, why are Zeiss making M mount lenses???

EOS Bodies / Re: Leica M9 – A Second Opinion
« on: October 16, 2011, 07:24:15 PM »
, I still use a 1950's Agfa (aka Ansco in the States) rangefinder and (having owned a rangefinder more than 30 years) I do understand the rf technique and limitations pretty thoroughly.

All Leica M  (from M2 to M9) are manual focusing cameras....
All Voigtlaender, ZE, ZF ZF.2, ZK and ZM lenses are manual focusing too. The field curvature of fast lenses is intrinsically pronounced so you either need to pre-compensate or live with poor focus from focus and recompose. Your final alternative is to focus on your subject and crop the image - but that reduces the camera's effective resolution to something like 11 megapixels. (purely an estimate based on the rule of thirds costing you 1/6 of your field in each direction.)

My comment that Leica has corrupted the M-bayonet specification.....Finally - I would like to address the comment on retrofocus designs for lenses degrading performance.

An Agfa/Ansco range finder camera from the 50's can hardly be qualified as a good well built range finder camera. It has fixed lens and the range finder accuracy and operation is way below Leica camera of the sametime.
Any lens that will fit the Lieca M is manual focusing by right. That is why I did not mention the Voigtlander and the Ziess ZM are manual focusing.  As for the curvature of field for the lens., No auto focusing can correct them.
That is another reason why the Leica lenses are more expensive. Leica trys to minimize them by excellent design and tight manufacturing control.
If M9 can use The Lieca M lenses all the the back to the 50's, I still cannot see why the M9 has corrupted the M mount. If the other brand cannot work properly,  it it is the other guy's problem .You are old enough to use an Agfa camera from the 50's. Do you remember why the Nikon range finder lens will not work right with the Ziess Contax?? Even both mounts are identical??
I have never mention that retrofocus degrade the lens performance. i just mention that It is easier to design short lens for range finder  than for DSLR.  FYI, even leica is using retrofocus design for their 24mm and 21mm M mount lenses.
The M9 is using offet micro lens to try to minimize the effect of the short back focus of the lens. on top of that  there is soft ware correction built-in the M9 also.
Please rememder that quality and price is not a liner relationship. It is exponental. Juts look at the price of D1 and the price of a Rebel.  Is D1 nearly 10 times better than the Rebel???

EOS Bodies / Re: Leica M9 – A Second Opinion
« on: October 16, 2011, 03:05:55 AM »
I'm no fan of Rockwell by any stretch, but what he's says about distance of rear element to image plane is close to what I read many years ago about why rangefinder cameras are capable of sharper images than their slr counterparts.

Mirror slap is a non-issue with mirror lock-up.
For lens sharpness, Rockwell is semi-right. It is easier to design short lenses (50 mm and shorter) for range finder cameras. As a case and point, in the early days of the film SLR, the "Standard lens" is 55mm to make the design easier. Whether it is sharper or not, It will depends on the actual design, the manufacturer and the price.
With the mirror locked up, it will slowdown the operation of DSLR a lot.

EOS Bodies / Re: Leica M9 – A Second Opinion
« on: October 16, 2011, 02:53:20 AM »
It looks like that the M9 has been badly "trashed" by people that have never used it. It is not fair. I can feel that these people might have never a good manual focusing, well made range finder film camera before either.
All Leica M  (from M2 to M9) are manual focusing cameras. Due to the excellent focusing mechanism of the Leica lenses and the mavelous coupling to the range finder in the body, it is a joy to do the manual focusing with very acurate result. With the proper techique, it can be almost as fast as the current mirrorless digital camera. If zone focusing is used. It can be even faster any DSLR.
One op claim that the M9 does not follow the specification of the M mount. I do not know how or where he got this idea. the M9 can use ANY Leica M Mount lens made by Leica dated back to the 50's. This is a good prove that Leica did not change any focusing related item on the M ount on M9. The only thing M9 has added on the M mount is the elctronic comunication between the lens and the body to let the body know the focal length of the lens being used. If the other brand lens cannot focus on M9, It is their problem. The same poster claim the Zeiss M mount lens will not work on M9. The B and H mail order store is full of review about how wonderful the Ziess lenses works with M9.
As M9 is asking a high price and being an obsolete equipment at the same time, it is also highly debatable.  M9 does not have auto focusing, does not have live view and does not have IS. But it is the only FF camera that does not use AA filter. neither canon nor Nikon can do it.  A lot poster in CR claim that they use manual focusing even their DSLR is AF equiped.  With multiple focusing points (can be as much as 51 ) being chosen by the camera, sometimes it is too much uncertainty. So is without auto focusing really being obsolete, or is it just another choice?
M9 is a minialist's camera. It give you what you need to take excellent picture without the bells and whistles. So is it an obsoleted equipment?
The pictures from the 2nd review at CR are being trashed also. It is even more unfair. He is just trying to show us how good the low light capability of M9, even without IS. The M9 is more hand heldable than DSLR due to lack of mirror bounce.
M9 is expensive, that is a fact. Our CR guy have never use any Leica M model before. After a few weeks, the M9 becomes his main camera and replaced his DSLR. That got to tell you something.

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 47