November 23, 2014, 05:47:12 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 - Gcon

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
16
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon France Teases New Products
« on: December 29, 2012, 06:57:53 AM »
She's definitely thinking of Ron Jeremy

17
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 20, 2012, 12:48:11 AM »
IS. Meh. IS isn't going to stop your subjects moving. Period. Also I quite like the higher ISO grain noise of the 5D Mark III. IS is not an issue at this focal length

The most noise is from fanboys who don't actually shoot - they just want all the feature boxes ticked on their shiny equipment they don't use much, and not having it gives them something to complain about in forums like this. My advice - get the current Mark II, stay off the caffeine and learn how to hold the camera properly with steady hands, build a bridge and then get over it.

18
Canon General / Re: A Lion Eats an EOS 5D Mark II & EF 16-35 f/2.8L II
« on: November 30, 2012, 02:13:15 AM »
Until the lion bites bits off and swallows them, then that's not "eating", that's "gnawing".

Most "web journalism" of this nature has a penchant for misleading sensationalist headlines.

Also, since when did CanonRumors go from a rumors site to a buyer's site, shoving "deal" after "deal" down everyone's throats. I'm getting sick of it - this site is now a total sellout.




19
Lenses / Re: Is the EF 800 f/5.6L IS Due for Replacement? [CR2]
« on: November 21, 2012, 06:15:11 AM »
"The new lens would incorporate Canon’s new weight saving technology." i.e. plastic.

20
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 11:05:03 PM »
I read "24"..."70"...."IS"... and got excited. Then I read "f/4", and immediately got a migraine.

Why Canon - for the love of God why?!!!!! With so many other lens models in the line-up that actually need an update or need to come out - WHY?!!!!!

35L - needs rounded aperture blades and weather sealing
17-40L - needs improved edge sharpness and better coatings for richer colors/contrast
16-35L - as above
100-400L - needs a refresh I'm told
200-400L - needs to come out
14-24L - needs to come out
24-70 f/2.8 IS - needs to come out

Canon is making as much sense as a wookie choosing to live on endor.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Firmware 1.1.1 Now Available
« on: October 18, 2012, 02:41:23 AM »
I notice on the splash page, http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/EOS1DX_firmware, that the first lens listed as newly compatible with the 1.4x is the 70-300L. WTF? The two aren't physically compatible.  Does Canon want to boost service revenue by repairing broken elements?

Good pickup! Tell me this someone please. I have these two components - the Canon 1.4x III and the Canon 70-300L. Will anything break if I put them together?! I thought it was a physical limitation. Hmmmm. Hope Canon enable this functionality in the 5D3 if it can be done!

22
+1 for 5D3 for these tweaks. I'm not terribly fussed about the f/8 option as I'm not a birder / sporter, and don't have any lenses that are f/4 and can be combined with a 2x (unless I get a 1.4x or 2x for my 70-300L).

The red point illumination would be mighty handy though, with the Aussie wedding season about to krank up.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: New firmware to Canon 7D, v2.0.3
« on: October 16, 2012, 07:41:29 AM »
Does the firmware update reduce the noise at ISO100? I find that really grainy noise even at base ISO is really the major disappointment with this body. In fact it's so bad I don't know why anyone would use it. I personally prefer the images from the 50D, and think Canon took a backwards step with this sensor.

24
Site Information / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II in Stock at Adorama
« on: October 15, 2012, 05:10:03 PM »
It would want to be good for that money! Can't wait for the reviews to hit. Usually I'd rush out and be first to buy but for that asking price - I'm a bit wary.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 4D reference in Wifi remote app video
« on: September 19, 2012, 09:18:41 PM »
It'll be the 4D for sure. Guaranteed. Why? Think about it.

7D - taken
6D - taken
5D - taken
4D - free
3D - misleading. Consumers will think "Dimension" rather than "Digital"
2D - misleading. Consumers will think "Dimension" rather than "Digital"
1D - taken

Of course it could be 8D or 9D, but really would they want to make it look worse from a numbering perspective than the 7D or 6D? No. they have nowhere else to go. 4D it is.  Nikon did the right thing IMHO by putting the D in the front - another win to Nikon. (I'm a Canon fan but I call it like it is).

26
Image 5 [Portrait] = cute girl. Absolutely horrible image quality. Don't tell me it's a front-focus issue. It's Canon's own website - as if they would post images of front-focused images. If they do then they need to sort themselves out ASAP. It's probably that the 6D can't focus to save itself. FAIL!

Image 6 [Portrait] = eyes are soft. Hair on the top of the head is sharper. Another "horrible focus abilities" issue? FAIL!

Image 2 [Madagascar] = horrible perspective, and bad CA on the RHS.  FAIL!

Image 1 [Baobab] = nice image but IQ doesn't impress. Barely a pass.


2005 called  (original 5D), and said it wants its AF system back!!!

Canon is so full of fail now, that it's unbelievable.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Official Specs
« on: September 17, 2012, 06:15:23 AM »
Anyway am I the only photographer that thinks the 18mp sensor is absolute rubbish?? The 100-400ISO range which I shoot in most, is awful in comparison to the 40Ds 10mp. It is extremely noisy, not clean at all and there is a lot of banding! I read a lot on hear about it and poo poo'd the problems because I thought people were being overly critical as its a tech forum. But 800ISO and over is a great improvement, but most of my stuff is done in the 100-400 range. So I am extremely disappointed in the 7D for IQ which is what I want. Everything else about the camera is perfect IMO, but there is no point in having a great camera with poor IQ.

You are spot on. I shot for a couple of years with the 5DII, and then bought the 7D as a backup, and a bit of a birder. I was horrified by the amount of noise at ISO100. I tried again using it in different situations. Sharp yes. Noisy - absolutely! It's horrible. It has sat in my spare bag for about a year - I just haven't got around to getting rid of it, but I haven't used it either.

If they brought out a 7DMarkII with some kind of huge base ISO noise improvements, and all other features the same (same 18MP), then I'd get one in a flash. It's unusable to me in its current form though.

28
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?
« on: September 16, 2012, 12:40:36 AM »
Other than the 11 AF with 1 cross type I don't see anything that is a disappointment from a lower cost FF DSLR. What did you guys want. A MkIII at $1500?
All new FF DSLRs should have dual slots, preferably of the same type

That way you can save to 2 cards at the same time for added safety. The first wedding you shoot where the card gets damaged before dumping the shots - you'll agree with me.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?
« on: September 15, 2012, 07:03:19 PM »
What a huge dissapointment. Canon have to bury that horrible horrible 5D AF system. No excuse for not having all cross-type AF. Also, WTF would their entry level FF have built-in wifi and GPS and not the top level 5D3 and 1DX? Can

30
"a pop star on a faraway stage" lol.  200mm or more would be much better for a "faraway stage".

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9