November 28, 2014, 07:04:23 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 38
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doing Market Research on Medium Format?
« on: August 06, 2014, 02:49:22 PM »
I think we can all see what is next.  This return to medium format is sure, in turn, to ingnite the race back into Large Format. 

No one can deny the public has been itching to drape a new synthetic version (kevlar?) of the traditional light blanket over their heads, hunch over the tripod, clutching the updated carbon fiber handle of a state of the art  flash powder trough. 

Party like it's 1899.  This could obviously become huge with the steampunk crowd too. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 180mm f/3.5 DO Macro
« on: July 28, 2014, 09:59:02 PM »
Seems like they would want to shrink a bigger telephoto lens before a macro but maybe.  I also wonder if the price would be beyond what most folks would pay for a macro?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 04:58:26 PM »

DigitalRev reviews have no purpose beyond entertainment.

What amazes me most are the number of posts on the forum lately scrutinizing the Sigma 50 1.4 beyond belief. Apart from the Otus, it's the best FF 50mm ever made from an optics standpoint. Let's stop discussing preferences about bokeh, rendering, etc. as if they are objective fact.

Yep.  According to nearly every review, too.  Everyone take a step back and breathe then answer honestly.

If Canon had released this lens with a red ring on it:  People would be singing the praises of its sharpness and color, contrast, and maybe some would swear that they can detect a certain undefinable something; something which can't be put into words, something which stirs the soul, etc...  And the price would be double or more.

If Zeiss had released this lens:  There would be no autofocus at all, and people would scoff at those lesser shooters that depend on such a pedestrian crutch as autofocus.  People would marvel at its sharpness and color rendering.  The images would send viewers into spasms of joy due to their sublime, yet undefinable other-worldly quality.  And the price would be four times what it is now.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 03:16:40 PM »
Also, why compare a 58mm lens to a 50mm lens?  The longer one will have more OOF blur taking the same shot at the same distance.

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4L IS disappointing?
« on: July 25, 2014, 11:40:46 PM »

In fact, I've even been considering selling my 70-200 2.8L II and picking up a 135L (and change), although I haven't been able to bring myself to do it yet.  If they bring out a 135L IS, that might well convince me ... although I'm still tempted by the 135L as is.   (And no, I don't want to just add a 135L to my kit. I really don't need any more lenses!)


Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 f/4L IS disappointing?
« on: July 25, 2014, 11:30:02 PM »
FWIW I'm really bored with 24-70 zooms, so I ditched mine (24-70 f/2.8 L) and got a Ʃ35 f/1.4A instead to bridge a gap in my range of wide to standard prime lenses. I find that I am shooting with primes more and more often, with really satisfactory results. Often I will have a wide or standard prime on the 5DMkII  and a tele-zoom on the 5DMkIII. My 24-105L and 17-40L get most of their use when I travel, the 17-40L is almost exclusively for holiday use .

Yes.  I have the Sig 35 Art and it just forces me to make better composition, and its colors and sharpness are just insane.  I almost can't take a bad image with that lens. 
I plan to pick up a 7d2 (if it isn't just a Bigfoot riding a unicorn) and then keep he 35 on the 6d and the 70-200 on the crop.

Lenses / Re: How many years before we see a 50L II
« on: July 24, 2014, 03:33:39 PM »
many years.
there is nothing wrong with the 50L.

it's a people lens. it's plenty sharp.
it's f/1.2 - so if you're not nailing focus, you need to work on your technique.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not...

Exactly.  It's not the f/1.2 aperture that causes the focus problems on this particular lens.  It's actually the field of curvature and is especially prominent at close distances from about f/2.8 to f/4.5.  The lens will back-focus and there is pretty much nothing you can do about it.  I thought it was pretty underwhelming for $1699.

You could manually focus... but I think the presumption is that those who struggle with f1.2 are using bad technique, like focus and recompose... which will all but guarantee the subject is out of focus.
Manual focus (even with the super precision matte screen) is almost impossible with the 50L at f/1.2 just like f/1.4 with the 24L, but things get a little easier with the 85L and 135L because of the focal length. 

The 50L is the ultimate love/hate lens for Canon shooters, I think, and to me, it's part of why it's so satisfying to use.  If you nail a photo with it at f/1.2 it feels like an achievement instead of a gee I pressed the shutter moment.  On the other hand, many people have tried the lens and hate it.  I see it as a very specialized tool for unique looking portraits, but similar results can be achieved with other lenses.

The part about loving it because good focus is rare and hard to achieve is a masterpiece in spin doctoring. :)

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it.  It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves. 

Why wouldn't they do that?  Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp.  Maybe they buy a Pentax next time. 

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 45x Zoom for Waterproof Camera
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:32:58 PM »
Is white balance tricky underwater?  Does it have a WB setting for that?

I found this Nikon Rumors thread kind of interesting to snoop on.

And it was also interesting to see how anemic the forum is on Nikon Rumors compared to Canon Rumors.  Very little activity, not nearly as well-organized, not as much content.

I found this Nikon Rumors thread kind of interesting to snoop on.

Canon General / Re: New Speedlite Coming? [CR2]
« on: July 19, 2014, 04:41:01 PM »
Why not?  Did the non-RT 430 not exist alongside the non-RT 580?  One had more power and sold for more.  It didn't hurt the 580.

It's about what you can sell. Till the 600, Canon historically had high and mid level flashes co-existing, as did Nikon. Since they brought out the 600, people have been expecting a smaller RT-enabled unit to come out any day (for more than two years now).
At this point, people have sort of accepted that they have to get the 600 if they want RT- and it is such a desirable feature people are ponying up the cash. So providing a mid level RT-enabled unit now makes less sense to me.
At the end of the day, I keep emphasizing on "to me" because I don't have all the market research data Canon does. So we will find out, I guess.

We are all just guessing of course, but I think the reason Canon has not been in a hurry to put RT into the mid-tier models yet is because Nikon has not yet fielded an RT flash, so for the moment Canon has the field to itself.   If this rumor of an upcoming 430/440 with RT proves not true right now, then I think it is a matter of time.  At the latest, i think,once Nikon puts out an RT flash or two, we will probably see Canon put that feature in the 2nd tier units.

Come to think of it, that is a good question.  When WILL Nikon answer Canon with an RT flash?  And why has it not already done so?  There are already 3rd party RT flashes out, and there are a lot more coming up soon. If the 3rd parties can do it surely Nikon has the ability to do so.

Canon General / Re: New Speedlite Coming? [CR2]
« on: July 18, 2014, 09:58:10 PM »
I agree with Sabaki. It might be a RT-equipped Macro.
Canon has not released a mid-level RT flash for this long and reduced the price of the 600s considerably, and people seem to be buying 600s happily enough. I don't see why they would want to release a 4X0-RT now and potentially decrease their profit margins.
Or else, it might be a small and inexpensive rt commander with fill flash capability only (all the functions of ST-E3-RT with flash capability of 270ex and AF assist- priced around $ 300 (wishful thinking...)

Why not?  Did the non-RT 430 not exist alongside the non-RT 580?  One had more power and sold for more.  It didn't hurt the 580.

Over time most devices acquire more features, while often holding steady on price and sometimes actually coming down in price, adjusted for inflation.   Look at early flat screen TV's.  Look at early "digital" calculators.  Very expensive with few features compared to modern cheaper better ones.  Today the cheapest model of Ford/Chevy/etc have features that were only available, if available at all, on their higher end vehicles years ago. 

Lenses / Re: Year of the lens....a joke....?
« on: July 15, 2014, 07:40:26 PM »
Photokina is where the big announcements will happen, that is how it usually goes at least.

Yeah, but how many lenses could we realistically expect them to launch all at one Photokina?  I think to be the as-hyped year of the lens, you'd need at least, say, four - minimum. Right?  To go down in history as their year of the lens they need more than two, right?   

Canon General / Re: Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Update [CR2]
« on: July 14, 2014, 07:30:09 PM »
But will it be able to make phone calls?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 38