April 18, 2014, 11:29:05 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 - dlleno

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 38
286
thanks RustyTheGeek that is really good to know

287
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 05, 2012, 01:40:25 PM »
Granted, dileno, I should have said "my experience," rather than "the facts." That said, the concern I see here about the screen being ripped off while chasing a moose in heavy brush or taken out by an errant elbow in a crowd (I've used my T3i in both situations) fails to recognize that in those instances you can merely flip the screen back on itself and fold it into the camera body so that it looks and behaves exactly like the fixed screen on a 7D or 5D.

In short, flip-screens add moving parts, are less weatherproof, and when protruded can increase the possibility of damage. But, the design is well engineered and has survived the test-of-time, at least in my experience. I've never had to send my T3i in for repair. I've never had a weather-related issue, although I am careful about using shower caps and such to keep things dry. And the protrusion issue is easily solved by flipping the screen around and folding it into the body. Hence, there is much utility and convenience to be gained by the flip for self-timers, low-angle macro, high-angle crowd shots, and even the occasional hold-the-camera-out-on-the-end-of-the-tripod-and-shoot-with-a-wireless-remote shots.

I'm not suggesting that the flip-screen doesn't have downsides, just that they're overblown. Or more simply, I find the pros well outweigh the cons. That's why I am hoping that the 7DII, with all of its hoped for improvements, includes a flip-screen.

no argument here, especially for occasional wildlife adventures and general purpose photography in good weather or indoors. in fact, should Canon target the 7D2 toards that market i suspect it will have the screen.  Its the serious outdoor wildlife 'togs that are not likely to to reach for the 7D2 if it has the screen because it won't be up to the weather sealing standards of those who chase moose regularly in the rain, and the ergonomic consequences of having it there (but not using it) are unsavory. 

time will tell where the 7D2 is positioned, i.e. if it is closer to being a 1D4 successor or simply the flagship crop  body with better specs than the 70D. 

As for the crop bodies winning the IQ contest in focal length limited scenarios (for larger prints especially), I suppose there is even a point of diminishing returns at very long subject distances (and very long focal lengths) where the "reach" advantage starts to erode due to environmental/atmospheric conditions.  To the extent this is true,  Canon is probably optimizing both IQ and their profits to move the pro 'togs to FF and longer glass (while abandoning the 'H' sensor), and positioning the crop 'reach' cameras for mortals who can't afford the longer glass.  This puts the "reach" debate in terms of "focal length" limits rather than "distance" limits, as neuro has done.   Thus,  when the glass budget is unlimited, the scenarios where the crop sensor produces better IQ than the FF sensors are few. 

288
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 05, 2012, 11:30:14 AM »
I do understand well that some of the consumer can afford more than one camera body. Each one for a different use, but not all of us can. For those who can purchase only one camera that one should have as much features as possible. If some shoot only sports, well just don't need that flip screen. If somebody is just taking pictures at the birthdayparty, than he just is ok with a xxxD. But if you find interest in shooting many different things you want a camera that offers all the needed featurs like flip screen, fast shooting, fast af and so on.
That camera would be the right one for me, because i can only buy one an not 2 more as a back up.

you're not the only one.    For example, some will buy the 7D2 even if it has an articulating screen if they are not likely to hike through the brush during the rain chasing moose.  Those who stand shoulder to shoulder in a crowd using a monopod, worried about that screen getting bumped by a flying elbow, may think differently.

And Miah your experience is important, to be sure; I just wouldn't go quite as far as saying that your assesment is factual for all wildlife/action 'togs.  I'm sure there are a number of situations where the 1D4 and 1DX would wink and smile where the xxD and Rebels would die.   

In the end,  Canon's marketing research has to describe the  target the market that will make them money, and then go after it.  Some will be closer to the target audience than others.   I'm reminded of Canons announcement that 1D and 1Ds would merge into the 1DX, and all the speculating around Canon abandoning the 1D4 market.

289
EOS Bodies / Re: April 2013 firmware update for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: December 05, 2012, 12:28:14 AM »

290
EOS Bodies / Re: April 2013 firmware update for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: December 04, 2012, 04:38:01 PM »
maybe they will include other goodies too, like 6fps with less than 50% battery and support for the AF assist beam when using flash in low light. 

291
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body is $2999 Most Places
« on: December 04, 2012, 01:43:57 PM »
... Those who paid the early adopter price weren't milked by anyone.  Those who bought it early made the calculation that it was worth paying extra to have the camera 8 months earlier rather than 8 months earlier.  If the camera didn't deliver good value for them at $3,500, they would not have bought it.  You can call it "grossly overpriced" but the camera market seems to be very competitive, with plenty of alternatives at many price levels.  If photographers are willing to pay a higher price for a particular camera, then it is worth that price to them at that time.  Canon is a business, not a photographers' aid society, so they're allowed to make a big profit if they deliver something highly desirable to their customers.  Sure, people have a right to complaint about anyone's pricing.  But with the number of the businesses making a big profit in the world, such complaining can become a full-time occupation.

+1 its funny folks forget that Canon is free to charge whateve they want and customers are free to choose whether or not they want to pay it.  The consequences of anything different are rather unsavory...
Yes, and keep in mind that they don't make any profit on the first batch of cameras, no matter how much they charge.  I'm guessing that before a camera like the 5DIII is released, there are several years' worth of research and development by a very advanced work force.  There is likely a huge "money suck" of salaries, benefits, facilities, taxes, etc., before the 5DIII earns any money.  Once the camera is released, they have to sell quite a lot of them to even break even on their investment.  So whether the camera is priced $3,500 or $3,000 initially, they are probably not making any profit at that point, just recouping a very substantial investment.  I'm just guessing, of course, and I have no idea whether or why Nikon would do things any differently.

certainly there is an intial investment that Canon amortizes across the expected life to produce x amount of profit over time. I'm sure that is carefully modeled and my guess is that the 5D3 project was approved under that (and other) scrutiny.  Whether the financial models  include a high into price or not I don't know, but I suspect so.  If they  made a few hundred more on the first few thousand units that would be money in the bank, to be sure. 

292
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 04, 2012, 01:33:57 PM »
Sad_Dave:  see?  there are important reasons behind the comments and speculations here.  Generally, the ones who expect all features on one camera are without a firm grasp of tradeoffs, target markets and cost consequences. 

as far as the discussion itself goes, -  A wildlife camera should be optimized for the environments it is expected to be used-- outdoors in less than ideal conditions.  It should not be have the ability to place a portion of its hardware in a mechanically  vulnerable position, increasing chance of equipment failure in enviroments more hostile, for example,  than an indoor birthday party.  Moreover, a wildlife/action 'tog is not likely to appreciate the cost, durability, weather sealing,  and ergonomic consequences of having such a screen but  simply avoiding its use.   

That said, the general purpose consumer who wants to chronicle family events, adding  a few cool portaits, landscapes, and macros along the way, would likely be happy with a general purpose camera with an articulating screen, especially if there is no desire to chase moose in the snow. 

I do acknowledge (and even suspect) that if Canon strengthens the wildlife/sports orientation of the 7D even further in the 7D2, and perhaps even produces a worthy successor to the 1D4, that there will be some disspointed consumers who want the status of a single digit camera with the consumer features of the xxD

293
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body is $2999 Most Places
« on: December 04, 2012, 09:02:53 AM »
... Those who paid the early adopter price weren't milked by anyone.  Those who bought it early made the calculation that it was worth paying extra to have the camera 8 months earlier rather than 8 months earlier.  If the camera didn't deliver good value for them at $3,500, they would not have bought it.  You can call it "grossly overpriced" but the camera market seems to be very competitive, with plenty of alternatives at many price levels.  If photographers are willing to pay a higher price for a particular camera, then it is worth that price to them at that time.  Canon is a business, not a photographers' aid society, so they're allowed to make a big profit if they deliver something highly desirable to their customers.  Sure, people have a right to complaint about anyone's pricing.  But with the number of the businesses making a big profit in the world, such complaining can become a full-time occupation.

+1 its funny folks forget that Canon is free to charge whateve they want and customers are free to choose whether or not they want to pay it.  The consequences of anything different are rather unsavory...

294
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body is $2999 Most Places
« on: December 03, 2012, 01:50:34 PM »
...and now if they would just support the AF assist beam in low light with flash.  maybe the promised firmware...

295
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body is $2999 Most Places
« on: December 03, 2012, 12:56:50 PM »
It looks like the lawyers have figured out a way to skirt the terms of MMAP pricing. :)

reminds me of a particular retailer site (name escapes me at the moment).  They explained on their site that clicking the "show me the price"  button was equivalent to walking into a camera store, seeing the retail price listed on the shelf, and then asking the salesman about the price they would sell it for!  It is funny that Adorama and B&H both reveal the lower the price in the cart -- and for the first time in a long time these two retailers do not agree in price down to the penny :D 

At the moment, Adorama is $2990.00.  Norman does the same thing (posts a different price in the cart) but is $3299.00

296
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 03, 2012, 12:36:20 PM »
I don't understand all of this argueing and guessing what one needs on the camera.
A flip screen is fine in some situations, so why shoudn't we have it? Other cameras have it.
A build in flash shure, why not? Nikon has it too.
Wifi sounds nice just like GPS so give it to us.
Low noise at high iso is not a question for nikon, canon had allways some problems wit that.
If someone is using it or not is just an idivuduel thing.
Why should a Canon camera have not all the same features like an nikon or sony. To be the best camera on the market it has to have even more than that. Let everyone decied what buildin features they want to use but to make a choise you got to have in the first place.
The price should be as low posible so a lot of people can get one and canon will make some profit there.

This is a rumor site.  There is signal and there is noise;  there is arguing and there is guessing -- thats what we do here. With the exception of the occasional troll,  the vigorous discussion is fueled  in part by speculation regarding how the camera is positioned, i.e. what feature set will be important to the targeted audience and what tradeoffs will be made and how that will affect the end user.  Most here understand the specialization that has to happen and that it not just as simple as "give us everything".   

For example, flip screens and pop-up flash are pretty individual things with their own tradeoffs like weather sealing, ergonomics and ultimate durability in the field.  Being a rumors forum, folks here naturally discuss what they anticipate in the camera, esp what would please or disapoint. 

297
BTW -- I received this statement from from Canon sales/product support, when I asked specifically about the 5D3 utilization of the flash AF asssist, and if the 6D suffered from the same malady:

"... the camera does support the AF Assist Beam from the flash, so the EOS 6D should work the same as well."

interesting...

298
Landscape / Re: Help Me Get Better - Crashing Waves - Round 2
« on: November 28, 2012, 10:46:01 AM »
love the 10-22.  just to lighten up the mood, here is a wave that hasn't crashed yet lol.  taken with the 10-22 REAL close.  no underwater housing.  camera moving with the wave firing away at 6fps.  I got drenched but the camera didn't :D

Wow!
Just wonder why do you have so much magenta in the left upper corner, is that color fringe or famous red noise, which may be the case because the same thing you can see on the lower right in the dark parts of the water with no contrast.
In case if this was produced by the 10-22 lens, you probably have a bad copy.

well, now you have me doubting that this was in fact the 10-22;   the no contrast in the water could be flare, and this could have been the 17-55, although the color fringing at the top of the wave is characteristic 10-22. 

as for the magenta itself, I suspect that is an artifact of heavy pp;  probably pushed the red sat slider too far. the colors were pretty wacked in post, so that the wave didn't appear too green and poluted :D

 :)
Depth of field seems bit to shallow to, you know, I have taped the focusing ring on that lens and using as fixed focus most of the time!
It has enough depth for regular landscaping work even at f5.6, the only problem is when I have to, very rarely zoom in, it needs small correction to the focus.

yes, I had the CP on, and now I think this was taken with the 17-55.  my apologies for drifting the thread here.  also -- part of the reason the foreground is not sharp is due to motion blur --  the camera was held at about a foot from the water surface in front of the wave,  without me looking through the viewfinder, and moving rapidly in many vectors to pace the incoming wave.  at the last moment I stuck the camera into the air and took the wave, which was probably only 3 feet high, I would say.  I think the lack of contrast is partially due to lens flare, and the magenta cast is partially because red has been pushed to bring out the sand, which was only a few inches below the water surface. 

I just put this photo up for fun.  please continue with the OP's inquiry, and discuss the other related shots

299
Landscape / Re: Help Me Get Better - Crashing Waves - Round 2
« on: November 27, 2012, 11:37:24 PM »
love the 10-22.  just to lighten up the mood, here is a wave that hasn't crashed yet lol.  taken with the 10-22 REAL close.  no underwater housing.  camera moving with the wave firing away at 6fps.  I got drenched but the camera didn't :D

Wow!
Just wonder why do you have so much magenta in the left upper corner, is that color fringe or famous red noise, which may be the case because the same thing you can see on the lower right in the dark parts of the water with no contrast.
In case if this was produced by the 10-22 lens, you probably have a bad copy.

well, now you have me doubting that this was in fact the 10-22;   the no contrast in the water could be flare, and this could have been the 17-55, although the color fringing at the top of the wave is characteristic 10-22. 

as for the magenta itself, I suspect that is an artifact of heavy pp;  probably pushed the red sat slider too far. the colors were pretty wacked in post, so that the wave didn't appear too green and poluted :D

300
Landscape / Re: Help Me Get Better - Crashing Waves - Round 2
« on: November 27, 2012, 08:48:17 PM »
love the 10-22.  just to lighten up the mood, here is a wave that hasn't crashed yet lol.  taken with the 10-22 REAL close.  no underwater housing.  camera moving with the wave firing away at 6fps.  I got drenched but the camera didn't :D


Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 38