April 18, 2014, 01:42:53 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 - Bob Howland

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 04:29:51 PM »
As I've written before, this model may represent nothing more than Canon's attempt to reduce the cost of manufacturing an M body. I doubt that Canon makes any profit on the original M body at the current kit prices and they weren't able to attract buyers at the original prices, so they may be trying to make something they can sell profitably with a 22mm lens for $500. A smaller M2 at that price would compete very well against something like the Panasonic GM1, especially with the larger Canon sensor.

That would explain the firmware upgrade for the current model. Essentially its development cost was absorbed in creating usable firmware for the new model.

All I know is that neither the current M nor the M2 makes me want to pull out my credit card. I'll wait for Canon's answer to the Panasonic GX7 (and/or maybe the GH3) but only if Canon also introduces their answer to the Metabones Speed Booster

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 11, 2013, 06:47:48 PM »
Canon could do a lot worse than introducing something like the Panasonic GM1, except better, assuming they also (simultaneously?) introduced something like/better than the Panasonic GX7 or GH3.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Teaser Appears in Korea
« on: November 08, 2013, 04:18:52 PM »
Let's see if I understand this: (1) Canon DPP includes support for an "M2", but not for a new Rebel; (2) supposedly credible rumors said that there are going to be no new DSLRs introduced for the rest of 2013; (3) it is about 3 weeks until the end of November and 7 weeks until Christmas; (4) this newly-rumored camera looks a lot like a Rebel or SL1.

OK, I admit it, I'm confused. Wishful thinking tells me this is the new M2 which looks a lot like an SL1. And, oh yes, Canon is introducing their answer to the Metabones Speed Booster, except that it is 1-1/3 stops, not 1 stop.

Some comments on other sites have complained about a firmware upgrade costing $500. However, just because they're not changing the sensor doesn't mean they aren't changing hardware, maybe a lot of it.

Also, the focusing may be smooth but I have to wonder how noisy constantly-focusing USM lenses are going to be. Shouldn't the 70D have the same problem?

EOS Bodies / Re: An Announcement Coming in November? [CR1]
« on: October 31, 2013, 10:51:04 AM »
That's kind of late for the Christmas buying season, unless Canon can have lots of stock on the shelves within a week or so.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Sports Line Updates Next? [CR1]
« on: October 30, 2013, 07:44:46 AM »
I already own and use a 300 f/2.8 L IS Canon, often using it with a 1.4x or 2x teleconverter. Based on my experience photographing sports, mostly motorsports, in dusty environments, these are NOT the lenses that Sigma should be making. Instead, they should make a 200-500 f/4 zoom lens or, preferably, a 200-500 f/2.8-4 lens whose maximum aperture is f/2.8 in the range of 200 to 350mm. If they felt ambitious, they could make a 300-800 f/4-5.6 that is f/4 from 300 to 560mm.

Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 20, 2013, 09:09:13 PM »
Frage, why are these pictures significant? (That's a serious question.)

Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 17, 2013, 03:24:31 PM »
Why is CR so sure that that Canon is still trying to sell M bodies made before cutting the price and thereby getting people's attention, not stock manufactured after that?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony FF NEX - competition is good. Canon?
« on: September 26, 2013, 12:17:04 PM »

If the EOS 6D Mark II went mirrorless than that would be pointless without a mount change and new lens lineup.

Putting an EF mount on a mirrorless camera adds a ridiculous amount of bulk which defeats the whole point of a mirrorless setup but to call it a 6D Mark II would make no sense to change mounts going from the Mk I -> Mk II.

The sony E mount makes sense because it has a 18mm flange distance vs 44mm for the EF mount.

The new FF lensmount could simply comprise shortening the distance from sensor plane to lens flange and introducing an adapter to take up the space, so that old lenses could still be used. As for the need for a new lens lineup, I somewhat agree with you, but, since the old lenses would still be usable, the new lineup can be introduced over several years. Hopefully the new lenses would be smaller than the old.

As for a name, how about "M6D"?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony FF NEX - competition is good. Canon?
« on: September 26, 2013, 09:18:15 AM »
Keep on dreaming AvTvM

quite to the opposite: camera makers are really dreaming if they believe, many potential buyers of mirrorless system cameras are wiling to pay MORE for a CHEAPER to produce mirrorless camera compared to an equally capable DSLR. Apparently they have to learn this the hard way. :-)

And a perfectly competitive marketplace, with lots of sellers selling essentially identical goods and/or services, would teach them that rapidly. Unfortunately, we don't have a perfectly competitive marketplace.

Like you, I expect mirrorless FF cameras to largely replace DSLRs. There is, however, the question of delays and when they occur. With a mirrorless camera, there will always be a delay from when the event occurs until it appears on the EVF, a delay that does not occur with a DSLR. However, the DSLR has the delay caused by having to move the mirror, which the mirrorless camera eliminates. So, pick your poison.

The only time I tried close-up filters was 30 years ago and I hated the results. I've had a macro lens in the 90-100mm range ever since. I currently use the non-L Canon macro for my staged head and shoulder portraits and macro work with a 5D3. However, most of my macro work is close enough that I use a tripod and remote release.

Pairings that I use for (infrequent) weddings & events:

5D3: 17-35 f/2.8, 7D: 24-70 f/2.8
7D: 17-50 f/2.8 Tamron ( or 17-35 f/2.8 ), 5D3: 70-200 f/2.8

For sports, especially motorsports:
5D3: 70-200 f/2.8, 7D: 100-400
5D3: 100-400, 7D: 300 f/2.8 with 2X TC
5D3: 24-70 (For pit photos), 7D: 100-400

If I did a lot of weddings and events, I'd buy another 5D3. My previous pairing was a 5D and 40D. Unlike the 5D, the 5D3 makes an excellent sports camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Bad News Closing out 2013? [CR2]
« on: September 20, 2013, 09:58:04 PM »
About right. The 7DII is strictly " dust in the wind " never happen at this point.

True. Imagine everybody's surprise if, instead of introducing a 7D2, Canon introduces a high-end EOS-M model to replace the 7D.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M Update Information [CR1]
« on: September 18, 2013, 08:46:41 AM »
If Canon wanted to introduce a FF mirrorless camera, my guess is that they would simply shorten the sensor-to-flange distance of the current EF mount and introduce both a new series of lenses and an adapter so that current lenses could also be used. APS-C is full frame for the EOS-M lensmount.

As for reinvigorating the EOS M line, fanfare would be good but only if they use it to introduce a much broader range of bodies and many more lenses.

Lighting / Re: Finally getting some Eneloops, but will my old charger work?
« on: September 14, 2013, 05:23:31 PM »

If you have rechargeable batteries, this charger is a no brainer.

If you have eneloops, how is this ~$60 charger better than the ~$6 charger from Sanyo?

Update: Some days you get the bear and some days the bear gets you.

First, what is the model number of the Sanyo charger? (Update: NC-MDU01 for the 2-battery unit powered from a USB port and MQN04 for the 4 battery unit powered by mains.)

Second, does the Sanyo charge each cell individually or does it connect them in series pair and charge the pair, a strategy which eventually destroys the weaker of the two batteries? (Update: The NC-MDU01 charges them individually while the MQN04 charges them in series.)

Third, what is the normal charging current of the Sanyo charger? (Update: 850mA for a single battery plugged into the NC-MDU01 and 450mA when two batteries are plugged in. 250mA for the MQN04) My LaCrosse BC700's normal current is 100mA (Update: 200mA) and my Maha MH-C800S 8-battery model defaults to 500mA (Update: 1000mA) but can be reduced to 200mA (Update: 500mA). More current is worse since it heats up the battery and damages its internal structure.

Anyway, I use the LaCrosse almost exclusively. The Maha is used when I have a lot of batteries that need to be charged in a hurry, but that's why I bought it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16