February 27, 2015, 06:05:15 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 - etg9

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Salesmanship and lower price trumps technical capability every time. 

+10 e.g. Mp3 vs. vinyl.

No, MP3 destroyed CD's and CD's took out tapes, tapes took out vinyl. The audio quality on tapes was poor but had a much easier time going places, since people don't sit in their house listening to music and would like to take it with them tape won. CD brought back a lot of sound quality from tape and kept most of the durability (could be scratched but wouldn't be eaten by the player).  CD got taken out by MP3 because of an ease of purchasing and better handling (no skipping, no scratching). Being able to sit at home and buy from iTunes or run with your music was another step in the right direction while only giving up nominal sound quality. 

Most people can't tell the diiference between a 256kbps mp3 and a CD, 98% of people can't tell the difference between 320kbps mp3 and a CD, no one can tell the difference between FLAC and CD.

Vinyl is the biggest offender of the bunch and even though it's the hotness in audiophile land these days it's mostly for nostalgia.

Mp3's took out vinyl not because of salesmanship or price (vinyl is cheaper a lot of times than an itunes album if you look around) but because it's a better format for the majority of people as it does what they want it to do.

//I'm sorry, I can't help it.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Surveys for 5D Mark III
« on: November 08, 2012, 03:05:10 PM »
I got the same survey and had to put a bunch of notes in mine because I just don't like where they are going. It feels very consumer-y. They seem to be looking at features that look cool. on a little symbol on the outside of the box at Best Buy.

My Answers were:

2,8,10 with a note that I would like better auto focus and metering.
7,2 with a note that I don't want an included flash just an included flash controller. GPS, WiFi and all those other functions waste battery and raise the price.

Next all the talk about pricing in here shows that people don't really understand how pricing works. especially on computers. DSLRs are not computers and cannot be priced as such. Computers (iPads, phones, etc.) are made out of silicon parts. As processes get smaller they can extract more parts from the same amount of material. As the process matures they can more efficiently manufacture these parts.

The new iPad has many more transistors than the 1st gen iPad but uses less silicon to do so. 35mm sensors don't change sizes, cost the same (silicon is actually up a little over inflation) so the cost of those is only going up. The Digic chips may be about the same however. Magnesium Alloy, Weather Sealing, Mirror, Motor, Shutter, Prisim, ect. should all be going up in price too especially if quality of such things rises too. Generally in parts costs for performance increase are not linear with the performance increase itself. a shutter that lasts 50% longer will cost more than 50% more to make as quality has to rise significantly. Lastly, as others have mentioned scale. iPads are sold by the millions and DSLRs are not pricing comes down with volume and usually efficiency can improve in manufacturing.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 06:17:28 PM »
either of the 200's (2 / 2.8)

Love it when auto-smileys make you smile :)

It totally got me. Good for one lol.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 06:06:39 PM »
Thanks Canon, this is a real Christmas present for me as I have a lot of other stuff to buy and this won't be taking away from that. These could not be any less useful to me. I have seen no outcry on this or any other forum to replace/augment the 24-105. The 35 f2 is rarely spoken about but I understand that isn't a great lens from the few comments there are. 

Things I would have liked to have seen before this: 100-400, 14-24, EF-S 10-22, either of the 200's (2 / 2.8), Both 50 1.4/1.8, 400 5.6, I'm also hoping for a 200-500

I'm in the minority here but I believe that the canon standard zooms are lacking compared to some of the other lenses. The 17-40 and 24-70 I have the same build quality to me, the 16-35II and 70-200II feel loads better than the 24-105, 24-70, or 24-70II (although I've only spent a little time with it).

Canon seems to be focused on the video crowd and for that I'm keeping my wallet closed.

Software & Accessories / Re: Need great Photo editing monitor
« on: October 25, 2012, 12:03:34 PM »
another happy Dell U2711 owner. Great monitor for the price. the 30" is great for photo work but isn't my favorite to game on or web surf.

The NEC monitors people have mentioned (PA271W) are a little nicer (not that much) and cost a little bit more, maybe justified for some. I've never owned one but worked on them enough to know they work well enough.

The Eizo stuff is a step up from there and can be color corrected easily if you need that. The money for me just didn't line up for these monitors as a serious hobbyist. However, if I were a professional who needed this as a real everyday tool this would be the monitor to buy.

Lenses / Re: 100mm f/2.8L IS vs 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II for Macro
« on: October 19, 2012, 04:34:21 PM »
Cameras and Audio seem to go hand in hand. I'll often go out and take pictures for the day and go home to a nice glass of booze and listen to the stereo; that's pretty ideal.

I know you already got the 70-200 already but the 100L (I didn't own the non-l or non IS) is a great piece of glass too and I like the look a lot better for portraits. There is more background separation and better fine detail retention to my eyeballs.

//looking to pick up an MP-E 65 next year

another vote for this on the 5Diii, at least for the red points.

Thank you Canon for listening to people on this.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS 5D Mark II Body for $1549
« on: October 15, 2012, 04:21:04 PM »
no Warranty, no deal. It's not worth the $150.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon
« on: October 09, 2012, 10:05:05 AM »
I have a Canon 5D MKIII and a Nikon D800e.

IMO the AF on Canon 5D MKIII excels over the Nikon D800.

The Dynamic Range on the D800e is unreal and in my opinion better than the Canon 5D MKIII.

And the detail on a 36MP image is also something to marvel at.

But at the end of the day 36MP does not look that great if you miss half the shots due to a poor AF system. And you really cant beat Canon L glass. With the D800 you need the best of the best glass to maximize the resolution potential.

I only use the D800e for product photography and Landscape shots. For everything else i prefer the Canon 5D MKIII.

So it really depends on what you shoot. But for an all around camera - you cant beat the Canon.

I agree with this a ton, I have a 5dIII and have used the D800 plenty to know that the Canon is a much better camera to have in my bag everyday for what I shoot. If I'm in a dimly lit bar or a really quick out of bag to street photo the Nikon doesn't do it for me. If I captured landscapes I would be tempted by the D800 but I'm not sure a 24" or 30" print would be all that much different out of either camera.

As for the should I switch, try both, shoot with what matches the way your brain works. I like the canon way of doing things, maybe you're a Nikon or Sony.

I don't believe anyone said it but I don't like the workflow in LR and Photoshop CS6 is great for the big edits but I have been using DxO Optics Pro 7 for batch processing and I've been liking it a lot. It isn't technically better than LR but the work flow feels better for what I do.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2012, 02:46:35 PM »
Mikael added that pie chart which is correct for the June 2012 standings of all CMOS/CCD standing. However that has little to nothing to do with what is going on as Omnivision and almost everyone else named there is a cellphone/small sensor manufacture. Cellphones, car backup cameras, security video cameras, ect.

To add a little more to the pressure that Canon is having it's all in the numbers. Nikon and Sony are the only places Canon is feeling any pressure from in tech from but companies only care about these numbers.

Nikon 2011 profit: ~349 million USD
Sony 2011 profit: ~ (-584 million) USD
Canon 2011 profit: ~3177 million USD (1.17 billion of which is from consumer products)

 As jrista said, Canon may or may not have the tech to beat Nikon/Sony but why should they go out and drop money on new stuff when selling the same stuff is working quite well making almost 10x as much as Nikon last year.

//all numbers come from the companies 2011 financial report. Nikon and Sony are numbers from the entire company

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 27, 2012, 10:06:11 AM »
These are some thoughts I had while reading this thread...

The technical talk in this thread is most welcome, I'm a computer guy but didn't know a lot (compared to some of you) about how the camera does it's thing and S/M Raw. These are always good reads and I thank that couple of you talking it out.

To people saying naive things, and there were a couple (that guy probably has a rebel and kit lens). I'm sure there are people out there who could out shoot me with a pinhole camera. Let's remember that the equipment is only measured against other equipment and that photographers have nothing to do with their gear. Skill, passion, and vision can be had by anyone and not only those who can afford an expensive camera.

The Nikon D600 looks far better on paper than the 6D, which is disappointment spec-wise and should have been a lot better for the money they are charging. I will not however be selling my Canon gear, as some of you have screamed for in this thread, for saying Nikon has a better product. There can be circumstances which you know nothing about that let people be in this position. Mine is that I already have a 5DIII that I feel is a nicer camera than both of the last ones but if I had to have a backup body or when I tell my friends to buy a camera I feel the D600 has the specs that I would rather have/tell people to get (and then borrow any good lenses they may have acquired) and I wish Canon was the name on it. I won't be buying a 6D.

And on the topic at hand. I would be interested in a Canon camera like this for landscape and maybe light studio work. More like a 645D than a D800. on this body I don't need high frame rates, I don't need a bazillion point AF, I don't need fancy video modes. I would like the following things, which I feel like Canon could do.

  • 46.1mp Full Frame - amazing IQ and Detail
  • 3 FPS
  • ISO 100-6400 (maybe a native 50)
  • 16bit - 14.5+ Stops DR
  • Low point AF (4,9,11 tops) with good spread and very accurate low light center point
  • Very weather sealed
  • Built in flash controller
  • $4800-5200

Cameras aren't losers, they're just objects...

Tell that to my camera. I leave it at home and tell it to look for work, go out and get a job. When I get home it's still sitting in the same place, didn't even move one bit. I suspect that some of my booze is missing but it just sits there and does nothing when I question it.

Also, I don't get all this about a price drop. I understand that there was a sweet one day sale. I understand that people are selling it for cheaper than when it came out. However, BH price today is $3464. OMGWTFBBQ!!! A whole $36 down the drain from buying the camera on day 1. Why does god hate me? If I had just put that $36 in the bank I would have made $0.29 and been able to put a down payment on a pack of gum.

I am not a pro and just bought it because I wanted to and the fact I'm trying to up my picture taking prowess. I thought that the camera I got was worth $3500 and that the specs and early tid bits sounded worth it. After using the camera I can say it does everything I want it to and I get some really great captures with it. I'm super happy and still feel it's worth it. I hope people get it for cheaper as it doesn't make my pictures any different. I'll still be really happy and maybe some friends can pick one up as well. Maybe I can get more cool backgrounds that I made myself.

If I just had $36 this would be so much better, but it's all I could do under the circumstances.

EOS Bodies / Re: At what price point will you consider buying the Canon 6D?
« on: September 18, 2012, 01:17:39 PM »
Having my 5D3 already, this isn't even a backup body. I might pickup the D600 for fun, though I will likely be waiting until $1900 on that one. It's the new 5DII.

LOL! That was 100% awesome.

Pages: 1 [2] 3