Messages

211

EOS Bodies / Re: The Last Generation of the Crop Sensor Cameras

« on: April 26, 2012, 11:04:59 AM »

Most of the market is looking for cheap equipment, so cameras with small sensors (& lenses with small image circle) will stay in the market.

As someone wrote in a local newsletter - he has a P&S w/ 35-1000mm (or some such) equivalent lens, he is satisfied with it, and screw the snobs who think heavy & expensive DSLRs are better.

212

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: BG-E11 Delayed

« on: April 26, 2012, 09:54:48 AM »

No. That's not true. That's IMPOSSIBLE.	Small | Large

NOT.

213

EOS Bodies / Re: Install DPP without a CD ROM?

« on: April 25, 2012, 04:54:04 AM »

Both of my computers no longer have a CD ROM (this is 2012 after all)... how am I supposed to install DPP when Canon only offers downloads of updaters that require software already be present?  WTF?!  Are they afraid someone who doesn't own a Canon camera might want to run their RAW files through DPP for fun?!

I tried these instructions, but Canon have obviously changed something in the installer for the Mac...
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/install_canon_software.html

Any ideas?

A. Ugly workaround: rip an iso image of the CD on somebody else's computer, mount the image as a virtual drive on your computer, and install from that.

B. Loan (or, in face of this being 2012, buy) a CD-ROM drive that attaches via USB, and install from there.

214

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 and Canon's Comeuppance

« on: April 23, 2012, 01:46:44 PM »

I remember the forums before the 5D3 was released and lots of people were like "add everything but more megapixels to the 5D3! We don't need more megapixels!" then the d800 is released and a riot broke out and now we all need more megapixels! It's obsurd.

I was against more megapixels before the 5Dmk3 & D800 were released, I'm still against more megapixels now that they've been released, and - surprise! - still waiting for wide primes to be updates & a new ultrawide lenses.

Next year I'll have a saving account opened, and I'm considering spending the money on a Nikon FX camera for the 14-24mm f/2.8, in face of the extra megapixels.

215

Lenses / Re: Any word on the Canon prime's with IS?

« on: April 20, 2012, 10:00:03 AM »

My guess is that these lenses will also look to target the landscape market, going from the MTF's they do seem to offer much better boarder to boarder sharpness than there predecessors or indeed the 24-105/24-70 mk1.

How would landscape photographers benefit from IS? I would think this is the market which would be most likely to use a tripod, and least likely to use IS.

216

Lenses / Re: Any word on the Canon prime's with IS?

« on: April 15, 2012, 05:42:08 AM »

Those lenses will have to have out-of-this-world image quality if they're going to sell more than a small handful of them. And if the not-quite-yet-on-the-street Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 with image stabilization is at all decent, basically nobody will buy Canon's new primes.

+1, why bother repeating what I've wrote half a dozen times like a parrot?

217

EOS Bodies / Re: I still don't get the crop debate

« on: April 12, 2012, 02:31:23 AM »

ok, yes I get that in today's market, the crop sensors are less expensive, and that it is cheaper to produce many, smaller sensors (more revenue from the same silicon substrate).  for that reason I don't see the crops going away soon. 

but the advantages of the smaller sensors (reach) are (currently at least) overshadowed by the consequences of pixel density  -- large sensors put more pixels on the image with lower pixel density, which is why the IQ is higher.  captain obvious at your service :-)

The extra reach isn't a result of the smaller sensor, but of the higher pixel density.

As example, There's no difference between taking a photo with a 5Dmk2 & cropping to 40% and taking the photo with a 20D (the rest being equal, including the lens), as 40% of the 5Dmk2's 21.1MP is almost identical to the 20D's 8.25MP.

The benefit of crop factor is in price, both for the body and [up to certain focal lengthes] lenses smaller image circle.

218

Lenses / Re: What is most EXOTIC Canon lens?

« on: April 11, 2012, 01:52:32 PM »

The FD 7.5 Fisheye is up there and I think was used in Reverie.

How is it different from the Sigma 8mm circular fisheye?

219

Lenses / Re: What is most EXOTIC Canon lens?

« on: April 11, 2012, 11:30:17 AM »

I'd say the 65mm MP-E 1x-5x Macro. It is certainly very odd in it's physical operation though not really rare. And no one else has a comparable macro lens.

The 1200mm is certainly rare but it's just a bigger 800mm

There's a 5X macro lens for MFT cameras.

220

Lenses / Re: Why is Canon so slow updating (legacy) lenses?

« on: April 11, 2012, 02:53:36 AM »

My guess is that:
1) The lenses still perform very well
2) There is way less money in these inexpensive lenses versus the 300, 400, 500, & 600mm primes that sports photographers world-wide use and demand!!

The short tele primes, e.g. 85mm & 135mm, do perform very well. I would think thrice before spending money on upgrading my 85mm f/1.8 - it's just good. The shorter primes aren't bad, but I think it's time upgrades with better IQ.

As for profit -

1. I'm sure super teles are more profitable per unit than shorter ones, but can the same be said per model, after taking number of units sold?

2. Sigma is making several primes in those focal lengths (30mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105mm macro, 150mm macro), and Samyang makes a few manual primes as well (24mm, 35mm, 85mm), and those compete with Canon's non-L primes. Those lenses compete with Canon's primes, and apparently sell those well enough.

221

Lenses / Re: Why is Canon so slow updating (legacy) lenses?

« on: April 10, 2012, 12:41:56 PM »

I will echo people saying 'it is all about the money', but this is not a bad thing.

Lenses are expensive to develop and retooling is a pretty major deal.  Compare this against the fairly incremental improvement you get out of new lenses and it quickly becomes kinda impractical. ...

Thus they have a much longer upgrade cycle... come out with a new Rebel and you might see 50% of the current users upgrade in 3 years.  Come out with a new 50mm f/1.4 and you will probably see closer to 10% upgrade and mostly just see new sales, which would be the same with the old version.

Some of those primes are >20 years old, and are upgrades of FD mount lenses. Canon probably recycled the optical design & manufacturing process for the glass, and 20 years is a long time to recoup the development & tooling expenses.

To return to a favourite example - buying a 24mm f/2.8 IS USM would be an incremental upgrade from the 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM, which is one of the reasons I wouldn't buy it, but be interested in a 24mm f/2. That's a new sale Canon wouldn't make otherwise.

222

Lenses / Re: Why is Canon so slow updating (legacy) lenses?

« on: April 10, 2012, 12:13:01 AM »

People underestimate the amount of technical skill and development it takes to create a lens. 
When you start adding "breathing", and other video considerations... the cost quickly moves beyond the pro/consumer range that is Canon's bread and butter.

Why people feel the need to "update" their glass when a new version comes out is beyond me.
Great lenses, should, last you your entire career if taken care of properly.

I'm interested in updated primes for other reasons.

The 24mm f/1.4L is too expensive for me. The 24mm f/2.8 non-IS is just one stop faster than my kit lens, and it's IQ isn't good enough to make me buy it. If Canon made a 24mm f/2 USM with good IQ, I would buy it. If the new 24mm f/2.8 IS USM would be very favourably reviewed, I would consider it.

223

Lenses / Re: Canon lenses vs 3rd parties...

« on: April 09, 2012, 05:04:17 AM »

As much as I love Canon L lenses and own a bunch, they ARE overpriced.  They were already overpriced, then Canon just decided to outdo the already high prices with their new lens lineup, e.g. 24-70 MkII for $2300.. really?

2nd that.

I'v considered upgrading my EF 15mm f/2.8 to EF 8-15mm f/4, and decided to buy a Sigma 8mm f/3.5. A major reason was price - not only new L glass expensive, but as the lens is available only from the local official distributor, which charges $250 more than the U.S. price (before taxes).

As I often shoot in low light, I also wanted to keep the 15mm f/2.8 for the extra stop.


[Yes, I've read how the new lenses cost the same in Yens after taking inflation into account. I'll care about that the day my salary is paid in inflation-corrected-Yens.]

224

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Weird banding on new 5D Mark II

« on: April 07, 2012, 04:56:26 AM »

I had JPEGs corrupted by a card reader, which happened intermittently, but those would usually ruin the photo starting from a certain spot to the bottom of the image. In this case it's the top of the image which is corrupted, so I'm unsure.

225

Lenses / Re: 85mm f1.2 II or 70-200mm f2.8L IS II

« on: April 02, 2012, 01:04:43 AM »

This might be relevant to the discussion - http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/F-stop-blues

Has anyone experienced this problem in the field?