October 30, 2014, 09:19:04 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 - dilbert

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 208
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Modular DSLR Coming from Canon? [CR2]
« on: Today at 07:57:22 AM »
What else could be modular?...
  • Lens mount
  • Built in flash
  • Sensor
  • LCD
  • Storage options (SSD?)
  • Camera body mount
  • Communication (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, GPS, 4G, SatCom?)
  • Power options (Li Ion, AA Alkaline, AC, USB)
  • Processor(s)
  • Auto focus system

Any other ideas?

Group them like this:
* processor, autofocus, sensor, lens mount
* power options
* flash
* storage
* lcd

2
Lenstip has reviewed the Sigma 150-600 S.

Be aware that they received the lens they tested from Sigma.  To me, receiving a test lens from the lens manufacturer means that:
 
1.  The lens has probably already been tested by the manufacturer, and selected as being one that is the best possible. 
 
2.  You will never be able to get one as good as the one tested thru a store.
...

This is an urban myth and I'm sure that I've read a response to this somewhere that goes along the lines of "We (manufacturer) don't have the time to test 100 different lenses and pick the best one to send to a reviewer."

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Modular DSLR Coming from Canon? [CR2]
« on: Today at 04:19:16 AM »
Will it be a new DSLR or new cinema camera?

Additionally, where it says "viewfinder" that could also be EVF.

How else would they do a modular OPF? Can't see that happening.

EOS Cinema is already EVF so having a modular/replaceable EVF on a Cxxx makes sense.

What else would be modular?

The section of the camera that houses the cards - different modules to house SD, CF, XQD cards could be attached to a central section that houses the sensor which again is separate to the back LCD. However that would potentially mean a smaller back LCD. And also the battery back/grip could be modular.

wouldn't be much sense for the EVF to be modular on a Cxxx series body though.. what would it be swapped out for? at least on a DLSR - you could swap between an OVF and a EVF depending on wanting stills or video.

How do you disconnect an OVF? It is an integral part of the camera due to the requirements in lightbox design.

Go to google and look for images of cinema rigs. There are all sorts of panels used for viewing what is being shot. Furthermore, since the EVF is an electrical connection, it is easy to disconnect one and use the other. The current Cinema EOS cameras all have an EVF.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Modular DSLR Coming from Canon? [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 11:56:16 PM »
Will it be a new DSLR or new cinema camera?

Additionally, where it says "viewfinder" that could also be EVF.

How else would they do a modular OPF? Can't see that happening.

EOS Cinema is already EVF so having a modular/replaceable EVF on a Cxxx makes sense.

What else would be modular?

The section of the camera that houses the cards - different modules to house SD, CF, XQD cards could be attached to a central section that houses the sensor which again is separate to the back LCD. However that would potentially mean a smaller back LCD. And also the battery back/grip could be modular.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Modular DSLR Coming from Canon? [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 12:10:59 PM »
A copy of what RED did.

6
Yeah right... I love people who shoot within the range 24 - 85mm to tell me how camera with NO dedicated small, reasonably bright primes over 55mm is great for all.

When you consider that 95%+ of people don't buy another lens other than the one they get in the kit box when the buy a DSLR, having a 24-85 range would have a lot of people saying "Yup, satisifies all of *my* needs."

7
HDR just looks tacky,IMHO, even carefully done.

I think jdramirez was referring to creating a higher dynamic range picture through bracket and blend rather than 'HDR'. I agree with you, HDR programs can make the picture look cartoon-like; pretty awful to my eye.

And my eye too. There are very few HDR images that I like.

I expect that many of the "well just use HDR and it'll be fine" comments are from folks that haven't tried to use it a whole lot because what HDR programs do typically isn't what we want HDR programs to do.

What I typically want a HDR program to do is something like this:
- image A is overexposed +2 with blown highlights and no shadows
- image B is correctly exposed
- build image C primarily from B but include data from A for all of B's shadows so that noise is removed and detail retained.

8
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 04:47:47 AM »
Availability will be at the end of the November according to one source.

Yeah, right, a few people are beta-testing some lens design now, and in one month it'll be available to the general consumer. This is flimsy, even for CR :-p ... on the other hand, no mention of *which* November :->

Love your style :)

9
Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 04:40:46 AM »
Late fall is not the best time to start selling the lens, fair weather photographers like me won't use one until late next spring.  On the other hand, if camera and lens sales continue to be poor, we might see better prices by Spring.

If it is a late November announcement then it may be that it isn't available until February-March at the earliest, ie the beginning of spring, in which case they might get better sales and premium pricing from people looking for a new lens to take out with them during spring-summer, as opposed to having the lens sit around in stores during November/December/January.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: It's just me but...
« on: October 27, 2014, 06:24:28 AM »
I can't even remember any lenses released this year besides the 400 DO...

Ummm.... 10-18, 16-35, 55-200, 24, 24-105... makes a total of 6 lenses... in what year did Canon last release 6 lenses? :D

Whee.  Two L lenses, only one of which is one is in a focal range that very many folks care about (the 16–35 f/4 L IS), plus a pile of low-end EF-S lenses.  Oh, and a kit-quality 24-105 lens, as though the 24–105L needed a further downgrade, rather than an upgrade.  :/

Most of us expected the year of the lens to be about quality, not quantity.  Where are the upgrades to the ancient lenses that people actually use with regularity?  You know, like the 16–35 f/2.8 IS, the 24–105 L II, the 100–400 L II, the 70–300 L II, the 28–300 L II, the 50/85/135mm L primes....  Or the EF-S 15–85 II....

You've got zero to no chance of seeing a new 70-300L this decade from Canon.

However the 70-300 does highlight that maybe it is time for a new version of the 70-200/f4L USM (now 15 years old) due to corner weakness, amongst other things. But it is possible that the 70-200/f4L IS USM has made that unrealistic due to the relatively small price difference between the two at present and the price change Canon would inflict on the non-IS lens if a new one were to be brought out.

The 85/1.8 is pretty damn good - only problem is CA. If Canon fixed that then they may find the 85/1.2L a harder sell, especially if they do a 85/1.8 IS USM. Thus it'll likely be a 80/2.0 IS USM to provide greater distance between the two products and lessen cannibalization. Rince and repeat for the 50. Don't know about the 135.

There won't be a successor to the 24-105/f4L.

11
Lenses / Re: Review: PowerShot G7 X via DXOMark
« on: October 26, 2014, 04:22:28 PM »
Are these color depth and dynamic range values are independent of sensor size unlike low light iso. What kind of photography benefits from Camera with better color depth and dynamic range.

The type photograph you take when you go on holiday in summer.

12
The 100-400 mk II is just going to be late.

In the 100-600mm space, each of Canon, Sigma and Tamron have two serious plays.

Sigma have cleaned up the 150-600 quite a lot (see http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23384.0) but in terms of size, it's a lot bigger. If Tamron do similar with theirs then arguing a case for the 100-400 will become tricky unless you only buy Canon and can't stand the thought of using a 3rd party lens.

And if you're a birder or interested in becoming one then the 3rd party lenses seem ideal unless someone else (ie company) is buying the lens for you. Now if this lens had of arrived back in 2011-2012, it would have been a very different story however it didn't.

14
Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight.  The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens.  Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent.  Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.  ;)

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

When the issue is portability, yes.  The 1D X and 100-400L with 1.4xIII mounted fits in a Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW or even a regular backpack – it's a very portable combo. At 560mm f/8, the IQ of the 100-400 is similar to the larger, heavier Tamron at 600mm.  If I want to compromise portability instead, I'd bring the 600/4L IS II which is 1.33-stops faster, has better AF and much better IQ, and can go to 840mm f/5.6 or 1200mm f/8 (still with better IQ than the Tamron at 600mm).   

Or I'd buy the 300/2.8, which is about the same length as the retracted Tamron 150-600 (and shorter and lighter than the Sigma 150-600), and with the 2xIII is 1/3-stop faster, has better IQ and better AF.  Sure, it's more expensive...but you always have to compromise somewhere.  Personally, the higher cost isn't a big concern.

Here's a challenge for you: limit your comparisons to lens solutions that are no more than 150% of the price of the Tamron lens.

Otherwise, if you want to take the "money is no object" path...

15
Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight.  The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens.  Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent.  Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.  ;)

How quaint. You recommend using a lens 2/3 of a stop slower, thus requiring the use of a higher ISO with an f-stop that requires many autofocus compromises.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 208