November 29, 2014, 01:40:55 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 - dlleno

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 41
331
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...

332
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...

333
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

334
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. 

335
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...

336
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

337
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

338
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


339
Great start!  I really hope that Mike the product expert can do more than just provide an SME presence on the forum to assist with understanding and using the equipment.  He needs to be able to influence or at least inform the individuals that can apply resources to address this issue, and not just talk about it.

340
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible positive 6D surprise? Should I wait?
« on: November 27, 2012, 12:00:45 PM »

I think it's fairly clear Canon had a specific type of photography/photographer in mind when they designed this system.  Namely people who don't shoot many fast moving subjects, but need to focus in all kinds of light.  Portrait and landscape are of course two that come to mind.  If you look at it from the perspective of that type of photographer, the -3EV center cross-type should be outstanding and clearly an upgrade from the 60D/650D, since the other points almost don't need to be there (even on the 5D3 the most precise points are in the center).  The sports/action/wildlife photographer is right to say this system is unlikely to be good for them - and get a 7D or 5D3.  I realize this isn't what a lot of people were hoping it would be, but for some this may be just what they needed (without the expense of the 5D3).
..

Some good points here.  6D looks to be very 40D like in that regard --  aimed at center-AF dominant work:  "grab focus;  then frame".  Whats interesting to me is that, while the -3EV center point on the 6D is attractive, to be sure, all the other points are +.5EV sensitive, which means the moment you pick a different focus point, the 5D3 clearly wins AF sensitivity by 2.5 stops . 

341
EOS Bodies / Re: Where the heck is the 70D or 7D mkII?
« on: November 09, 2012, 04:17:08 PM »
getting back to the original topic:  I suspect one reason we haven't heard more about the 7D2 is that Canon is trying to protect holiday sales, and may announce something soon into 2013.  They've telegraphed the big MP FF (to keep people from jumping to Nikon I suppose) but they have not telegraphed anything re:  the 7D2

342
EOS Bodies / Re: Where the heck is the 70D or 7D mkII?
« on: November 08, 2012, 06:43:16 PM »
on that topic, what if the FF 46mp monster and the new 7D2 crop sensor are based on the same process?

I bet it is :)

and the natives are restless for want of information!

343
EOS Bodies / Re: Where the heck is the 70D or 7D mkII?
« on: November 08, 2012, 06:13:26 PM »
... I have my doubts that Canon can get anything more out of the current 500nm process.  I suspect that any significant improvement in Canon's APS-C sensors would require a move to a newer process.
I have my doubts that we will see anything being announced before February or March next year, so we probably still have a while to wait before we see Canon play its hand.

What I suspect would be a likely approach from Canon is to move its APS-C sensors to a new process - possibly next year, while it carries on using the 500nm process for full frame for another 3 years or so, until the 1DX and 5DIII are replaced.  That would probably be done in order to achieve the required manufacturing costs.

That theory does square, in my opinion, with the fact that 7D2 rumors are quiet, while the 7D1 ages mercilessly, and yet Canon has already introduced a new crop sensor in the t4i.  What will be interesting to see, should this come to pass, is what IQ level can be acheived, how it compares with the current FF lineup, and what we might learn (by implication) regarding what Canon's future acheivements in future FF sensors.

on that topic, what if the FF 46mp monster and the new 7D2 crop sensor are based on the same process?

344
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Would I benefit from going full frame?
« on: November 08, 2012, 04:15:44 PM »
my 17-40 on full frame is inferior to the EF-S 10-22 on crop.

My experience too. Is that what others have found, or did I have a bad copy or didn't spend enough time with the setup?

I'm thinking thats why God inspired Canon to invent the 16-35 II :D :D

on a related note:  with the recent introduction of the 24-70 F/4 L IS, at $350 more than the 24-105 f/4 L IS, I wonder if the latter is due for an update and price increase

345
To me the picture is a big deal because there arn't very many other ways to get such a dramatic capture.  Cost aside -- from requests to the pilot (lets go over there, no up higher, now over here.  try 500 more feet ... ahh thats it...) and strapping himself in dealing with the cold and the 1% keep rate, it all shows what one has to do to get shots like this. 

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 41