April 20, 2014, 11:23:49 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 - Chuck Alaimo

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 56
16
EOS Bodies / Re: What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?
« on: March 08, 2014, 02:47:21 PM »

I have to wonder what people are doing to mess up a shot with an SLR, when I upgraded from a compact I was satisfied with the results even after forgetting to focus with the first few images. I was shooting from a tripod though, maybe it's just flat out unrealistic to compare the experiences of a fiddly nerd type with the average person.
If you're just looking at images on a low resolution screen and not pixel peeping a decent cellphone camera might seem fairly competitive, at least in good lighting. Chances are most people compare quality on instagram

I see this all the time at events and even family gatherings.  amny just think that right out of the box the thing will make amazing images.  so it's left in auto everything mode and all points focus mode. 

Scenario:

why are my shots out of focus.  I take a look...well, you have it on all points, your focus is not locking on what you want it to because the camera is making the call for you. 

Oh, so how do I change that? 

did you read your manual?

no....

if they are on a canon I can help them easily and show them nikon and sony's interface is all wierd --- i tell them they have to just read their manuals...and you'd be surprised how many say they threw that out

from focus points to the good old, how do I stop the flash from popping up to the basics of shutter speed (why is there blur, because your shooting moving things at 1/15th ---- ohhhh, didn't know that...how do I change that)....

It's sad, but it's true.  these are the folks that have only snapped 1000 shots in 2 years on their slr, but well over 100,000 on their cell phones...


17
EOS Bodies / Re: What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?
« on: March 08, 2014, 02:08:10 PM »
Was in my local camera store this afternoon with a friend of my daughter and my daughter. Her friend has got into photography because of her iPhone 5 and just purchased an EOS 6d with 24-105mm f4L, 17-40mm f4L and 100mm f2.8 macro. Thats £ 2,983 minus mail-in cash back of £60.00 making £ 2,923 ($ 3,096). Its the smart phone generation that really gets into photography that will keep DSLRs as well as keen / club amateurs going. Were being pessimistic because sales are normalising but the flip side is of that 1 billion smart phones that were bought in 2013 even if a small percentage buy DSLRs that will be a large number.

Wow, that's awesome for her.  I get calls from my parent friends quite often - the good old my son/daughter is really digging photography and we want to encourage it so what do you recommend.  Your friends daughter is quite lucky, most that ask me end up saying their budget is $400-700 - so I point them towards either rebels, or used older models. 

I am betting the #'s on this get wacky though - of the 1 billion cell phones per year, how many will say, i dig photography and want to explore more.  1 out of 1000?  1 out of 10,000?  1 out of 100,000?   And how many (especially if you factor in that many are young) stick with it beyond that initial purchase (add a lens, add a flash, add another lens...etc etc.)?   Add to this one other point --if we're talking about young people, the fresh batch of news photogs - unless you have parents who are that special mix very generous and moderately well to do (not talking rich, but, if your on the low end of the middle class your desire to foster and be generous is tempered by your budget).  your on your own, working part time and saving those pennies for upgrades, which for a 17 year old, that will take a while. 

I'm not saying these are bad shooters at all, just that this age bracket isn't making much money and most likely isn't working professionally so they have much less money to spend than lets say, a hobby shooter who makes 80K a year


18
EOS Bodies / Re: What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?
« on: March 08, 2014, 01:46:47 PM »
In the last 7 years, I've seen 104 people in my office (out of the 148 total staff) who bought a DSLR ... but only 9 of them are actually doing something with their DSLRs. I have an American colleague who bought my entire kit (DSLR, lenses, tripod, flash etc for $2500) in 2009, but he hardly ever uses any of that gear (I think the last he used was over 2 years ago). I think that does reflect the vast majority of DSLR customers in the past 5 years or so ... a lot of them bought DSLRs thinking that it will somehow magically transform their images, because they see other photographers take great images with DSLRs. But they do not understand the basics of photography (i.e. f/stops, aperture, ISO etc) or have the interest in post processing ... most of them use the auto mode and get frustrated that the flash keeps popping up at the most inappropriate times or their photos, from their very expensive DSLR/lens, don't look any better than their smartphone and not many are willing to carry the weight/bulk that comes with DSLRs  ... eventually they give up, some sell it off, other let it collect dust ... the DSLR sales "peak" we are referring to accounts for a vast majority of people who have bought them and pretty much never used them after the first few weeks or months ... basically it was the beginners who were caught up in the hype. Lets face it, DSLR photography is an expensive hobby and the upgrades are never ending ... not everyone is willing to keep on upgrading like some of GAS sufferers.

So, now, it the more serious hobbyists / professionals who are buying/upgrading DSLRs and not the vast majority of beginners (who used to buy till a couple of years ago).

Just the day before yesterday, I gave a ride to an English lady during a bird watching trip (organized by a famous birder), and she bought her Nikon D300 + 18-200 lens 5 years ago ... she told me that she shot less than 1000 photos with it, she says that most of her images don't look any better then her iPhone 4S. So she just uses her D300+18-200 once in a great while, when she thinks she might need some reach. So why should people like her, be upgrading to an expensive DSLR/lens ... so they basically stopped buying/upgrading them ... I think that is the biggest factor in the loss of sales, the economic slow down etc are just secondary factors.

You hit the nail right on the head here!  People forget there there is skill involved in photography, many do believe that the final image and how good it is is based solely on the camera, not the eye of the photographer, not the settings chosen by the photographer, and because people are used to their phones the post process choices done by the photog.  I get that all the time, people look at my images and say the good old...you must have a really nice camera.  these people think, ohhh...if i spend $$$$ i will make better picutres - which is the scenario you paint there perfectly.  Oh, you need to learn things about light, oh you need to learn things about post process, and if you don't learn then your not gonna get a much better image than your phone could get.

 

19
EOS Bodies / Re: What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?
« on: March 08, 2014, 01:36:40 PM »
I don't think I'll buy a 5D4. The 5D3 is so good already. That's the problem, how does one convince me that this camera now isn't worth keeping to make me buy a new camera?

i'll answer by 1 upping it ---My guess is the 5 series is tied to the 1 series so they can share R&D cost.  So, what are they going to improve in the next 1series? 

And yup, another way to answer it is to guess on what the majority of feedback to canon said.  Last time around it was all about AF, give us good AF.  Well that's done. and they improved high ISO too.   My guess is we'll see a bump in DR, a bump in MP's, duel pixel, and maybe the holy grail of improved low ISO performance.  the 5d series is the camera of choice for wedding photographers (well, those that shoot canon), and canon has seen that this is a lucrative market so I am guessing the mp bump will be low (up to like 24/26MP's) because you don't want the resolution to be too huge.  AF can stay pretty much the same, just improve the accuracy, integrate that 6d center point.  Boom, I take a pre-order for that please!!!!

Does that meet your needs?  It depends on what you shoot.  It also depends on how many miles you put on your body.  For many of us, the upgrade cycle does closely follow the pattern for body replacement for many shooters.  In 2 years or so when the 5d4 hits the shelves, i will most likely be about to replace my 5d3 or my 6d.  so at that stage my kit may switch to a 5d3 and a 5d4...or a 5d4 and whatever the 6d2 turns out to be. 

If your a studio shooter, or architecture, or something that moves at a slower pace (IE, less shutter clicks per day, per job, per year) then you won't NEED a new body as soon.  So the upgrade does have to be more of a wow!

But for a shooter like me, it's like a car.  I drive a 2004 rav4.  When that car hits the point where repair costs are too great it will be time to replace it.  Bells and whistles won't matter, I'm gonna get a new car cause it's needed

20
PowerShot / Re: Canon to Leave the Entry Level Point & Shoot Market?
« on: February 25, 2014, 11:52:16 PM »
FF mirrorless body is about same size as P&S. It's time Mr. Canon, before it too late ::)

don't see how this changes the equation.  Mirrorless FF will be at least 1k  more expensive than anyone in the entry level P&S category is looking to spend ($200 or so vs $1500-2500)...

Mirrorless doesn't get you to facebook.  Mirrorless doesn't let you watch youtube.  Mirrorless doesn't let you do video chat.  Mirrorless doesn't give you a dataplan!  Mirrorless does not give you angry birds, words with friends or candy crush saga, or any of the other apps like that.... Mirrorless won't get you to porn (unless you film it yourself)...

Those not buying entry level P&S cameras kind of want 1 device.  Cell phone cameras for the most part are pretty much as good in most situations as a p&S - mind you, we're talking about very casual shooters here.  Mirrorless is way more expensive, not as capable (for what that market wants).  Mirrorless, especially FF mirrorless is gonna only appeal to a unique niche mix of pros, hobbyists and enthusiasts or those who travel a lot!

Either way, it makes sense, anything below slr's has to offer something compelling, and entry level P&S's are far from compelling!!!!

Instead of using R&D resources to develop 100ish diff. P&S, Canon now can use that R&D resources in decent mirrorless. FF mirrorless I hope.

Canon can kick start with FF mirrorless + 20mm F4 pancake. Follow with 17, 35, 50, 85mm pancake style.

I didn't buy A7r due to DR crap. I bought it for few reasons - compact and FF IQ(higher ISO). I wish Canon would release something like this soon so we don't have to discuss this topic ever again ;)

I still don't get how FF mirrorless changes this equation man.  Like I said "Mirrorless FF will be at least 1k  more expensive than anyone in the entry level P&S category is looking to spend ($200 or so vs $1500-2500)."  If your looking to spend $200 on a camera (which is what we're talking about here, entry level stuff) then how is FF mirrorless R&D going to help?  This market segment isn't gonna buy anything over $1000 - save the select few who want to take it to the next level. 

To put it on another level - even mirrorless APS-C doesn't fill the current entry level niche.  They could push out a mirrorless rebel for instance, the $600-800 with lens price tag won't be appealing.  The are people that are ditching cameras with better IQ for cell phones...   

21
the D4s is out and it´s..... meh!

canon has not to do much to make the 1D X Mk2 better at all points in the feature list.

so i expect a minor upgrade from canon. :(

why would you expect that?  I can picture the canon imaging board room where they debate the future of each line.  They have their plan that they'd rather stick too (which is not rush a new 1 series to market, take their time to make something truly awesome), and their emergency plan (reaction strategy, a less thought out more marginal refresh to compete if the competition does something that warrants reacting)

The d4s doesn't look much different from the d4.  I'm sure people will buy it, butI think the 1dx stands in competition.  We'll see, the proof is in the pudding  - and as we know, you can't 100% judge a camera on a spec sheet.  How will the early adopters feel and will the images from it rock the photography world, that will in the end determine what canon does.

Personally I think this will lead canon to staying the course...

22
so, shortly after the announcement, Here are some thoughts from 2 of my nikon shooting friends...

"-No jump in mp from D4. 20 would have been nice
-Can't stand XQD. Not so much because it's flawed but because two different kinds of cards in the same device is just stupid and illogical. Why not just stop dicking around and make both slots XQD if it's so great? Two kinds if cards. Two kinds if readers. Pain in the ass desk cluter.
-$500 jump in price.
-Might as well stick with D3s for action and buy a D800 for landscape and studio.
D3s fullfills high ISO needs and speed needs.

Suck it, Nikon."

"Agreed wholeheartedly, and this probably is going to push a lot of people to jump ship to Canon too i bet. Nikon raising the price point for insignificant changes year after year, the market is only going to tolerate that for so long"


LOL...grass is always greener .....


23
Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 25, 2014, 12:50:15 PM »
I think there is the whole, art is in the eye of the beholder argument - but - there is also the good old, name = prestige.   Chances are all of us here Could take that shot, but, would any of us even think of consider showing it that large?  image:  --- that's pretty huge! 73 x 143 in ---6 feet by close to 12 feet...huge.  Gursky can and did do that because he has both skill and the name and of course the lab and his own giant printer too. 

It's sad because I see so many artists making such amazing things...selling them for $100 a pop, then see this---yeah gursky's is huge but...it's 4 million not because of the content ---

Face the facts - it's 4 million because it's a gursky.  Same shot printed to same size by unknown fill in the blank artist - well, your talking a few grand at most because - unkonw fill in the blank artist isn't known, has no acclaim.  Where did this thing sell, christies, and yeah, they cater to the rich, the rich want bragging rights, they want that piece on the wall that will be the talk of the next cocktail party (mind you, the cost of the cocktail party for this rich guy alone is probably more than the unkown artist would would get for his print) ---ohhh it's a such and such...

Sorry if that ruffles feathers, but it's true...

So in your opinion, spending $4 million to buy this piece, is a wise investment?  Somehow, decades from now, it will be worth several times that much (even adjusted for inflation)?  In other words, what you're saying, is that Gursky as an artist, is at the same level or above, as Ansel Adams, or Picasso.  I submit that he is not, and thus it's a bad investment.

that part is also eye of the beholder - at that level, what is seen as "value" is not what we see.  If you were andy warhol, a stained napkin doodle is worth 30K. 

gursky is lucky, he's alive and selling this for 4 mil.  Many artists have to wait till their dead to sell at at level

24
Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 24, 2014, 09:34:23 PM »
I think there is the whole, art is in the eye of the beholder argument - but - there is also the good old, name = prestige.   Chances are all of us here Could take that shot, but, would any of us even think of consider showing it that large?  image:  --- that's pretty huge! 73 x 143 in ---6 feet by close to 12 feet...huge.  Gursky can and did do that because he has both skill and the name and of course the lab and his own giant printer too. 

It's sad because I see so many artists making such amazing things...selling them for $100 a pop, then see this---yeah gursky's is huge but...it's 4 million not because of the content ---

Face the facts - it's 4 million because it's a gursky.  Same shot printed to same size by unknown fill in the blank artist - well, your talking a few grand at most because - unkonw fill in the blank artist isn't known, has no acclaim.  Where did this thing sell, christies, and yeah, they cater to the rich, the rich want bragging rights, they want that piece on the wall that will be the talk of the next cocktail party (mind you, the cost of the cocktail party for this rich guy alone is probably more than the unkown artist would would get for his print) ---ohhh it's a such and such...

Sorry if that ruffles feathers, but it's true...


25
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 24, 2014, 09:04:13 PM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

You will love full frame cameras, but you won't like how much the lenses cost.

There are some value ef lenses... but if you get a nice body, it is just a waste to put on mediocre lenses. 

Even then... if you just go with primes like the 40mm, 35 f2 is, 100 f2... you can get by.

not to mention the decent 3rd party options...

26
PowerShot / Re: Canon to Leave the Entry Level Point & Shoot Market?
« on: February 24, 2014, 08:59:29 PM »
FF mirrorless body is about same size as P&S. It's time Mr. Canon, before it too late ::)

don't see how this changes the equation.  Mirrorless FF will be at least 1k  more expensive than anyone in the entry level P&S category is looking to spend ($200 or so vs $1500-2500)...

Mirrorless doesn't get you to facebook.  Mirrorless doesn't let you watch youtube.  Mirrorless doesn't let you do video chat.  Mirrorless doesn't give you a dataplan!  Mirrorless does not give you angry birds, words with friends or candy crush saga, or any of the other apps like that.... Mirrorless won't get you to porn (unless you film it yourself)...

Those not buying entry level P&S cameras kind of want 1 device.  Cell phone cameras for the most part are pretty much as good in most situations as a p&S - mind you, we're talking about very casual shooters here.  Mirrorless is way more expensive, not as capable (for what that market wants).  Mirrorless, especially FF mirrorless is gonna only appeal to a unique niche mix of pros, hobbyists and enthusiasts or those who travel a lot!

Either way, it makes sense, anything below slr's has to offer something compelling, and entry level P&S's are far from compelling!!!!

27
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 21, 2014, 03:25:51 PM »
I like to see 6D Mark II.  Improvement over the GPS/battery issue.

Question: What's Next from Canon?

Answer: 5DMkV and 7DMkIII (I did not want to become boring with the usual next models  ;D )

Merge but delete - the 7d2 is like around the corner.  5d4 is proably still a bit away.  But, given the nature of the 6d, a refresh of that may be a late 20144 or early 2015 thing ----

which I might say is quite interesting ---- how would the 6d2 look?  Given the timing, would we get a peak at the features and capabilities of the 5d4 with the 6d2?  Kind of like, here's something to wet your lips, now don't you want a full drink?

LOL, it would make sense for wedding shooters using either or both systems - if a 6d2 arrived on the scene in the fall of 2015, that's around when I'd probably be considering replacing my 6d, and the fall of 2016 may be when i need to replace my 5d3. 

Either way, my guess is we'll see 1/2-1 year between the 6d2 and the 5d4.  And given how well the 5d3 is doing, I don't think canon is in a rush to refresh that. 

Another thing to consider.... the sooner the 6d refreshes the more lackluster the refresh will be (same sensor, same processor, just a few added things - nothing major - a rebel refresh as it were).  if a 6d2 arrived in the summer it would be pretty much like that I'd say.  But, timed with the launch of a 5d4, they could showcase either a new sensor or new processor - something that gives a preview of what to expect in both the 5d4 and the next 1d series ----if that's how things go then we're waiting cause i highly doubt we'll see a refresh of the 5 or the 1 series till at the earliest late fall of 2015 (and that will most likely be announcement of the bodies, not the launch! ----plus, summer olympics is in 2016....sounds like a perfect time for a 5d4 and a 1dx2!

28
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 21, 2014, 11:41:34 AM »
... but it is baffling that Canon does not seem to be interested in the Lion's share of that market :-\ ... surely, with their experience as a successful camera manufacturer, Canon CAN make a great mirrorless camera ... but for some reason they seem to have deliberately crippled the EOS-M. ... yet Canon ain't interested? ... are they deliberately sabotaging the market to give mirrorless a bad name? :-\ :-\

Maybe Canon doesn't own certain key patents regarding mirrorless cameras and thus don't want to be walloped into bankruptcy by a no-account company like Olympus.  ;D
I wonder why you mention sabotaging. As if it isn't their right not to put resources to mirrorless...
I do not understand what you mean by: "As if it isn't their right not to put resources to mirrorless" ... but let me explain why I used the word "sabotaging":
Over the years I've used several third party lenses (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Rokinon/Samyang) on Canon cameras (400D, 450D, 500D, 60D, 7D & 5D MKII) and Nikon cameras (D70, D3100, D5100, D7000, D7100 & D6100), when I first got the third party lenses, everything would work well on my Canon/Nikon cameras ... but mysteriously whenever I updated to a new firmware(s), the third party lenses would suddenly not AF as well as they used to before, or the OS/VC would become noisy or the camera batteries would drain faster (when using third party lenses) ... so it is my assumption that Canon/Nikon do some "tinkering" (sabotaging) to "encourage" Canon/Nikon camera users to buy only their lenses (I suppose I'd do the same thing if I was in their shoes ... and why not). If you notice, both Canon/Nikon got into the mirrorless business with disappointing mirrorless camera models ... since Canon/Nikon account for a major portion of camera sales across the globe, they are in a unique position to give a product a good/bad name with subtle tactics. The EOS-M camera was released in June 2012 (that is nearly 21 months ago), yet there are only 2 native lenses available in most parts of the world ... the 11-22mm UWA lens is only available in just a handful of countries ... does one honestly believe that people will not want to buy that awesome small lens, which has received very positive reviews? ... something does not add up here when the ONLY 2 major players (Canon/Nikon) produce halfhearted cameras ... I cannot believe that Canon/Nikon, with their massive resources and R&D, are not capable of producing compelling mirrorless cameras ... for me the only logical conclusion is that they are not interested in the mirrorless business (as they've got far too much invested in their highly profitable DSLR business) and they want it to stay that way ... and the best way of giving mirrorless cameras a bad name is produce halfhearted ones that do not inspire confidence in the general public ... thus "encouraging" people to buy DSLRs ... therefore, the word "sabotaging". Everything is fair in love and war ... and business is war.
I wonder if they are looking further down the road than we give them credit for, and are positioning themselves for the day the DSLRs go mirrorless and that they plan to use the same EF mount and the same EF lenses.....
Quite possible ... obviously, it isn't an accident that Canon holds the numero uno position, they seem to be very clever about their business decisions. Personally, I prefer Canon cameras (with the exception of mirrorless) over any other brand ... and it'd be awesome if we can use EF lenses on Canon mirrorless cameras.

Seems to me that the lion share of the market is that other 80%! 

Mirrorless Mirrorless Mirrorless...Said it before, will say it again - mirrorless needs to find it's identity.  I think canon is putting very little effort into mirrorless because they don't want to take the chance in defining the market.  I think canon is just waiting to see what happens, where will the market go.  Let sony, oly, fugi do the R&D.

As has been talked over, the whole digital market is in flux due to the sheer # of cell phone camera users out there.  mirrorless currently is trying to push this smaller lighter formula, but, will this be a winning formula or will this be the trendy thing that's the talk of the town until the next cool thing arrives?  Unfortunately, for the smaller lighter concept we already have capable devises for that - cell phones.  these are the folks that were buying P&S camera's.  Small light and portable, yeah mirrorless systems are smaller than slr systems but but it's bigger than a cell phone, and unless you buy 1 lens and stick with it, then you've got lenses.  If your a woman I guess you have a purse to put all that in, but if your a guy, and it's summer - 1 device in the pocket or damn, i have to bring that stupid hipsack....and for the biggest segment in that group, you can't send txt's with your mirrorless...so cell phones tend to win.

So, let the other's break the ground here.  Canon can silently wait for mirrorless to figure out that there is a small niche of folks who just want this in it's current form.  As all that is going down, canon can push R&D to get EVF and or Hybrid EVF/OVF into a standard slr form factor with stand slr mount. 

 

29
Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: February 16, 2014, 04:28:23 PM »
wow...there are some gorgeous shots in here....

Here's a few

30
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 16, 2014, 01:55:05 PM »
This also causes a drastic loss of battery life ...

Which is solved by bigger batteries ... which is why I keep shouting for people to stop harping on "the small size of mirrorless" as a feature. Make a mirrorless camera as big as 5DIII and cram the sucker full of batteries.

... and the resulting information overload is distracting.  I turn it all of in my EVF cameras ...

For some. But isn't it great that you can actually turn it off, huh?  ;)

... the EVF is lousy in every way compared to an OVF.

Depends. Definitely so in 2012; it became better in 2013; and next year it'll be even better. For comparison, I remember a time when we all felt that film was still soooo much superior to digital and "pros" wouldn't touch it for serious work. But look at where we are today. So please don't judge EVF's on how they are now, as the technology is constantly being improved.  :)

I keep saying similar things (IE use an slr body type, with an EF mount - so no one has to use silly lens adaptors or wait while each and every lens ever made gets resigned to fit the current mirrorless mold).  But, this is where mirrorless has its downfall, it seems like the biggest proponents for mirrorless want their cake and want to eat it too.  All the bells and whistles of an slr, in a package smaller than the A7, but smaller with smaller lenses and of course, a magical battery compartment that can fit 2 1dx batteries...

when it comes down to it...it really is about form factor.  there was another post somewhere here showing the first digital camera's, goofy looking things, the first idea was that cause it's new it should look radically different...high tech...result, they looked like a joke and weren't taken seriously until digital camera's started to look like regular cameras. 

which is why i feel that mirrorless may just be a cool for now, trendy product. 

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 56