October 25, 2014, 08:39:08 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 4 ... 207
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 08:10:58 PM »
It has to have the word "pro" written on it. If those three letters are missing, it is not a "pro" camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:20:27 AM »
Typical Canon response:

Person 1: We are not making enough money

Person 2: Well then raise the price.

Fixed that for you.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:19:24 AM »
I think this makes perfect sense... The Nikon D750 made the D610 nearly obsolete, so why should Canon bother to bring a D6xx competitor instead of a similar priced D750 competitor?
I expect the 6DII to be specced similar to the 5DIII and the 5DIV probably to be high MP... would make sense to have the three important Nikons (D4s, D810, D750) covered. Df and D610 are nothing they have to care about ;)

Using that ....

Fast forward to two years from now and Canon's cheapest FF DSLR is twice the price of Nikon's cheapest FF DSLR and people looking to upgrade to a FF DSLR from their phone, m4/3s, APS-C or compact camera are no longer buying Canon.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:40:27 AM »
I personally think that the 6D is just fine where it is, the issue may be that consumers think there is something wrong because it sells for less.  Bring the 5D III to $2500 and adding a 3D at $3600-$4000 makes more sense.

This is the only sensible strategy for Canon.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:38:11 AM »
It would appear that Canon needs to rethink their DSLR naming scheme - that is unless we're going to see a FF DSLR that is a XXD model - or do they want to just not sell full frame DSLRs for under $2000? Sony and Nikon will quite happily eat that lunch for Canon if Canon isn't interested.

Yes, Canon being disappointed with the 6D means that they think they could have set a higher price (especially considering the D750 from Nikon) and made more money from it - that's my bet.

Maybe Canon see themselves and their full frame DSLRs being the "top end" of consumer digital cameras and that they should therefore cost and charge more for them.

If Canon try to position the 5D vs the D810 and the 6D vs the 750, what picks up Nikon's 610? Canon can't put a 8D or 9D in there because that would look stupid with the 7D being APS-C.

Hence why I believe that the current naming scheme for Canon's DSLRs has now run its course and Canon needs to come up with a better naming scheme/standard that doesn't involve "Mark"s.

I presently shoot with a 1D Mark IV and a 5D Mark III, which are fully supported by my present version of DPP.  The 7D Mark II requires that I update my DPP.

Here is my problem with that.....

The newer version of DPP does not support my operating system.  I run Vista 64.  Updating my operating system requires that I go to Windows 8 which needs a clean install.  Huge job.  Also, I'm not sure that a lot of my current software will run on Windows 8.  I have CS4 as well as plugins such as NIK, Neat Image and a slew of other free standing applications.

Can you upgrade form Vista 64 to Windows 7 64bit?
Or is the problem there Windows 7 availability?

As much as I was not comfortable with the user interface of Lightroom when I tried a demo last year, I thought I would now have to go that route.  Guess what?  Right.  It's now only available under CC and I refuse to rent software on a monthly fee basis which is why I still run CS4.

Lightroom does not need to be bought and used through CC. LR is available as a standalone product. You may need to uninstall the trial version you bought.

I'm 72 years old so I guess my 1D4 and 5D3 will have to do me the rest of my life or until my computer cr@ps out and I have no choice.

All Canon had to do was continue to support the operating system and I would have added a 7D2 to my bag.

Maybe you have bought yoru last DSLR?

EOS Bodies / Re: AA Filter: Still Relevant, Marketing Ploy, or Obsolete?
« on: October 12, 2014, 11:15:52 PM »
The AA filter is now obsolete.

However what's required in order to deal with it when and where it happens is an image review that is able to display it so that you can look at what you've captured and re-shoot if required rather than needing to wait when you get home and discover it when it is too late.

Or even add moire detection (like there is highlight detection), even if it cannot be eliminated by in-camera processing.

What part of the world do you live in? Because by the sounds of it, wherever you do live, the wind don't blow there and the earth doesn't rotate either.

You can't HDR an interior because of the wind or the rotation of the Earth?  ???

As for landscapes...neither GND nor manual blends have any issue with movement as long as there's not a large moving section that crosses the line or mask. You're not going to HDR a sprinter, but wind is seldom an issue in a landscape. I can hand hold a 3 frame bracket for crying out loud. Just how hard is this wind blowing that things radically change in <0.5s?

HDR tools also have features to compensate for motion.

I would encourage you to get more personal experience with topics before writing about them in a manner that reeks of someone that has read up on something on the Internet and decided that this then makes them an expert on the topic. Being an Internet arm-chair expert is easy, problem is that such expertise is doesn't understand where reality disrupts the theory. And there are a few arm-chair experts on here, not just you.

Landscapes and interiors are the last challenging subjects. Landscapes easily exceed any sensor, but they're still so HDR/GND. Same for interiors. Again I'll say that jrista's interior room test scene was better then most I've seen, but while it proved Exmor has less read noise (no shock), it also proved how little this really matters. The highlights were still blown to preserve the shadows. A real shot for a magazine would either A) go ahead and completely blow out the shuttered windows in a pleasing fashion, or B) use HDR.

What part of the world do you live in? Because by the sounds of it, wherever you do live, the wind don't blow there and the earth doesn't rotate either.

I'm with you on this, RLPhoto.  Any perceived/imagined DR "problem" is all too easy to work around.

Oh my, we're going full circle, aren't we? Just as I thought even the fiercest dr antagonists seem to conclude that for some applications (think "noon beach volleyball") 11ev or 14ev dr might make a real difference, it's back to square one with everything "easy to work around" :-p

It's called going with the flow and siding with what appears to be the best idea/argument at the time.

It's amazing how many electrons can be expended discussing/fighting-over minutia.  Just because an observer can find a difference between Sony and Canon sensors doesn't mean that the difference plays any meaningful role in serious image production.

I'm with you on this, RLPhoto.  Any perceived/imagined DR "problem" is all too easy to work around. 

To me, it's as if DRones use this small (yes, observable, but only under test conditions) difference as an excuse for being _unable_ to make a great image.  It's as if they're saying "... if only I had [fill in the blank] I'd be able to make great images.  But because I don't have, I can't and won't."

There are limitations with any piece of equipment.

Some limitations can be worked around, some cannot.

When you see that a different brand of equipment doesn't have the same limitations as yours and that the limitations the other brand doesn't have limit what you can do with your equipment then it would seem to me to be only natural to desire that limitation removed from the equipment that you own.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 11, 2014, 02:23:42 AM »
Fundamentally, I don't think you understand landscape photography, Dilbert. Just like I generally don't think you understand cameras, camera technology or photography. Just look around at some of the most highly rated landscape photos on sites like 500px, 1x, etc. The majority make exquisite use of wide angle lenses to bring in both foreground and background elements. Sometimes the foreground may just be interesting patterns in foreground sand, other times it may be an interesting log or stump. In almost every case, the foreground element helps solidify the sense of depth and create interesting, and yes possibly unexpected, relationships between foreground and background.

I'll take that into consideration.

Here ya go, dilbert:
Yes, then I'll be able to come back and taunt you all with pictures that your Canon cameras can't match :D

I don't see a vow anywhere in that text.

You've stated your intentions of taunting Canon users with pictures that our Canon cameras can't match. That's the point. Nitpicking over semantics is merely an attempt to divert focus from your stated intentions, which you claim you never stated: ie "taunt you all with pictures that your Canon cameras can't match." 

Replacing "vow" with "state" or "express" doesn't change the context of you said in the least bit. Nice try, though.

Wow, you're really focused on conflict, aren't you? Semantics are important, as is knowing how to read a sentence for what it says rather than what it doesn't say.

Actually, what it will come with is a tripod mount that attaches to the lens, thereby shifting the center of gravity and the weight that the ball friction needs to keep horizontal. As it stands, in the 70-300 range, I'm only aware of the Canon 70-300L having a lens collar for tripods.

Yeah, keep blaming the gear, buddy. I've shot with heavy long lenses without tripod collars more times than I can count. A sturdy tripod, a cable release, and locking up the mirror works wonders.

I'm guessing that the gear you're using is completely different to that which I use on a regular basis as you have different regular operating requirements.

Possibly, but since you brought up a 70-300, I presume we're talking about long lenses, in which case my experience applying the aforementioned techniques (sturdy tripod, cable release, mirror lock) with a 70-300L, 70-200 f/2.8L, and 100-400L are still applicable to the discussion.

Actually, the tripod itself is not as important as the head that is mounted on it because not all heads are the same when it comes to ball heads.

Don't know how many read this:

I'd say for every 2 out of three drones, the photos they actually produce are garbage. Now I'm speaking about the drones that come here to complain so fiercely that when we actually scrutinize the photos the produce, they fall flat on their face.

Careful. I get flamed every time I make a similar observation. According to some of the most vocal DR "advocates," most people seeking more DR do indeed produce stunning images.......it's just that they keep those images top secret, and no one is allowed to see them.
I think you mistake that I want to be correct on that statement. I really hope that I'm wrong and a Droner can prove me wrong. IE: dilbert.

I'm probably just like everyone else where probably less than 3% of my images are what I'd call "postcard" quality.
That sounds like you have a lot of work on and DR would be the least of those things.

Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.
And I'm sure DR is only a miniscule part of making those photos.

No but it helps.
Not as much as a proper ball head. ;)

haha! Yes, indeed :)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 207