April 17, 2014, 09:51:05 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 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 38
361
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2012, 02:16:23 PM »
My real question concerning C or H sensor is how many people on here are actually using a 7D with ef-s lens'?  How many people spend that much on a camera, that much more for a 7D II upgrade and then puts $300 glass on it.  Make it a pro crop camera!  C or H, but actually make it a pro price point for the technology to separate it from all of the T series and xxD series cameras!

5D II, 7D, 70-200, L 24-70 L, 16-35 L, and a bunch more

You might want to look up the prices of two important EF-S lenses that provide key capabilities ,found in no other lenses,  for APS-C bodies at high IQ levels. 

an APS-C camera, as a 2nd body for pros and a primary body for prosumers, will be served well by the top EF-S lenses at those focal lengths.  if the camera is a 2nd body or used exclusively for its reach, then thoses S lenses do not have to be mounted up.   

An H camera would be a niche for BIFers for whom the S lenses would provide no benefit anyway, even if they did fit.

362
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2012, 09:00:22 AM »
That's been hashed out here several times in the past, & unfortunately the conclusion is that anything bigger than a 10D mirror will whack into the rear element of an EF-S lens.


yea, and I just don't see the S factor as significant or important in the H discusssions.  If Canon produces another H body, a lot of folks will have to seek therapy but such such a camera imho would target a segment that won't care about S lenses.

363
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 22, 2012, 10:06:27 PM »
The reason that APS-H BIF body discussions go haywire is because they usually contain references to the numeral 7, and that brings all sorts of philosophical musings that don't address the issue, namely "what body does canon expect the BIF togs to use?" 

whatever technology is available in 'C' is also available in 'H' with a corresponding set of well known advantages to the larger pixel pitch.  Whats  compelling to me is the hole in Canon's current line-up -- the BIF/Wildlife optimized body.  The 1Dx does everything except the reach part, and yea I totally get that BIFers are the ones who will take the AF performance hit for the ability to AF at all at f/8 -- so I do see room for a 1D4 successor, as long as we can keep the numeral 7 from coloring those discussions.  Call the body whatever you want, or make it a C or an H; doesn't matter. 

I suspect, however, that if Canon produces another H body, it will of such a price point and specialty niche that no one will care about putting an S lens on it, and there will still be room for a 7D2 in 'C' form.  Frankly I agree with those hoping that a new and disruptive "C" sensor is forthcoming and that the 2nd or BIF body will be the king of crops named the 7D2.  To do that, however, such a camera would have to produce convincingly better IQ than cropping a 5D3 or a 1Dx image to the same FOV.   who knows, maybe the BIF 2nd body will be mirrorless.

364
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 22, 2012, 12:56:40 PM »
APS-H Please! :D

On the 7D, APS-H would ONLY be acceptable if it was accompanied by a versatile APS-C crop mode that worked properly with all EF-S lenses.

no argument there, if 7D2 is aimed at approximately the same market as 7D.  Unfortunately, an APS-C crop mode would not be capable of reducing the size of the mirror, a dimmentional challenge that limits the possibility of using the short-back focus lenses with the larger "H" sensor. I haven't seen any evidence that such a challenge can be overcome. It maybe possible I don't know - I just haven't seen evidence or desire on Canon's part to do it.  I'm aware that some have even modified the EF-S 10-22mm lens for use on a FF (at 10mm the mirror strikes the lens).     so maybe it can be done I dont know. 

maybe the body could operate in some sort of mirrorless mode to use the S lenses, but I dont' see that catching on either.

The biggest benefit, to me, of a crop mode is to reduce the size of the data transfer to increase fps, which is not necessary in the 7D world because of the dual processor and moderate pixel count.  There is no IQ advantage that I can think of -- throwing away pixels is easy enough to do in post.

Assuming that the mechanical challenge can be overcome, the point of a crop mode on such a camera would be to hide the imperfections outside of the image circle of the "S" lenses.  Some sort of auto-detect would be necessary, along with a dual mount capability with the white index mark that we have today.  That part is certainly doable. it just doesn't seem likely to me, that Canon would do this, as it would be too expensive for the market that depends on the S lenses.

Quote
Personally, I would prefer if APS-H was left to a higher-end body, preferably equipped with a multi-point f/8 AF sensor. ;)

yea, and without APS-C mode :D  which this segment would not care about.  The question that still bugs me is "what is the 2nd body that Canon expects the pro wildlife togs to carry"?  These are the togs most likely to appreciate a 2x converter on a 600mm f/4, and would be more likely to accept the AF consequences just to "get the reach" -- and they are not to concerned about the UWA capability on a 2nd body optimized for wildlife.   

365
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 21, 2012, 12:10:30 PM »
yea, and the 5d3 AF ,by itself, is no slouch and a reasonably capable sports body in its own right.   to avoid being a yawn, 7d2 will have to improve upon the 7D in a way similar to the 5D3/5D2.
If the 7Dmk2 is going to relate to the 5Dmk3 as the 7D classic related to the 5Dmk2, they will have to do some remarkable improvements to its "sports capabilities" (as the 5Dmk3 is a significant improvement over the 5Dmk2 in this respect). I dont see how they could do that without throwing in some new, exciting technology (similar to what they did with the on-sensor PDAF of the 650D).

On the other hand, Canon (and Nikon) seems to be reshuffling line-ups all over, so perhaps the 7Dmk2 will instead be targeted at landscape and macro photographers? :-)

-h

I believe 7D2 will be more related to 1DX as a action/sports/wildlife camera rather the 5D3. I believe the 70D will be related to the 5D3.

In the past were: 1DS3 - flagship; 1D4 ( pro body for sports and action) 5D2 as all around affordable FF.

Now we have: 1Dx - flagship; 5D3 as all around  FF, and the APS-C bodies.

It's missing something. The missing link may be a big MP body dedicated to studio/landscapes or a sports/wildlife camera with a lower price than the flagship.
Who knows maybe we will see both  ;)

exactly. I'd suggest that both are missing links:   The Big MP body-almost-medium-format-answer-to-the-D800 may be the 6D.  the sports camera with a lower price than the flagship is more difficult to figure out because of what Canon did to the 1D4.   

The 1Dx embodied the stated changes in Canon's strategy,  which was to merge the 1D and 1Ds lines.  And merge they did -- the 1Dx has best sports/wildlife capabilities and IQ combination to date.  But it is missing one feature:  Reach.  A sports/wildlife camera with a lower price than the flagship would, imho, be either of these two possibilities:

1.  If Canon expects the sports togs to carry a 2nd body, it would essentially be a 1D4 successor -- a king of the crops, and something capable of putting "more pixels on the image" to produce convincingly better IQ than cropping the best FF output for the equivalent FOV .  We've hashed this ad nausium, but imho Canon can't do that with today's "C" sensors.  It would have to be an H or some new and distruptive C sensor that no one has yet even rumored about

2.  If Canon expects the sports togs to "do without the reach", and carry two 1Dx bodies, then in this case the bar is lower and the "sports/wildlife camera with a price tag lower than the flagship"  is a prosumer APS-C,  highly capable sports body with only a small improvement in IQ compared to cropping a FF for equivalent FOV. They could even use the T4i sensor,  which of course would be a big yawn.   

366
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 11:38:29 PM »
No way that's going to happen, 7D would be better than 5D3 in specs but without FF sensor.
But if it so, definitely going to upgrade.

Well, the 7D was better than the 5D2 except for its sensor. No reason the 7D2 couldn't be better than the 5D3 in the same way.
I can only imagine the only thing it will be better at is FPS and possibly tracking...Maybe give it 1dx af system but with fewer points. Else, it won't touch a 5dm3 in my opinion but then we shall see.

yea, and the 5d3 AF ,by itself, is no slouch and a reasonably capable sports body in its own right.   to avoid being a yawn, 7d2 will have to improve upon the 7D in a way similar to the 5D3/5D2. theres no way, imho, Canon can meet the rumored specs in this thread without an H sensor... oh dear did I just open that can again?

367
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 04:35:54 PM »
I got nothin to say till its at least CR2.

like :D

368
EOS Bodies / Re: review the 5D3 reviews
« on: August 20, 2012, 12:44:08 PM »
good point -- had they downplayed the in-camera raw conversion, assuming that RAW shooters won't care, it would not have been a complete review.  They did make it clear what folks need to be aware of.

on the topic of the 5D3 itself, it will be interesting to see if Canon addresses the jpg conversion and video IQ

369
EOS Bodies / review the 5D3 reviews
« on: August 20, 2012, 11:56:51 AM »
sorry if this has already been hashed -- feel free to point to those threads.  Whats your vote for the most objective and useful 5D3 review, and which reviews do you find less useful than others? 

For example, in reading the dpreview piece, I came away wondering why the in-camera jpg conversion was given so much attention as a negative, or "con".  Generally I wouldn't expect users of a $3500 camera body to depend that much on in-camera jpg conversion, but maybe its just me --  it doesn't seem all that critical to me:  Interesting and important to know, to be sure, but just not critical. 

 I used to shoot raw+jpg, using the jpgs as proofs and to help me identify the keepers  but then I discovered the CR2 conversion plug-in for Windows Photo Viewer and now I don't depend on my camera to produce jpgs at all. 

370
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 11:05:50 AM »
Maybe it's the Sony 24MP APS-C sensor  ;D

Or it's rumored by Sony:
1. Start making people dream about 24MP APS-C from Canon
2. Wait for Canon making people dissapointed
3. Advertising: "Come to daddy..."

 ;D

thats hilarious, and maybe even true, lol!   after all, this is a CR1 rumor and no more credible than those before it. I suspect the purpose is to keep the flame alive. 

That said,  the content in this one for the first time mentions noise with an oblique reference to the shortcomings of the 7D in that regard.  Its as if someone is reading the forums and putting stuff out there known to generate lots of activity :D

Anyway unless Canon really strikes with a new and disruptive "C" sensor technology  there's seriously no way these rumored specs will come to life without going to an H sensor, which of course re-hashes all the same chatter again on that topic, for example how horrible it would be to force 7D upgraders to sell their S lenses to 70D owners, how the integer "7" and the letter "C" can never be separated, etc..  Alternatively, if they do have such a disruptive crop sensor, capable of pushing the pixel density limit while at the same time reducing noise, then they already have, "in hand",  successor technology to the 5D3 and 1DX, requiring only the migration to the FF production. 




371
Macro / Re: Canon 100mm USM MACRO (not L / IS)
« on: August 13, 2012, 03:22:48 PM »
love the 100mm macro.  sure I've missed some shots due to no-IS but generally if I'm doing macro I'm using a tripod


372
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 13, 2012, 03:10:00 PM »
Sorry to break it to you, guys, but the 6D rumor is just wishful thinking  :P.

Canon has both the high and low ends covered with new models: new 1DX, new 5DIII, new Rebel, new EOS-M system.
Together with a discounted 5DII, a discounted 7D, and a discounted 60D, they are all set for the holiday shopping season this year.

The 70D will be the next camera from Canon - likely in Jan/Feb next year.
...


"set for the high and low ends" -- agreed, except that there is no pro crop body (time will tell if this is deliberate or not).  That aside, canon is still quite weak in two areas it seems to me. 

1.  The 60D may be discounted but it takes only a slighly clever customer to figure out how old it is.

2. In the advanced crop body space there is nothing, save the 7D which is (slightly) older than the discontinued 1D4.  The 7D firmware udpate may be an attempt to squeeze one more drop out of this platform but imho all this does is make existing 7D owners happier  and does little to make it attractive for holiday shoppers who know how old it is. 

I want to know what Canon expects 1DX and 5D3 owners to puchase as a second body. right now there are no attractive options -- for new purchases I mean.  If they don't want to loose holiday revenue they will have to either deliver or  entice people to wait until after christmas to buy.  and it better be something more attractive than a T4i in a 7D body.

It will be interesting to see if and when Canon makes a move in these areas.

373
Lenses / Re: How do you pack your lens hoods when traveling?
« on: August 10, 2012, 04:56:18 PM »
when I load for easiest access,   The 17-55 has the hood on correctly and with lens cap off,  either separately or attached to the camera.  When I load for transit, the hood is reversed and lens cap is on. 

70-200 is bagged with hood reversed with lens cap on (cause there isn't room to install the hood normally) either separately or attached to camera.

 the 10-22 hood is too big to be stored on the lens, and rides in a separate compartment

374
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 10, 2012, 12:53:21 AM »
...
We make the mistake of looking for a one-camera solution to our needs. Canon wants to sell us all at least two bodies.

Now that's hitting the nail on the head.  Got my 7D, waiting to see which way to go for FF.

nice.  what attracts me to the 5D3 is the fps and AF system, as the FF solution.  But if your FF needs do not include action, then 6D. 

I'm one of those who sees value in the high-speed burst, no matter what body you are using - so a 4fps FF isn't attractive to me.

what is the 2nd body Canon wants to sell to 1DX and 5D3 owners?    A high performance crop body comes to mind, but it would have to produce convincingly better IQ in distance-constrained situations compared to just cropping the FF image in post to achieve equivalent FOV, a scenario where the 7D just barely edges out the 5D3.

375
Lenses / Re: Lens Filters etc.
« on: August 09, 2012, 07:06:36 PM »
couple of thoughts on filters


1.  I'm currently in the "naked" camp.  I used to put the best B&W UV filters on my lenses, especially on those non-Ls that are not sealed.  Then I realized that in 30 years not one mishap was avoided with that practice.  Recently I did an experiment showing an increase in flare due to the addition of the filter (on my 17-55, which is flare-prone to begin with).  So  took the UV off and shoot "naked" now whenever possible.  now the only filter on my 17-55 is a slim B&W circular polarizer, of course only when needed.  my lenses all have hoods -- even my 10-22.  that provides the protection I personally need. 

I've got a couple of primo B&W UV filters 72mm that I don't use anymore and would be willing to sell :-)

2.  yes, you can make minor PP corrections to darken the sky, with all the hazards thereunto appertaining, but what you cannot do in post is remove reflections from water or other reflecting surfaces like airplanes, windows etc.  here the polarizer is just fantastic - remember that reflected light is polarized light.   So you're at the beach for example -- you can remove that reflection coming off of the water and get nice "depth".   

here's a couple of examples.  in the first, my objective was to capture the boy's reflection, so polarizer is off.  in the second, polarizer is on because I wanted to capture the depth of color in the incoming surf.  the dark sky was a bonus but not my primary objective.  Even the color of the underlying sand is evident, something that would be impossible without the polarizer.   FYI that one is at 17mm (1.6x) just a few inches from the incoming wave.  I had to act fast :-)

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 38