April 18, 2014, 06:42:06 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 - 7enderbender

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 43
Lenses / Re: Any info about a new 50/1.4 II ?
« on: October 22, 2011, 04:56:45 PM »
I read a few months ago various comments about a new 50/1.4 II : do you have any News about it ?

That would in fact be great. Same lens only better mechanical build would do. And then an update to the 580EXII and I'm pretty much all set.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS-1D X Canon USA Press Release
« on: October 18, 2011, 09:46:19 AM »
Bye bye Canon, hello Nikon.

You won't be seeing me here anymore, good luck with new Prosumer 18mp camera kids, and keep an eye on EBay, all my lenses etc will be there soon.

Aren't you overreacting a bit here? Not that I personally think that the features of the new 1D X warrant trading in my 5DII and shelling out several thousands of dollars (especially since I don't do this for a living and don't need to rely on the top notch build quality of the 1-series). I had to chuckle a bit when I read about face detection and saw that the AF points are still all centered around the middle, which still makes me want the M9 rather than a more expensive Canon SLR. But be that as it may - why would it matter if the thing is 21MP, 18MP or 12MP when there is no professional printing technology around that would translate all the data into say, a 8x10 photograph. And I mean photograph, not Office Jet print out. It's all a mute point.

But for now I'm curious to see real life results from the new flagship.

Canon General / Re: Photography - Equipment or Skill ?
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:21:02 PM »
We spend allot of time here comparing equipment and extensively analyzing the pros and cons of bodies, lenses, etc.

However - many people say, that the real ingredient for producing special pictures - is the skill of the photographer. Many all time famous monumental photographs where taken black and white with "simple" equipment. The special part of those photos is often the content and meaning of the picture - much less the "sharpness" or other tech features.

How important is our equipment ? Would you agree that it more like 85% skill and 15% equipment ?

I think that really depends, as many have pointed out already. The technical aspects of photography are not really "hard" compared to other skills and art forms. Good equipment makes it both, easier and more flexible. Non of this has to do with composition, "having an eye" and the creative thought process. Yet good tools are always a plus. Using a screw driver to stir paint can not exactly be attributed to being creative if you know what I mean.

And for some things there are certain minimum criteria. I personally always liked playing with depth of field so fast and or long lenses and big sensors/film are a plus. In the film days this was relatively affordable. With digital today it's on average more expensive. My first digital camera, a point & shoot just couldn't do much of what I wanted it to do. So that was a clear technical component that was not sufficient. But for most of the other aspects it wouldn't really matter if I was using my 5DII, a Leica M9 or an entry-level Rebel kit and whatever is messed up or flat out boring is due to my own limitations and not the cameras'. In fact, I believe that some equipment challenges can help improve skills.

I don't know about anyone else, but I've been waiting for 2 years for Canon just to release these two products. In my mind it's an absolute no brainer for Canon.

5D Mark III

- 32 Megapixels
- no more low iso noise problems
- 7D Autofocus
- Improved Dynamic Range
- Lower noise (signal to noise ratio not just noise reduction)

24-70mm F/2.8 IS

- Capable of resolving around 32 megapixels wide open or nearly wide open.

Seriously. They would sell these things faster than they could produce them.

Non of this would excite me or make me "upgrade". And I don't think we need a new lens in order to resolve 32MP (or whatever). And I would certainly hope they don't put IS into the 24-70, though I might then be able to pick up the current version cheaper to compliment my 24-105 instead of trading it.

The limitations of AF are a different problem. What I'd like to see in the future are AF points that are spread out much further then even on the 1 series. And I would finally like to see a digital body that allows for very good manual focus. That is the bigger problem for me since I'm really not all that fond of AF in general but "modern" SLRs are not build for anything else really.

Canon General / Re: Canon 5dmii quirk or software issue?
« on: September 18, 2011, 09:16:20 AM »
I use that same exact combination but never Bridge for the download but rather the Canon EOS utility tool. I prefer that latter because it works easily with my naming convention for the downloads.

In any case, I would try the Canon tool to test if there is a problem with the camera or card etc. Then make sure that the Adobe stuff is up to date. There were just a few new updates for Bridge and CS5 (depending on which version you have). If that doesn't help I would try Bridge on a different computer just to make sure that it's not a limitation of or conflict on your current machine.

EOS Bodies / Re: APS-C Camera with an L Lens as a Kit
« on: September 14, 2011, 09:56:25 AM »
Just curious: what are you using now?
People always say (I also do ;-): "Don't panic. Your current cam won't stop taking pictures, right now" if they are whining about new cameras... But well my camera almost DOES. I have 350D. I'm using it half private and half for my job (flyers, marketing product photography etc.) I often come to the limits of the cam...

For that purpose APS-C would be quite enough, but a customers asked me if Icould do a small image film of their company additionaly I want to start a professional video blog. And well... for that purpose a full frame cam would be kind of nice... kind of VERY nice  :)

Especially at a project where you are recording yourself, a flip screen is a everything else but not "useless".

Get the 60D
The problem is that I made a big mistake! I went to the shop and took the 7D in my hand... The next mistake I made was looking through the view finder (man! The AF of the 7D is REALLY cool, the 100% VF also)


All of that makes perfect sense. If your current crop camera serves you well artistically and professionally I see no reason to switch to a different format. Given your specific need for this type of video application the 60D seems like a good choice.

But here is my thought - and take it with a grain of salt because I have different applications and rarely ever do anything that resembles professional work in those areas. I always enjoyed photography and if there sometimes is something that is somewhat "professional" it's more along the lines of a "vanity business". I really don't enjoy video production so it's just family stuff for me and very rarely helping out in a pinch. Hence, I have never even tried the video capabilities of my 5DII and rather rely on my little DV camera. And when I recently helped my wife with a work project that included interviewing people I actually took a pro video camera from a local studio with me. That was way easier than trying to figure out how to use my 5DII and hook it up to decent audio equipment etc.

What I'm saying is that, yes, the new EOS cameras are being used by professional and enthusiast video folks because of the large sensors, low light capability and DOF options. But it is also pretty difficult and in the end expensive to do this right.

If I did this for money I'd have each tool fitting each need. Get the 7D or 5DII (or whatever) that you like for stills and get a decent used video cam for the other stuff. Again, my 5c based on my limited and unique experience.

Lenses / Re: 3D EF lens
« on: September 14, 2011, 09:36:17 AM »
Given Canons success with the video side of its DSLRs it's inevitable they are going to want to keep pace, and the current demand for 3D is almost overwhelming.  Virtually all new screens are now offering 3D and the price is falling all the time, the issue is content for which there is huge demand.

I remember the 'Nimslo' 3D camera (nearly bought one) as I remember film had to be sent to some country like Switzerland for processing, it's nothing new for stills, but given todays multi media methods it can't be long before there's demand from web users for 3D images.  I can see a day when news organisations print an image in 2D and have 3D (switchable) on their web pages.  It might someday be the case that anyone wanting to supply commerical images is forced by market pressure to offer a 3D option.

Sometime there will inevitably be a 3D lens for EOS cameras I hope it's not too expensive!

Really? Hasn't this been tried for decades without ever taking off? But now this time around it'll all be different? I don't see it. It's a gimmick nothing more. I was waiting for my wife downtown recently and the kids and I sat down in the TV section of a BestBuy. So we tried the big 3D TV screen. Very unimpressive. You couldn't pay me to put one of those into our family room. But then again, I'm the type who still has pretty basic cable and a small CRT TV hidden in a closet. There is still a lot of reading in our house. Actual books.  That's 3D enough for me. [/social commentary]

EOS Bodies / Re: APS-C Camera with an L Lens as a Kit
« on: September 13, 2011, 02:02:07 PM »
I suggest deciding on a format now and sticking with it.  Either get 5D2 plus 24-105, or 7D plus 15-85.

Yop, you're right... The problem is: The needs and requirements for new "toys" are growing fast if you surfing the net and watching videos... Actually the only thing I'm missing at a 7D or the 5D is a flip screen...

Probably I'll just wait until the next announcment from Canon... Either the 7D2 or the 5D3.

Just curious: what are you using now? And what are you intending to use the swivel screen for? To me this is a pretty useless feature that I hope Canon will never introduce to the 5 or 1 series (or equivalent). Another part that breaks without any normal use value. It's an SLR for a reason. "Live view" is one of those things that are really meant for very special applications. Again, just my view.

EOS Bodies / Re: APS-C Camera with an L Lens as a Kit
« on: September 13, 2011, 01:53:40 PM »
I'm completley torn...

Actually I want a 7D (or successor), but I really like the 24-105L. But the problem is, if I buy a 7D body and a 24-105 seperately I'll pay (at Amazon) 2345 EUR. This is quite a lot. The problem is, that the 5D II Kit with the 24-105 is just 2555 EUR. Thats just 210 Euros more.
I never wanted a full frame camera... but well... just about 200 bucks more für a fullframe body... this is hard and kind of frustrating...
The same problem comes if you want a 60D with a 15-85...

Why aren't there more different Kits?

This exactly what I point out to people when the subject 7D vs 5DII comes up. It's what I figured when I was in the market for my first digital SLR last year. Only that I wanted "full frame" anyway all along which is why I waited so long to transition from film.

But in all fairness, the market is already pretty spaced out within three main SLR segments: entry level kits, mid range kits and anything that appeals to serious enthusiasts and pros willing to shell out some serious cash. I looked at the 7D briefly. The problem was that not only did I really want a 5DII but also the kit lens did not appeal to me at all. And going "L" on these crop bodies is also somewhat questionable for general photography because you'll miss out at the wide end or pay even more extra. Not that a 7D with, say a 24-70, 24-105 or 16-35 wouldn't go a long way. But you already did the math...So unless you care mostly about the long end then it makes limited sense to most people to save 300 or 400 bucks that you'll spend elsewhere.

Just my take though.

Canon General / Re: An article Canon should read.
« on: September 07, 2011, 09:22:08 AM »
Very interesting article/business case indeed. But I happen to disagree with it. I agree with the general notion of disruptive technology and how these things have been handled pretty smartly by Mr. Jobs. He is an exceptional leader. In no way does the situation compare to the auto industry. Detroit's problems are rooted in running companies like bureaucracies - thanks in part to the outrageous deals that the unions were able to make over decades. This is not about "cheaper and smaller cars" as some people claim. Today's European and Japanese car fleets for the most part are neither cheaper nor smaller.

Canon and Nikon are in a very unique market segment. The only similarity that I see with Apple is that a lot of the sales are based on image and perception. And I would argue that Canon and Nikon actually live up to a lot of the expectations of the pro-level and mid-range buyer, while mostly satisfying the vast number of P&S buyers. Not a bad business concept in my book. If Apple on the other hand will survive without their big follower-creating Steve Jobs has yet to be seen. I don't see how most Apple products are in any way superior. I came pretty close a few times to buying an Apple computer and decided against it any time. Those that are used by pros in the creative industry are very expensive and at the same time very limited in a number of ways. If photography and/or music was not only my passion but my day job I'd probably have one of the big ones. Everything else is a toy. Pretty styling (obviously important if you sit at Starbucks all day) and good enough to write emails and to be on Facespace or whatever. Other than that I find most of their stuff more than annoying. I do like my iPod classic though - simple and big enough to hold my entire CD collection at a halfway decent sample rate. But their laptops are a joke. Either big and expensive or they don't even have a firewire connection that I need for a bunch of hardware that still serves me well. And anything touchscreeny just makes me cringe. That's why I still love my ThinkPads, regular PCs with Win XP and my old fashioned BlackBerry with a real keyboard.

But that's me. Obviously a lot of way more hip people think otherwise. The question remains for how long. Apple got really lucky with the iPod. Nobody was ever able to come up with an alternative. The iTunes store was a very smart move. I doubt that they will be able to continue this with their other gadgets. There are already plenty of alternatives to the iPad and iPhone for those folks who like this approach. Image alone may not cut it for much longer, especially after Mr. Jobs retirement.

EOS Bodies / Re: Getting a little bit Fed Up...
« on: August 23, 2011, 12:29:14 PM »
I would never buy the latest kit, the problem is that it takes an age for Adobe & other software providers to issue their RAW / ACR updates, meaning that you have a camera which for professional use is just about useless.

You would also never get that "out of the box, new feeling". This is a matter of opinion... some people can't wait for Christmas, others couldn't care. I will install Beta operating systems to see what's new and work through the bugs - others will stick with Windows XP because it's more "stable"

At least I know when I have a brand new camera that the support will eventually follow :D

That's a good comparison. Was just thinking about that as well. There are obviously different user types. I'm your typical "Windows XP" kinda guy. I had to use Win Vista once and was annoyed by it. Win 7 may be better but at the moment I just do not care. I use XP/Office 2003 at work (10000+ employee company that will not roll out anything new anytime soon - and frankly, why would we?). And I use the same on my home computers because I don't have the time and patience to redo everything all the time. Stuff works and does what it's supposed to do. Good enough for me. That by the way is one of the reasons why I could never be convinced to go the Apple route. The constant reminders to "update" to a new version every other month on my iTunes stuff is bad enough. As long as my workflow or equipment doesn't change I don't need more colorful versions all the time.

Same with cameras. I'd still be shooting with my old non-AF film equipment if labs hadn't gone to hell around here. And don't get me wrong, I like shiny new toys, but some things just don't add any value and I was actually quite happy to have had analog cameras that were built to last and didn't need replacement every few years. I'd rather put the money towards other stuff (more lenses or a new bike or whatever).

EOS Bodies / Re: Thank you Canon
« on: August 22, 2011, 03:36:56 PM »
We're just lucky that Canon still seems to be interested in maintaining its image as a professional photography company - despite the fact that most of their revenue comes from office machines and consumer grade P&S cameras.

I don't think that's entirely true.  You're right that office machines are the largest chunk, but in 1Q2011, approximately 35% of Canon's revenue came from their camera division.   Canon sells a lot more P&S than dSLRs, with the latter only represent around of 20% of uint sales.  But units don't matter, value does - and dSLRs and lenses make up around 70% of revenues from the camera division.  So, that means something on the order of 25% of Canon's sales revenue comes from their dSLR lines.  Granted, the vast majority of that is the Rebel/xxxD line, but still, they have a strong incentive to maintain position as a market leader, and the cache of the pro lines is a part of that effort.

For the numbers, see Canon's 1Q2011 report.

Exactly right. I've been looking for the actual details on the figures in their financial statements but didn't quite find what I was looking for. But I'm on the same page with you, only that I counted the Rebel series as part of my broad statement about "P&S" cameras. Whatever you want to call the consumer and "pro-sumer" segment. It gets even more confusing because Canon actually puts all camera related items under "consumer".

Revenue alone is not helping us either since we'd need to know what the actual profit on the 1-series cameras is. In the big picture probably not a lot. But of course they benefit from image/cache and trickle-down technology.

So, really. It's all good in the end. They've been a leader in the pro and consumer camera market for quite a while, just survived an earthquake and the aftermath of a national catastrophe and obviously still working on bringing to market a few more big ticket items. What's the rush? The current line-up of gear obviously works well at all levels.

EOS Bodies / Thank you Canon
« on: August 22, 2011, 02:20:13 PM »
Is it just me or does it feel like Canon is dragging their heels in getting back as the market leader in the Pro SLR market? Maybe I should wait till September to point fingers, but I am really getting disillusioned with Canon. I am doing a lot of pro golf events for magazines and studio work. After a lot of saving and hard work I got enough money together in December last year to move to the 1Ds range and I knew buying one then would be a mistake - so I waited. There were times I thought I should just get a 1D, but there's no stock... So I am still waiting.

Now reading things like "However, we’re told Canon is more interested in getting production up to 100% before announcing new EOS products" is not really the type of news I want to read...

Am I the only one who feels this way? Is Nikon the new leader? (I know swearing is not allowed - but hey, sometimes you need to get things of your chest)  :)

Maybe I just need some feedback from fellow Canon users before I decide to switch to the yellow brand...

I think people need to stop complaining about things that are really non-issues. Last time I checked, Canon was and remained the market leader and actually gained a little over Nikon in 2010. Not that it matters.

Pros will use whatever is available and fits their needs and budget. I mean, I am "just" an amateur photographer because I make my living in a different industry and, hence, use photography, music and sports as an outlet for my own enjoyment. But I still follow what goes on in those industries so I think I may be able to make a valid point here.

So, if anyone paid me to take pictures at pro gold events I'd bring whatever I need for that given that I'd be paid accordingly. You need a pro camera now or yesterday? Why not buy which ever you prefer and that fits your lenses? Who cares if its the red or yellow brand? And if for whatever reason you don't want to buy a current model you can always buy used or rent for specific jobs. That's what pros do.

The complaining about stuff and the whining how expensive and insufficient it all is will mostly come from non-pros with nothing better to do. Which makes sense to some degree, because $10,000 in camera gear is actually  A LOT of money for a hobby. For paid work it's not. Or when did you here the last time that the pizza delivery guy complained about the cost of his 1998 Corolla? Probably in the same ball park as a few pro photography tools. Yes, to us amateurs gear is expensive. For pros the tools are actually pretty cheap compared to the equipment cost in other industries.

One more thing: instead of complaining about Canon/Nikon we should be grateful that they are (still) around and catering to pros as well as amateurs. Good stuff for actually pretty low prices given that there are really are no high grade 35mm alternatives available in the digital age. Try digital medium or large format...

We're just lucky that Canon still seems to be interested in maintaining its image as a professional photography company - despite the fact that most of their revenue comes from office machines and consumer grade P&S cameras. So we might want to scale back the negative commentary a bit. How about "Thank you Canon. Keep up the good work. Can't wait to see what next thing you cook up that is only for a small fraction of your market and has cost you a fortune to develop!"

Lenses / Re: Hello and What to put in my camera bag to come?
« on: August 17, 2011, 08:39:28 AM »

Thanks alot Afira, Scottkinfw and 7enderbender. Again you make me reconsider my options.

If only two lenses... wow. Good question. I think I would go with a zomm 24-105/4 or 24-70/2.8 and a really fast prime for nice portraits. depending on the zoom it would either be 135/2 or 85/1.2 (or Sigma 85/1.4).

Actually I haven't considered the 100/2.8 Macro (yet). Some years ago it was on my list since I wanted to try Macro, but I bought "magnifying filters" instead and realized it was nothing for me. But now the lens is forgotten. I will check it immideately!

Since I will be using a FF 200 mm as the longest reach feels short. But perhaps I put too much value into those last 100 mm...

I'm sure you have thought about that already but I'll mention it anyway:

If you go beyond 200 you might want to factor a decent tripod and/or monopod into your calculations as well. If done right, unfortunately not a cheap additional tool...

Lenses / Re: Hello and What to put in my camera bag to come?
« on: August 16, 2011, 05:13:50 PM »

If you have a 200 mm, how often do you think you should have had a 300 or a 400?

Almost never. I have a 500 for my film camera and stuff beyond 200 to me is highly specialized. It's good for sports and wildlife obviously. I don't do a lot of that. And if there was ever a need I'd rather rent a really good one in that range. I mean, it all depends of course. I actually shot a few nice portraits with my FD 500. But you can do the same with a lot of other lenses. Or better.

I like the fixed 200 for outside stuff with the kids. You have to think of course and move around. But the 2.8 aperture and small form factor beats the zoom option for me. And the 70-200 2.8L is just too expensive and too big - and too white for me...

But think about it like this: if you had to decide to get 2 lenses only and only those for a long period of time, what would you be the most comfortable with?

I'd either go with a good 50 and the 135L or the 24-70 and the 135L. 50+135 would be more likely, which is by the way the first combo I had when I started using my Dad's camera back then. There is not a lot that this combo won't do.  Later I relied on and traveled a lot with a Sigma 35-135. I mostly used it either at 135 or between 35-50ish.

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 43