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.
The 7D and 5D3 are nearly identical in size. The majority of that heft was from those L-Zoomz. Try a using 3 small primes instead and your back will thank you.
like a 24mm, 50mm, and 135mm prime. or even f/4 zooms like the 17-40L + 50mm + 135mm.
I would always recommend taking at least one back-up lens, even if is just a pancake Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lens.
If you are just a photographer and not in multimedia which I find hard to believe, then a version of photoshop is £17 a month which I also see as good value, compared to spending the full outlay on PS Extended which is £649, then a new version will be out in 18 months with an upgrade path of 50% off so thats £900 for one programme. or £204 a year for PS CC.
TBH I feel most of the people who are complaining are not current subscribers to CS anyway and get it some how under the rug...
A lot of people who bought the 24-70 mark ii are trying to convince themselves as well as others that they made a good(perhaps "worth it") purchase. Wake up people don't lie. The fact is, this argument whether the mark ii is worth the upgrade from mark 1 is the same thing as the argument of having more pixels. When you only view the image 100% crop then you will notice those things. Other than that, you will barely notice(if you will notice) the better sharpness. For the record, i owned both but end up selling the mark ii after 2 months of extensive use.
Was hoping they were going to fix the black AF points to illuminate them. Had a really, really hard time a couple of nights ago doing some nighttime street photography. Frequently impossible to find the active AF point unless you turn the camera toward a light colored background.
AF Oneshot is a lot more accurate in low light...plus one can see which AF point is illuminated.
There's a vast array of different ways of using the AF system on the 5DIII, I'm sure with a little exerimentation a workable solution can be found for your style and genre of photography.
***Is the 1DX really the Flagship Stills Camera?***Yes.
Who said anything about extra physical controls? All of those features could be implemented in the menus of the 5DIII. The 5DIII already has "Scene Intelligent Auto" (the Green setting)
My point is that the green box itself is a top level item (it takes a spot on the mode dial, at least on the 5DII).
Putting the art filters inside any menu, which requires a few steps of navigation to reach and also generally requires taking ones eye from the viewfinder, renders them considerably less useful (aside from the fact that most users of this body consider such features useless in general this would make them a little bit more useless).
As long as they are buried inside a menu, those features wouldn't actually be harmful. I'm going out on a limb here, but my guess is that there haven't been a lot of requests for these features from 5D users. Your post is the first I've heard of this.QuoteThis is not about loss leaders/free riders. People paying $0 for their blogs get ads on their site, so they are not necessarily loss leaders/free riders.
You seem to be trying really hard to not understand here. The marginal software development cost of adding users to a software product is 0. Therefore the economics of developing software are completely different to those of developing camera bodies.
Far from providing any illumination, your analogy is off base and amounts to a willful obfuscation of an issue that you are apparently unwilling or unable to address in a more forthright manner.
Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)
This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.
You can add creative filters, with much higher quality, AFTER the fact. You can't refocus all the soft images after the fact from poor AF calibration. One doesn't affect the ability of the body to perform to spec the other one does. So I'd say that one of them is a bigger cripple than the other.
But you can't add the exact same creative filters, or as easily, if you have to process them on your computer. You need time ... and a computer. Oh, and you need to find or buy the creative filters somewhere. More time/money. So omitting them is an obvious loss for 5DIII users. Likewise, you can't fix all of the blurry images after the fact because you lacked the proper scene mode. Again, a huge loss for 5DIII users.SL1 users can instantly dial in the proper scene mode and get the shot. So why not include those features in a 5DIII? Are they just "crippling" the camera for the few users who would find those features valuable and possibly necessary?
As I've said before, the Rebel cameras do perform to their spec. Your theory that they have poor AF calibration and don't perform to spec is based on a different spec shared by a few people on gear forums. This is like a Ferrari owner complaining that a Kia doesn't perform to spec, especially at the race track.
Yeah you can find the same only better and who uses a DSLR and doesn't own a computer?
Plus, they are a bonus. MFA is fixing something that is broken, totally different.
Let me ask you why they chose to omit the cool creative filters and scene modes in the 5DIII? (Hey, I would really like them.) Or why they chose to include the green Auto mode on the mode dial of the 5DIII?
Putting extraneous items on physical controls is not comparable to having an extra item in a 3 deep menu heirarchy -- since they can't custom build a camera for everyone, they need to make a cost/benefit call which means any item on the physical controls must be carefully thought out.
It wouldn't surprise me if there was some internal debate about the "green box" on the 5D -- there is after all already a P mode as well as Av and Tv.QuoteAnother analogy: Wordpress.com offers three price levels for blogs they host, from $0/year to $99/year $300/year. To get the ability to edit CSS on your blog (a "premium" feature), you have to go up from $0/year to $99/year. Of course, you get some other premium features bundled together for that price.
You have a lot of analogies but they aren't really relevant. The $0 a year option is obviously a loss leader. Also, the fixed costs of software development are very large but the marginal (per user) cost (of the software development itself) is 0. The close to zero marginal costs are why they can afford to have free riders. Camera manufacturers do have fixed costs but they also have marginal costs. There's not much point in them letting free riders in -- the sales of rebel units are large enough that it would be crazy for the manufacturer to price them at the marginal cost (e.g. as opposed to recuperating fixed costs/making a profit). So I think another place where the analogy falls down is that the $0 a year wordpress customers are free riders while it is probably not the case that this is true of Rebel users.
| Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 - A DSLR you'll never want to leave behind | Small | Large |
Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)
This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.
You can add creative filters, with much higher quality, AFTER the fact. You can't refocus all the soft images after the fact from poor AF calibration. One doesn't affect the ability of the body to perform to spec the other one does. So I'd say that one of them is a bigger cripple than the other.
SL1 users can instantly dial in the proper scene mode and get the shot. So why not include those features in a 5DIII? Are they just "crippling" the camera for the few users who would find those features valuable and possibly necessary?