July 26, 2014, 03:09:38 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 - npherno

Pages: [1] 2
EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: July 04, 2014, 12:00:38 PM »
If they keep up the innovation, I think they have a chance. They are really making cameras people want, with great new technology. I bought a NEX5 for its size and image quality, and its great (save for the menu system).

I think the same of my NEX-6; only wish it had the A7's menu structure because the menu structure is amateuristic and not user friendly if you need to change advanced options while shooting.

Sony needs more good (and reasonably affordable) lenses too; I'm not too impressed with their lens line-up and I'm getting to the point that I think I'll sell on my 16-50 & 55-210 OSS because I'd rather use adapted FD lenses.

You see, this is where I think Sony is turning a liability into an asset. I also figured it would be hard to leave Canon because of lens investments. Sony seems to be encouraging third parties to make adapters to use any lens with their cameras, WITH AUTOFOCUS. Leica lenses seem to be what a lot of Sony users are using, but certainly Canon lenses would work well.


I love my 50D, but Canon definitely annoys me with their constant arbitrary cutting features and segmentation of their products. They seem to never want to deliver their best, but simply what the market will tolerate.

Canon and Nikon both better wake up before customers leave in droves. Sony's cameras are still rough around the edges, but the features they offer are very convincing, especially when portability isn't an issue. I personally cannot afford a A7s now, but when I can, I think Sony will be ready for prime time, and will have smoothed those remaining issues (maybe one or two years).

Btw, my previous statement is correct--Canon does have a low light king-the 1DC and it is $10,000, lol.


EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii vs Sony A7s vs GH4
« on: July 03, 2014, 12:43:42 AM »
Wow, I just took a look at the A7s, and am pretty amazed. The performance of that camera is remarkable! When your sensor can take photos in the dark at ISO 80,000, that is really game changing.
Canon and Nikon should be worried--Sony's
Canon or Nikon would charge $10,000 for their camera if they had a product with these results.


From the WSJ:


Detractors say mirrorless cameras are another futile attempt to save the camera industry from smartphones. That doesn't mean they can't keep grabbing customer attention as the technology improves. A certain segment of consumers are always likely to want something better than the masses. That's where mirrorless could erode the high-end DSLRs that Canon and Nikon have banked on as less vulnerable to the smartphone trend.

The scope for disruption could be far greater than some expect. Sony is already offering mirrorless cameras with "full frame" image sensors as large as top-end DSLR cameras. That means it's plausible high-end hobbyists and some professional photographers will make the switch in coming years.

Nikon and Canon have one big advantage—their lines of interchangeable lenses that keep longtime users loyal. If the companies are smart, they will capitalize on this by building on their currently minimal offerings of mirrorless cameras that can use their existing lenses.

Japan's digital camera makers were blindsided by the impact of smartphones on the industry. They should have no excuse if they let technology pass them over again.

Luminous Landscape writes:

    “DSLRs will diminish in market share and likely will become a niche product for wealthy enthusiasts. Mainstream enthusiasts will move to so-called mirrorless system cameras and the mass market will happily take pictures with their smartphones while uploading them in real-time to Facebook.
    Sony has seen the writing on the wall better than most. So have Olympus, Fuji and Panasonic. Nikon and Canon have had an ostrich-like mentality and are therefore about to be side-swiped by a market shift of tsunami proportions. Unless their market planners grow the cojones needed to adapt to the changing marketplace, in a few short years there’ll be a lot of executives in Japan staring out the window at a train that has swiftly left the station.”

I can't find the article, but a Sony VP said that they wanted to be number two in the camera market in say 5 years.

If they keep up the innovation, I think they have a chance. They are really making cameras people want, with great new technology. I bought a NEX5 for its size and image quality, and its great (save for the menu system).

Apparently I am not the only one wondering if my next camera will be a Canon.
Look here--

Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 27, 2014, 07:23:00 PM »
This sucks!  No more competition for Adobe.  I have a bad feeling about this.

There's still Capture One and Pixelmator

I looked at Capture One again today. it looks good! And it also has a similar DB based organization structure similar to Aperture, as well as a first rate RAW converter. I hate to buy it, but its better than file based organization or a cloud subscription.


I edited a shoot I did of an engagement party. The RAW engine is WAY, WAY better than the one in Aperture with regard to noise/low ISO. I read that this uped to be the weak point in Cature One, but it really performed well for me. If you want DB archiving like Aperture, set up a catalog, and store the images in the catalog.

I shot with a 50D @ 1600, which were basically noise free.
They offer a free full feature 60 day trial. I'd be curious to see what you all think.

BTW. Capture One is resource intensive. It is slower than Aperture for me. Perhaps it is 32 bit, I havent looked.

Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 27, 2014, 01:44:54 PM »
It is a strange strategy. If they intend to keep the pro users, why would they offer Aperture pros a path to migrate to Lightroom? Its not inspiring to think that advanced features will be making it to the new product.

Why not keep the pro features, while still monetizing the cloud storage?

Software & Accessories / Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 27, 2014, 12:53:33 PM »
Apple is reported to be ceasing work on Aperture, and migrating users to the new Photos app in OSX, and to Lightroom.

Apple has told The Loop that the company will be ceasing development of Aperture and iPhoto, offering Photos for OS X as a replacement, which was first shown at WWDC.

“With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture,” said Apple in a statement provided to The Loop. “When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS.”

Apple says libraries will be able to migrate across to the new application when the application ships. Apple is working with Adobe to offer a upgrade path to Lightroom.

The state of iPhoto on iOS is currently unknown, but its outlook doesn’t seem good given the retirement of the application on the Mac.

Not good at all.


Lenses / Re: 70-200 for trip to Vegas and Grand Canyon
« on: March 22, 2013, 09:25:46 PM »
Packing for a trip to Vegas and Grand Canyon. Just wondering if it's worth taking along the 70-200. Trying to keep down the weight. Any thought?

Taking: 5D3, 17-40 f/4, and 24-70 f/2.8.

You might want to take the 70-200 for some sightseeing stuff in Vegas. I saw a shooter with one @ the Stratosphere taking shots along the strip. There is also the possibility of perhaps shooting some sights on a helicopter ride, where that range might be useful.

Lenses / Re: Best lens from my set for nightclubs?
« on: March 22, 2013, 09:19:40 PM »
Though in low light this could be another benefit, shoot at f1.4 for the shutter speed but get the dof of f4, win win. Unless you wanted very shallow dof!

Great idea.  1.4 or anything under 2.8 has razor-thin dof's.  Sometimes that's good, but often it would be preferable to get a little more dof while still enjoying the shutter speed possible with a wide aperture.  I'll experiment with this at a party we plan to attend tonight.

Thanks again.
Thank you to all the advice, particularly from those who actually read my post ;)

I don't have the 16-35L, and this would be a great lens for it. I don't have the cash for it at the moment.

RLPhoto - no idea why dance receptions are relevant to this...

LOALTD - I understand the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is pretty good, but I have the 35L and so have no compelling reason to buy it. I keep reading about autofocus issues, even with the Sigma, and so went for the 35L instead and have been pretty happy with it.  I was hoping for the 35L II but this seems like a fantasy.

TrumpetPower!  - I do have the 40mm pancake but hadn't considered it - 2.8 is only one stop faster than f/4, and with the high ISO capabilities of the 5D3 I would choose the 24-105 f/4 over the 40 f/2.8.  The reason to go for the primes in this environment would be to get substantially more aperture. I love the colour rendition of the 24L. I do take your point about it being more easily passed off as amateur though. My 40mm stays on my camera a lot of the time when I'm doing street photography as it is less conspicuous.

Sorry, I responded before my morning coffee!

Out of your collection, the 24-105 will be fine, especially if you are shooting with flash. I dont own a 5d3, but my 50D hunts like crazy in some scenarios without the faster lens or flash assist. Barring that, I think the flexibility for the unexpected will be pretty well suited with the zoom.

Lets see some of your work when you are done, and please check out the link I posted earlier. There is WAAY more info on that link that can help you out with tackling how to shoot in clubs.

Thank you actually, you gave me a push to go out and shoot tonight...


Lenses / Re: Best lens from my set for nightclubs?
« on: March 21, 2013, 10:00:05 AM »
Look here...

I'd recommend the 16-35L, you are going to need the low light for some shots and wide angle for groups.


EOS Bodies / Re: 5D X or Mark III Specs & Release Date? [CR1]
« on: February 03, 2012, 02:14:03 PM »
I would LOVE to be wrong, but how could this camera be real?  What differentiates it from the 1DX?  (ie. is there $4100 in difference?)

Not to be a hater, but I think this sounds more like a wish list... my wish list.. =)  IF it's true, I'll be ordering mine asap... if not than i'll go sulk in my room.

+1 on these.  It's a nice wish list.  Wishes don't often come true.  But Canon's goal is to make money, total profit is what matters, not profit per camera line.  This may represent a strategic shift - combine the 1-series lines to a single body to reduce R&D costs, put top technology in an 'affordable' camera that to the casual eye looks a LOT like the top of the line pro camera, which boosts sales of that 5-series model (a great price for a baby 1D X), and the unit sales of the 5-series more than makes up for lost sales on the 1D X.

If this is real, they are going to be very, very popular. After suffering with the banding and AF issues of various models this could be the one we have been waiting for.

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« on: January 29, 2012, 02:42:08 AM »
61pt AF

CR-Guy: Do you believe any S___ in your inbox?


I do think 61-pt is somewhat of a stretch, but you never know.  He's been right many times before and has reliable sources and wouldn't CR2 this if he didn't think it was probable.  Everyone is saying these specs are unbelievable based on a price of $2500 (which I highly doubt will be the final cost).  But if the camera is $3000-$3500 it seems like it could be possible.

I agree that it's much more likely to get a variant of the 7D AF, but if it did come Spec'ed as rumored, and at a reasonable price, Canon would have a hell of a camera to sell. It would be like the D700 we wished we had.

Does anyone know how many D700's sold vs D3's? Im not sure about the specifics of the Nikon line, but perhaps the accountants at Canon rather sell volume rather than a limited number of the high-end?

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DIII will come
« on: November 18, 2011, 10:31:14 PM »
All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this...

The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system.  The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities.  The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition.  Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail.  If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"?  This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image. 

Canon must risk their 1D X sales by upping the specs of the 5D MkIII AF system, many people won't actually need it most of the time but that's not the point.  I live in the UK and my car (like most these days) has air conditioning, which is great for the few days a year I actually need it.  Try selling people anything other than a base model without A/C. 

Canon are competing in this market on a differentiation strategy, if their sensor isn't a lot better than the new Sony FF unit, what will Canon differentiate on? In my view, the 7D's AF system is the bare minimum for the 5D MkIII; let's not forget that the frame coverage of the AF points would be virtually the same as with the 5D MkII (just higher density).  If Canon are unwilling to go the whole hog and fit the new 61pt AF system to the 5D MkIII (and 7D MkII), they should develop a new AF system for these cameras; how about a 39 pt "low density reticular array".  ;)

I agree, but maybe the 7D AF will be adequate enough? You KNOW Canon isn't going to do better than that. I also think that besides the actual, you know focusing (only kind of important..Low light be damned if you cant get a AF lock), the sensor better rock. Sony/Nikon make "better" looking random noise at high ISO, and Canon should as well. Ive learned to live with banding on my 50D, but on a $2.5K camera, thats BS.

I have to say (and I can hear the detractors now regarding NEX processing and sharpness levels) my NEX-5 is WAY better at low ISO with noise than my 50D, shooting in RAW. Im still not too invested in Canon, I'd def switch to Nikon if the D800 was compelling.

EOS Bodies / Re: T2i vs. 60D vs. 5dMKII
« on: November 03, 2011, 08:12:33 AM »
Interesting debates. Thanks for the advice.

It sounds like the overwhelming recommendation is 60D.

Just to clarify since I wasn't clear. But my primary use will be video. I'll be looking to do narrative documentaries think "Inside Job" or any PBS or Michael Moore film.

Secondly I'd use it for sports for my students.

Finally I use it for stills.

Assuming the 60D still holds as my best for this what top 3 lenses would you suggest ... Sounds like a 50mm and small zoom lens?   I'd like to spend no more than a thousand on lenses. I also need suggestions for:

SDHC card

i would buy the fastest lens for the available light you intend to shoot. Some people swear by longer lenses for portraits to prevent distortion off facial features. Personally I shoot portraits with a wide angle and it looks fine.
If you want natural light video, i would say get a 2.8f or less. Daytime shooting or lit scenes would change that though.

EOS Bodies / Re: T2i vs. 60D vs. 5dMKII
« on: November 02, 2011, 10:37:02 PM »
60D. You don't really state what your primary use is, but given what you have said, i would go 60D.


Autofocus. 9 Cross points may allow you to get shots you cannot get with a T2i.
Better controls. Canon Prosumer ergonomics are way better. You need hard buttons or get stuck mired in menus.
Better build quality. Magnesium body.
Auto ISO. Not sure if T2i has this.
Wireless Flash control built in. If you like photography and need a multi light setup, you will save $$ or be forced to buy wireless controllers.
Faster shooting speed vs T2i.

The 60D helps you get the pictures you want with less hassle, like other more expensive bodies. That said, if you are unsure at all I would not get a 5dII, just because the features (low light shooting, FF) might not be missed. If you really want a camera "you can grow into" the 7D is probably better served than the 5DII. 7D has better autofocus, and good video from what i've read. It also has wireless flash control, better AF, and built in flash (5DII has no flash), and faster shooting speed than the 5DII.

...Nikon makes cameras for photographers, and that Canon "nickel and dimes" their customers.

Exactly. For example, if you want to edit .CR2 RAW files with 'native' Canon software, they "nickel and dime" you by giving you DPP for free, whereas if you want to edit .NEF RAW files with 'native' Nikon software, they give you...oh, wait - you have to *buy* CaptureNX2.

Haha, well said, but at that level, who doesn't already own Aperture  or Lightroom? I am a Canon owner. I like my 50D. I think that one needs to be honest and admit that although one can say no product is perfect, Canon absolutely was stingy on the 5D AF. There a few other ways they were cheap.. Wireless controller not built into the body was a pain, No flash on 5D vs D700, etc. Small stuff.


 As noted, Canon also still needs to find a reason to make someone pay $8k for the flagship.

Durability and shutter cycles.

Much (much!!) better AF performance.  I bet they'll hobble the 5DIII's AF, just like they did with the 5DII.

Thats exactly what I am afraid of. It seems that Nikon has a chance to take the "bang of the buck" (not counting lenses and accessories) category if the D800 has competitive video.

I agree AF and durability of 5DMiii should not be close to that of flagship, but If Nikon can ship proper AF, and good frame rate, so should Canon. D700 Beats it in low ISO as well.

Bottom line is will Canon intermediate shooters who may not have much invested in Canon stick around if Nikon is significantly better "perceived" value, especially if D800 is released first, and/or the 5DMiii is not as good or better.

I think Canon is forgetting that perception is important in the marketplace, and I can say my current perception is that Nikon makes cameras for photographers, and that Canon "nickel and dimes" their customers.

Pages: [1] 2