January 29, 2015, 09:35:56 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 - sanj

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 121
271
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 03, 2014, 02:12:03 AM »
Even if the cameras are comparable at higher ISOs, having one that performs better at lower ISOs is always a nice thing to have. Think of it as an extra feature added in for free such that you don't just have IQ performance comparable to Canon's but better.

How do you conclude that it's 'free'??  Does that extra low ISO DR come with a handholdable 600/4?  Does it come with an AF system having >40 cross-type points?   Etc.

Dont understand. Just because we have handhold able 600, we should not get better IQ at lower ISO?

272
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 11:38:07 PM »

EVF are hopelessly bad. Still laggy. Yiiiiikes.

I'll take the tiny Rebel pentamirror any day over the EVFs available today.

The latest Olympus EVF has a lag of 0.016. (16 milliseconds). I wouldn't call that "hopelessly bad."

Even if it were true (I think it isn't), that's still hopelessly bad.  It needs to be under 5ms for all lighting conditions, preferably closer to 2ms.

I wonder if you have actually used an EVF. To me, after using XE2 for over a year, they are GREAT.

273
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 11:33:31 PM »
If it goes EVF ... will Canon make it mirrorless? No more mirror-slap would be good!

Interesting to see how far Canon will go with this...

But obviously they're preparing themselves to do mirrorless in an SLR styled body, a la Sony A7.

Canon and mirror less? Naaaa that is for inferior camera manufactures. [Sarcasm]

274
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 11:30:57 PM »
Oh no!!! The mighty Canon is going to have the lowly EVF. Oh hooo. Now what will all the anti EVF people say???
Let me start reading the thread after posting this…

It ought to be entertaining...

275
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 02, 2014, 07:39:27 AM »
Wouldn't this sort of sensor be incredibly helpful for sports/action?

Nope - we expose our images properly.

Epitome of lack of critical thought here, especially from someone implying they are a sports/action photographer.  Sometimes the light is really low, where the only way to get a reasonable shutter speed is to underexpose.  Some photographers cannot afford fast lenses, so their only option would be to underexpose to get proper shutter speeds.

So, no other way to put it, but you are flat out undeniably wrong.  This sort of sensor would be incredibly helpful for very many sports/action photographers.

Call me a 'text book' guy but I do not believe in over exposing or underexposing. (Unless it is to create a mood). Why? Because I know wrong exposure effects IQ.

276
Portrait / Re: Can we identify this man?
« on: October 02, 2014, 12:10:20 AM »
I am baffled by some of the responses in this thread. OP sees a photo of someone who obviously is doing something wrong and wants that man be identified so he can be stopped. Is there something wrong with that? Seriously…
Would you want him doing this to one of yours?

277
This link is not good for my diet control.

278
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 02, 2014, 12:05:02 AM »
Until I can look through a Nikon viewfinder and change ISO settings with my right index while also adjusting any other setting I need, I'm sticking with Canon.

Haven't you heard?  With a Nikon camera, you don't need to change ISO – just set ISO 100 and you're done.  In post you can push it to ISO 3200, with a SoNikon sensor that's easy-peasy and the IQ is still better than Canon.  Or so I've read somewhere or other...   ::)

You make fun of it...but it's possible. Because there is practically no read noise, digitally lifting ISO 100 to ISO 1600 or 3200 is effectively the same thing as actually using those ISOs (with the added benefit of having massively more dynamic range).

Jon, I hope you are wrong.  Serious, whats left when you have eliminated the science and have dug deeply into the art of photography....Composition?! Not really a concern on these massive megapixel cameras....

As Ron Popeil stated - Set It and Forget It -

Sorry, not sure I understand... You hope I'm wrong about what?  ???

Composition is obviously important. Getting good focus is obviously important. Getting the right frame is obviously important. I'm not saying they are not, no one who appreciates more DR is.

But here is my stance on the issue. When you nail all of those other factors. And, it's more than possible to nail every one with any pro- or semipro-grade DSLR from Canon or Nikon (and some even from Sony, and probably Pentax as well). We already have cameras with phenomenal AF systems, with very high frame rates (although the best frame rates do tend to cost), and composition is a simple matter of preference...reframe to taste. When you get all that right, what's left? Sensor IQ.

I already have awesome AF. I already have a great frame rate (7D) and a good frame rate (5D III, the 1D X is out of my acceptable range of cost). I already know how to get good composition. When it comes to landscapes, a lot  of it is simply a waiting game...waiting for the right light, the right weather, and being at the right place in time to get the shot. When all that comes together...the only thing I don't have, is the best sensor IQ money can buy.

It's not a complicated equation.  8)

I used to say that technology is killing XX .... in this case photography.  I am wrong about that, technology is taking photography in another direction, IMHO the wrong direction.  When technology levels the playing field for all afforadably, when all I have to do is turn that dial to the green P, not worry about the photo because post processing will take care of any issues, photography is dead.   Composition, lighting, position, weather are just reduced to chance moments that anyone carrying an IPhone has an equal probability of capturing that moment....Probably a higher probability ...

The younger generation are not looking for technology advances in a DLSR camera, what they do expect is that the technology advances are crammed into their IPhone 6. 

A camera is slowly becoming nothing more than a vehicle to take a selfie and quickly post it online for every to "LIKE".

Must tell you that I think just the opposite. Art can, and is created by an iPhone and such. Normal (selfie) sort of pictures can be created by top end cameras. It all depends upon the user.
Advancement in technology is a great thing to happen in life including photography. Lots of different kinds of pictures can be taken now with advancement in technology. And remember that not all photographers are artists. They take pictures to capture the moment.

279
No.
1. Resale value and
2. F4 at this focal length is fine for me.

280
Yes low light would have been much better. Also IS would have worked wonders. So voting for a 'yes'.

281
Such excellent comments. Each one of them. I did not vote as am confused. I like some of my older (film) photos although they are technically not so good.

282
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why haven't you left canon?
« on: September 30, 2014, 10:31:36 PM »
Therapeutic reasons, I'm an obsessive-compulsive moaner, and picking fault with Canon is so easy (thanks to the handy hints I get from this forum!) and much more socially acceptable than doing so with your friends.  I don't actually take any photos, but whinging about the lack of a match for Nikon's 14-24, or the antiquated dust-sucking 100-400, instead of my friends behaviour (or dress, their wife, their girlfriend, or both or...), has saved me from a few black eyes.  You have to be careful, though.  When I started going on about Canon's sensor and shadow noise, I quickly picked up the nickname "Dynamic Range" - which was great, I'd never been called "dynamic" before!  8) Anyway, I must have overdone it, I went from being "Dynamic Range" to "Out of Range", nobody wanted to listen to me, so I've had to stop moaning about that and find something else.  Canon haven't failed me in that respect - I have been having a good whinge about the lack of video capabilities in Canon's DSLRs,so much so that I've managed to lose that horrible "Out of Range" tag for the much nicer "4-Ker"...

Hahahaha

283
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: September 30, 2014, 10:27:00 PM »
Remember that the 5D3 is already 3 years old. It makes sense that a new camera within its range would have better performance. The 7D2 has better IQ than the 5D3, too.

No way.

284
Canon General / Re: How Soon We Forget!
« on: September 30, 2014, 07:19:17 AM »
I think there's photographers and there's people who talk photography.

For photographers, it's important to take pictures, for the others, it's all about chat-chat-chat!

Like you? Come on! I visit this forum and take pictures. It is possible to be a photographer and also read up on technology/techniques.

Slow down and read what I said. For photographers it's important to take pics. We all read up on technique and so on and that's definitely not what I said.

I was relating to the OPs opening statement of "With all the chatter today about needing more MP or DR..." I do make the assumption that some are way more interested in chatting than shooting.

Understood. :) Peace!

285
Does this timing imply that nothing new will be released soon? I think so.

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 121