September 19, 2014, 08:16:10 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 158
286
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G1x vs. G16 vs. ??
« on: July 28, 2014, 09:50:27 PM »
As I said, I am not looking to get either.

I was merely pointing out that comments like "it has stunning low-light-capabilities" and "The G1X II would be a no brainer had Canon given the G1X II a modern sensor, as it stands the RX100 III still out performs it" are either bullshit, or don't actually stand up to image comparisons.

But why should we let actual images sway us when we have internet printed reviews that support our preconceived ideas? Enjoy your RX100III.

287
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G1x vs. G16 vs. ??
« on: July 28, 2014, 08:42:12 PM »
Guess it all depends what you want, as the article in the link mentions, want the best IQ, then it's the RX100 III.

To each their own....


" if .......... you don't mind losing zoom power and shallow depth-of-field,"

Er, what if you do? And what if you don't want or need 20MP from a P&S?
But if you look at their example images in RAW, particularly at higher iso, that isn't what they actually show. You can lead a horse to water.........

Not saying the RX100III isn't an excellent camera, just that comparison images don't actually agree with the comment. But what do I care, I wouldn't buy either.

288
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G1x vs. G16 vs. ??
« on: July 28, 2014, 05:46:14 PM »
" if .......... you don't mind losing zoom power and shallow depth-of-field,"

Er, what if you do? And what if you don't want or need 20MP from a P&S?

289
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G1x vs. G16 vs. ??
« on: July 28, 2014, 04:40:43 PM »
Thanks for the link and article:

"The RX100 III's 20MP sensor gives it a clear resolution advantage over its most direct rival: the Canon G1 X Mark II. As the shooting conditions become more challenging, this advantage begins to slip away. As you'd expect, the fine detail that's visible in the low ISO shots, is lost as sensitivity rises. This is equally true for the Canon, with a loss of saturation, as well as detail.




The G1X II would be a no brainer had Canon given the G1X II a modern sensor, as it stands the RX100 III still out performs it.

Here is hoping Canon comes out with an RX100/new LX8 competitor as the days with the 1/1.7" sensor are what they are, but no longer the best you can buy.  Or bring on the G1X III with a new sensor, cut the weight, and address the AF issues.

I'd go for the Sony RX100 Mark III and I will do that myself to compliment my DSLR kit, because it has stunning low-light-capabilities and is pretty much the perfect pocketable compact camera for me (high res, but not too much noise; good AF; good video; good EVF; 24mm at the wide end; very fast lens for a compact camera). If you need the 70-100mm area often, look at the G1X Mark II. If you go for the Sony, be prepared to shoot RAW, as I find the Sony JPEGs to be too aggressively sharpened/noise-reducted. I hope you will make the right decision for you!  :D

I wonder about you guys sometimes, never let actual results get in the way of the hyperbole.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m3/12

Well if you need 20MP from your P&S, and if you think they are worth having, then have at it. But don't say and agree with stuff like "it has stunning low-light-capabilities" and "The G1X II would be a no brainer had Canon given the G1X II a modern sensor, as it stands the RX100 III still out performs it" when all it actually seems to lack in comparative images is resolution, and considering resolution is a conscious design decision, like I say, if you need a 20MP camera why look at 12MP cameras?

290
Software & Accessories / Re: RRS or Markins?
« on: July 28, 2014, 04:20:51 PM »
Just to follow up, I got my Acratech GP a few days ago.

Welcome to the club. I can't recommend it any more than I did, if I lost mine today I'd order another one immediately.

There are a couple of things I actually spoke to Scott at Acratech about, when the clamp is mounted on the bottom there should be a detent to stop the whole clamp rotating on the base, when it is the "right" way up it has positive locks, when reversed it doesn't, not a biggie but if you are cold and wet, or hot and sweaty you can move the clamp unintentionally, though this is not a dropping hazard. And the pan and clamp knobs come close to each other when it is inverted.

Mine doesn't look pristine anymore either!

291
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G1x vs. G16 vs. ??
« on: July 28, 2014, 04:06:42 PM »
The G1X II would be a no brainer had Canon given the G1X II a modern sensor, as it stands the RX100 III still out performs it.

Here is hoping Canon comes out with an RX100/new LX8 competitor as the days with the 1/1.7" sensor are what they are, but no longer the best you can buy.  Or bring on the G1X III with a new sensor, cut the weight, and address the AF issues.

I'd go for the Sony RX100 Mark III and I will do that myself to compliment my DSLR kit, because it has stunning low-light-capabilities and is pretty much the perfect pocketable compact camera for me (high res, but not too much noise; good AF; good video; good EVF; 24mm at the wide end; very fast lens for a compact camera). If you need the 70-100mm area often, look at the G1X Mark II. If you go for the Sony, be prepared to shoot RAW, as I find the Sony JPEGs to be too aggressively sharpened/noise-reducted. I hope you will make the right decision for you!  :D

I wonder about you guys sometimes, never let actual results get in the way of the hyperbole.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m3/12

292
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 03:50:04 PM »
I suppose the newer cameras with a WB target on a colour wheel are much better than the older cameras that only allowed you to dial in WB on the Kelvin scale. On my 1Ds MkIII's when I put in a personally selected ºK value I get a zero tint value and no in camera way to change it. That's progress for ya.....  :)

Lightroom also displays the camera derived Tint value.

293
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 03:18:20 PM »
I know WB is supposed to give you "true", even valued, white black and gray tones, but there is no doubt that in camera it doesn't, all my AWB tungsten shots have an orange colour, and I am happy with that...

AWB, like auto exposure, kinda seems to put you in the ball park most of the time, but it doesn't actually know what you are trying to do as a photographer.

Exactly.  Well, almost - orange really isn't in the ballpark with white, it's somewhere in the next town over.  I sometimes leave indoor shots a bit warmer than neutral, but I don't like them orange.

 :D Alright, maybe not orange, perhaps "warm", a few hundred degrees off for pure even tones.

But the tint issue in AWB is one I never really did get my head around, if WB just does blue to yellow, then tint, with green to magenta, is every bit as important, particularly for things like stadium gas lights and fluorescent lamps and the multitude of colours they now come in.

294
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 02:41:56 PM »
As for the AWB result, what colour was the light? If it was tungsten then the Canon is a more accurate representation of the actual colour of the scene, the NIkon has removed the colour, take your pick.

Sorry, but it's auto white balance – the idea is to render a white/neutral object in the scene as white/neutral in the image, not to render it as 'the actual color of the scene'.  Under tungsten light, AWB on most Canon bodies will render a white object as orange.  That's a WB fail (even if it's by Canon's design - they should put that tweak into a Picture Style, not AWB).

I have found that to be the theory, but not the execution. Certainly all bodies seem to handle AWB differently, often the same body in the same situation will produce different WB levels in a sequence. Also, WB is only one part of the WB control, Tint is the other.

When I shoot tethered I can do an in camera custom WB and it looks good, if I then go into DPP whilst tethered I can re WB that image with the additional Tint control and it shifts, sometimes quite a lot.

I know WB is supposed to give you "true", even valued, white black and gray tones, but there is no doubt that in camera it doesn't, all my AWB tungsten shots have an orange colour, and I am happy with that, maybe it is just the  difference between the Tungsten temp and the actual colour if the bulbs I have used.

My first 1D actually had an exterior WB window that measured some ambient, it didn't rely on 100% TTL, I really liked the AWB on that camera but not so much since.

AWB, like auto exposure, kinda seems to put you in the ball park most of the time, but it doesn't actually know what you are trying to do as a photographer.

295
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Will the G17 have a 1" sensor?
« on: July 28, 2014, 02:17:26 PM »
Sony is hoping a couple if there cameras will sell???

The RX100 I, II, and III, have cannibalized S120, G17, and G1X II sales.

When is Canon going to produce a competitive model???

OR, when is Sony going to make a camera that doesn't cost the Sony corporation a fortune? Besides, do you have actual true sales figures for all those models?

296
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:34:41 PM »
I AFMA'd the 50 1.4 to +4. I didn't AFMA the nikon. I didn't know Canons AWB was that poor - I actually assumed the opposite. Part of the learning curve I guess. So basically what you're saying is these results are in fact typical? I was kinda hoping they were isolated to my body - so I could send it for service again or sell it and take my chances on buying another.

There is probably nothing wrong with your gear, just your ideas of what a comparison is.

In defense of the 50 f1.4, which is as sharp as the 100L Macro at f5.6 ( http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=6&LensComp=107&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3 ), try them both stopped down.

As for the AWB result, what colour was the light? If it was tungsten then the Canon is a more accurate representation of the actual colour of the scene, the NIkon has removed the colour, take your pick.

297
Lenses / Re: Lenses in the 20mm range
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:21:06 PM »
With tripod use and a measured approach 17 TS-E without question. Shift is a very valuable interior technique and the 17 TS-E is unmatched in this field in the 135 format.

If you want AF, IS etc I wouldn't know.

P.S. Interior spaces that are "square", that is the four walls are at 90º to each other, you miss a huge amount of wall space on the two closest walls where the camera has to be a few inches off the corner. More than 94º is important for record type images.

298
CR should come up with some kind of way to host photographers of this caliber from time to time.

Video, Blog, or whatever.  I think it would be cool and really set CR apart from (and above) other rumor sites.

Absolutely agree with that idea.

299
"Size = Small = Not much improvement.
Gels = Neat = Not enough incentive."


Price = DOA

£120 is over $200, for a bit of plastic to stick on your flash that can be done better with a piece of 69c foam paper.

300
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Will the G17 have a 1" sensor?
« on: July 28, 2014, 11:23:24 AM »
I can't see Canon coming out with the S130 and G17 and having an outdated 1/1.7" sensor when Sony, Panasonic, etc are pushing forward with bigger sensors.

Probably not.

The G1X series is supposed to be the crossover larger sensor P&S, also that lens speed is very fast, it would make the lens much bigger than the 140mm f2.8 on the G16, so a substantially bigger camera.

Why not? Canon play by their own tune. Sony are churning out different cameras in the hope that a couple actually sell, FF mirrorless, fixed lenses on FF cameras, three FF versions of their A7 while they lose more money than their core insurance business can support; meanwhile Panasonic are playing the out video feature game, but both are throwing huge amounts of money into a market that is in a terminal death spiral. P&S's are not the cash cow they were just a few short years ago.


The two main selling feature points of P&S's is size and price, now phones take basically the same pictures for "free", which kills price, size is it, it seems to me Canon are happy with their camera sizes.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 158