November 28, 2014, 09:40:06 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 ... 216
Probably Sigma 24-105 does not sell as well as expected. They should concentrate on the manufacture of 35 and 50 Art, which seem to disappear from the shelves quickly.

I'm hoping that is the case.

For me, the IQ was very underwhelming when compared to the L and nowhere near what I expected.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: LuLa likes the Samsung NX1
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:38:21 AM »
I always find it interesting that LuLa falls in love with each new camera model.  They are true Hardware Geeks. 
Their review of the new Pentax MF camera has me wanting one :)

Hardware geeks? Camera geeks :)

And why shouldn't one fall in love with each new model?

It's just a pity we don't get to do that when it comes to our partners ;)

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:27:55 AM »
Now for a dose of reality...

Canon has sold over 100 million EOS cameras and something like 130 million lenses.

Of that number, it was estimated that 120 million lenses were sold in kits with 96 million bodies.... in other words, 4 percent of the bodies sold are bought as lone items, and only 10 million lenses are sold outside of kits.

Some very sobering statistics that serve to remind us that the mass consumer market and buyers of Canon cameras is completely unlike the majority of the posters here that have at least one, if not two, non-kit lenses.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:23:20 AM »
I agree, I was looking out for the people who might be impressionable enough to buy into your snake oil garbage and I assumed you knew better, sorry if I overestimated you.

Like I said, it kind of sounds logical, but is completely erroneous and you are doing those that don't know better a huge disservice by repeating such utter garbage.

Honestly, I am totally gobsmacked by the abusive resistance from the CR "regulars" to the suggestion that Canon should drop the "crop-frame" system.

A few reasons why:
* A number of CR regulars likely have EF-S lenses that will become worthless if Canon dumps APS-C DSLRs
* If Canon dumps APS-C DSLRs then the only DSLRs that Canon will sell are the more expensive full frame DSLRs that not everyone can afford
* Dumping APS-C would mean that FF DSLRs are required for the full pricing spectrum, devaluing the equipment owned by various people.
* Dumping APS-C would mean people need high megapixel cameras (anyone for 50MP?) to deliver similar pixel density to the 7D2 and more MP = more expensive camera

I'd be very curious to know if any of the abusive resistance didn't in some way involve money.

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:19:05 AM »
No, sports are not the whole pro market, but they are a HUGE segment of the pro market. Weddings, portraiture, food and product photography, photojournalism, etc. are certainly parts of the pro market. Wedding photographers seem enamored by Nikon's latest offerings. They loved the 5D III, but the D750 seems to be the hot thing in that segment right now. I know a number of portrait photographers who seem to prefer Pentax (it seems to be a size thing in particular...smaller bodies, smaller lenses.) It seems as though studio photographers who frequently look to MFD have been looking to Nikon's D800 more often lately (although who knows, now that Exmors are in MFDs, they will probably go back...either way, Canon doesn't exactly have a product for them right now, nothing that competes with current competitor offerings anyway.)

Canon has a massive presence in the pro photography world, no doubt. However the pro world does not seem as locked into Canon as they used to be. At the very least, they have diversified.

For Pros, equipment is a tax deduction and an expensive that is written off over a number of years (as few as 3 in some instances.)

So after 3 years, your new 5D Mark III is now worth $0 to your business inventory.
What do you buy next?

Another 5D Mark III, meaning you'll have been using the same camera for 6 years when the next one is fully depreciated or something else newer that has better IQ, features, etc, even if it is another brand?

Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:14:34 AM »
I keep coming back to a certain point as it seems to be the touchstone for any company that tries to sell into the consumer marketplace.

As markets change, companies that can't keep up will experience falling revenues and may, in extreme cases, be forced to close it's doors.

Consumer desires can be fickle.  What sells one moment may not be the thing that sells the next.

When we first landed in Europe I saw a lot of tourists running around with pretty high-end Canon DSLR gear strapped around their necks, but no longer is this the case.  That was three years ago. What I see these days are a LOT of mirrorless (Sony APS-C, Oly, Pana, some Fuji) and a few high end Sony RX1 and the occasional Leica (of all things).  But more than ANY of this, I see where cell phones and tablets have taken over for most of the tourist's imaging "needs."

For the pro-level shoots (commercial, weddings, fashion - well LOTS of fashion as this _is_ the place afterall) I see almost 100 percent Canon pro-gear.  Though I have to add that the most serious fashion stuff I see being shot around town is with Fuji-blads.

For pro-level video I see LOTS of Canon 5D MkII/MkIII.  Even in-studio stuff here in France where they pan back to show an overall scene.

Based on these kinds of "on the street" observations I think Canon has the portable pro-level video market sewn up.  I can imagine them continuing to invest in that area. 

Canon seems to still have a strong part of the tourist DSLR (Rebel) market, but is very quickly loosing to cell phones and mirrorless.  I can imagine Canon continuing to sell whatever they can into that space, but for further R&D?  I don't see it.

For published fashion work I can see Fuji-blad will remain _the_ "go-to" system.

For sports and wildlife photography I can see where Canon could remain strong, but how much gear can they actually sell into a market that's likely already saturated?  If the new 100-400L development cycle is any indication, we may see the existing gear in the stores for a long time to come.

Your observations match mine. I think Canon managed to capture the emergent DSLR-video market at exactly the right time and got a lot of mind share because of it, just as they did a few years earlier when they were beating Nikon with image quality on their DSLRs. Nikon has since caught up but the emergent market has since moved past both Canon AND Nikon to mirrorless.

The thing is that Canon is now failing to capture people "stepping up" into real cameras. Thus it may be that the wave of Canon owners has surged and is now a swell moving towards shore.

Of note is how quickly this change has come about - in less than five years. So whilst Sony may be bleeding lots of money and having trouble turning a profit, it is chasing new users and consumers (and the next wave) whereas Canon seems to be content riding the wave that is already on, regardless of where it is heading.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 26, 2014, 07:50:36 AM »

I'm not the one refusing to accept that the future is coming.

No, you seem quite interested in the future, refusing to accept whatever the future brings, frustrated that it probably won't conform to your desires any better than the present.

Would you care to demonstrate how I'm refusing to accept whatever the future brings?

I would add that thus far, Canon hasn't demonstrated much of a future when it comes to photography and that the future of photography seems to be escaping Canon but I digress.

Further, you're not even in the market for whatever the future does bring until that tax refund comes along.

No, that's called being financially responsible and planning your budget. I could buy new equipment now but it doesn't form part of my budget to do so and the next point in time when I'll have cash to throw around.

If you (or others) have more cash to burn before then, well then good for you.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX-1 Review
« on: November 25, 2014, 10:47:40 PM »

Ultimately we don't get any choice.

Canon chooses what enables them to make the most money.

If EVFs can be built at a lower cost than OVFs and generate greater profit, which way is Canon going to go in order to keep shareholders, etc, happy?
dilbert, either accept what the market offers (as if you could afford it prior to next Spring's tax refund), or start/buy a camera manufacturing company, bend it to your desires.

Either way, please stop your incessant whining here on CR, save it for your wife or someone else, somewhere else, anywhere else.


I'm not the one refusing to accept that the future is coming.

In the present day, digital photography is no place for conservatism unless you want to be obsolete.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: LuLa likes the Samsung NX1
« on: November 25, 2014, 03:59:14 PM »

LuLa is impressed. A contender for the APS-C crown.
LuLa has trouble reading Samsung's spec page that they linked to in the 'review'.
Lula mentions the NX1's weather sealing, Samsung's page states;
"6 This product is not water or dust proof. It is designed to resist dust and minor splashes only. Exposure to severe conditions is not recommended."
Not impressed with LuLa.

Well since there is no standard for the term "weather sealing" it is hard to tell if they got it right or wrong. No one is claiming that the camera is "weather sealed" only that it has "weather sealing".  So if it is sealed against dust and minor splashes, it probably does have "weather sealing"

That's the problem with camera manufacturers using the term "weather sealing"

Exactly. I believe that Lens Rentals has pointed this out in the past.

And if you look at Canon product pages that mention "weather <something>", nowhere do you find an actual definition of what that claim means.

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 03:55:44 PM »
Not pointing in any special direction, and I could have posted this in quite a few threads here today: But somehow I can imagine early on in the weeks that there are individuals who have had sex offerings turned down during the weekend - by both of their hands...

I love that :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 03:51:31 PM »
It's far too early for a 5DMk4, Canon is not Nikon.

you know, a quick google would have told you how silly your post is.  5D was replaced in 3 years, 5dII in 3.5 years...

sept 2015 (next year) would be .. what? 3.5 years.

So am I cancelling my ebay listing or not?  :o

And the 5D3 was 3.5 years due to unexpected natural phenomenon interrupting things.

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 03:49:33 PM »
(1) if you are using flash as your only light source in a dark environment then you could use the -3Ev to achieve autofocus while the camera shoots at a clean ISO and reasonable shutter speed.
(2) if you are using a flash which has an AF-assist beam then you won't need -3Ev for achieving focus.

Anyway, my point is that not everyone shoots with ambient light alone, some people use a combination of ambient and flash and some use purely flash. Good specs are useful but not always necessary.

Top of the class!

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 07:02:55 AM »
What kind of people wonder around taking pictures in the dark with teleconverters?

Nikon's is more rewarding if you're using teleconverters with your lens or you're focusing in very low light situations (-3EV on the D750.)

If you put a 2x teleconverter onto a f/4 zoom lens then you're at f/8.0. Low light levels, at events, near dawn or dusk, etc.

-3 EV with an f/8 lens could mean, for example, a 0.5 s exposure at ISO 102400.  How rewarding do you think that would be at events or shooting at dawn or dusk?  Apparently you have no comprehension of the amount of light -3 EV represents.

That would be fine if AF was in some way linked to ISO, but other than its rating, it isn't - your camera's PDAF array isn't built into the sensor, so changing the ISO that you shoot at won't help your AF (and if you're using live view, the camera will increase ISO as required for contrast based AF.)

To put this in better context,  using an f/4.0 lens at ISO 100, EV-3 correlates to an exposure time of 2 minutes and EV-1 (which the 5D Mark II does) would get you 30 seconds. At dawn/dusk, I have so often found TTL autofocus to not work that I default to live view AF now (if not manual.)

For the curious, a full EV table can be found here:

So yes, I know exactly how much light -3 EV represents (and have experience shooting in very low light conditions.)

EOS Bodies / Re: Another 50mp FF DSLR Mention [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2014, 03:10:03 AM »
Thank you for pointing outside of in certain select situations, such as sports and wildlife photography, there's no reason to buy Canon.

Good try.  Actually, pretty pathetic...but I thought I'd start by saying something nice.

Well consider that reviewers everywhere are now generally panning Canon when it comes to their DSLRs and especially the sensor.

Really?  Reviewers everywhere?  You need to read more widely.

I'd prefer a system which gave me the same AF performance with every lens because then I'm not faced with having to make any compromises.

Even if that AF performance was less accurate and precise than it could be with faster lenses?  That's a pretty big compromise you'd be making for that 'same AF performance'.  Oh, and speaking of same AF performance with every lens, every Canon lens that mounts directly on a Canon dSLR will autofocus.  Will every Nikon lens that mounts directly on a Nikon dSLR autofocus?  More compromises...

Explain to me how the autofocus works on the TS/E 17mm.
Or does that lens not mount directly on a Canon DSLR?

Facts, do you have a problem with those?
Or do you just prefer sweeping generalizations without regard to facts?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 216