October 01, 2014, 10:47:13 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 ... 115 116 [117] 118 119 ... 199
1741
Lenses / Re: Why is the 24-70 MK1 price so high.
« on: July 09, 2012, 03:30:33 AM »
B&H has it new in stock for 1600.00

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=264304&is=USA&sub=cpw&A=details&Q=

Well you either pay $1600 for Mk I or wait for Mk II and pay $2300.

B&H aren't dumb and are out to make money just like everyone else.

1742
Lenses / Re: Patent - Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS
« on: July 09, 2012, 03:28:39 AM »
If Canon replaced the 24-70/2.8 USM with a 24-70/2.8 IS USM, then I imagine a whole lot of people would have been severely annoyed with the price. Given Canon's current pricing we could expect this lens to be well over $2500 and possible close to $3000.

Would the Canon faithful accept a lens selling for around $1200 with a lens close to $3000? I think not.

But now that the 24-70/2.8 USM Mk II is on the market at $2299, a 24-70/2.8 IS USM for $2799 doesn't seem like such a big deal, does it?

1743
Lenses / Re: A New EF 50 f/1.8 IS? [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2012, 10:38:32 AM »
First rumored in July 2012, announced in March 2013, delivered in January 2014.

1744
EOS Bodies / Re: Any actual photographers out there?
« on: July 08, 2012, 12:09:21 AM »
Warning: heresy against Canon Rumors In this paragraph I am going to commit the heresy of criticizing the powers that be. Mods, feel free to delete this paragraph... here goes. For an example of what I was saying above about good websites become profit making machines rather than serving their visitors, has anyone noticed that admin seems to be AWOL about further information the 1D X even though he now has it? And yet he has taken the time to post links to a very lukewarm deal on the 7D and promoting it like it was the greatest deal ever. (I know it is just lukewarm because just this month I added a fifth 7D to my inventory for $1149 including the 28-135mm lens with a U.S. warranty, and it was shipped instantly and in my hands the next day from an authorized dealer. Other well-known price points on 7Ds have included several instances of the body only for $1,100. So for the admin to advertise the "body package deal" for $1,349 was simple commercialism just like Ken Rockwell does.) I for one was extremely disappointed with the 7D body only "package" advertisement, which at that price was not doing a service to any visitors to Canon Rumors, and have also been disappointed by many similar posts to "deals" rather than the time to provide good info to us about products. I know that the admin is providing this entire site to us out of his good will, so I do appreciate that--however, the good will equation is starting to become a profit equation now that the website has become so popular. I hope that the admin can resist the temptation of the "love of money" because that will be the demise of this website and the end of its popularity.

Yup! And the "sticky" top aspect is annoying too! Quite often more recent stories are published but because the top story is the one the website owner wants to promote, others just get added below it.

1745
EOS Bodies / Re: Any actual photographers out there?
« on: July 07, 2012, 11:37:28 PM »
Love this site and the various topics that seem to get people hot under the collar. But am amazed at the rather low level of knowledge out there on the subject of photography and the poor quality of work being showcased in these forums. Is it just me or do others agree?

You're not the first one to comment on the quality of the photographs posted in the forums.
My advice is just to ignore them and everyone congratulating each other on how good they are.

1746
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Is the future of DSLRs FF only?
« on: July 06, 2012, 01:55:39 PM »
So long as there is a price sensitive market there will be sensors other than FF for DSLRs.

If you read the blog entry in full (including the PDF), you'll note that the price differential between a FF sensor and a crop sensor should be quite small. Less than 10% of the price of a $1500 camera.

Why would you pay $1350 for a crop sensor camera when a FF sensor is $1500? (for example)

1747
Third Party Manufacturers / Is the future of DSLRs FF only?
« on: July 06, 2012, 11:06:28 AM »
On another rumor site was a link to a blog that talked about the future of DSLRs being FF only:

http://falklumo.blogspot.it/2012/06/true-reasons-full-frame.html

1748
Hmpf!

1749
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Real Estate Photography 5D mkIII
« on: July 04, 2012, 05:40:07 AM »
Isn't that a bit negative, after we had such nice and constructive posts from both @lex, wickidwombat and revup? I am not exactly a HDR enthusiast or something, but some of @lex's shots can really only be done using HDR and yes, they look well composed and well executed in post-processing. Thanks @lex!

Hey, I added some constructive advice: get a 17mm TS-E.

HDR won't fix the flaws that arise from not using that len.

1750
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Real Estate Photography 5D mkIII
« on: July 04, 2012, 02:50:55 AM »
Have you done no post-production correction except for HDR?

I hope you didn't charge for these because I definitely wouldn't have paid for them.

Get yourself a 17mm TS-E lens if you're going to do more of this type of work.

1751
Sports / Re: AFL (Australian Rules Football)
« on: July 03, 2012, 05:46:46 AM »
Nice shots, but I also dislike the vignetting. Withhout it, they would be better!

There is a 200mm focal length limit to AFL matches - though you could easily get around that if you add in a TC or body with crop factor etc
  :o what do you mean? You are not allowed to bring longer lenses? Hard to believe....

Not really. Longer would be the domain of those that are paid to take photographs there.

1752
Sports / Re: AFL (Australian Rules Football)
« on: July 03, 2012, 02:23:29 AM »
As for process, they were all shot on my 5D III, with a 70-200mm @ 200mm ƒ/2.8, ISO 800, and a shutter of 1/800s. Post processing was mainly fixing the white balance

So work out what the white balance should be and set it manually next time. You should be able to do this for each ground without any trouble as they don't change the type of lights that are used.

Also, take along a 300 or preferably 400mm zoom to really get in close with the players.

200mm is just not enough.

1753
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]
« on: July 02, 2012, 05:19:59 AM »
There's no way the 7D replacement will not accept APS-C lenses. So no sensor bloat - that's just silly.

APS-H is D.E.A.D. It was only there for faster frame rates compared to FF. It was a compromise. Canon solved this with the 1DX. The whole point of a crop-sensor lens in a semi-pro body like 7D is just that - the crop factor! Otherwise you'd just get the 5DIII. My left nut to say that APS-H will never ever see the light of day ever again in a new body - it makes absolutely zero sense.



You forget one very important aspect of the whole picture: The marketing perspective

The APS-H sensor have no direct competitor

Do you ever recall seeing the 1D cameras advertising mentioning that it was APS-H or that it was a 1.3 crop and not a 1.6 or 1.0 crop?

1754
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS & EF 28 f/2.8 IS Quick Review
« on: June 30, 2012, 03:10:04 PM »
I wonder if these two lenses are an experiment with the marketplace.

Canon's caught out in the image stabilisation thing because of companies like Sony that have sensor based IS so that all of their lenses benefit from that type of tech.


1755
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS & EF 28 f/2.8 IS Quick Review
« on: June 29, 2012, 04:35:08 PM »
Or to put it another way...

Do you spend $800 on a 24/2.8 IS and another $850 on a 28/2.8 IS or $1300 on a Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC?

Pages: 1 ... 115 116 [117] 118 119 ... 199