September 02, 2014, 03:02:01 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 - tomscott

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 37
Lenses / Re: Cost breakdown of a lens EF & EF-S
« on: September 19, 2012, 10:34:03 AM »
I doubt it is down to tolerance. A 20 year old machine can cut to a tolerance of 1 micron aka 0.03mm. It will be something to do with the quality of the glass, growing the crystals and the quality of each one, I would say the QC will be much higher so nothing with any defect in it what so ever. Also R&D the R&D in these products eventually trickle down to the lower models.

Like buying a top of the range S Class mercedes. It will have everything Merc can possibly do but a C class wont. Same with Canon, new coatings, design of the elements etc etc

Its not like the 24-70 is made of metal anymore its plastic...

I would say it is £2300 because they can charge it for it. Every pro will buy one, thats a lot of people.

Lenses / Re: Were EF-S lenses a bad idea?
« on: September 19, 2012, 07:55:30 AM »
As a pro I get a lot of friends family and random acquaintances asking me what I use bla bla bla...

Then they ask wow thats a nice camera, nothing about the glass.

Amateurs who are not obsessive about photography generally think the better the camera the better their images/kit will be but in reality the camera is crippled by the glass you use.

I was buying a camera for my dad yesterday in a local superstore. The guy selling it asked what I use so I told him and he said 'wow, Im really starting to get into my photography and doing a lot of product shots for my portfolio.' I was impressed and asked a few more questions and it turned out he was using a 1100d and the standard kit lens and two flashes and was looking into buying a 60D and asked what I thought. He was surprised to hear that buying the 18mp 60D with a standard lens 18-55mm would probably turn out worse images than his 12mp 1100d with the same lens.

I then went onto tell him buying some high end EF-s glass or EF L lenses will aid him more than buying a new body. The 1100d isnt great but its not bad. Shooting product photography and not selling the results the 60D will not aid.

I explained that good glass is needed to resolve the sensor, and you get better results from better glass. He was puzzled at first and then appalled that the 17-55mm would run him nearly as much as a new camera. I said well cameras come and go, but buy good glass and it will do you well for longer and not only give crisp, sharp results but will give his camera more life as it will feel so new with the quality the lens was giving him.

Anyway point being we as canonrumour-ists we probably fit into 25% of the key demographic of Canon photographic products. We seek the best and go as far as being upset or personally insulted if canon doesn't deliver what we want.

Whereas the rest of the demographic wants a camera which on paper has great features and think because the camera comes with the kit lens that it is good enough for the camera. So will go and buy a camera over glass unless they need something specific so like a telephoto for 'further away' or wide angle for 'wider shots' or macro to 'get closer' what ever it may be. But also will probably try to find the cheapest not realising that they are slower, noisy, slow to focus and will cripple them in quite a few situations.

So will Canon regret making the EF-s system well no, because they offer cheaper alternatives to the key demographic and will outsell L lenses at least 3 or even 4:1 also the APC cameras will outsell the FF variants in the same respect. I would say the average person wont want to spend over £300 on a new lens, which is where quite a lot of EF-s lenses sit.

As for the user. Well L lenses in my opinion aren't as suitable on the standard/wide end. If you want a wide angle lens or a standard zoom, L lenses are too much on the tele side, 24 on crop is 38.4. So buy buying L only glass I feel I would miss the shot opportunities. I would rather buy the high end EF-s lenses than miss shots I would have otherwise. Especially when the 17-55 and 10-22mm are such fantastic lenses, if anything as good as their full frame alternatives, apart from weather sealing. Lets be honest those are the only two lenses to have in the EF-s range and wont cost more than £1200 for the pair which is a simple lens in L glass for a lot of lenses. Plus are so popular selling them is not a problem I see them selling privately for 80% of their value and even closer in shops so you wont loose a great deal on them.

For everything else the L lenses are perfect, 100mm macro giving 160mm 70-200mm giving 112-320mm. So when I bought my EF-s lenses this is how I thought and it has worked great for me. Now trading up to FF I only have to replace two lenses with full frame alternatives, but like them so much and keeping my ACP as a back up I may just keep them.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D!
« on: September 18, 2012, 07:52:39 PM »
I have just bought a 7D and have been very disappointed with the IQ from it. Much worse than my old 10mp 40D. Amazing camera but whats the point when the IQ is rubbish. So noisy where it counts 100-400ISO, very disappointed.

Do a like-for-like comparison and multiply the 10MP image by 1.8x and see which camera is best, you'll be surprised

Dude, there are so many people that don't get this it blows my mind. They just zoom to 100% in PS and start complaining, never stopping to think that 18 MP at 100% is higher magnification then 10 MP at 100%. Or worse, they zoom to 200% or 300% failing to realize that they are now testing their viewing software and not the cameras. This is the source of so much confusion and so many bad recommendations that it's not even funny.

There are people who honestly believe that diffraction and CA is worse with higher resolution cameras because they can't equalize their image sizes in PS. And there are people who will recommend a 40D over a 60D or 7D for the same reason.

Another comparison where this drives me nuts: 1D3 vs 7D. The 1D3 is a great camera, but the 7D has superior IQ across the board. Yet when the topic comes up: "Oh, my 1D3 shots are sooo smooth. Not like that noisy 7D." Yeah. Scale those shots up and see how soft and noisy they become.

Sorry, I don't mean to rant, but this hits one of my pet peeves.

I honestly didnt know this. Thank you for pointing it out. So basically to get a true comparison I need to photograph one subject with both cameras but with the 40D zoom to 180% to get the same magnification to accurately compare?

So really is it more accurate to view the 7D images at less than 100%?? Like 66%? Because at 100% they do look grainy at 100-400 especially. I have been more impressed by its higher ISO results than the 100-400ISO range.

I have been looking at 5DMKIII sample raws at staggering ISOs at 100% and the detail is phenomenal in comparison, 1600 (if not higher) is easily similar to 800 on the 7D. I no it is full frame and the 7D has higher pixel count but what is a true comparison? I was under the impression 100% is 100% and a viable comparison, all the quick reviews ive seen online do this like thecamerastoretv 5DMKIII and D800 although the D800 res is much higher.

Fairly silly post. Also about the 5DMKIII everyone who has used it pretty much describes it as the perfect camera and I have to agree. If you want a landscape studio camera without going full frame on a budget buy a D800... simples.

As for target market it was targeted truly at the only area where good money is made in photography! Events! It is a wedding photographers dream camera. Its also a great photojournalist tool.... and a great all rounder for everything.

The target market for the 6D is amateurs looking to upgrade to full frame. Simple. Whether they have achieved this is yet to be revealed! Please wait for reviews before bashing, its very easy to bash when you haven't touched the camera.

I love this fanboy BS. Every time a new announcement is made all I see negative comments, but the CEO should resign is a new one.... HAHA!

EOS Bodies / Re: Enough Full Frame Talk: Where are the 7D II Rumors?
« on: September 18, 2012, 08:06:22 AM »
How about they address noise throughout the range!! It is useable up to 1600 atm but 100-400 is absolutely dreadful! I was shocked when I saw how bad 100ISO is compared to the previous generation.

Maybe I was expecting too much, but I dont know why people are happy with this cameras IQ and noise performance at all. The older cameras might not have the bells and whistles of the 7D but the IQ was better not so much on the 50D but certainly on the 40D. I say bring the MP down to 15-16 and sort it out. Appalling.

Sorry for my rant now, I didn't want a 7D, I wanted to wait a little longer for the 5D MKIII to drop in price in the UK. But my old 40D broke so I replaced it for the mean time. Apart from the AF, FPS and screen I dont see any benefit of this camera over the older generation. It handles great but it is pointless without the IQ and the fact every APC camera in Canons line up is using this sensor... wow.

Still don't understand why people rave about this camera. Or am I missing something!???

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D!
« on: September 18, 2012, 07:00:48 AM »
I have just bought a 7D and have been very disappointed with the IQ from it. Much worse than my old 10mp 40D. Amazing camera but whats the point when the IQ is rubbish. So noisy where it counts 100-400ISO, very disappointed.

The new one better be better, but the 5D MKIII bests it in every way apart from 2fps so thats where im headed instead.

Canon General / Re: Loving Canon right now.
« on: September 18, 2012, 04:23:26 AM »
I will judge when we have an actual idea about how this camera works, as no one has picked it up and used it yet to review it. Until then you can argue the specs until your blue in the face.

Although a few people might be eating their words. This product isnt for me but doesn't mean its not for anyone else. A lot of people on here fancy themselves as pros but I wonder how many actually are.

You wont be able to compare the 5DMKII to the 6D because by the time it comes out it will have been discontinued. Anyone who makes money from photography doesn't buy used, as its a risk. Any down time means money lost, so the only cameras you can compare it to in Canons line up are the 5DMKIII and the 1DX.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS 6D sample images and video here
« on: September 17, 2012, 03:06:34 PM »
That D600 portrait is sharp!!! WOW! Looks like the 6D has locked onto the tip of the nose instead of the eye, although that area is sharp the Canon images have been resized? Whereas the Nikon ones are all full res?

The 6D video is stunning. I think it will be a great camera just not for the pros.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Official Specs
« on: September 17, 2012, 05:39:24 AM »
I think maybe people are asking a bit much.

Is the 6D designed to be a professional camera? I dont think so, although its product designation is quite confusing. But for the time being I think Canon will keep a full frame camera with its professional designation just to differentiate it from consumer crop cameras.

So really, I think of this as an XXD camera.

The 5DMKII was designed as a professional camera, and also its brother the 5DMKIII. Although the price has come down in Canons mind it is still a $3500 camera so releasing a new entry level camera at $2100 is acceptable. This will quickly reduce as the 5D MKIII's has.

Am I blown away no, am I angry no, am i disappointed... well a little but surprised no. I think it would have made sense to just use the parts bin to create a homologation of the 5DMKII and the 7D. But for an entry level camera this would be overkill and quickly kill the 5DMKIII although its what most people wanted. Also the complex AF is too much for people upgrading from XXXDs or XXDs, if anything the 11point will mean a seamless upgrade and the feel of the camera will not be too much of a change, and basically mean the photographer wont have to re-learn the skill. But heres hoping theres more than one cross type.

I am a photographer and am published in a lot of publications mostly newspapers. So I like crop, cheap cheerful and it works, basically have the privilege of printing on glorified toilet paper. So I was shooting on a 40D for a long time as I didn't like the newer cameras until the 7D. I only just bought a 7D a month ago as my second 40D died, and bought it because I am still waiting for the 5DMKIII to be where I want it to be in terms of price. So a 7D has filled in for now.

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.

So if we are real for a minute about the 6D.

The 5DMKII will be discontinued very quickly to give the 6D a chance. Therefore once the retail units are snapped up the only real affordable full frame option for most is the 6D, its specs are not bad. 11 points is enough for the amateur. This camera is not for you 'would-be' prosumer or pro photographers. So those with the XXXDs XXDs and 7D that want better IQ than the poor 18mp sensor (Canon dont seem to want to drop), the only path is the 6D.

Not everyone needs the AF spec and speed of the 7D and it is overkill for most. For portraits and landscape I would say manual focus is more popular for accurate focus, it is with me, especially with landscape as you have the time. Live view with the 10x view is very helpful. Or if AF is to be used, single point with centre point is my chosen focus path. So this is a great camera! If we ignore for a second the 5DMKII and the D600.

But then the 5DMKII and the D600 come back into the frame. If this is a camera that is to be aimed at the amateurs wanting the best IQ then the 5DMKII has more MP count and is known to be a great performer IQ wise (we wont know about the 6D for a few weeks) and the camera will handle basically the same as the camera they are upgrading from, so a duck to water. At the moment it is cheaper and widely available.

Then we have the D600, most amateurs will have some kind of brand loyalty but price and spec is everything to them the latest and greatest for the cheapest. Also how many have got a vast amount of money invested in lenses, so really its not a bad camera to switch to. Lets be fair although we dont like to admit it, Nikon are blowing the market out of the water atm and the D600 is a very compelling camera.

But the one thing canon has got going for it, its a pain to change. lenses are better and upgrading the body is simpler than changing systems. Also bodies are around what, 2-3 years? so even if it is not perfect some may still upgrade and have blinkers to the competition. It is more paramount for pros to have the best features as it could be the difference between being paid and not. But if we are talking amateurs just wanting to take pictures then not so much of an issue.

Then we get to price. It is double every APC body, near enough. It also needs all new lenses as EF-s or crop lenses wont work. The lenses are much more expensive, and cost/quality may be an issue as cheaper glass could result in poorer images than the older APC camera. But how many amateurs no this? Also no inbuilt flash, they are poor but useful for a quick portrait and you can get ok results with them. Now then will have to buy a $250+ flash and carry it around.

So this is pretty much grey area, the split between crop and FF has now shot them in the foot. Which is why I understand Nikon allowing adoption of crop lenses, although pointless in the grand scheme of things it does means they can have the new camera, without spending $3k with a lens. So really until the adoption of FF becomes more widely adopted this could be a success or a failure. We will have to see.

For the others that are pros or prosumers, the $600 is nothing extra to buy the 5DMKIII really. So the 5DMKIII is a really attractive purchase over the 6D and is where I am going I will order one in the next month or so.

70-200mm L 2.8 is a brilliant lens. If you need IS you could have a compromise by selling the 70-200mm and buying a 70-200mm MKI IS which will give you a better hit rate with the IS and buy a 5D MKIII and with its AF youll be sorted.

Only about £500 extra for MKI IS after selling a 70-200mm L 2.8. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Arrived
« on: September 14, 2012, 10:51:34 AM »
I just think IS is a value added option and is useful. Wouldn't have cost them much to incorporate it, seen as tho a lot of Canons lenses have IS. Also in 8 years when its ready to be replaced people will be desperate as every other lens will have it... so does this mean a sooner upgrade. I find it useful on my 17-55mm.

But really its not necessary I use a 70-200mm L 2.8 without IS and dont have any problems with it and it would benefit more at that range. But still for a £2200 lens bit of a skimp without it.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?
« on: September 14, 2012, 09:09:53 AM »
Why would it take SD when the 7D takes CF!? Seems a bit of an interesting choice...

Doesn't sound very promising IMO. Weather sealed, but 11 point AF so a new system there too along with a new sensor...

I think this one is a fake.

I expect the 7D/5DMKII homologation. Makes more sense, with the parts bin, and more value for the photographers.

Software & Accessories / Re: BG-E11 weight
« on: September 14, 2012, 08:05:28 AM »
Gym session....  ;)

Canon General / Re: Buy canon gear from the States (for Europe)
« on: September 13, 2012, 10:45:49 AM »
You could go to Guernsey or Jersey. Tax Haven and not £600 for a flight.

Put it this way all people outside Britain.

5DMKIII with the 24-105mm is £3,500 or $5,600 dollars in UK.

In America the same kit is $4,100 or £2800! For you yanks to understand that is $1500 or £700 more for the same camera.

Again with the 24-70 MKII £2,200 or $3500!!!
In america it is $2,300 or £1426 an £800 saving. Much more than 20% import tax.

In america you could buy a 5DMKIII with a 24-70MKII for the same price as the 5DMKIII with the 24-105mm lens kit over in the UK!!!


I dont care who you are but those savings are huge savings. Would take what an extra couple of months to afford?

It makes complete sense with the money you save you could have a week in NYC or which ever city of choice. Its sad but if your going over to America and are a photographer its what happens, as I would prefer to buy things in the UK but the prices are just stupid in comparison.

The chances of being stopped at customs for a camera are very very low. Could you imagine if they stopped everyone for electronics? I brought this iPad for the journey with my iPod and iPhone... macbook... camera... never happens.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D: Buy now or wait?
« on: September 12, 2012, 07:26:18 PM »
Well I did just that. My 40D took a turn for the worst so needed something to fill untill I can get hold of a 5DMKIII. So I got one a year old under 10k shots for £750. Have to say the camera is incredible, everything is great but...

and its a big BUT! The IQ and noise are horrible in the places you don't expect. In fact I am impressed how good the ISO performance is over 1600 (as the 40D was unusable over 1600) but up to 800 it is horrible! 100-400 really really disappointing, especially 100!!! Coming from a 40D it was much cleaner, its still working to make a comparison and shot two side by side and the 7D is worse, noticeably worce. The DR has no difference either... so where it counts it was disappointing, and i was expecting it to be better especialy DR i thought the IQ would be similar. Everywhere else it is an awesome camera the AF system makes the camera useful for everything and the 8fps is great too, but now after 2 weeks im thinking of just selling and biting the bullet for the 5D MKIII and converting FF.

On my 40D I didnt use any NR at ISO100, on the 7D im using 5-10 on the slider and loosing detail. The NR is set to standard too. Its ridiculous, I was using 5-15 for 400-640 on the 40D.

Maybe I was expecting too much but was a bit disappointed. Not just my cam either have tested two to make sure its not just mine.

Is this normal from you other 7D owners. I hate dissing this camera as im a true canon guy, and ive heard great things about the 7D.I remember hearing another member being upset about the ISO100 performance and thinking he must be mad. But I really feel strongly on this one.

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 37