February 26, 2015, 06:00:34 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 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 41
406
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.   

407
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.   

408
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?

409
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

410
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

411
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. 

412
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. 




413
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


414
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.

415
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

416
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.

417
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 :-)

418
Here are some of mine. the first is an 10mm  UWA shot, using a hand rail for support.  8/10ths of a sec, Canon 10-22mm at f/4.5 (no IS),

The second is handheld 1/6th second at 50mm with the 17-55 IS at f/2.8,

The third is handheld 1/15th second with the 17-55 at f/2.8 and 55mm (equivalent to 88mm in a FF).  IS is your friend

all 40D at ISO 1600.  no time to set up anything or influence any lighting -- just grabbed the shot while the guide was giving her speech

419
some nice work there, to be sure.  most of us don't have time to attach lights to baloons or even take multiple exposures to stitch together, which of course requires a tripod and a certain absense of other people kicking it  ;D .  on most any guided tour, unless it is specifically for photography in which case there may be special rules or exceptions, you have to be quick, anticipate a shot by looking ahead,  take many of them, use wide and UWA, IS whenever possible, high ISOs, capture the lighting that is present at the time, and expect few keepers.  monopod is going with me next time, even if it just stays clipped to my belt, but based on my last experience I could have used it very effectively. I took my flash in, but only for that one shot, anticipated near the end of the tour when I wanted to show family members near the exit. 

the only other thing I haven't seen mentioned is that multiple burst is your freind, not for stopping the actions of others, but for stopping yours lol :D

420
lol yea.  I went through a number of cpu cycles before arriving at the 3551.  I didn't want to regret my purchase ever.  and I do mean ever :D    There were things I just was not willing to compromize, such as setup speed, durabiilty, weight, and LENGTH.  so many 'pods are too short for tall dudes to use correctly and in all anticipated scenarios.  for example, shooting up at birds.  and resting the leg behind yours to obtain additional stability, not just straight vertical in front of you. The gizto is just the way to go!

The RRS required firing some some neurons to.  for $100 the kirk version of the manfroto is ok, but I sent mine back without even opening the package.  too wimpy.  the RRS was like wow finally someone knows what a stable head means.  and the "02" version allows you to switch the orientation of the head itself.  anyway sorry for the thread drift - I just like my gitzo :D

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 41