September 18, 2014, 08:07:10 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 - RLPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 187 188 [189] 190 191 ... 230
2821
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 50D vs 7D
« on: July 18, 2012, 09:02:09 PM »
I currently own

Canon 50D
Canon 70-300L is
Sigma 17-50 2.8
Canon 50 1.8
Canon 580 EX II

I am thinking of upgrading to a Canon 7D.   Part of the reason is for the much better focusing system for action shots of wildlife.

I am also wondering if there will be any significant improvement in ISO performance from the 50D, or would a better option would be to invest in glass.

Thank you for any advice.

Yes its worth the upgrade to the 7D, because you can down-sample the 18mp files and reduce the grain tremendously for decent sized prints.

2822
DISTORTION!?! :o

2823
EOS Bodies / Re: Mark III price dropping
« on: July 18, 2012, 08:14:43 PM »
I just ordered a MK3 body for 3,099 on evil bay. USA retail, non-grey market. 8)

Its really too bad your supporting evil bay by buying something they will get at least a 10% fee out of on the seller side, if not more when you factor in the PayPal fees as well. :\ (I really despise ebay these days...moneygrubbing greedmonsters...meh.)

Oh well, Too bad canon didn't turn out a product that I feel is worth the extra 500$ Retail. ::)

Well, at least Canon would put that extra $500 to GOOD use! More money to fund better R&D, so that the next sensor they release IS as good as an Exmor, maybe? ;P All eBay will do with it is hire more moneygrubbing greedmonsters to figure out how to stick it to their sellers to and even greater degree! Yay...funding ebay greed...fun....

You bet, Canon would put those 500 Bucks in their pocket! LoL! ;D

Look Canon should have just priced the 5d3 at 2999$ and everything would have been peachy. It would be an equal priced but faster camera to compete with the d800. When an extra 500$ get slammed on top of the other thing's I'll need to run the camera into my workflow, Its just bleh.

I probably would have just purchased the 5D3 at release if it was 2999$. No problemo.

2824
Don't know if this counts but I don't shoot alot of wildlife. :P

2825
EOS Bodies / Re: Should/can Canon keep making its own sensors?
« on: July 18, 2012, 05:15:01 PM »
EPIC FAIL

Let's start with the logic: "I wonder if Canon will reach a kind of "Apple Moment", like when Apple quit spending its R&D money trying to beat Intel on a component (CPU's) and started just using Intel chips like everyone else."

Apple has NEVER made the CPU, The Apple I, II, III used Rockwell 6502's as the base, the Mac's used standard 68000 family (68008, 68016 et al) until the Power series used IBM power PC chips (which have so much power that they were illegal to export - remember those commercials with a mac surrounded by tanks because it was too powerful to export>); the switch to Intel chips lobotomized the Mac's to an extent (there are several things you just can't do with an Intel chip because of it's architecture so Apple has to ignore / block those instructions when using the chip in apple os modes

The OP has NO idea what they are talking about so the logic is an epic fail

The question, rather, is how important is the sensor to the camera - is the camera (now that we left film for digital) no more than an extension of the sensor? At that point the sensor becomes key to product development and - yes - it is best (if you can afford it) to keep it in-house

Going back to computers; IBM set a standard in 1981 with the PC - but by 1985 IBM was number 5 in the PC-compatibles market; the problem was that the only thing IBM actually made on the PC was the l;abel; everything else was stardard parts that anyone else could piece together (some better than others) and most cheaper than IBM; Apple had many non-standard parts (for example Steve Wozniak had developed a way to go from 20 chips to run a disk drive as found on standard S-100 computers to 4 chips, one being called the "Integrated Woz Machine" chip, or proprietary and better architecture).

This is what sensor design is to cameras - you can do much better when using your own technologies if they are better technologies; make your own "woz" devices and Canon has, which is why Nikon had to outosurce - they just can'y afford to keep up with Canon on this.

Here is where your analogy falls apart - IBM went to they PS-2 because they lost their market and were trying to get it back not by making better 6technology but by making proprietary technology. Back in the mainframe days IBM had figured out a way to make money by taking their standards and creating paper :Institutes" as they wrote off the costs of development a second time by "charitable donation". The names of these "institutes" are ANSI (American National Standards Institute) and ASCII (American Standards Conference for Information Interchange). A Company called Control Data joined these and began making IBM-Compatible terminals at a lower price undercutting IBM. IBM sued and lost - once CD had joined these tax dodges they had tjhe right to build terminals with these standards -- so IBM set a NEW standard that was thoroughly incompatible (3270 and EBCDIC) which are NOT better hut different - and a large part of the market migrated, when they needed to upgrade, to smaller but compatible manufacturers - Digital Equipment (DEC PDP computers which were not originally called computers in fear of IBM, Control Data moved into computers, HP, and many others

This is where Nikon is - to a certain extent they can't be the Canon alternative without simply being a different lens mount, they need to offer something significantly different -- but they haven't the money for it. The issue with Nikon is that Canon is 60% of the market, Nikon is only 25% so a much smaller company; sony is in many more markets, essentially dominating video, so sensor technology is necessary to their operations; and (here is where outsourcing works) it is a much more trivial matter to incorporate some of the concept that they developed for video into still camera sensors (for their own (minolta - remember) use as well as for Nikon's with Nikon supplying some of their expertise on their versions but manufacturing exclusively by sony)

In other words the economics of the situation is that Nikon simply can not afford to make it's own sensors AND keep pace with Canon; this is a Nikon issue and has nothing to do with sensor technology - and that is the OP's epic fail, not understanding the problem. You don't understand the computer industry demonstrating a fanboy mentality and then carry that misunderstanding to Cameras like a bad program gone wild Nikon's adopting a more generic way of getting sensors will be their death - it becomes no more than a (industry standard) sensor in a non-canon lens mount; Nikon is now in a death spiral they may not come out of, necessitated by financials; they simply can not compete on the same turf as Canon. Look for Sony to put money into Nikon, then buy the rest of the company and make Nikon the high end of the Sony cameras

While Canon keeps on in their 60% of the market

Yeah! what this guy said. ;D

2826
I am a Pentax user and I am looking at Nikon or canon for wildlife work. I have to say from using a 7D its has one of the worst control setups of any camera. If anyone has used a K7 or K5 you would be much happier you can think about taking good pics instead of fighting with the camera. Unless you need fast AF then pentax is behind in that.

I disagree, The 7D has fantastic ergonomics and handling. 8)

2827
Does CS3 has the ability to process RAW images?

I wouldnt buy CS3 as its ancient already. Yes it does process RAW files but its ACR converter is outdated already.

You might want to look into CS6 for processing RAW files in photoshop. Its more trouble some and expensive that just using LR for RAW processing.

I use CS3 after I export my RAWs into PSD's for further editing in photoshop.

Camera Raw files -----> Lightroom 3 --------> CS3 ----------> Final Image.

2828
Portrait / Re: Artsy images (Semi NSFW)
« on: July 18, 2012, 02:10:41 PM »
Good Stuff. Keep shooting. 8)

2829
EOS Bodies / Re: Mark III price dropping
« on: July 18, 2012, 01:52:23 PM »
I just ordered a MK3 body for 3,099 on evil bay. USA retail, non-grey market. 8)

Its really too bad your supporting evil bay by buying something they will get at least a 10% fee out of on the seller side, if not more when you factor in the PayPal fees as well. :\ (I really despise ebay these days...moneygrubbing greedmonsters...meh.)

Oh well, Too bad canon didn't turn out a product that I feel is worth the extra 500$ Retail. ::)

2830
What do you think of LR?

LR3 + CS3 = Best Image processing Ever.

LR4 I can't use yet.

2831
EOS Bodies / Re: Mark III price dropping
« on: July 18, 2012, 01:27:09 PM »
I just ordered a MK3 body for 3,099 on evil bay. USA retail, non-grey market. 8)

2832
Lightroom or Aperture if your on a mac. Both are good software but DPP isn't very intuitive to my tastes.

2833
Perhaps because they offer similar performance and the excitement of 4 years of patience made some sour.

I understand that. But it is better than the mkii in MP, horizontal banding, High iso noise quality/structure. They obviously didn't focus on the sensor as much as they did the other features of the camera. Every other aspect of the camera is better and much improved over the mkii which made it worth the upgrade. Esp. for the ones who needed those upgrades.

Canon will do the minimum amount of R&D into a new camera that's needed for customers to buy it. No more, and some times alot less.

Its funny because nikon did the opposite, Don't change much on the d700 but add a new sensor. Bam, d800.

I will agree with all of that. Is there any company nowadays that will produce something great and give their all?

And the D700 to D800 = 5D to 5DmkII?

I Suppose pentax is trying there best and give it all in there new APS-C bodies but no-one is paying attention. A real shame since they used to be such a big player in the SLR market.

d700 ----> d800 = 5Dc ------> 5D2 - Agreed. Very similar.

Its funny because I just ordered a MK3. I skipped over the mk2 series.

2834
Perhaps because they offer similar performance and the excitement of 4 years of patience made some sour.

I understand that. But it is better than the mkii in MP, horizontal banding, High iso noise quality/structure. They obviously didn't focus on the sensor as much as they did the other features of the camera. Every other aspect of the camera is better and much improved over the mkii which made it worth the upgrade. Esp. for the ones who needed those upgrades.

Canon will do the minimum amount of R&D into a new camera that's needed for customers to buy it. No more, and some times alot less.

Its funny because nikon did the opposite, Don't change much on the d700 but add a new sensor. Bam, d800.

2835
If this turns out to be 1999$ for body only, I may replace my 7D for this only If it keeps the majority of the working features of the 7D.

Pages: 1 ... 187 188 [189] 190 191 ... 230