« on: November 26, 2014, 04:12:41 PM »
Related to ACPS:
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.
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 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
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.
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.
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.
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.
......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.
I'm not the one refusing to accept that the future is coming.
Further, you're not even in the market for whatever the future does bring until that tax refund comes along.
.....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.
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?
Either way, please stop your incessant whining here on CR, save it for your wife or someone else, somewhere else, anywhere else.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/samsung_nx1_first_impressions.shtmlLuLa has trouble reading Samsung's spec page that they linked to in the 'review'.
LuLa is impressed. A contender for the APS-C crown.
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"
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...
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?
(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.
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.
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...