Messages

1951

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: June 09, 2012, 07:17:55 PM »

IQ deduced from a sensor score that reflects numerous measurements not relating to IQ?

Hugh? Even dxo's critics in this thread state that the measurements aren't the problem, just the non-transparent computation of the final score.

Google's algorithm does not give a score that influences spending habits nor does it pretend to be 100% accurate.

You should think again about this statement: Google does give a score (rank 1, 2, 3, 4) and if you don't think the Google rank influences spending habits ... well, what can I possibly say?

Where does dxo state that their sensor score is 100% accurate and the ultimate judgement? Every smart person will know a overall score is a reduction of complexity and thus has to lose accuracy - so it's not wise to take it as a sole basis for a decision. And while it is regrettable dxo doesn't disclose their formula, this fact alone doesn't prove they're out to get Canon.

1952

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Information.

« on: June 09, 2012, 07:06:40 PM »

I have a G12 and a A550 - dont try to manipulate non facts into an earth shattering revelation - you have absolutely no idea what kit people have.

Of course I have no idea what kits people have, so it is rather strange you're using this fact as an argument and with the added edgy tone. And with your gear collection, you seem to be very last person to qualify as a standard example.

But I can read posts, no manipulation there, and these turned from "who would want a pancake lens?" to "I want one for my dslr, too!". This is certainly not earth-shattering as you suspect, but simply interesting - and to me it shows there will be a large market for technologically competitive mirrorless systems instead of people getting many camera bodies at once.

1953

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark

« on: June 09, 2012, 06:32:33 PM »

to me, that makes the DxOMark Sensor Score a meaningless and useless number

While not transparent, the score isn't meaningless to me if it usually reflects the iq differences that a multitude of reviews express in words sooner or later. You can see it this way, too: Google's search engine algorithm is not transparent, too, but does that make Google useless?

1954

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Information.

« on: June 09, 2012, 06:29:05 PM »

Looking forward to it. On any DSLR body, such as my non gripped 5DMKII, it should make for a super light package.

It's interesting to see how many full-fledged dslr users suddenly speak out their desire to have a more compact, lighter camera system for some occasions. Imho this points towards the future - once mirrorless, more compact systems get a premium image, competitive af & lens selection, the old-school dlsr line will be less attractive.

1955

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D mk II still a viable option?

« on: June 09, 2012, 06:24:52 PM »

When I put my full inventory on the sig line I get flamed 

But if you don't you'll get flamed, too - nobody without a full frame body and a personal lens zoo could possibly have a valid opinion on anything, you 7d cheapo! ... on the other hand maybe it's clever not to be connected to ancient, dead-end aps-h technology :-p

1956

EOS Bodies / Re: Has Canon hidden its mirrorless technology in plain sight?

« on: June 09, 2012, 06:19:33 PM »

Also, Canon must protect from self-cannibalization. They don't want to kill the Rebel series sales when the mirrorless system arrives.

I'm not so sure about this - Canon knows mirrorless and evf is the future, and that the sub-$1000 market will be dominated by these systems in the near future. So rather than fearsome protection of their Rebel line, the clever way to go is to release competitive mirrorless systems no matter what, or someone else will.

At the same moment, old-school dlsrs will move up in the price range, meaning they might ditch the xxxxd line, move the xxxd and xxd up and sacrifice a possible 7d successor for a full frame in the $2000+ price range.

1957

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: T2i vs T4i for sports

« on: June 09, 2012, 06:10:28 PM »

I see that the T4i has just been released and I dont want to sell her my camera if the T4i will actually b better for low light in an area such as a basketball gym. I also see that the T4i has continuous auto focus for video which would b a plus for her as well. Is the T4i worth getting over the T2i for image quality in a low light sports environment?

Funny you're asking such a question if you are a future 1dx user ... anyway: imho the 650d is better in low light because of better pattern detection (cross type af points) which will make a difference if all af points are active. This plus more fps for sports plus video af which you're saying is wanted points strongly towards the newer body.

Just be sure to relay the fact that the af servo system is still complete crap for shooting sports, I know because the 650d inherits the af system from the 60d I have. The 7d + large open aperture lens for precise af is the system you should recommend for sports, even if it's more expensive and hasn't got the latest video features.

1958

EOS Bodies / Re: Will there be a 7d2 at all?

« on: June 09, 2012, 05:32:01 PM »

Ok, if given the choice, which of these two would you buy if both were priced at $2000:

• 7DII with an improved 18mp/1.6x sensor, 10 fps, 61-points AF
• 7DII with a 22mp FF sensor (same as the 5DIII), 5fp, 19-point AF system

Interesting question, you should do a poll yourself on this. Personally, for what I shoot I'd like to have the ff version because of the better iq (lens-sensor combination) - that's why I hope Canon will release something like this to replace the 5d2. But I'm not on a big budget, I guess the rest of the world would either get a real 5d3 or want an updated crop 7d2 for tele action shots.

But I'd still like to see a salesmen with a customer in front of him explaining why Canon offers two $2000 bodies, and what the differences are...

1959

EOS Bodies / Re: Will there be a 7d2 at all?

« on: June 09, 2012, 05:13:05 PM »

If we were talking entry level I'd agree but once you get up to the level of a potential 7D2 and a FF model at $1500 or more potentiasl buyers are likely to know what there after.

I have to disagree, many people walking around with 7d bodies in Berlin are guys who use a kit lens and can hardly find the shutter button - but the camera salesmen talked them into getting something "good" while not getting the most expensive model (5d2, now 5d3). People who are likely to have a clue are 1d owners, but even there seem to be a couple of very well-off amateurs. This forum is biased towards people who are tech geeks.

1960

EOS Bodies / Re: Will there be a 7d2 at all?

« on: June 09, 2012, 02:21:34 PM »

Do manifacturers need to limate themlseves to a single model in each price bracket?

I've been asking myself the same question, and think: They don't "need" to, but releasing different camera bodies with nearly the same price tag doesn't seem clever marketing-wise because it will confuse customers, which then might go for something else completely. So I think Canon with its well-known marketing will try to avoid this if possible.

1961

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 7D Firmware Version 2 Coming Soon

« on: June 09, 2012, 01:52:40 PM »

I see no need whatsoever for a 70D.   Either go cheap, but good enough = Rebel/650D or go more expensive and get a faster, better APS-C cam in a wheathersealed, robust body. No need to artificially put something in between.

Putting a product between $600 and $1600 isn't artificial, it's essential in this price range. And it makes sense too, because many people who bought a 60d seem to want better ergonomics (top lcd, back dial) without premium "flagship" features and price tag.

1962

EOS Bodies / Re: 650D (T4i) or 600D (T3i)

« on: June 09, 2012, 01:14:39 PM »

But I'm sure there will be an ML upgrade for the 650D in the works soon (as well as for the 70D when it's released)

ML is essentially developed by a single person (Alex) atm, and the ml status on digic5 bodies like the 5d3 is essentially printing "Hello, World" on screen. So don't count on a non-paid project like this to persist developing with the same speed & quality, and don't expect all features available on the digic5. You may be lucky and it might take less than a year for the port, or it may not appear at all if the devs are offered paid jobs elsewhere.

1963

EOS Bodies / Re: 650D (T4i) or 600D (T3i)

« on: June 09, 2012, 10:14:49 AM »

I'm more interested in the better quality for video and potentially fixing moire and just generally having a newer camera.

If you're not keen on live af then the 600d will have higher quality video because it runs magic lantern right now, *the* killer feature for video, the hdr video feature alone outclasses much more expensive cams... http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Unified

Magic Lantern HDR Video	Small | Large

1964

EOS Bodies / Will there be a 7d2 at all?

« on: June 09, 2012, 10:09:18 AM »

With the release of the updated 7d firmware, the writing's on the wall - it's hardly probably that a 7d2 is just around the corner if the year-old model gets a free facelift. So what's your take on Canon's strategy for the mid-price range?

1965

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 7D Firmware Version 2 Coming Soon

« on: June 09, 2012, 09:52:44 AM »

I supposed my wishful thinking FF/Crop 1.6 7DX to be a fine replacement of the 5D2. And of course you are right, it wouldn't be a 5D3 killer at all. But an affordable body for many purposes. Tag it  US $ 2400 and you get a nice gap between APS-C and the next level FF body, the current 5D3. Any other comments welcome.

Given the apparent (lack of) Canon's sensor building capability, it wouldn't be a fine 5d2 replacement, it wouldn't be a replacement at all. And I still think there's a larger market for a $2000-$2500 full frame body than for a high-end aps-c, if Canon should choose to only produce one body in this price range.

First off, this enthusiast's forum isn't a market representation, here are more people around that would pay anything for a high-end aps-c birding body. And since this can replace much more expensive action bodies, too, while taking cheaper lenses because of the 1.6x crop factor - what would Canon's interest in this be?