Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II

« on: Today at 04:45:23 AM »

So, everyone should carry more weight just for those who want a flash? I don't think so. I would like to see a
radio trigger inside and everyone could easily go out with a 90EX if he wants to. Normally never the build in flash
saved a picture for me, because frontal white light always looked like a compromise to me. On sunny days with
backlight you can maybe have some advantage. If the flash could be turned to the side or upwise I would try it
again.

Come on, does a built in flash really add much weight and bulk? I estimate the pop up flash of my 7D to weigh about 20 grams max. Canon presumably bases a camera's feature set on what it perceives the general target audience for the camera will want, you're never going to please everybody. Just as some people object to having video capability in an DSLR. Saying the built in flash never saved a picture for you doesn't make it apply to everybody else.

2

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Coming in July? [CR2]

« on: May 22, 2013, 06:20:27 AM »

Bleh. I'm sure the 70D will be a cool camera for the advanced soccer moms, but how about releasing some stuff that people are actually waiting for?

Yeah, it's only 'soccer moms' that use the 60D isn't it? Nobody is waiting for the 70D at all.

3

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II

« on: May 17, 2013, 05:12:05 AM »

I'm thinking that the 70D and 7D2 will be too-little-too-late.

Because historically Nikon never trailed Canon did they? They never had to catch up with anybody else?

I'm so tired of all this 'Canon are entering the graveyard spiral' stuff. What you actually mean is 'it will be too little too late - FOR YOU'. Not everybody. Canon may fail, or they may not. But neither you or I can make those kind of statements with any certainty.

4

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Review - Real World

« on: May 15, 2013, 06:52:26 AM »

I have had the 6D for a few months now. Everything about it in the review is true. I haven't used the 7D before. Instead I came from the 60D. I find the AF spread deficient. I thought I would be okay with it if it worked similar to my 60D. But the focus points don't spread out as evenly due to it being a larger sensor. I dont shoot sports but it's a pain shooting kids when they move a lot. I'm learning to live with this. But if you come from 7D, I'm afraid it'll be harder for you to adapt. I'm actually thinking of getting a used 7D as a secondary camera so that I could use the 10-22efs plus take advantage of the crop factor in certain situations.

Sorry, perhaps my previous post did not make it clear, I already own the 7D so to go full frame but to keep the performance of the 7D the 5DIII would be the obvious upgrade. The issue is cost- the 5DIII is double the price of the 7D in the UK! Therefore keeping the 7D for performance and getting a 6D for landscapes and the general FF benefits may be a better bet for me.

5

Lenses / Re: Andy Rouse Reviews the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x

« on: May 15, 2013, 05:40:22 AM »

In my own experience, I couldn't believe how much better the build of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is over my 70-200 f4 IS - made me realize that there was more to the extra cost than just a tripod mount and an extra stop.

I'm curious, what are the main differences between the build of the 2.8 IS II and the f4 IS in your opinion? I own the f4 IS and it's probably the best made lens I have- no complaints from me.

6

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Review - Real World

« on: May 15, 2013, 05:06:55 AM »

More and more users keep reporting how much they enjoy and are satisfied by the 6D.

It just goes to show how an excellent camera cannot be seen beyond its specs by the spec sheet nazis who wanted to leave Canon as soon as it was announced.

How true. I'd like to upgrade to the 5DIII from a 7D but it's just too expensive for me at the moment. There are times when I'd miss the 7D's performance if I went to a 6D, but maybe keeping the 7D and getting a 6D as well would give me the best of both worlds. Certainly the 6D should be a fine landscape camera, which is what I do most!

7

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 13, 2013, 10:02:16 AM »

A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

I absolutely agree with this statement, as I'm sure most would. The problem comes when you seem to suggest that with skill, creativity or by sheer will you can use any camera to 'get the shot', whatever that may be. But there are so many instances where this is just not the case- high resolution macro work, deep space long exposures such as the Hubble space telescope, fast moving small targets. You could make some sort of shot, but would it be any good?

8

Lenses / Re: 17-40 f4 L discontinued???????

« on: May 13, 2013, 05:43:11 AM »

It is possible they will update date it, but NO ONE is clamoring for a better performing 17-40.

I don't entirely agree with this, the 17-40's inferior corner performance at wider focal lengths and apertures is fairly well known, so if Canon could improve the performance, I for one would be interested. A possible 14-24 2.8 is of lesser interest to me if it means it does not have a screw on filter thread, as is the 16-35 2.8 as I mainly use the lens stopped down a bit for landscapes. The current 17-40 is a nice lightweight and relatively compact sealed lens, which is good for e.g hiking outdoors and travelling light!

9

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

« on: May 10, 2013, 09:02:44 AM »

RL, in it's simplest form your kit must be sufficient to perform for the application for which you intend for it. To that end, as an example, how would you ever get a single usable shot of a bird or aircraft in flight using a pinhole camera? Your new profile picture shows you using something that looks like a 200 F2, so to some degree, you must think your gear matters, unless it's to look professional, and I mean no offence by that.

10

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon are you listening?

« on: May 01, 2013, 08:51:12 AM »

Oh, they're listening.

Canon announces the 7D Mark II
  • 19 megapixels
  • 21 AF points (all cross type)
  • 8.5 fps
  • Dual Digic 6
  • ISO range 100-25600 (expandable to 51200)
  • Extremely low image noise*

* low noise mode is JPG only and output is a 5 MP image

See, they listen well!

Neuro, is this an announcement that I have not yet been privy to?!

11

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon are you listening?

« on: May 01, 2013, 08:40:22 AM »

......And whatever happens, it must definitely have more DR. Anything and everything else is of lesser importance. 

12

EOS Bodies / Re: Bye Canon?

« on: April 30, 2013, 07:44:28 AM »

you are so funny..... really,really.... the things that are important to me:

1. DR ( and yes those 3 extra stops make the difference)
2. Resolution. In what i do (commercial,product) size matters ( like in other cases  )

let me put it this way.... why the top Pro photographers shoot only with Hassyes and MF cameras  

Emphasis on your words 'IN WHAT I DO'. That doesn't encompass everbody. I don't see many pros using MF and Hasselblad at sports events. Correct tools for the job etc.

13

Lenses / Re: Lens sharpness and distance from subject

« on: April 29, 2013, 05:33:17 AM »

It does. Use a lens at 1m, then at infinity - it is a different lens really. I have noticed this with my 17-55 - much better at 2-3m than at infinity.

Many people test lenses at close distances and make far reaching conclusions; and this is wrong.

This is a very good point, and not one I've seen covered in any depth on most review sites I've come across- anybody know any review sites where this is considered with more than a passing comment?

14

EOS Bodies / Re: 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]

« on: April 25, 2013, 09:56:55 AM »

I have both lens optical layout on my blog. I have used both lenses and the 10-22 is by no means "worthless crap".
http://zeebytes.blogspot.jp/2012/12/glassware-canon-10-22mm-f35-45-and-17.html?m=1

That looks like an interesting article Zv, I will take a better look when I have more time. Here is arguably my best image with the 7D and EF-S 10-22, not full size as the file is too big. Viewed at 100% (original file) the limitations of the lens are apparent but I wouldn't have got this shot without the ultrawide.

15

EOS Bodies / Re: 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]

« on: April 25, 2013, 04:56:25 AM »

Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive.

jrista, from an old Canon lens brochure I have, it appears to me (and I stand to be corrected) that the EF-S 10-22 optical layout is not that dissimilar to the 17-40L (complete with SUD and aspherical elements), apart from smaller elements, presumably for the reduced image circle.

(*-by this, I mean ultra wide on crop)