Messages

16

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]

« on: June 29, 2012, 07:46:22 AM »

Thats why you need something like the LEE filter kit that has side covers.

My Sigma 12-24 needed a custom solution for the light leakage. And basically sorted out, it has no light leakage.
Mine's with a friend on vacation now, so can't really snap a shot of it to illustrate what I mean. 

But .. you can get away with it with a little gaffer tape at the sides of the filter clips if you use the generic Cokin adapters.

17

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]

« on: June 29, 2012, 07:19:32 AM »

Looks like you guys haven't played around wide angles enough ...

For the Sigma 8-16, this is what you need as an adapter to use square filters:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/14101-REG/Cokin_CP499_P_Series_Universal_Adapter.html



For larger lenses like the Nikon 14-24mm, there is this :

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/693472-REG/LEE_Filters_KIT_SW150_SW150_Filter_Holder_Kit.html

18

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]

« on: June 29, 2012, 05:35:29 AM »

It's not like a 7D successor is going to get the autofocus capability of the 1DX and it is the autofocus ability of a camera that makes or breaks it with respect to sports and to a lesser extent wildlife.

A straight lift od the 1D4 AF would be big improvement on the existing 7D AF - but (maybe) not as good as the 1DX AF

Who knows maybe we will see a ultra wide EF affordable lens with the 7D2 announcement.

You mean like the already rumored 14-24? As I said above, that has a curved front element and is not suitable for use with filters.

I believe Lee/Cokins will work OK? (but not on the 8-15)

Agree on the 1DmkIV AF part. It would be at almost no additional cost to R&D development.

As for the Lee/Cokins, they only work with the X-Pro series. I used them for the Sigma 12-24, with a custom made adapter for my 5DmkII.  You need a filter circle of about 127mm to clear the 12mm on a FF.  Since the 8-15 has similar FOV, it should be similar too.

19

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]

« on: June 29, 2012, 01:03:24 AM »

APS-H. Why? I really see no point in it anymore. It served a purpose when FF was wildly expensive and APS-C wasn't up to the IQ. It had an added advantage of faster frame rates and a higher useable ISO, great for low light level sports shooting. Now, with improvements in IQ in other sensor formats, the reason no longer exists for the format to hang around. It really is a no mans land for formats.

From Canon's point of view it could mean that their lens R&D only has to worry about EF lens if APS-C development is not at the high end - and we get more high quality, budget lens like the shorty forty instead

Just to add, it would serve as a bridge between EF and EF-S lenses and as Brian suggests, allow them to concentrate their efforts on EF lenses without alienating existing EF-S lens owners. A high quality camera that allows the full utilization of both formats ( that is provided it has EF-S crop compatibility mode). 

It would also be attractive to EF glass owners who want a higher-speed camera without paying mortgage for one. Something that has say ~8-9fps, minimum current 7D typish AF module (the 1dMkIV AF would be really awesome though..) ... Under US$2500/-.  And in a 7D or 5DMkII body format.

It would be a really attractive camera to a lot of people. And as Canon has always like to do, explore hidden niches of the market with a high potential which no competitor can touch for sometime.

But as with almost all ideas here, nobody knows for sure what are Canon's considerations in the overall scheme of things. 

20

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]

« on: June 28, 2012, 10:23:17 PM »

I know I am showing my ignorance, but I'll ask anyway. APS-H (1.3) - Would it support EF-S? I would assume not! I only own one (10-22mm).

It can work from about 14~15mm onwards supposedly. (Someone tried with a 1DMkIII some time ago, maybe you can try a search on it ..)

But if such a camera does come about, i would be in Canon's best interest to have a crop-compatibility mode that toggles between 1.6x and 1.3x crop. This would be a great way to make everyone happy ... and ensure that it becomes a great selling camera !   

21

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcement Day July 24, 2012? [CR2]

« on: June 22, 2012, 12:32:04 PM »

I don't know about you, but my definition of safe is around the 50 meters/yards mark - the "half a football field pitch" length. I've never seen anyone recommend anything closer as being "safe".

Not unless you were in a car with the engine left on idle ....   

Or you have 300-400 meters between you and the bear with some ready -to-scram car or secure shelter to run to ...  anything under that is definitely not safe if you have big camera gear at hand ! 

22

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Mirrorless Entry

« on: June 20, 2012, 07:38:58 AM »

So we'll have to wait and see if Canon bring out a competitor to the NEX-7 because this first camera is not going to be it.

Agreed.

Mass market is where the money is, and making money more often than not has been Canon's priority. So, its highly plausible that they will want to target something that they can push numbers. Quickly. And as odd as it sounds, a high-spec MIL camera is by general consideration to be 'niche' ..

As much as its a dream for me that there's an EF-mount FF MIL camera, that's highly unlikely to happen for a while. Because the market hasn't been saturated to the point that such a segregation niche is required at this point in time. Well, at least that's what I think Canon is considering. 

But who knows, they may very well spring a surprise on us ?? 

23

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Mirrorless Entry

« on: June 20, 2012, 01:23:26 AM »

Thank you for strengthening my distaste in narrow minded fanboys. You do see everything in black and white, don't you?
Everyone who doesn't love Canon's latest camera must be a Nikon troll, right? 

Not everyone. But its just the way you word things that turn people off.

Its the same as the old story of people bashing the 5DII's AF based on not more than 20 shots on the camera. And people praising to the high heavens the D300s and D700's 51 pt AF being the be-all and end-all based on numerical specifications.

If you have spent sufficient time ( and that I mean many months and at least 10,000 deliberate and planned shots) with these cameras, much of these can be debunked. I have spent plenty of time on my 5DII and my friend's D300s to say that these stories were all off the mark.  The 5DII has a very capable AF, if you know the limitations of the lenses you're using and also the frame-rate as I shoot mostly sport with it. The D300s though it has 51 pts in theory, you can't really use all of them except for 'not so fast moving' objects in really good light.  Else you'll have to dumb down the number of useable points to achieve the predictability and speed of response of what's built-in as default on the 7D for comparison. In fact, in really poor light, the 5DII was a lot more responsive and predictable as compared to the D300s with full 51pts enabled.

Likewise your tone on 5DIII and D800 comparison. Have you spent similar amounts of time and shooting experience with both cameras to have explored all the strengths and flaws of both cameras to compare ? If not, you're pretty much trolling off others heresy from the web. SHOUTING on forums doesn't make you heard ... it just turns people off like in any normal conversation.

24

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Mirrorless Entry

« on: June 20, 2012, 12:14:01 AM »

Instead of pouring your hate into every thread why not have a more objective approach backed up with some real experience/evidence instead of just malicious rumour and gueswork?

That's so true indeed.

BT topic.

I think this would make sense that they are looking at an 'entry' MIL camera with the G1X sensor. It has the right attributes that an P&S upgrader would want.

i) It has proven to take really good quality pictures on the G1x.
ii) Its aspect ratio would allow for really compact lenses. Probably something not much larger than what we see on the G1x for the same aperture and focal length range.
iii) It would keep the costs of such a system down, thus more attractive to P&S upgraders.
iv) Its 'upward compatible' with EF mount as well as EF-S lenses. In short make a good back-up camera/secondary travel camera for people who already own EF / EF-S glass with an adaptor.
v) It leaves room for the APS-C sensors of the DSLR cameras.
vi) It leaves room for a separate line of MIL cameras that clearly differentiates itself in the market. Which Canon has tried and proven quite a few times in history. Such as the original Rebel, the 5D, the G1x, the G-series powershots.  Possibly an APS-H or even FF MIL camera if they determine there is strong enough a demand for them down the line.

Of course, many of us on this forum would want something that's of higher specifications but economically, its not really so viable for Canon if the market for something 'higher end' is not deemed to be strong enough at the moment.

25

EOS Bodies / Re: NEW FF Body that is able to take EF-S Lens

« on: June 19, 2012, 05:37:01 AM »

Its gonna be a lot of compromises if you want it that way.

Firstly, to clear the mirror/prism, your viewfinder would be something in the range of 60-70% view.

Secondly, to clear the mirror/prism, your AF array would have to be as small as an APS-C one. Meaning it covers barely 1/3 or even 1/4 of the sensor area.

Thirdly, its probably more sensible to engineer an APS-H sensor camera that can take EF-S lenses instead. Since its just a minor tweak as someone has experimented on the 1DmkIII some years back. (Think it was the EF-S 10-22 lens ?? ) And probably make it at a more attractive price point for EF-S/ APS-C upgraders.

26

EOS Bodies / Re: 4 More DSLRs Coming in 2012? [CR2]

« on: June 13, 2012, 02:16:58 AM »

Well, maybe one of these cameras include the 1D-C 4K camera ? Or has that already been accounted for ??

I would guess the mirrorless to be essentially the G1X with a lens mount.  US$1100 (basic kit).

The 'entry-level' FF to be build in an up-sized T4i body, build quality and AF feature wise (including touch screen). But the ergonomics and size of the current 60D. Either rehashing the 5DII sensor or the 5DIII one with limitations on ISO up to perhaps 6400 or 12800.  US$1500 (body)

The 7D replacement to be with 80% 1Div innards in the 5DmkIII body.  Without an integrated grip. US$2200(body)

The high MP camera ? Doubt they would miss out on such a niche, probably 40+MP in a 5DmkIII body with 19pt AF, 4fps.  ? US$4000 (body)

That would create enough of a gap in terms of price and product differentiation I believe But my guess is only as good as everyone else's here.   

27

EOS Bodies / Re: Odds & Ends - Mirrorless [CR1]

« on: June 01, 2012, 10:41:27 PM »

I won't be too surprised if they came out with something like this: Canon A35 Datelux



http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/data/1976-1985/1977_a35lux.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1976-1985&p=1

Its "FF" film and coincidentally had a 40mm f/2.8 fixed lens.  (should be very similar to the pancake 40mm to be rolled out ?? ) ...

28

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 25, 2012, 11:32:50 PM »

I'm not sure I see this happening, we might label a camera an "entry level" FF but really the market is vastly different from a Rebel. Your still talking at least $1500 and for that amount of people are going to expect higher build quality, plus if your selling an unsealed body your limating the market for sealed L lenses in the future, one of the big reasons for offering a cheap FF body in the first place.

We have to look at it from a business standpoint and not from a 'wish list' standpoint of view if we want to get close to what Canon will produce.  And at this point, we don't know what is the pricepoint which Canon will peg such a camera at.   

29

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 25, 2012, 11:30:24 PM »

Why not keep the 5D2 as the entry level ff by putting making a 5D between the 5dII and 5dIII by upgrading the af to 7D standards?

Then we could  have:

5DII classic at $1500
5DIIn  - classic with updated AF at $2000
5DIII at $3000

Its cheaper to produce a camera with Rebel-like quality and features compared to the 5DII.

30

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake Coming [CR3]

« on: May 25, 2012, 11:21:20 PM »

RIGHT, Let us talk about phsical laws. A small sensor will only need a shorter focal length to give the same angle for a bigger sensor.  Micro 3/4 has a mutiplicayion factor of 2.  So the 14 mm Panasonic ancake lens will be equilvalent to a 28mm lens on a full frame.  The 14mm will need a total of 40mm (20mm for the lense, 20mm for the fringe depth). That is a ration of  2.86. Now apply this ration for the 28mm for FF. than it will need 80mm. That is physical Law. Sensor size does not matter???  The bigger the sensor, the bigger the lense for the same viewing angle.

Thr Fringe diatance can be set to anything by the manufacturer to suit the usage. NEX fringe is set so thin for the using of adapter for the OLD range finder lenses,like Leica, Canon etc.  The fringe distance can be set independent of the back focal plane distance.  For mirrorless, the lenses have the luxury of going inside of the body and into the body. Have you look at  the Leica wide angle lenses lately???  As the the rumores 1mm back focal distance lens from Canon, it is going to be huge. In order for it to work, the rear element of the lens MUST cover the whole sensor. What it mean is the lense will ge going inside of the fringe and way into the body. You just cannot make a cmera body with a 1mm fringe distance.

Here comes the phsical law again. the size of the optic is determined by the focal length, speed of the lens and the associated mechanical and electronics part. It got nothing to do wit hthe fringe distance (except for wide angle lens for range finder cameras, that is another story). Just look at the pancake lens from Panasonics. The optics are small, the lens dismeter is large. That is for the mechanical and theelectronis component. It has got nothing to do with the fringe distance.

You've got your physics a little mixed up and the topic/areas being discussed here too it seems.

When we talk about back focus plane distances and how it affects the size of the lens, we are referring to sensors of the same and equal size, not across different sizes.   When you get one design with a back focus plane at 1mm versus one at 30mm, the optics required for the shorter one is smaller.  Par equal area of focus and within limits of optics diffraction. Which is why Leica comes into such a picture. It was design to use FF (in the film days) but yet for equivalent focal length and aperture lens, they were smaller than say Canon or Nikon designs, even if they were all full manual, non-AF lenses.

In this case of Canon's mirrorless, nobody seems to be certain for sure what's the sensor size. And we can only infer from the back focus plane distance that for the sensor size they are designing for, they are trying very hard to miniaturize the size of the lenses.  And for what ever size sensor they are using. Be it a FF,  1.3x, 1.6x or 1.85x crop, it SHOULD be (within limitations of cost and practicality) smaller than lenses designed for sensors of equivalent crop factor.