October 25, 2014, 02:30:40 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 - ScottyP

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 38
376
Lenses / Re: Your 70-200 f/2.8L IS II...
« on: July 31, 2012, 07:52:23 PM »
Love mine.  It grabs focus so quickly it is a little startling at first, even though it is also nearly silent.  I never really notice the weight.  I agree with Neuro that on a crop frame it is long indoors UNLESS you are talking about a large public space or an indoor gym, in which case it is maybe the best lens in the world.

377
Canon General / Re: "Time for a Change at Canon?" -Barons
« on: July 28, 2012, 12:30:08 AM »

I have posted before, that if you are unhappy with Canon's offerings, you should not whinge about them, rather, do not buy them.

Vote with you wallet! It's by far the most effective management and strategy tool in the market.
well, this is not that easy if you invested in glass already.

Yes, you are right (no, it is not that easy). 
I get livid when I see people saying "if you disagree with anything Canon is doing, do not talk about it.  Instead you should dump all your (EXPENSIVE) camera gear at a loss and go buy it all over with Nikon.  Bull.
1.)  Do you really expect to go to a website about a product and read NO NEGATIVE VIEWS???  If you want that, go join a cult. 
2.)  Who the heck are you anyway to tell people they need to shut up?
3.)  The whole point of a website about a particular brand is to discuss both its good points and also the points which could use improvement.
4.)  Buying from the company (to the tune of THOUSANDS of dollars) gives one the right to comment freely.

378
Canon General / Re: "Time for a Change at Canon?" -Barons
« on: July 27, 2012, 12:39:28 AM »
In my utterly meaningless capacity of O.P., I hereby declare (without any relevance) that this thread has been hijacked.
My point was about the "bleak" and perhaps not "scathing" portrait painted by the article.
Canon is not CURRENTLY competing by price:  in prices they still exceed even Nikon. 
They are not leading in "meaningless" benchmarks like Megapixels.
Their mirrorless product is what it is.
Canon may have some advantage in high-ISO with lower noise.  (GOOD!)
Canon has a lot of other products besides DSLR's which are REALLY doing poorly, and to which by comparison cameras are an area of healthy business.  Those areas (copiers, etc., ) are doing even worse than their competitors.
UNLESS, of course, they can suddenly transform the playing field with a game-changing new product(camera or otherwise), or if they can regain the jump on NIKON on DSLR tech.

The point of the article seemed to be the lack of recent innovation, the loss of market share and the lack of hope for the future.

380
Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:38:11 PM »
Double the weight matters a lot in 747's or locomotives.  In lenses, they are relevant but not nearly so much so. 
What matters is your use.  If you ever want to shoot someone's kids playing indoor basketball/volleyball/etc., the f/4 will be a hinderance. 
If you shoot in big halls/wedding reception places indoors, you may find f/4 a problem. 
If you hate artificial lighting, f/4 could be a hassle.
 

If none of these things apply, then it will be rare that you will need to shoot basic indoor shots at @200mm w/o added lighting.

381
EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:26:03 PM »
I see Nikon using Sony sensors, and Sony itself is using its new sensors in its new well-received bodies, and I read people discussing how the Canon sensors seem to be falling behind. 

I wonder if Canon will reach a kind of "Apple Moment", like when Apple quit spending its R&D money trying to beat Intel on a component (CPU's) and started just using Intel chips like everyone else. 

As was pointed out earlier, Apple never built their own chips. Also, Intel aren't the only company who manufactures x86 chips.

Apple made a number of smart business decisions and released several very successful products (imac, ipod, OS X) after Jobs took the helm in 98 (and well before they adopted the intel architecture in 2005)

One of the problems with having Canon drop sensors is that most of the companies who build sensors are either their competition, or companies who would like to become their competition.

Quote
Canon makes better lenses than Nikon, and could focus on staying ahead on that.  They could/should take a page from the perfectionist Steve Jobs, and focus on addressing all the 1000 little niggling customer gripes and wishes about cameras, and making Canons just work better and smoother than Nikon (or Sony).  Outclass the competition by thinking of everything, and including it; and by not withholding simple little crap in hardware and firmware that they could instead make standard in all their cameras for very little cost. 

Providing nicer products is always a worthy goal, but the Apple way is not to push high end functionality down to low end models so that users of said low end models may aspire to have high end functionality made available at the low end price. Rather it would be to simplify and clean their product lineup by simply eliminating those "tweener" product lines so that these users are left to choose between (for example) the Rebel and the 5D.

Another lesson from Apple, by the way, is that they have never been leaders from a pure price to performance standpoint. Instead, they always lived or died by the idea that users would pay a premium (in some cases a fairly hefty premium) for a well crafted product.
Canon have an analogous though not identical approach -- their plan is essentially to build a compelling system. A good system is not just about sensor performance. It is a comprehensive product line, which includes professional grade support, bodies, lenses, and even printers. The only other manufacturer who can play in the same ballpark at present is Nikon.

Canon has the part about "not leading from a pure price to performance standpoint" and "charging a premium" down pat.  Do they have the all-important counterbalancing point about superior user-experience/funcionality sewed up, or are they resting on the security of having people heavily committed/invested in its lenses not being able to switch easily?  In the face of real competition to its market share, Canon should compete by being better for the same price, just as is standard practice in all consumer goods.  If you can steal a march against Nikon by putting better firmware into a lower model body, DO IT.  And how much could AMFA really cost to include?? 

382
EOS Bodies / Re: first pic of canon mirrorless?
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:11:45 PM »
But can it read?

There's an app for that.

383
Lenses / Re: Good, inexpensive zoom lens? Beginner here.
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:07:19 PM »
I didnt read the entire thread, so I don't know if this was already mentioned or not but Canon makes a 70-200 F4L lens for $700 brand new.  You might find one second hand for your $500 budget range.

It does not have IS, but optically it is one of the sharpest lenses canon currently produces.  I would not hesitate at all to get this lens.  IS is great, but if you are going to shoot at at least 1/200 or faster at max focal length on this lens and develop steady handling you certainly don't need it.

Just my 2 cents worth....
I would agree with that.

384
Software & Accessories / Re: Paint On batteries
« on: July 20, 2012, 10:21:17 PM »
It's already easy to see how old-fashoned I will appear to my kids when they are in college or young adults.  Stuff like this now seems to appear more regularly, escaping my notice entirely.

385
Lenses / Re: New 17-55 coming soon?
« on: July 20, 2012, 10:14:17 PM »
Mine has zero dust after several thousand clicks.  I bought it based on the nearly universal rave reviews, whichrally make it stand out for attention to anyone shopping the net for lenses.  It is not made of metal, but it is about as solid as one could make a plastic lens.  Not even remotely similar to EF-S kit lenses.  I have nothing but high praise for it. 

It is a little expensive, but it holds value very well.  The used ones sell for only about $100.00 to at most $150.00 less than I got it new, so I think it will be hard to lose on the deal.

386
Lenses / Re: Keep 70-200 f4 IS or go for f2.8 IS II?
« on: July 20, 2012, 10:01:39 PM »
Go to The Digital Picture, and look in "TOOLS" and do a lens comparison for sharpness.  It is a really interesting time-suck educational resource.  ;)  You can compare ISO 12233 shots side-by-side with LOTS of different lenses, including Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, LensBaby, etc..  You can adjust the aperature and the focal length on both lenses you are comparing.  You can even compare lenses using the 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters, though it is not readily apparent how to do it.  Just jack the focal distance beyond the lens's native length, and you automatically get to test out the teleconverters! 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Comparison-Tools.aspx

Hopefully this does not get me banned on CR or anything (ha).

387
Was feeling a little nutty today, and bought 100 shares of Nikon (NINOF) at $28 a share.  Had rolled old 401(k)'s into Fidelity, and was squirrelling away the proceeds into a lot of new investments.  The order has not cleared yet, but I assume it will do so Monday. 

Was considering buying some Canon, but at present the stock didn't look promising enough even for a lark.  Also, Canon does copiers, etc., so it seemed like less of a "pure photo play", which is what I thought was interesting in the first place.

Maybe if this grows, after some years, Nikon can buy me a nice Canon to play with in my retirement.

Feel free to check in from time to time and flame me royally if I lose my a*s on it!  Will teach me to stick to mutual funds where qualified professionals make the investments.

388
EOS Bodies / Re: first pic of canon mirrorless?
« on: July 20, 2012, 09:21:39 PM »
Sure, but how good is its call quality, and can I play Angry Birds for very long without running the battery down?

389
EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?
« on: July 20, 2012, 04:44:30 PM »
Price of canon gear....

I hope that we all realize that one of the reasons for price increases is that the dollar yen exchange rate has changed from about 110  in 2008  To about 80 now.  That's about a thirty percent change, thus gear is more expensive for us.

Exactly!  That is why Honda Civics cost $135,000.00  errrr..... no... wait a sec......

Perhaps Japanese companies CAN find a work-around any exchange-rate issues any time they actually want/need to be competetive... 

390
EOS Bodies / Re: first pic of canon mirrorless?
« on: July 20, 2012, 04:35:39 PM »
Looks like a toy.  Has fewer controls than our little P&S SX 120.

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 38