August 20, 2014, 04:25:46 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 - GMCPhotographics

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 47
271
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are Canons innovation?
« on: January 11, 2014, 06:23:31 AM »

The problem with the Df is not that it's an intriguing and interesting little camera. Nikon has no problem with intriguing and interesting. Like I said, 24karat Gold Plated Lizard Skin DSLR. :P The problem with the Df, is Nikon didn't put in the proper effort. It doesn't sell not because it's got a "retro" design. It doesn't sell because it probably has one of THE WORST control designs on the face of the planet. Stacked dials? Seriously? That's about the most useless control mechanism I can think of. Nikon rushed the Df to market. Again, probably because they felt they had to, in order to attract more interest in a niche line, because...well a) that's what they do, and b) they are having a hard time selling things like the D800 (it's total sales volume is a fraction of the 5D III.)

If Canon put their mind to releasing a retro-styled DSLR, I would bet good money that not only would they do it, they would do it right, do it on their own time table, and when it finally hit the shelves, it would sell well. Why? Because it wouldn't be impossible to control, and people would know that it had that Canon guarantee of quality behind it. It would have been thoroughly and properly tested and field vetted before it hit the streets. It would have Canon's superb and superior customer service backing it up.

Will Canon do it? Well, probably not. I'm sure some people are demanding it, but again...Canon responds to the most critical demands first and foremost, and they only have so much money to spend on R&D.

I agree about stacked knobs and what about the 1/2 stop shutter dial....hullo? The Df is a nice looking camera, but that's exactly who Nikon have gone for...looks over substance. It's an ok camera but it's UI is severaly limited. Most selections have to be made in the menu system which kind of misses the point with a retro styled camera. I suspect that a lot of buyers who are attracted to this camera want to "look" like a photographer over actually "being" a photographer. It's the strength of the images which count and not what the box looks like.
I have an old Canon A1 and AE1 program. I bought them new a long time ago...do I use these at weddings to give the impression I'm a real photographer? Certainly not! I'm hired fro my skill and reputation and not for the camera in my hands...lets fact it, anyone with deep pockets can buy a pro camera but that doesn't make them a professional.

272
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: January 11, 2014, 06:10:02 AM »
I'm quite content with the DR of my 5D3 ;D




Lovely shot. But is it only me who feels that a bit more detail in the burnt out sun area would be nicer? A grad filter or change in lighting. Just wondering... I know the hot spot is interesting but JUST A BIT MORE DETAIL perhaps?


Personally, I like it how it is. I might actually increase the glare just a bit. Not every region of a photo needs more detail, sometimes lower detail and less contrast is exactly what you want.


It's a lovely shot and one I really like...but that sky is blown out. An ND grad would render the sky darker and probably lost detail in the darker sky areas. It would have increased contrast where it wasn't wanted. The only way to have fixed this here is to have taken a 2nd photograph but at a 2-3 stop darker exposure and then blended the highlight areas carefully in photoshop using a layer. Shadows can be pulled but clipped highlights are not recoverable. It's also important to render the sky brighter than the foreground, another error I regularly see where ND grads are employed. If an ND grad was used with the above photo, the sky would have been darker than the foreground and wouldn't look right.

Many people here are talking about the D800's extra DR, but the truth is that it's only in the shadows...or rather it's the push-ability in the shadows during post production with low iso noise is really what is being talked about. Highlight clipping / blown highlights occurs at pretty much the same between the 5DIII and D800. So it's not really any extra DR, just better iso thresholds in the deep black areas.

273
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 08:19:17 PM »
The TS-E 17 is about as bulbous as it comes, it doesn't even pretend to have a flared rim like the 14-24, however it is not flare prone, it handles light sources very well and maintains excellent contrast. There is also a cost effective filter solution for it.

The TS-E 17L does attract more flare and ghosting in direct sunlight than the 16-35IIL. The new Nano coating helps a lot, but it's a big element and it's hard to shade.

274
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 09:49:42 AM »
I wonder if the D800 sales might be pointing them in another direction...

I think the fact that Canon has not rushed a 36mp camera to market is further anecdotal evidence that the D800 series have not been an out and out winner for Nikon.

A high mp FF camera seems to fall into two very different camps. On the one hand you have a few serious photographers who really will be able to use that potential resolution in their work, and then on the other hand the casual user who gets most pleasure by drooling over the size of images at 100% on the computer screen. Pleasure may turn to disappointment when they find they have to use the finest glass, stop down a couple, mount on a rock solid tripod, crop out the edges of the frame etc, etc.

My guess is that when Canon do introduce their high mp offering it will be a very high end camera. Then when the consumer is educated enough to understand why a 18 mp 1Dx is five times more expensive than a 40mp 9D we might see a high mp 'budget' camera.

The great thing about the 5DIII and 1Dx is their image quality and frame rate. If we have a camera with a higher MP count, then the frame rate will drop. The current throughput for Dual Digic 5 is 225mb/s. This gives us a throughput which can be cut several ways, 12fps @ 18.1mp = 217mb/s. If we assume the same Dual Digic 5 chip set, 225mp / 5 fps 45 mp. If you want the higher MP chip then there's only one way the fps can go.
If the Canon develops Digic 6, generally a gain of 1.5x according to past upgrades, we get a potential figures of 340 mb/s, 12fps @ 28mp (nice) or 5fps @ 67.5 mp or 7.5fps @ 45mp.

275
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 05:38:00 AM »
Canon doesn't have to answer the D4s. It needs to answer the D800(e).

No, they really don't. The 5DIII was the answer, and it has outsold the D800 and far outsold the D800E.

I still think it's possible we'll see a high MP sensor from Canon in the future, not as an 'answer' but rather to capture a part of the market they feel may be untapped.  But we'll only see that if Canon feels there's enough of a market for it.  I wonder if the D800 sales might be pointing them in another direction...

This is a sensible, yet very stupid, way to look at it. Fans of music artists also waste time on caring about the sales of their own favorite artists. In the end though, all that should be irrelevant to the fans. It doesn't matter if plenty of others bump the same music. Bad sales might actually force something better out the next time.

Canon's sales don't really matter to me. Or actually... Had the 5D3 flopped, Canon would most likely work hard to make improvements and maybe they'd even unlock some of the features that have been artificially hidden to justify the 1DX price tag.

From a sales point of view you can say that they don't have to do S___ now, but instead of viewing the whole situation as a competition agains Nikon, there are other aspects. Besides, they need to beat the crap out of the 5D3 with the upcoming replacement to get money from the 5D3 purchasers again.

The bottom line is though that I don't care how well Canon does on the markets. Nikon can outsell Canon and I just don't care. For me the thing that matters here is the equipment I can afford to use. Surely it's heavily linked to the markets, but that's none of my business.

The 5DIII is the answer to the 5DII not the D800E...I'm not sure Canon are particualrly bothered at how Nikon splice their line up. The D700 was a huge sucess for Nikon photographers but a disaster for Nikon. It was essentially the same camera as their premium D3...but for a lot less and it totally raided the sales of their flagship. So when it came around to the D700's replacement, the cold reality of a consistent product line up forced Nikon to totally change the direction for that camera line. It's the kind of mistake which Canon rarely gets it self into. They are far more cautious and wiser with their products. Look at the 5D -> 5DII -> 5DIII...it's an evolution which doesn't confuse or frustrate their customer base. Take a look at the 1Dx and 5DIII....neither eat the sales of each other, quite the opposite they compliment. The problem Canon has with the 7DII is that it is a direct challenger to the 1Dx...and the 70D has filled the niche which the 7D once held. So one has to wonder how or where Canon will take the 7DII. It's slow to arrive becuase Canon are thinking about that camera very carefully. 

276
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 05:15:18 AM »
^ Posting web sized pictures to justify your point of view is pretty silly, unless they are 100% crops. The poor corner sharpness of the 16-35L II (and 17-40L) has been proven over and over again.

They are mediocre when compared to other L zoom-lenses like the 70-200 2.8 IS II and 24-70L II, and they pale in comparison to the Nikon 14-24.

Time for an update! But the same thing can be said about a boat load of other lenses from Canon. :-\

So you think those things you listed will make a great image any more sellable? No it won't...so I would say that the metric by which you judge a lens is way off base...and I'm sure that Canon are in no hurry to replace it becuase it's still selling well.
The sun star image would be hard to do with a 14-24mm lens...sure it might be sharper....although at f16 I seriously doubt there will be much difference in sharpness. The front element on the 14-24 is so bulbous that it's very flare prone. The 16-35IIL is very good at handling flare, far beter that the new 24-70IIL which every one seems to rave about.
The same is true with the lower image of the light house. The 14-24mm is hard to use filters (not impossible, but a PITA) and the flare issue is a serious concearn to a landscape photographer....but of corse if your only metric is wide open sharpness then yes the 14-24mm is a great lens too.

277
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are Canons innovation?
« on: January 10, 2014, 05:09:35 AM »
But innovation is mandatory for all companies.

Certainly, at least for tech companies.  But the point of the OP's thread was that Canon isn't innovating.  Fastest frame rate in a dSLR.  Most cross-type AF points with the widest spacing. Smallest dSLR. Supertele lenses that are >25% lighter than their predecessors.  Dual pixel AF. 

The issue isn't Canon not innovating, it's that people define innovation as developing only those products/features they personally want.  I don't shoot video with a dSLR and when I'm using Live View, I'm not in a rush.  By the logic of many people bashing Canon for not innovating, I should not call dual pixel AF an innovation, because it doesn't benefit me.  But it is innovative, as even the OP has acknowledged.

Canon have had so many firsts over the years. Some of their features are still way ahead of the competition.
When I look at their camera and lens cataloge and then go and look at the competition...Canon's stuff is generally better and more advanced. I have an 85mm f1.2 II L...I love it, I have a TS-e 17L and it's amazing, I have a pair of 5DIII's and they are the best camera's I've ever used. I have a 400mm f2.8 L IS and it's an amazing lens, I have a 8-15mm L fisheye....it's brilliant.
Canon when they innovate generally get it right first time. Their AF system / mount is quite old now...but it's still state of the art. Other brands often come around to Canon's thinking over time. Canon were the first to go CMOS....everyone else was mad on CCD chips....but look at the market now.

278
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 05:00:26 AM »
Canon doesn't have to answer the D4s. It needs to answer the D800(e).

No, they really don't. The 5DIII was the answer, and it has outsold the D800 and far outsold the D800E.

I still think it's possible we'll see a high MP sensor from Canon in the future, not as an 'answer' but rather to capture a part of the market they feel may be untapped.  But we'll only see that if Canon feels there's enough of a market for it.  I wonder if the D800 sales might be pointing them in another direction...

Yep, there's a world of difference between corporate sales spin and market realities...Canon are masters of weighing the two in a fine balance. I would take a balanced and versatile camera like the 1DX or 5DIII over the crazy specs of the D800E any day. 

279
Lenses / Re: The 10 Oldest Canon Lenses in Production
« on: January 10, 2014, 04:57:46 AM »
I have 100/2 and 200/2.8 and they NEED replacement - 100 have horrible purple fringing, 200 needs IS.

The 200mm f2.8 II L which I used to own was SO sharp it was possibly sharper than the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II which I replaced it with. It was a stunning optic and rediculously cheap for it's performance. A real sleeper lens!

It's funny when I look at the age of these lenses and often over looked / unloved lenses....take a look at Nikkor's lens catalogue. A lot of them are a LOT older!

280
I agree, I have all of the Canon fast primes from the 24IIL up to the 135L and I have to say that the 50 f1.2L is the weakest and softest performer in terms of optics of all the primes. Its a shame but true, its a good lens but not a great one. It pales next to the 85mm f1.2 II L and 35mm f1.4 L in just about every respect. But sadly, it's still the best performing 50mm available on the Canon ef mount when shooting wide open. I'm just waiting for a 50mm f1.2 II L to come along and rock my world....
+1 - Like you, I have owned all of them (and still own most of them), and the 50L is the weakest of the L primes, and that's why I sold mine a few months ago.  I soon realized that for it's purposes (portraits at f/1.2-2) and general shooting at f/8-f/16, it's a great lens.  the 24-70 f/2.8 II is sharper and performs better in tests, but when I look at the final image, the 50L is just better in my eyes, and f/2.8 is a poor substitute for f/2 or larger apertures when it comes to portraits.  I'm mighty interested in the Sigma and a future 50L II, but for now, I've realized that the 50L gives me great results even if it's not as great as its siblings.

Yup and as I've said so many time before...sharpness is just one measurable component of a lens, it shouldn't  be a deciding factor, but an added bonus. Unfortunately, so many photographers choose optics purely based on sharpness reviews. The 50L really does offer a nice view on the world and offers a great look to the final images. Just a little softer than other L's as it struts it's stuff. I'm more of a 35/85 combo guy. Recently I did a few portraits at a conference using my 24IIL and 50L and fell in love with that combo all over. 

281
Canon General / Re: What is the problem with Canon
« on: January 09, 2014, 11:07:16 AM »
It takes several years to spec, design and productionise a camera. From a paper concept to a boxed product takes around 2 years, the top tier pro stuff has a lot of testing which causes it to take even longer. To speed things up, some parts are designed as modular units, the AF system, Shutter mechanism etc.
Some of the development time can be spread out across multiple cameras to spread the engineering load and time across multiple business units. This is why the 1DX and 5DIII were co-developed. Both teams were utilised to create the two cameras with a lot of the tech shared and co-developed. Once developed, Canon will want to re-use this tech as much as possible because the engineering effort is expensive and slow. You can be sure the AF system in the 1DX and 5DIII took a very long time to develop.
Sensor tech takes even longer to develop, the number of MP on a chip is quite simple to etch. It's a simple task, but to re-engineer the entire signal path of the chip will take a lot of effort / time and cash to get right.
Canon are sure to have begun that chip work and it is in their interest to bring it to market ASAP, but it takes as long as it takes...unfortunatly.

282
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« on: January 09, 2014, 10:57:50 AM »
Or at least make as weak as on the 70d.  The image comparisons of the 70d vs. the 6d etc points to the idea that the best of Canon lenses can resolve the difference between the AA filter on the 6d and the smaller pixel size/weaker AA filter on the 70d and heck it looks pretty darn good.

Hoping the M-3 is dual pixel, and weak AA filter.

When Canon said the dual pixel is a game changer - perhaps this is part of the change???

I can't speak for the 6D as I've never tried one. But the 5DIII I am very familiar with along with the whole 5D linage. The 5DIII has the weakest grade AA filter of any of the 5D series. It's really noticable at times.

283
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D610 yes D600 minor upgrade!
« on: January 09, 2014, 06:36:24 AM »
Nikon really dropped the ball with the D800 and D600. Canon have really picked up their game with the 1Dx, 5DIII and 6D. The new 610 specs look very much like a feature plugged responce to the 5DIII and 6D.
If it were a response to the 6D, it would have GPS and Wi-Fi.  Unless by that, you mean it's a response to the 6D not flinging oil all over the sensor.  :D
It's not a response to 6D... we all know it's a response to D600...  :P

... as was the 6d, Canon would have never released it without the pressure from Nikon.

We could (or rather not start) to argue Canon vs. Nikon systems and specs vs. reality all day long, but from what I've seen Nikon's updated camera leaves very little to be desired and the trolling level of some of the posts above proves that Canon die hards are at a loss to find any real arguments :-o

RGB metering, silent shutter, 100% viewfinder, 6fps, f8 autofocus, 39 af points, 24mp ff for under $2000, oh my, this is throwing down the gauntlet.

I remember reading an interview with Canon's DSLR director from a few years back (he was a newly appointed exec at the time). He talked about the need to unify the 1D series into a single camera and splitting the 5D into two models for two markets. One would be pro-ed up and the other consumered down. So on hind sight, the 1Dx / 5DIII and 6D are the products of his direction as opposed to any marketing / product pressure from Canon. It's quite clear that Nikon tried to splice into Canon's range and not the other way round. So the D700 was sitting in the gap between the 5D and 1Ds III.
lets face it, the 5DIII really is the 3D we all wanted and then some. Sure 35mp would have been nice, but the current camera is easily the most versatile from any camera manufacturer to date and is a PJ / wedding photographer's wet dream. 

284
If you can't get sharp photos with a 1.2L, then YOUR technique is not right for this lens.

That L lens is lovely but has limitations that many on this thread want nothing to do with -- it is not the sharpest lens and has rather inconsistent focusing (and not just at wide apertures), as has been spoken to numerous times on this thread. 

But implying we are using it wrong is probably not the kindest thing to say.

Maybe you could put things a bit more softly:  "Perhaps another 50mm lens is a better choice for some of us."

It certainly is for me. 

- A

I agree, I have all of the Canon fast primes from the 24IIL up to the 135L and I have to say that the 50 f1.2L is the weakest and softest performer in terms of optics of all the primes. Its a shame but true, its a good lens but not a great one. It pales next to the 85mm f1.2 II L and 35mm f1.4 L in just about every respect. But sadly, it's still the best performing 50mm available on the Canon ef mount when shooting wide open. I'm just waiting for a 50mm f1.2 II L to come along and rock my world....

285
It's funny when Nikon and Canon trolls go to war over announced cameras. I just sit back with some pop corn and watch the fire works...or I get out and do some shooting :D
My first camera was a Canon AV-1 (manual focus, and Av only). I chose Canon becuase that's what my Dad used and I could borrow his lenses. I've stuck with the brand for my whole life and I've never looked back. For me operate a lecia, Sony or Nikon is like handling aline technology....I mean after all, their dials go the wrong way :D

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 47