November 29, 2014, 04:53:21 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 - awinphoto

Pages: 1 ... 112 113 [114] 115 116 ... 134
1696
Canon General / Re: Pro grade AF (not 7D like)
« on: September 20, 2011, 10:33:17 AM »
I laughed when I read that spec: "Pro Grade Autofocus (Not 7D Like)."

I thought, "Geez, I hope they don't come up with something MORE sophisticated than the 7D, it's already way smarter than I am."

I've had mine for over a year and a half now and I have to admit I still don't think I've mastered the autofocus system. No complaints about the camera, just the user.

The longer I own the 7D the more I learn about the autofocus. In my opinion it's one of the most sophisticated features of the 7D and it takes some real work to master. That doesn't mean you can't get good, sharp shots easily, it just means that if you don't use it properly, you can get misfocused shots.

I'm not saying in your case it's user error. But, I know in my case, almost all problems I've had with focus have been my fault, not the camera's.

Haha I felt the same way when I got the 7D... on prior upgrades from the 10D through 50D I felt secure and had a good grasp of how those cameras worked and the upgrade was pretty seamless, just grasping new bells and whistles and layouts from model to model... The 7D was the first camera I had to break open the users manual to learn because it was so sophisticated... 95% of my single shot photos are tack sharp with a margin of error for user error and the rest other burst shots which depending on the situation may or may not be 100% tack sharp or not.  I was able to shoot at the Reno Championship Air Races prior to the major incident which shut down the races with the 7D and 70-300 L Lens and clearly at those speeds and so close the ground, the majority out of 600+ images were acceptable focus with 1/6 being 100% tack sharp and even fewer being portfolio quality in my opinion, but that's based on other factors outside of the camera/lens... Given the tough nature of jets racing nearer the speed of sound, that's not a bad ratio in my opinion shooting in burst modes. 

1697
EOS Bodies / Re: More New Full Frame Rumors [CR1]
« on: September 19, 2011, 01:49:37 PM »
Nikon probably has a new camera planned called the Canon Killer haha.  For what it's worth, cameras at this day and age are so similar and quality is so close such as IQ between 5d m2 and D700 and 7d vs D300s... It will be interesting to see what innovations and new bells and whistles they throw in these puppies... Whether it's a revolution or evolution... I'm not getting excited until I see it in writing in form of a Press Release, however I hope it's soon... I'm not fussed too much about more MP but I want AF, IQ, and sharpness detail without having to turn sharpness up in raw or shooting modes...

1698
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: September 17, 2011, 12:18:37 PM »
Well crap, I had the chance to test out this lens borrowed from Canon CPS at the Reno National Championship Air Races on thursday and spent most friday processing photos until the tragic plane crash at the races.  My thoughts and prayers goes towards those who died or were injured during the race.  (the plane crashed very near my seats I was in the day prior).  Out of respect for the event I'd doubting even showing the photos... what a terrible outcome...

1699
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: September 13, 2011, 07:14:42 PM »
I just got the lens in from Canon CPS and I will begin testing this lens... Some first impressions/observations without playing with it too much... It is short and fat... After using the 70-200 F4 IS, this thing is shorter and fatter... very beefy lens... Those used to lets say the 70-200 F2.8 weight may not be in for as much of a shock, but compared to the F4, it's definitely a beast.  You may say "well look at the specs and you will know how much it weighs... well I did... but it's still something one is never looking forward to... It doesn't come with a lens ring... one may definitely consider it because if you are rough with your gear, it may give way...

Secondly, the focus ring and the zoom ring is a tad too close together... It doesnt help that the rings are reversed from other lenses to the zoom is closer to the hood.  I dont get the reason why this is.  If you have one hand on the zoom ring, your palm is on the focus ring... so that easily could knock off focus... Compared to any of the 70-200's, you have plenty of real estate between those two rings so that isn't an issue... Not a game breaker but something I will have to get use to... From a few informal shots, it is sharp, but I will do MA and run some real world shots and post later...

1700
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 08:53:20 PM »
I'm not sure that I understand the comment about crop sensor cameras being for amateurs only.  There are tons of benefits to having them.  They are typically faster (great for sports) & they have a much higher pixel density (great for cropping).  Both of those are reasons enough to be a number one choice in many situations. 

Don't get me wrong, I want a full frame, but even with one I wouldn't always use it.  If I were taking pictures at a game I would definitely choose the crop sensor, and if I were shooting wildlife I would probably go crop sensor also.  What's the big advantage with having a full frame?  More picture?  You can get just as much picture with a crop sensor - just take a couple steps back.  Now you have a higher resolution image of basically the same thing.  Also, don't full frame cameras have issues with the edge of the picture sometimes?  They are also typical worse at handling noise right?

Either way, I'm curious to hear the reasons why FF cameras are pro cameras and everything else is for amateurs.  By that logic the 1D is basically a Rebel.

Full frame cameras can be prone to vignetting and unsharp corners in poor quality lenses but they make the most a camera can out of an EF lens. Why waste glass and only use the middle of it when you can use it all? The focal length change gives an apparent shallower depth of field as you can then get closer to your subject also. I would hate if my 50mm wasn't actually 50mm...

Another massive reason for full frame is its hands down superior noise handling. No crop sensor compares and noise reduction technologies don't count as they affect the sharpness of your image.

They both have their uses.

There are a lot of pro's for either system, however people need to realize there are professionals who shoot with what they have including crop sensors, full frame, film, and beyond... There are situations where a 7D can shine over a 5d... It's using the best gear for the situation and conditions and knowing how to use the gear to it's fullest potential that makes one a pro (and get paid for doing so)... 

1701
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 12:20:03 PM »
Seriously, those who think they "need" 21 or 24MP would have/should have moved to FF by now. All DSLRs should have FF sensors, maximize the lens mount FFS. Leave the crop sensor to the lowest-end Rebel and the so-called "large sensor compacts" .

There's a time and a place for each body type... There are those who are just learning or basically cannot afford those price brackets and has to make due with what they can get... That being said, I dont mind if manufacturers increase MP as long as they increase the quality so the image quality doesn't suffer... otherwise it was all for not.   

1702
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 12:06:33 PM »
The megapixel wars will not stop anytime soon. Setbacks and slowdowns might occur once in a while as new technologies are developed to overcome barriers but I have no doubt that we will have the same discussion at 50, 100 and 200 megapixels in the not too distant future.

That's fine as long as the image quality doesn't start to suck...

1703
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 11:26:38 AM »
I think we can be getting to the peak (especially on crop sensors) in resolution... perhaps they can bump it up to 21...

Shhhhhh.  Don't tell Sony that.   :P

Haha my lips are sealed (except on this forum that is)

1704
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 11:10:23 AM »

More resolution is more resolution... Kinda like how a photoshop file built to minimum standards of 5x7 will look ok/good but a photoshop 8x10 downsized to 5x7 printed will have that little bit extra...

Yes, but we  cannot get 8mp resolution out of a 2mp monitor... so perhaps it is not about the absolute number pixels.

So perhaps there are other factors to be considered, for example, if the effect of AA and bayer filters less of an issue with higher resolution shots proportionally? I would think yes and that would probably explain some of the difference we are witnessing... What else should we consider?

For the last decade i've been a big proponent for increasing resolution due to more information, bigger prints, more options in post... I think we can be getting to the peak (especially on crop sensors) in resolution... perhaps they can bump it up to 21 but I want to see a big jump in IQ and noise... With full frame I think they have a little wiggle room should they want to but dont overdue it... The bigger the MP the better lenses you need... From this point on though I wont mind more MP as long as other areas are focused more on as far as improvements...

1705
EOS Bodies / Re: A Week in Rumors
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:19:47 AM »
seriously guys, do you always get canon bodies for xmas? i mean, expensive pro bodies...

Not me. I agree that the xxxxD/xxxD are Xmas presents, less so the xxD, and not really the xD.

Personally, I keep a separate 'gear fund' in which I accumulate supplemental income (consulting, etc.).  When there's enough in there for what I want, I buy it. Voilà, Xmas any time of the year!

As for Canon ' concentrating on consumer bodies' for the holidays, it seems that a few years ago they managed to ramp up production of the 5DII around November...

It's all about taxes... At the end of every year just before christmas I always evaluate what i am missing in my lineup and what money i have after bonus's, paychecks, and kids christmas presents goes towards my new lenses, flashes, lighting, etc... Its amazing how much those writeoff's knock you down a few tax brackets in april. 

1706
EOS Bodies / Re: A Week in Rumors
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:15:10 AM »
"It was suggested this was to make sure Canon could meet the production demands that the Christmas and holiday  seasons require"

What demand? There is a big xmas demand for the 1DmkIV? 5DmkII? I think these products are all on the downslope of their sales...there is no large demand. Canon would be foolish to push their releases into early next year if indeed they make higher sales at xmas time.

As for not annoucing new models that won't be available for 2-3 months....isn't this the norm?  Doesn't Canon ALWAYS do this?

The 1DmkIII was announced in Feb and wasn't available until May...I'm no math whiz, but that's 3 months.

The 5D mkII was announced in the middle of Sept and was only shipped at the end of November. um...that would be 2 months.

I'm pretty confident this is exactly what will happen when Canon (finally) announces some new bodies.

sean

You're missing the  big picture... the 1d and 5d cameras (to professionals) are tax write off's... so whatever profits we get and can afford upgrades at the end of the year, we do what we can to upgrade so we can write it off in the next year taxes... almost every company in every industry does this...

1707
EOS Bodies / Re: A Week in Rumors
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:12:02 AM »
No release prior to the holidays seems like a poor decision.  Sure, they want to be able to meet production requirements, but they're going to take a hit if the D5100 becomes the hot selling dSLR for the holidays.  Honestly, if I was just getting into photography, the D5100 would seem a more attractive buy than the T3i.  The latter is essentially the same guts as the 2010 T2i; nearly two years old.  The point and shoot market could take a hit this holiday if the iPhone has another update to its camera and the other phone makers follow suit.  I'm not sure what Canon is predicting it will be selling a lot of camera-wise this holiday season...

From a marketing perspective, i couldn't agree more...

1708
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:08:46 AM »
I'm awaiting the release of a 400 mp camera so I can sell off all my telephoto lenses.

Hahaha... gave me a good chuckle this monday morning =)  I wouldn't mind having good crop ability as long image iq is superb.. 

Was "Jurg Ammon" from the still photography or camcorder side of the house? The trend in the last generation of Canon prosumer camcorders was to have future pixels. 1080P video is only about 2MP.

Thats what I tell whoever asks me "how many megapixels does your camera have"... but guys the truth is, that an 8mp image shown on a 1080p TV/monitor looks much better than a 2mp image... why?

More resolution is more resolution... Kinda like how a photoshop file built to minimum standards of 5x7 will look ok/good but a photoshop 8x10 downsized to 5x7 printed will have that little bit extra...

1709
United States / Re: Why a shutter curtain?
« on: September 10, 2011, 10:21:28 PM »
the mirror is still there so we buy the mk3 or mk4 when they release the electronic shutter versions... (Nikon used to make one like this)...  perhaps cynical but the manufactures need a range of new features to make us part with our cash for each new version...

Sooo.... you're saying if IF they release a DSLR with an electronic shutter vs a real one, you would be more inclined to buy it?  Really?  REALLY?  How does that improve the IQ?  How does that improve DR or noise performance or the AF? What benefit does an electronic shutter have over a real (and if you think that the price will be cheaper you are fooling yourself).  If not anything, as I mentioned before and neuro acknowledged, the light hitting the sensor consistently could degrade the sensor, give burn in, and shorten the lifespan of the camera, let alone the nightmare of dust... P&S does not change lenses so this isn't an issue with them, but would be horrible with DSLR's.  I see ABSOLUTELY no up side in an electronic shutter...

I know from digital medium format that it is a necessity with a curtain. This is due to the sensor keeps reading and "flushing" the information while not exposing.

If the sensor did not have the curtain you would get corrupted images with a lot of strange colors when reading your images from the sensor.

exactly...  Plus medium format also utilized leaf shutters and 3 shot studio capture... You're not going to take these out in the field to get dust or anything else...  Also... considering you can buy a decent car for the price of a leaf digital back... and they rely of lenses shutters for their capture or if they thought it would be more beneficial to do that, they would have put pressure on camera manufacturers to make new lenses... hence they have not... 

1710
United States / Re: Why a shutter curtain?
« on: September 09, 2011, 10:26:51 AM »
I'm not going to pretend I know the intimate makings of these modern DSLRs... but just some food for thought... Lets say hypothetically with the lens cap off, the mirror within the camera blocks (lets say for example) 95% of the light the lens sends through and 5 percent somehow wraps around/bounces/or otherwise somehow still seeps through behind the mirror in which the shutter blocks the remaining light from getting to the sensor itself while not in use.  What chance do you suppose if they get rid of the shutter completely and go fully electronic, that the light that does get past the mirror would eventually weaken/degrade the sensor if not immediately but over time or even worse give a burn in effect like we see with computer monitors?  So lets say the 1d cameras which have a shutter/sensor rating of 300k exposures, well by 150k the sensor starts to downgrade or become less sensitive, would it be worth it or am I over-thinking this?  Even worse the mirrorless camera that has been talked about, what affect that would have with light constantly hitting the sensor?

Pages: 1 ... 112 113 [114] 115 116 ... 134