August 21, 2014, 05:00:08 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 - dilbert

Pages: 1 ... 98 99 [100] 101 102 ... 186
1486
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Small Sigma 180 f/2.8 OS Macro Issue
« on: August 11, 2012, 05:50:42 PM »
Whilst the issue of making a lens mount open or closed is an interesting argument, the fact of the matter is that you know full well that the EF mount is currently a closed system.  On that basis, it is not fair to bang one's fists on the table and demand a solution to a problem caused by a competitor's unauthorised reverse engineering of Canon's product.

Reverse engineering when done properly is 100% legal and does not need to be "authorised".

And we as consumers are definitely within our rights to demand that Canon open up their lens communication protocol to make it easier for 3rd party integration.

1487
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Small Sigma 180 f/2.8 OS Macro Issue
« on: August 11, 2012, 09:09:02 AM »
typicall for sigma.
you wonder if they have a quality management at all.

how can such an issue not be noticed and fixed when developing a lens?

This is NOT a Sigma problem.

It is a Canon problem.
You are very unfair and I totally disagree.

Canon's business is too sell Canon products, not Sigma or Tamron or any other brands.
When Sigma sells 1 lens, Canon does not receive any yen/dollar for that. Why should they care about them? Sigma should already feel happy that Canon doesn't try to definitely inactivate their reverse tech and making their products unusable --> end of business.

Does that then mean that you should buy Canon tripods, Canon monopods, Canon camera bags, etc?
Where do you draw the line?

Canon need to realise that it is the ecosystem around their products that keeps them alive.

1488
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D: Buy now or wait?
« on: August 11, 2012, 06:47:24 AM »
...
You mileage may vary, but I could see a 70D in the near future for less.

I expect the the 70D will follow the specs more closely from the 60D than the 7D.  No AFMA, etc., etc.

Expect the un-expected. The 70D will be the 7D and the 7Dmk2 will be a new camera. When their released, the 7D prices will plummet, which is an even better reason to wait.

Repeat, there is no guarantee that the 7D MkII will ever come about. There have even been rumors saying that it is a one off.

Patience is nice but neither time nor the world waits.

What do I mean by that?

I saw an amazing sunset the other night but I didn't have a camera with me. There's no order book in nature to say "give me another one of those tomorrow night when I'm ready." Rinse and repeat throughout life in everything from the big to the small.

1489
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Small Sigma 180 f/2.8 OS Macro Issue
« on: August 11, 2012, 06:36:58 AM »
So Canon doesn't provide a proper way for other manufacturers to make EF lenses without paying horrendous licensing fees. Then it purpously breaks compatibility with existing 3rd party lenses with new bodies. That doesn't sound good to me. All Canon would have to provide would be a proper way to ID the lenses. A simple manufacturer ID + item ID would be sufficient.

I think that you're being a touch unfair on Canon here, why should Canon go out of their way to help third party manufacturers compete with them for lens sales? I don' think that you'll find many other manufacturers doing that.  The only exception that I can think of is Sony, who have 'open-sourced' the E-mount protocols.  If you think about the reason for this, you'll realise why it doesn't make sense for Canon: the NEX range is still very new and lacks lenses.  From Sony's perspective, they are seeking to trade future competitive advantage in lens sales for short term gain in market share of the system (assuming that having more lenses available makes NEX more attractive to potential buyers).  Canon on the other hand, has one of the largest lens ranges available and these are at the heart of the EOS system's competitive advantage.  Why would they jeopardize potential sales of their EF lenses just to assist a competitor?

Lets see. The last lens I bought for my Canon camera wasn't a Canon lens. It is quite possible that the next lens also won't be Canon. Why? Because Canon lenses fail to offer the same value as other brands.

Now if I couldn't use 3rd party lenses on Canon cameras but I could use 3rd party lenses on other cameras then that would be a very big disincentive to buy Canon cameras.

The main difference here is this:

Song gets consumer electronics.

Canon doesn't.

There's now talk of Sony allow 3rd party applications to be loaded onto the next NEX camera much like you do with smart phones. This is yet another sign that Sony understands the consumer electronics market and that Canon (and by extension Nikon) do not.

1490
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Small Sigma 180 f/2.8 OS Macro Issue
« on: August 11, 2012, 06:32:30 AM »
typicall for sigma.
you wonder if they have a quality management at all.

how can such an issue not be noticed and fixed when developing a lens?

This is NOT a Sigma problem.

It is a Canon problem.

1491
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Small Sigma 180 f/2.8 OS Macro Issue
« on: August 10, 2012, 07:24:56 PM »
Why the heck are the new top line Canon cameras so broken?

Companies like Sigma reverse engineer Canon algorithms rather than license them.  I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often.

This isn't because of reverse engineering.

The Sigma lens is telling the Canon camera that it is Canon EF-ABCE and the 5D3/1DX have a built in map to address light falloff for the Canon EF-ABCE lens and apply that to the image created with the Sigma lens without knowing that it isn't required.

1492
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon PowerShot Pro1X [CR1]
« on: August 10, 2012, 06:35:34 PM »
Canon has too many High-end compact systems already. I doubt this one will amount to anything.

So?

The market for smaller consumer cameras is going to evaporate over time as more and more people use their phone and not their camera.

Thus the market evolves to a point where nobody buys or sells a simple $100 or $200 camera.

Where the money will be made is in offering people that are looking to step up from phone cameras to something else that has higher/better image quality and not all of those people want the same thing in a camera.

1493
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Small Sigma 180 f/2.8 OS Macro Issue
« on: August 10, 2012, 06:31:31 PM »
Does the problem manifest itself on all full frame Canon cameras?

Looks to me like the lens tells the camera it is a specific Canon lens and the Canon camera incorrectly applies correction based on that.

Isn't it time that Canon and Nikon grew up and made their cameras more 3rd party lens friendly?

1494
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 10, 2012, 10:01:25 AM »
These comments are ridiculous. It appears everyone wants/expect Canon to produce a camera that is equal to or better than the 5D Mark III but for half the price.

Couldn't care less about the number of autofocus points.
One that works with 100% accuracy, 100% of the time is fine by me.
6fps? Couldn't care less. 2fps and I'm happy.
Video? Huh? Well, whatever.
Weatherproof? If the camera is more weatherproof than I am then there's little point to it. Meaning I'm probably going to "call it a day" before the camera does, so care factor = 0.

All that I care about is the ability of the sensor to capture light and do so with the least amount of noise possible and with the highest accuracy possible. Oh and a top panel LCD :)

1495
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D: Buy now or wait?
« on: August 09, 2012, 05:13:35 PM »
wait on it. The 7D is a good camera but will be replaced soon.

Wrong. It will not be replaced "soon" and some even doubt if it will be replaced at all.

1496
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D: Buy now or wait?
« on: August 09, 2012, 11:44:29 AM »
What new camera are you afraid of appearing?

7D Mark II? Nope.
6D? Nope - well even if it is announced, you won't be able to buy it this year.
70D? Maybe but nobody really knows for sure what its specs will be.

1497
EOS Bodies / Re: I doubt they would miss Photokina
« on: August 09, 2012, 11:39:08 AM »
If Canon has the product ready to announce, it does not make sense that they would skip Photokina with it.   The Nikon D600 will be out there; it would make sense for Canon to be able to talk about their lower-priced FF as well --- unless the Nikon D600 will smoke the Canon 6D so completely that Canon wants to avoid putting a spotlight on it.

I think the D600 will be better spec'd, but the 6D (or whatever it will be called) should be a good camera as well.  It just doesn't make sense for Canon to take a walk on Photokina as far as this new model is concerned, even allowing for the declining importance of trade shows in the age of the internet.

Two thoughts: maybe the real situation is that the announcement will be at or near Photokina, but the rumor source meant to say that availability will be in October -- that Canon is ready to put this camera in the pipeline quickly.   (That should give it a big advantage over the D600 -- good luck getting one before mid-2013!)

or...  There is something even bigger to announce that Canon wants to have the full spotlight!    A new 70D with new sensor technology, perhaps?  :)

though canon doesn't always put things "in the pipeline" quickly. Look at the new mirror-less M camera. It won't be out until October. This being said I hope the new "6D" DOES come out in October like this rumor stated...

With Canon's recent delivery reliability, we'll be lucky to see it before Christmas if it has an October announcement.

Actually, that's my bet for the October timeline: if Canon announce at Photokina, then people will expect it before Christmas and will get upset if they can't have it and will likely defect to Nikon for the holiday season buying.

By announcing in October (my bet will be on mid to late October), it'll be fresh enough in people's mind that as the holiday buying season starts a few weeks later, people will wait for the 6D rather than give up on Canon and go with the D800.

Thus Canon can't deliver it before the end of the year but if they don't announce something, then people will jump ship in the leadup to Christmas.

1498
Actually, no. A 20 year-old-intern would have included a "lol" somewhere and other crap. The person that wrote this review has been writing camera reviews for years for a newspaper and is old enough to have used film SLRs.

.
That rather florid copy was probably written by a 20-year-old intern who fancies himself a "photojournalist."


From a local newspaper:

Verdict: This is a wonderful camera. If you hvae Canon lenses and want to move into the blissful realm of full-frame capture, then the 5D Mk III is for you. But the MkII is just as good for stills and costs $1600 less. If you already have a 5D Mk II (as we do), there is no pressing reason to upgrade. If you are starting from scratch with nothing invested in lenses and accessories, then look at the Nikon D800. It has superior ergonomics, a more luxurious feel and higher resolution sensor, and produces uncompressed video. And it is several hundred dollars cheaper.[/u]

1499
From a local newspaper:

Verdict: This is a wonderful camera. If you hvae Canon lenses and want to move into the blissful realm of full-frame capture, then the 5D Mk III is for you. But the MkII is just as good for stills and costs $1600 less. If you already have a 5D Mk II (as we do), there is no pressing reason to upgrade. If you are starting from scratch with nothing invested in lenses and accessories, then look at the Nikon D800. It has superior ergonomics, a more luxurious feel and higher resolution sensor, and produces uncompressed video. And it is several hundred dollars cheaper.[/u]

1500
His chart claims that a D3100 has 0.0 read noise! 
That should give a clue as to accuracy / credability.


Why, you have your own data from doing the same measurement with a D3100 sensor that contradicts it?
Or you have another source that you can cite to show that it is wrong?

No, I didn't think so.


Is one necessary? If I told you that I dropped a penny and a bowling ball off the Leaning Tower of Pisa, and both of them flew straight up into the stratosphere, would you need a source to prove I was wrong?  0.0 read noise is an electronic impossibility (if it had stated below the LLOQ, or something similar, fine, but not zero).


First, "0.0" is not "0". Second, it could mean LLOQ, but I don't know enough about the method, etc.

Generally speaking, if you want to criticise someone else's results of a scientific method then you do so by doing your own experiments that prove your point. And yes, I'm willing to bet that the method DxO use to generate the raw numbers that goes into those calculations and the method of arriving at the calculations in that table is a lot more scientific than the process of saying "That 0.0 is wrong and because that 0.0 is wrong all other results lack credibility."

Further, all of the results (except for that line) seem completely reasonable which tends to suggest that there is more than fiction behind them. If it was Ken Rockwell posting this information then I'd be extraordinarily suspicious. But it isn't and more to the point, the page is free of ads so quite clearly there's no need by the author to generate lots of page views by creating sensationalist content.

Finally, as the "About" page says (http://www.sensorgen.info/Calculations.html), all of the calculations are based on DxO data. If the "0.0" seems outrageous then you're free to download the data for yourself and see if the published methodology confirms that "0.0" is correct (or not) and also to contact DxO and challenge them on the accuracy of the data for the Nikon D3100 or even start threads all over the Internet about how the true extent of Nikon fanboy-ism at DxO is revealed by results that are obviously bogus for the D3100.

Pages: 1 ... 98 99 [100] 101 102 ... 186