October 21, 2014, 03:47:41 AM

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 - AmbientLight

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 33
31
Actually you can look at the specs for the new Powershot G1 X Mark II sensor as an example.

According to specs it is relatively low MP (12-13 MPs depending on shooting format) and it is supposed to be good in low light. I have actually pre-ordered one of these as it also offers a very nice focal-length range. According to Canon this Powershot will offer good reaction speed and what is praised in Canon ads like it will be fully optimized no-nonsense controls. Of course this camera doesn't really qualify as a rumor. We only need to wait some time until it arrives in shops and of course in reviews, too, for those not wanting to pay for something they don't know how it will really perform.

32
Lenses / Re: Canon 50mm f1.2L lens focus shift
« on: January 14, 2014, 10:29:48 AM »
One of the problems with the 7D + 50mm f1.2 setup is that this camera's AF is not very well suited for this lens. When I first purchased the 50mm f1.2 it took me a significant time to learn how to properly focus this lens. I eventually learned the technique, but as soon as I switched to 1D-X and 5D Mark III, I could lay that technique to rest as with those cameras the lens focuses perfectly. This is a technical difference you cannot really make up for.

With the 1D-X acquiring focus also appears to be a bit more snappy, because it provides more power to the lens, which has an effect with large aperture lenses (the 85mm f1.2 in particular).

Regarding technique you can try two things:
1) Allow the camera more time to achieve focus. Don't shoot or avoid fast-moving, erratic moving subjects.
2) Experiment with manual focus. You might be surprised.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: It's here! Firmware version 2.0.3 for the EOS-1D X
« on: January 13, 2014, 12:39:02 PM »
I see it took 4 tries to get it ready for the masses, v2.0, 2.01, 2.02, & now v2.03!

 :o Would you prefer version 2.00 with some bugs not having been fixed before delivery? I rather prefer downloading firmware for my 1D-X, which happens to be not an X.00 version, because the software revisions imply that some corrections have been made after running version 2.00 through QA.

Please note that in software development you cannot expect people to work on a version 1.9.Y and then to rename it to version 2.00 after endless testing and corrections. It is necessary to always expect something unforeseen, so at first developers target something like in our case a version 2.00 and then they make corrections after running the software through QA tests, resulting in software revisions.

34
Canon General / Re: Advice for future path please!
« on: January 09, 2014, 08:44:37 AM »
If noise from the 7D is limitting you, then now is the time to go full frame.  I though the 7D was the greatest camera made...then dove I into the full frame pool with a 5D3.  Now my poor 7D is neglected.  The 6D is quite tempting, but I shoot sports and wanted the focussing benefits of the 5D3.  Your wildlife adventures may dictate which of the two will meet your needs.

 As for lenses, I bought my 5D3 with the 24-105.  I don't understand all the written abuse this lens gets, my copy seems quite sharp and I love it's versatility - in both focal length and IS.  However, my most used lens is the 70-200 2.8 Mk II -- which I highly recommend.

With full frame, you get less noise, sharper images (with quality lenses), and deeper color latitude. (My 5D3 produces sharper images with my 70-200 than my 7D does.)   Given your current lenses, I would suggest full frame before another lens.  It's really hard to appreciate the IQ benefits of full frame until you get one.  You may look differently at lens options after buying a FF body.

If you do stick with crop bodies, then definately go fo the 17-55 2.8.

I can only support what you wrote.

On a full-frame body many lenses you might want to neglect on a crop body suddenly become very useful pieces of kit. Not only the different frame size, but also the different resulting depth-of-field play a part here. You shouldn't overrate the amount of bashing some lenses have received, especially on this forum, where sometimes posters abound with criticism passing judgement on a very high product quality level. Although I can understand that, it can lead to a somewhat distorted view.

35
Canon General / Re: Advice for future path please!
« on: January 08, 2014, 09:02:33 AM »
A while ago I was also shooting a 7D and using a 50D as a backup camera. I also had a collection of L lenses and no others in preparation for my upgrade to full-frame, so my situation was somewhat similar. Eventually I decided to go all-out and purchased a 1D-X and 5D Mark III as a backup camera and since then my crop cameras don't see much use.

In my opinion you should be seriously looking at a 6D and if your budget allows, a 5D Mark III. This may breath some new life into your 17-40mm, because its focal length range is much more useful on a full-frame camera, but then again you may end up exchanging it eventually for better wide angle lenses, which is what I did (I replaced it with 14mm f2.8, 17mm f4 TS-E and 24mm f1.4 lenses). What I want to warn you about is that upgrading to full-frame may lead to further serious symptoms of gear acquisition syndrome.

36
Canon General / Re: Question re: 4K
« on: November 28, 2013, 05:22:58 AM »
Hi AmbientLight.
I think my point was that if everyone does the "not getting it until there is sufficient content" bit, there is unlikely to be a large uptake of the technology to capture, process and especially broadcast the medium.
I personally have no intention of being an early adopter, possibly not even on the crest of the wave adopter.
Not sure my eyes are HD compatible even with glasses on, let alone 4k!  ::)

Cheers Graham.

Hi Graham,

There's a good concept called hype cycle having been created by a company named Gartner. It basically assumes that early adopters of new technology are most likely to waste their money, serving only to provide others with profits. From the buyers' perspective that is no good.

On the other hand technical progress will continue with or without our approval, so purchasing early on to enable new technology to become profitable is not really necessary. Early adoption may even turn out to be harmful as it might slow down mature product selection, which serves consumers better in the end.

If new technology is any good, it will sell. If it is in a status of not being really mature enough to be good, it is better to leave such things alone to allow market forces to clean up.

Cheers

37
Canon General / Re: Question re: 4K
« on: November 28, 2013, 04:08:13 AM »
Why are you in a hurry to be an early adopter anyway? You can wait until appropriate media are generally available and then you can grab the best established tv on the market for a bargain price instead of plunging ahead now.

 I don't understand the need to be first. It's not like its a brand new 1D-Xs or something... :-X

38
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 28, 2013, 03:51:03 AM »

IF Canon wants to stay in business with me, they better think about what I want and how they keep ME happy.

If Canon was a car company and only listened to you I'm sure this is what we would be inflicted with...



Thank god they know how to make cameras to suit the majority and run a business successfully.  ;D

 ;D ;D ;D

Oh, great. Is this a beer can holder on the outside of the driver's door or am I imagining things?

39
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony to revolutionize our lives!
« on: November 28, 2013, 03:44:50 AM »
There are some research programs which have drivers wear a cap that lets you drive your car and control phone, messages, email, gps, and potentially other devices by thought.
 
Its happening, and the potential is huge.  I'm too old to expect to be around by the time its practical, but the idea is something we have thought about for a hundred years or more.
 
Companies are positioning themselves to be able to take advantage of the technology with relatively simple current gadgets.  Control of the playstation by thought?  Its going to happen!

Wouldn't a driver gets fined excessively for wearing such a cap, because it keeps the driver occupied with lots of things other than driving?

In many countries people do get into real trouble for actions like eating pizza, being on the phone, using SMS, writing e-mails, checking a calendar and drinking all at the same time as someone is driving. Judging from the initial reactions to Google's glasses there is quite a lot of opposition to overcome, before consumers can finally make use of integrated devices like what you describe effectively. The future may be not so bright.

40
Canon General / Re: TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
« on: November 27, 2013, 03:29:33 PM »
@Maximilian

I agree that Samsung is not playing around. This is exactly why I don't see them as primarily a camera vendor. They are an electronics company and as diversified as is typical for large Asian corporations. They will do anything to get into evolving markets, just as you said, but becoming a camera vendor requires specialization in lenses and you can't get there in any form just with electronics engineers and a lot of money.

Getting excellent R&D staff for lenses like for example Zeiss or Canon or Nikon currently have available is next to impossible without purchasing a company just to get their staff. You can't hire excellent R&D staff in that area coming directly from universities, because nowadays there is very little research in that area. Just go onto university webpages and try to find one with actual research in optics. The best I could find searching for such a topic have been people researching better contact lenses.

To grow organically a company must have some staff specialized in lens design to begin with and then they must grow that R&D staff over decades to get to where they want to be. There's nothing easy about that and no shortcuts available whatsoever. Purchasing a weaker, much smaller player is the thing to do and the example you make of Sony's acquisition of Minolta just serves to show how difficult it is to reap a profit shortly after such an acquisition. Minolta was not exactly a weak player on the market for SLRs.

41
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: November 27, 2013, 03:08:02 PM »
Probably the next rant will be about full-frame high MP cell phones with lens adapters replacing anything in their path.  :o

Like this?



This is it exactly.

Given current smartphone camera specs (e.g. Nokia Lumia) we can expect a combination such as this to look good on paper. I just don't know how people can be so ignorant to believe that a combination like this will be better than a DSLR, though. The ergonomics of such a combination are terrible, not terrific.

42
Canon General / Re: TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
« on: November 27, 2013, 02:31:38 PM »
All interesting answers and thoughts.

I have no idea right now what else to add. Except for one thing:
I am missing any thought of the role SAMSUNG will be playing.

They have entered the system camera market.
And if they go forward with that as they did in other markets (TV, LED, of course not to forget smart phones and tablets), I think they will take over a big part of the consumer market and maybe then also aim for the pros.

The last thing I believe is that they will draw back.

I don't know where this notion of wondrous change in Samsung comes from. They have been an excellent vendor for computer monitors like 15 years ago, so how come anyone should be surprised that they become a top TV vendor? I don't get how people should be surprised by that. Samsung has also been busy in other areas for quite a long time and they have been at this since 1938. Just read their corporate history.

Nevertheless Samsung is nowhere near being a serious player in the DSLR market. They are not even a big player in mirrorless yet, although they have entered this market. As I see it they just try their hand at producing point-and-shoot cameras to gain some valuable R&D experience to provide some fringe benefits for their smart phone business. You can turn that argument around and stand it on its head as well: Samsung is willing to invest in this area as an offshoot of their smart phone development. You shouldn't expect Samsung not to be aware that the point-and-shoot market is shrinking rapidly.

Nevertheless there is a vast difference between being for example Nikon and being Samsung. Just think about being able to produce high quality lenses. Are you seriously expecting Samsung to be able to do so on the next 10 or even 20 years without having to purchase some other corporation?

You can look at Sony's acquisitions and collaboration with Zeiss for what a corporation must do to become a serious player and even Sony is not replacing Nikon yet, although Sony appears to be doing perhaps not all the right things but at least quite many of those. There is still an awful lot of learning curve ahead of them, before they can replace one of the top two. Just bringing out interesting products is not enough. They must be willing to somehow keep their related system products valid for decades as well.

It should be no surprise that a well established vendor such as Fuji is still doing well. The bottom line is: You either have experience and make it work or you don't.

43
EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 27, 2013, 02:08:30 PM »
We, the declining stills orientated market, are fortunate that the ideas they are moving towards are somewhat complimentary to our own "needs" for still based equipment, so far.

The customer only comes first if the company can sell the stuff they make and give their shareholders a reasonable return. If they can't they will try to find other customers, not different shareholders.

hehehe! Quite funny. Next suggestion will probably be to kneel down and beg to Canon "please, please give me a new stills-oriented camera."  ::)

no way!

In reality it is way easier for (almost all of) Canon's customers to turn around and find another supplier of excellent image capturing gear than it is for Canon to find "new customers" willing to pay inflated prices for fairly un-innovative products.

Say, do you exist in some sort of distorted reality field?

Sony is not doing well financially, but at least they are fighting for corporate survival, Nikon is facing decline for years, while Canon is far more successful than any other camera or lens vendor.  :o

Looks like you may want to morph yourself into a different customer, then.  :o

44
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony to revolutionize our lives!
« on: November 27, 2013, 02:03:10 PM »
This will raise computer hacking to a new level with exciting new opportunities.

Computer hacking may lead to hair-raising results.  ;D ;D

45
EOS Bodies / Re: How can I choose between 1DX and 5D MARK III?
« on: November 27, 2013, 11:45:29 AM »
Actually, reviewes suggest that both are excellent.

For landscape I would go for the 5D3 because of the extra pixels, excellent IQ, less weight and lower cost.
If shooting moving subjects is also your target (and no money and weight constraints) I would buy the 1Dx.

Once you add a battery grip to the 5D Mark III the weight and size advantage is lost. What remains is the excellent silent shutter plus those extra pixels.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 33