October 22, 2014, 08:48:55 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 5 ... 206
31
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'd love to be proven wrong. dilbert has vowed to post images that makes Canon shooters envious once he switches to SoNikon.

Strange, I don't recall ever making any such vow.


Quote
For his sake, hopefully that new camera will come in a bundle that includes a functioning ballhead and cable release.

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.

32
...
Not even good (i.e. not intended to purposely put Canon in the worst possible light, i.e. properly ETTRed) evidence matters any more....and that's something I've found to be rather odd and confusing.

It's not really that odd and confusing. Prior to there being good evidence, people could just shout louder about DR not being a problem. Since good evidence has been introduced, they are faced with admitting that they were wrong or continuing to shout loudly or even louder and nobody likes admitting that they were wrong.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 09:00:33 AM »
...
I'd jump ship if I could take my lenses with me. It's really difficult when you have some $18,000 invested in lenses that can only be used on Canon equipment. That's also a critical source of frustration for me. I really want better IQ for my landscape photography...and I'd also love some fast UWA lenses that perform as well as the Nikon 14-24mm (the 16-35/4 might be an answer to that, although I do like the f/2.8 aperture of my 16-35 L II).

I often feel I'm STUCK with Canon because of my lens investment. To really get the best of the alternatives that exist right now, adding the D810 and a couple UWA lenses like the 14-24 is an extremely costly endeavor as well...nearly $6000 with just the one lens, over if you get any other lenses. The A7r (or it's successor, which will hopefully be released early 2015 and bring some much needed improvements for AF and other features with it) is a very viable middle-ground option, and I'm very thankful it exists.

You don't need a UWA lens for landscape photography, in fact relatively recently I could have very handily used a 500mm or 600mm zoom lens ...

I've shot landscapes with telephoto lenses before. It's possible, and can be used to good effect. For example, this:

...
And this:
...
are telephoto panoramas, created with my 100-400mm lens (from a very great distance).

However, for the kind of compositions I really like, sweeping scenes with close, highly detailed foreground objects back to distant mountain scapes or something like that, UWA is the only option. You simply cannot do that with a 500mm or 600mm lens. The ultra wide field of view is what I want, because it lets me do things like this:
...
I could even use a couple mm wider FoV than the 16-35mm. The beauty of UWA is you can get within a mere foot of your key foreground subject, and still bring in a massively expansive landscape behind it. And still have the whole thing pretty sharp (or, if your using a T/S lens, you can have the entire thing super sharp throughout the entire field.) That's a unique capability.

Let me give you a quick critique. What are those two wide angle shots about? The mountain and its reflect or what's under the water? There are two completely different parts of that image and I'm not sure that joining them makes it better. For example, if you crop all of the bottom under water bit off the first, how does it look? Stronger image. What does the rock add to the image? If you cropped it out, would it be better or worse? Wide angle for landscape is hugely over hyped. Wide angle shooting people at events where you can't get far away from people without risk of disturbance is another matter.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20990.msg448151#msg448151

34
Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 08:47:39 AM »
The pricing of this lens is out of alignment with it being an f/4. Several factors could contribute to this:

1) difficult to manufacture in quantity
2) Canon perceives that there is a large, pent up, demand for this lens given how desirable it is to use the Nikon 12-24 plus adapter and thus lots of people willing to pay handsomely
3) the IQ is exceptional and Canon don't want to "give it away"
4) any combination of the above 3

Best advice in reaction to this lens is to wait a year or so and see what happens with the street price - similar to how the price corrected for the 24-70/f4L IS USM

35
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 12:06:56 AM »
This seems to be the growing canon user sentiment; switching to Nikon is too costly, the Sony a7R looking more and more like a viable option. My a7r demo unit arrives this week, will be putting it through its paces shooting mostly architecture, studio ads. For editorial work and other  high iso projects, my 6D is a capable tool.

Will be most interested to read what you have to say about that!

36
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 09, 2014, 10:25:28 PM »
...
I'd jump ship if I could take my lenses with me. It's really difficult when you have some $18,000 invested in lenses that can only be used on Canon equipment. That's also a critical source of frustration for me. I really want better IQ for my landscape photography...and I'd also love some fast UWA lenses that perform as well as the Nikon 14-24mm (the 16-35/4 might be an answer to that, although I do like the f/2.8 aperture of my 16-35 L II).

I often feel I'm STUCK with Canon because of my lens investment. To really get the best of the alternatives that exist right now, adding the D810 and a couple UWA lenses like the 14-24 is an extremely costly endeavor as well...nearly $6000 with just the one lens, over if you get any other lenses. The A7r (or it's successor, which will hopefully be released early 2015 and bring some much needed improvements for AF and other features with it) is a very viable middle-ground option, and I'm very thankful it exists.

You don't need a UWA lens for landscape photography, in fact relatively recently I could have very handily used a 500mm or 600mm zoom lens ...

37
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 09, 2014, 08:43:05 PM »
That would be nuts.

Imho this isn't the point, people buying all kinds of premium products can be called nuts.

But with the 5d3 release and the multiple delays for lenses and cameras, many Canon users have proven to be rather resistant against "jumping ship". Probably simply because they like their long-term brand, Canon service, Canon usability, Canon whatever and are as conservative as Canon themselves. If you have €25k lenses, another $1000 more or less for a camera that actually makes use of their potential resolution is a minor expense w/o running into compatibility issues with adapters.

That is not really the point. Existing users may be committed to a particular brand, but new users are not. By not competing effectively in the market Canon might think that their current user base will keep on buying their stuff, and that may be correct, but new users are going to buy the best tech available now, which is not Canon. And those users are going to show life long loyalty to whatever choices they make now as well. So, the damage done to Canon's market share might not show up tomorrow, but in a decade or so from now the effects of their short-sightedness is going to manifest itself.

100% agree.

38
EOS Bodies / Re: Multilayer Sensors are Coming From Canon [CR2]
« on: October 09, 2014, 10:38:35 AM »
Just throwing it out there..... could it be multiple layers for highlights and shadows rather than RGB?

No.

As has been mentioned somewhere else, the problem with the RGB sensor is that it is poor at recording colour that is either towards the upper bound of visible light (violets) or reds that are close to infrared.

Going from RGB to IRGBU is a 66% increase in the points in the spectrum from which to determine what colour a pixel should be.

39
EOS Bodies / Re: Multilayer Sensors are Coming From Canon [CR2]
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:06:25 AM »
I'm not sure what UV light does for skin...apparently Canon found something useful with UV light.

Creates melanomas.

40
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 10:54:38 AM »
So funny and so sad...

http://www.canonwatch.com/little-bit-canon-see-impossible-humor/

Love it!!

I think I'm going to print it out and post it to the head of Canon! Or maybe the head of their digital camera division! Or both! Hmm, need to get some addresses to write too! wooo wooo!

41
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 08:19:13 AM »
The term DRone, which was originally meant as a joke, has become an excessively derogatory term used explicitly for insult of anyone who isn't satisfied with Canon's status quo.

Sorry, but no.  Many people have expressed dissatisfaction with aspects of Canon's technology or (in)actions without issue.  It's not the what, it's the how.


It's possible to discuss the issues with Canon technology

Of course it is.  But regarding DR, it's been done.  To death.  Beyond death.  Yet it gets brought up...again and again.  A household scene shot with Canon and Exmor, then pushed several stops in post?  Your living room...no different than Mikael's garage.  It's been done.

Have you given any thought to why it keeps being brought up?
Or how you might contribute to why it keeps being brought up?


Quote
particularly those in the anti-DR crowd

Anti-DR crowd?  I don't think there is one.  There is general acknowledgement that more DR would be good to have.  However, there are many people who are annoyed by DRoning.  As I said...it's not the what, it's the how.

I'm a part of a number of online communities...this one is becoming one of the worst

Not from what I see.  There are lots of threads where people with questions get them answered quickly and accurately.  There are lots of threads where people post wonderful images.  There are a few threads where people argue about Canon sensors – you can choose to participate in them...or not.

As can you choose how to behave or choose not to behave. When adults start misbehaving and throwing around insults, the community does not become better for it.

42
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 04:30:50 AM »
Is it possible to unsubscribe from threads on these forums, so they don't show up in your new replies list?

Just do like I do and ignore that feature of this website and just read what interests you, not what people have said in response to you.

43
how to resolve the controversy
Only two possibilities:
1. Canon designs or buys a sensor equal or better than exmor.
2. Canon to file for bankruptcy and will stop designing sensors and selling cameras.

I vote for "1." ;)

PS.: And even if "1." would happen soon, the sensor wouldn't be good enough to them... I suppose.

+1.

Except that I can't wait forever because people don't live forever.

44
...
According to sensorgen, even if the 6D banding is lower (which is definitely a very GOOD thing), it's overall read noise has hardly changed from the 5D II days. That read noise increases random noise well above the photon-shot limited level, and tends to decimate the color fidelity of Canon shadows. The 6D truly shines at high ISO, though...definitely lower color noise than my 5D III. It's become a pretty popular DSLR for astro because of that (or, it was...until those Nikon hackers figured out how to remove the black point clipping...the Nikon D5100, D5300, D600, and D800/810 are becoming very popular now as they can be used at ISO 100, which is HUGE for astro, given the massive DR of a deep sky object...stars can rapidly clip the signal at ISO 400/800/1600 while the nebula or galaxies are still buried in read noise.)

Looking at the cached sensorgen data (pity the domain rego fell through), it appears that Sony have used a non-Exmor sensor design for the A7S as the noise readout isn't flat like it is for the D810. However the full well capacity of the A7S is absolutely huge at ISO100 and this is evident right down the chain. It should be a full stop ahead of the 6D at all ISOs.

According to sensorgen, the 6D is off by 1/3 of a stop for ISO (ISO1600 is closer to ISO1250 than 1600, etc) but this seems pretty common - the A7S photographs at ISO1310 for ISO1600.

45
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:51:17 AM »
The option list can go from NYC to SFC for all I care.

If I need to do prints at ~3' in size at 300dpi with out of camera images then there is nothing that Canon currently offers that will do that for me, irrespective of the lens. If I need clean shadows then there is nothing that from Canon that I can currently buy to give me that. And so on.

All the options in the world are meaningless to me if the system doesn't offer me the options that *I* need and what I need is better IQ, not a dozen super expensive and heavy lenses that I'll never own or use.

Conversely, the ability to capture the shots is just as integral to the process. I would imagine that for a very finite (miniscule) niche of photogs shooting very specific niche things, using Sony would be perfect and without issue. But for the rest of the real world (and majority of photographers), it is much more laborious and/or impossible to accomplish certain types of photography with a Sony a7xxx rig.

90% to 95% of DSLR purchasers never buy another lens. That's an awful lot of DSLR owners that own a body plus kit lens and that's an awful lot of DSLR owners that will see no benefit from Canon's huge lineup/system and an awful lot of photographers that will probably do just as fine with a Sony as a Canon.

You and I, we're already in the minority of photographers.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 206