November 21, 2014, 07:31:56 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 - dswatson83

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 17
121
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Official Specs
« on: September 17, 2012, 01:54:47 PM »
This reminds me of what happened when the 60D was announced. 50D owners were hoping for an upgrade and instead Canon put out a more consumerish 60D thus making the logical upgrade to the 50D the vastly more expensive 7D. This seems to be what Canon is doing here where instead of a 5D mark II or FF 7D competitor at a similar price, they have restricted some pro features and added wifi & gps to bring it to more of a rebel upgrade than pro model. Thus 5D mark II owners are forced to upgrade to the vastly more expensive 5D mark III.

122
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 01:47:40 PM »
Children,
If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Cheers,
DJD
If this camera was a toy, then you would be right. But for many of us a camera is a tool for a business of some sort and as such, we have needs that must be met from our tools in order to get our job done. By looking at this spec sheet and the samples posted, I don't think this tool works for anyone. As a result, this means we either need to up our price point to get a very high priced 5d mark III (which can hurt in this economy), or switch brands which is not as easy as it sounds. A Nikon camera 'feels' different, the buttons are different, and it could take a while for it to be 2nd nature. Plus many of us are invested in lenses & flashes that do not work on the other system. We are upset because those of us with 4yo 7d's or 5dII's need to upgrade to meet consumer demands, but could live without some of the extreme advances (focus system/build) of the high end 5D3 or 1Dx. And, many of us have price restrictions that keep us from the 5D3 or 1Dx ($2,100 vs $3500 or $6,500 is a big difference). We depend on companies like Canon to produce great cameras at each price point to keep our business thriving and to keep customers excited about the quality of their photographs, even in demanding situations such as low light or with lots of fast movement. With the 6D, I would be limited to taking pictures where focus & composition are not critical. Plus, I wouldn't have the assurance of duplicate files on a separate card. A flash works for focus assist in low light photos also and slow sync speeds surly won't help with flash in daylight. Features such as wifi & gps offer no business benefit that I can think of (to me at least) but focus & card redundancy matters.

123
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Official Specs
« on: September 17, 2012, 12:02:52 PM »
It just feels like this camera was more of an attempt to hit a price point without trying to hit features of any other existing Canon camera rather than a model directed at a specific user base.

They avoided competing with the 60D, t4i & 5D3 by lacking live AF from the t4i, no headphone jack like the 5d3 and no tilt screen of the 60D & 4ti, no clean hdmi out, and no dual card slots.

For photography it seems weak as it is lacking a decent AF system (even something like the 7D), no dual card slots, or at least a single pro CF slot if you can only have 1 (such as the 7D), only 3 bracket exposure vs 7 of the 5d3, way slower than the 5d3 or 7D, no flash, no 100% view finder, only 1/4000 max shutter speed, only 1/180 max flash sync, and usb 2.0.

Then it seems that since this resulted in a body to inexpensive, they added gps & wifi which few people need in a DSLR rather than adding back some of the specs they removed to not compete with the other cameras.

It's a camera that seems weak no matter what area of photography you are in:
For sports - too slow and bad focus system, no CF or dual card slots, No 100%VF, no joystick, limited controls
For Wedding/Event - No dual card slot for backup, poor focus system, slow flash sync, No 100%VF, no af joystick
For video - No live AF, no swivel screen, no headphone jack, no clean hdmi, no dual cards for backup or overflow, no silent operation like the 5D3 or D600
For studio/landscape - No 100%VF, No Backup card, only 20MP vs the D600 & D800, limited DR most likely
For Travel/consumer - No popup flash, no card backup, no swivel screen, no live af, no touch screen

What/who is this camera for. This is clearly Canon's attempt to produce a camera without stepping on any other camera's toes.

Instead, the best camera for each item never include the 6D:
For sports - Buy the 1Dx, 7D, or even 5D3 (don't buy a 6D for this ever)
For Wedding/Event - buy the 5D3, 1Dx, then maybe a 7D or 6D (both have some negatives)
For video - Sony A99, 1Dc, 5D3, 1Dx, 60D,  t4i, then maybe a 6D
For studio/landscape - 5D3 or go Nikon because they are the best for this with the D800 & D600
For Travel/consumer - Nikon D600 or 5D3, t4i, then maybe i'd get a 6D

124
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 12:00:21 PM »
It just feels like this camera was more of an attempt to hit a price point without trying to hit features of any other existing Canon camera rather than a model directed at a specific user base.

They avoided competing with the 60D, t4i & 5D3 by lacking live AF from the t4i, no headphone jack like the 5d3 and no tilt screen of the 60D & 4ti, no clean hdmi out, and no dual card slots.

For photography it seems weak as it is lacking a decent AF system (even something like the 7D), no dual card slots, or at least a single pro CF slot if you can only have 1 (such as the 7D), only 3 bracket exposure vs 7 of the 5d3, way slower than the 5d3 or 7D, no flash, no 100% view finder, only 1/4000 max shutter speed, only 1/180 max flash sync, and usb 2.0.

Then it seems that since this resulted in a body to inexpensive, they added gps & wifi which few people need in a DSLR rather than adding back some of the specs they removed to not compete with the other cameras.

It's a camera that seems weak no matter what area of photography you are in:
For sports - too slow and bad focus system, no CF or dual card slots, No 100%VF, no joystick, limited controls
For Wedding/Event - No dual card slot for backup, poor focus system, slow flash sync, No 100%VF, no af joystick
For video - No live AF, no swivel screen, no headphone jack, no clean hdmi, no dual cards for backup or overflow, no silent operation like the 5D3 or D600
For studio/landscape - No 100%VF, No Backup card, only 20MP vs the D600 & D800, limited DR most likely
For Travel/consumer - No popup flash, no card backup, no swivel screen, no live af, no touch screen

What/who is this camera for. This is clearly Canon's attempt to produce a camera without stepping on any other camera's toes.

Instead, the best camera for each item never include the 6D:
For sports - Buy the 1Dx, 7D, or even 5D3 (don't buy a 6D for this ever)
For Wedding/Event - buy the 5D3, 1Dx, then maybe a 7D or 6D (both have some negatives)
For video - Sony A99, 1Dc, 5D3, 1Dx, 60D,  t4i, then maybe a 6D
For studio/landscape - 5D3 or go Nikon because they are the best for this with the D800 & D600
For Travel/consumer - Nikon D600 or 5D3, t4i, then maybe i'd get a 6D

125
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS 6D sample images and video here
« on: September 17, 2012, 08:40:33 AM »
if you rate that portrait at 10/10 how you rate this one (made with Nikon D600):
http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/img/sample01/img_02_l.jpg
12 out of ten????
Man, that Nikon shot is WAY sharper than the Canon 6D. I've been a Canon fan for years but Nikon is winning me over. I'd never buy the 6D over the D600 but the 5DIII is still compelling. When it comes to straight picture quality though, Nikon is winning all over the place. Not sure whether to switch to Nikon with the D600 or D800 or to update my 7D to the 5DIII. The 6D is worthless to me. The best combination though is a 5DIII with a D800. The 5DIII for the low light and run & gun style shooting with the D800 and a nice sharp lens for landscapes and portraits. Of course, the D4 is even better for low light & run & gun shooting so you could go all Nikon

126
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:47:36 AM »
How much did you think a FF 7d would cost. it would be combining a 7D (about 2200 on release) and a 5D2 (about 3000 on release)...it costs about US3000/3600AUD and its name is a 5D3. The camera does 100,000 shots, so its not meant for pros, who would actually be able to use a FF7D to its potential. Stop you're whinging or start you're saving. I agree that Canon just got beat on paper by the D600, but lets see some samples before final judgements are delivered.
The 6D could have easily have had 2SD slots & a had a 7D style focus system for $2200 if they pulled out GPS & wifi. No one was asking for a miracle, just 9-19 cross type focus points so we could use something other than the center, and maybe a high precision dual cross type like the 7D for the center. No where near what the 5D III can do. Nikon managed this, and a flash, for under $2100. Plus, in sample images, that is where the Nikon sensor normally shines with better DR and low noise. The 5DIII vs the D800 proved that. I'd still take the 5DIII for a wedding camera any day over the D800 for the focus system, more manageable file sizes, and speed, but nothing beats a D800 image, especially at ISO 100-800.

127
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:31:44 AM »
Very funny to hear that the 6D have only a SD-card-slot.
If you have a 7D or a 5D Mark II and you have invest in very expensive and fast CF-Cards you cannot switch to the 6D or you burn a lot of money.
Canon. You loose a lot of customers if you donĀ“t change your product policy.
Yep, this absolutely should have had 1CF & 1SD, dual SD, or at least 1 CF if they were only going to have 1 card slot. And without cards being 100% reliable, I try to use dual slots for any professional work. Guess i'll never use this camera as a main body.

128
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS 6D sample images and video here
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:27:43 AM »
With that focus system and a single sd card slot, I would never use this for anything professional. The portrait pic 5 looks like the focus locked on something other than the eye. With this crap focus system i'm sure the photographer either had to focus and recompose or just locked on to the lips which look like they would be closer to the center (the only decent) focus point. The result is a missed focus on the eye.

129
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:17:47 AM »
This is ridiculous what Canon has done. I have been looking to update my 7D and was really disappointed at the price of the 5DIII. When I saw rumors of the 6D I thought my prayers would be answered and I would get a full frame 7D! This camera is ridiculous. It is a full frame 60D. Maybe this could be a backup camera or something but that is it. I doubt a ton of people want a full frame 60D and are willing to pay $2100 for it.
I am so pissed at Canon right now for crippling this so much (and why include wifi & gps?). They could have priced this for $1800 without those or have put in a worthwhile focus system instead. And not even a dual SD card slot????? Ridiculous Canon. Also, i'm pissed at Canon's new extreme pricing, and for making almost no improvements in the last 4 years in video. Even their recent lenses were disappointing, not in performance, but in usability. Who wants a f/2.8 24mm & 28mm prime and why put IS in that and not in the 24-70 f/2.8? Its obvious Canon knew no one would buy the 24 & 28mm lenses if the 24-70 had IS at f/2.8, even if it was $2,500.

The 6D is not a worthy upgrade for 7D users for sure so now the decision is to save up for the 5DIII or switch to Nikon where the D800 & D600, while not perfect, have alot to offer. I could easily get away with the D600 as a main camera and be very happy where the Canon 6D would even be disappointing as a backup. My only full frame capable lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 II and that is probably easy to sell.

130
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Arrived
« on: September 14, 2012, 03:19:00 PM »
The reason for IS is mainly for video. I want 1 lens as an all around lens and if I want to use this for video, I either need a tripod or another lens. That is not cool. Plus, a big use of this lens will be event photography and anyone shooting a wedding has taken pictures of the church, flowers, scenery, and other items where the shutter could be slowed down and ISO lowered. Not to mention in a wedding, people hardly move and it would be great to get away with 1/60 or slower shutter in my nervous hands. I'm shooting at ISO 1600-3200 alot in these ceremonies and every little bit helps.

131
I, personally, will give Canon about a year to release a budget FF because am invested in the system. I don't need an FF that can track a fly flying towards me, a frame rate fast enough to capture a balloon exploding, or weather sealing tight enough I can take the camera diving. I do want better AF than a Rebel/60D (the 7D AF would do), AFMA, 5 FPS would be plenty, and a significant improvement in IQ over what any of those cameras can deliver. Better noise control at higher ISO levels (at least clean images @ 3200... please?) would be greatly appreciated. I will gladly pay two grand for such camera and promise to eventually buy a 24-70 MKII and whatever will replace the 430EXII.
Deal Canon?
Right on. I also want 2 SD slots rather than 1 which should be a given.

132
Lenses / Re: Likeliness of a Canon EF 14-24 2.8 anytime soon?
« on: August 29, 2012, 09:18:50 AM »
At the current rate, even if Canon announced it tomorrow, it could be a year before you see it, and even then, with very limited quantities. Given that, I doubt you will be seeing anything in a store for 1-2 years if (and that is a big if) this was a high priority lens in testing now. Not to mention, with Canons new pricing structure, I doubt it would be under $2500

133
Lenses / Re: Canon 50 F1.4 VS 50 F1.2L Lenses
« on: August 29, 2012, 09:13:22 AM »
The 50 1.4 has some issues. The sharpness is good, especially from f/2.0 on, but the focusing is slow and sometimes not on. Probably due to the fact that this is an older design and does not have a USM motor on it. Thus, it is fairly slow. That said, your only other option is the Sigma 50 or the overly expensive Canon 50L. For the price, the 50 1.4 is not bad, other than the focusing.

134
What I would give to have the 5D mark III as my workhorse camera and the Nikon D800 as my dynamic photo shooter. I shoot weddings and the mark III is the jack of all trades with great low light, fast shooting, awesome video, more convenient file sizes with more than enough resolution, great screen, 3 custom modes, and just overall awesome pictures. However, there is no denying that in scenes that have great lighting with plenty of DR, with a style that looks good super sharp, paired with a great lens, and shooting at lower ISO speeds, the D800 will yield a noticeably better photo when placed side by side. During portrait sessions, I do shoot some photos under those conditions that would make for some really stunning pictures using the D800. However, all of that comes with many weaknesses such as huge file sizes, not quite as wonderful (but still good) low light results, and slow speeds that keep me from wanting it as my primary shooter.

135
Can anyone who owns a 5DIII and the new Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC confirm if the 5D recognizes the Tamron as a f/2.8 lens to use the 5 dual cross type focus points? Given that even the original Canon 24-70 mk1 does not, this had me a little worried.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 17