Messages

16

EOS-M / Re: EOS M Announcement in the Summer? [CR2]

« on: May 16, 2013, 09:44:50 AM »

It was mentioned that Canon doesn’t have plans currently to launch more EOS M prime lenses, as they see the segment as “entry level”. I’m not sure I agree with that if true.

Nor I and if Canon have said that then it shows a rather remarkable disconnect with where digital photography is going.

17

Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70

« on: May 15, 2013, 10:02:54 AM »

If the 3rd party lens did not work as advertised then it would be a simple matter to return it to the place that you bought it from.

Sure. Check the TDP review ... that's exactly what Bryan did, THRICE ...

Not quite.  He bought a copy retail (as usual), it was bad, and he exchanged it for a second retail copy, which was decentered.  He sent that copy in for service, it came back worse than it went in (how's that for quality service?).  He sent it back a second time, and the 'repaired' lens had a new serial number.  Anyone want to bet that Tamron didn't hand pick and pre-test that replacement lens?

So?

I've had a similar experience with Canon's repair service in Irvine, CA, where I sent something off three times before it came back fixed properly.

18

Reviews / Re: The Digital Picture Reviews the Tamron 24-70

« on: May 15, 2013, 08:05:46 AM »

I won't say that I've not had problems with Canon, but the problems with the third party lenses have been (a) more frequent, and (b) are compounded by lack of customer support because (usually) Canon and the third party manufacturer blame each other and refuse to take responsibility for the problem.

If the 3rd party lens did not work as advertised then it would be a simple matter to return it to the place that you bought it from.

I'm am comfortable giving my lenses and bodies to Canon for calibration ... I'm not too sure about Tamron.

Not all Tamron lenses can have their focus calibrated in the same way that Canon lenses can due to the way in which they are made however AFMA pretty much negates this problem.

19

Lenses / Re: Andy Rouse Reviews the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:58:09 AM »

This lens is 10x the cost of the 100-400, but is it 10x a better lens? It will be very interesting to see what an updated 100-400 will bring.

Well if there is little to no distortion and no visible CA, then the IQ is better than almost every other lens out there.

But in terms of value for money, well the law of diminishing returns applies: past a certain point, you have to start spending exponentially more to get moderate gains.

e.g. Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC vs Canon 24-70/2.8 II. The Canon is twice the price but is it twice the IQ (or better)?

20

Technical Support / Re: Why am I receiving "Access Denied - Security Block" to some posts?

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:55:16 AM »

I have submitted the issue to my host.

I've seen it quite a few times and just ignore it as being a function of cookies not being correct for a given URL or time that I visit a URL. A reload or clearing of the browser cache usually fixes things up. So it may not be a problem that the host can do anything about... or at least not completely.

21

EOS Bodies / Re: New 5D3 Raw video samples mind blowing!

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:49:11 AM »

This is insanely awesome.

But keep in mind:
* no audio recording

The audio recording could be a bitch but then a clapboard will solve that problem for you.

* only 24 minutes of 1920x1080 24fps RAW video in a very expensive 128GB 1000x CF card

How many movies or TV shows feature more than 5 minutes of continuous footage of any one thing? (I suspect that even 5 minutes is a long take and that most are much shorter.)

So you've got plenty of room to video a take, transfer it to HDD, wipe the CF and do another.

22

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording

« on: May 13, 2013, 10:26:49 AM »

The ML guys have their resolution selection interface wrong.

It should be something like "16:9 (1920x1080)", "2.35:1 (1920x816)", etc.

23

Lenses / Re: EF 14-24mm and Filters

« on: May 13, 2013, 08:35:18 AM »

how likely is it that a EF 14-24mm can be used with screw on filters?

will it have a bulged frontelement that prevents the use of filters?

The best way to handle filters for lenses such as this is to do what they do with the big telephoto lenses and put the filter at the rear of the lens.

24

PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked

« on: May 13, 2013, 08:11:10 AM »

Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?

Oh, you're bashing Canon? Big surprise. No innovation the last year? Where have you been?

Well, that's dilbert for you. Confuses lenses with cameras and talks out of both sides of his mouth.  Just recently, dilbert started a thread about the SX50 being the best superzoom ever, and now Canon has done 'as little as possible'. 

Look I could retaliate but to what purpose would that serve? Maybe it is better to play the ball (lets talk Canon) rather than attack people.

25

PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked

« on: May 13, 2013, 08:08:14 AM »

So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Pity because if the RX200 rumours are true, it seems that Sony stepped up in the lens department:

http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/

I'd rate that as quite possibly true.

Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?

Oh, you're bashing Canon? Big surprise. No innovation the last year? Where have you been?

Ok, name one area where Canon has led the photography field with new innovation in the last year - and by innovation I mean something more than gizmos added to cameras.

26

PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked

« on: May 13, 2013, 05:35:54 AM »

So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Pity because if the RX200 rumours are true, it seems that Sony stepped up in the lens department:

http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/

I'd rate that as quite possibly true.

Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?

27

PowerShot / Re: Two New PowerShot Cameras Leaked

« on: May 13, 2013, 12:57:49 AM »

So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100.  The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100.  I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.

Yeah but it will have WiFi and facebook and GPS and other gizmos that people crave - who cares about the lens? I mean seriously?

28

Lenses / Re: 17-40 f4 L discontinued???????

« on: May 10, 2013, 09:49:05 AM »

i would love to see a 17-40mm II with better optical performance.
the borders on the curent version suck, to be honest.

+1

29

Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?

« on: May 09, 2013, 09:30:26 PM »

I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

What is your goal?

To create a piece of art or to depict reality?

If you're creating art then adding clouds is fine.

If you're trying to depict reality then obviously no.

30

Street & City / Re: San Francisco Long Exposure Cityscapes!

« on: May 09, 2013, 07:35:21 AM »

So why am I so critical of night shots?

Well what makes one different to the other?

Just different lights and a different reflection. Maybe a little difference in framing. They are a phase that nearly every photographer goes through. I just don't see them as challenging. Why?

Because the light is always coming to you and it is relatively constant, everywhere.