December 21, 2014, 09:49:45 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 - AprilForever

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 50
16
A few thoughts.

1)  The guy is a jackweed - Seems he gets mugged / robbed a lot, and I think I understand why

2)  Half the features he talks about are available for Canon and Nikon - Plop in an Eye-Fi card and I can do remote shooting and change the settings from my phone or tablet with an App. 

3)  Remote tethered shooting can be great (getting camera in hard to reach places for interesting shots) but Wi-Fi gets overloaded quickly.  Here is a test.  Do a 3 second burst at 11 FPS with moving subjects from a tablet and wait to see how long it takes to get images transfered or get responsiveness back to your camera. 

4)  I actually PREFER the Eye-Fi route - why?  Because TECHNOLOGY changes. Wi-Fi standards change over time and if you bake it into the camera, you are stuck.  The next version of wi-fi is not something you will be able to change with a firmware update

5)  Construction. Construction.  Construction.  The Sony is NOT weather sealed.  Most of the heavier more rugged pro-DSLRs have some for of magnesium alloy body.  I do notice a difference in range and strength of connection between my 5D MK III and my back up video t5i body. 

6)  I do like the Electric Viewfinder and can see some of the benefits. 

7)  I like "big"  I find the size of the Canon's to be great as well as the layout of the controls to be superb where it is easy for me to adjust while still looking through the viewfinder.  I find with smaller camera, the layout is more "awkward" at least for me to change several settings very quickly.

All and all I am glad some of these cameras are out there.  Nice to have options, a decent travel backup, and have a feeling these will start pushing the bar on both Canon and Nikon.  Survival instinct is a good thing. 

8)  I am not a big fan of Wi-Fi built in.  I have used it, and in so many cases, I notice it gets bogged down.  Might be nice if instead of building it in, Canon and Nikon give the ability to add modules for it, main reason being standards change... for example, MU-MIMO will only really start coming into being next year.  The new 802.ac standard is just really hitting the market in stride and while 802.ac is nice, 802.ax looks to be monster with 10+ GBps transfer - so to my point, as these new standards come out, new antennas and hardware are needed, I would rather pop in an  Eye-Fi Mobi Xtreme (Made the Xtreme up) into my Canon 5D MK IV and take advantage of 802.ax than be sitting there waiting on 802.n. 

Expandability is nice.

Indeed!

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 2.0X TC With Diffractive Optics Element
« on: October 19, 2014, 01:49:36 PM »
Maybe the patent isn't for size/length/weight reduction, but rather IQ improvement. Diffractive optics are better at managing light dispersal. That can allow for a shorter lens, but that isn't necessarily the sole purpose. I for one would like to see better IQ out of a 2x TC...the current TC III is good, but it does impact IQ.

That's what I was thinking too when I saw it. It would be indeed fascinating if they can improve it!

18
And the guy's pictures were not at all stand out for anything...

says mr. anonymous on the internet.
at least he made it to nat geo... you? :P

care to share some of your work?

he does:

http://bobkrist.com/

Oh, and I have posted several pictures here on this forum, and other places on the internet as well, which you likely would have checked first, if you were not a sock puppet for Bob Krist. Self promotion is all well and fine, but be honest about it, no need to hide behind fake names and insult people who disagree with you.

19
what he doesn't do is illustrate his decision with one half descent picture! Certainly nothing that I would deem National Geographic worthy!

unlike you. a self proclaimed critic who has not shown a single picture.  :D

Quote
Bob Krist is a freelance photographer who works regularly on assignment for magazines such as National Geographic Traveler, Smithsonian, and Islands. These assignments have taken him to all seven continents and have won awards in the Pictures of the Year, Communication Arts, and World Press Photo competitions. During his work, he has been stranded ona glacier in Iceland, nearly run down by charging bulls in southern India, and knighted with a cutlass during a Trinidad voodoo ceremony. He won the title of “Travel Photographer of the Year” from the Society of American Travel Writers in 1994, 2007, and 2008. In 2000 his work was honored at the Eisenstaedt Awards for Magazine Photography in New York City.


now i would really like to see some of your images guys.
you know something that shows your DSLR´s are superior. ;)

you seem to have the idea, that because he changed the camera he suddenly became a worse photographer.
i mean sure all the snapshots you take on vacations are masterpieces.... so don´t be shy!

but hey why i ask... mr. and mrs. anonymous on the internet sure know better than this guy. :P

Very low post count, blatantly re-posting the link to a personal webpage, taking on regular members of the community, and calling them anonymous... Are you sure your name is Jon D and not Bob Krist?

20
Hmmm....

At a recent wedding held in a wonderful, ancient Saxon church ( part of it from about 980 AD) the vicar, who was extremely strict about photography in the church, allowed me, after suitable arm twisting, to shoot from one of the chapels in the sacrestry, "as long as there was no flash and no sound whatsoever". Using a 5D I just shot that part in live view, totally silent.

1/1600 flash. Wow ! I just use HSS.

Ten frames per second ? OK I'll have to get a 7DII ( which doesn't cost $3300)

Dust on the sensor ? Now that really is stretching the boundaries of reasons to change systems.

So to conclude this is one of the weaker lists of reasons that I have seen for changing.

What you said. Also, it sounds like what he wants for video is a camcorder. Moreover, downsampling isn't the only thing which causes moire...

This reads like a cheap advertisement for sony, written to lure in entry level people looking to upgrade.

And the guy's pictures were not at all stand out for anything...

21
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 09:40:10 AM »
I must say I was expecting something totally different than Irista 2.0. I was expecting a gear announcement. What I am confused about: what is so impossible? Youtube shows videos... If Canon became amazed because they can have people share  videos like youtube...

I was expecting the high res thingie, though I am not interested in it. Twas merely for the shiny! I await more eos-m mount stuff. 85 2.0?

22
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D MK2 RAW Files
« on: October 05, 2014, 09:28:14 PM »
Nothing in the squirrel looks in good focus, and the whiskers are eaten away by noise/noise removal.

That shot was best left for a full frame sensor.

Clumsy processing, maybe?

23
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 05, 2014, 09:24:41 PM »
Sounds like some kind of motivational seminar. It's probably related to an event where they'll have tutorials and workshops. I really doubt any hardware other than a white rebel or a new handbag.  :P

Exactly what I was thinking. Maybe, you can now buy it with pink trim!

Or, maybe they are announcing the fabled legendary 3D!

24
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: October 01, 2014, 09:44:20 PM »
http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review

Quite an excited review of the Nikon D750. Sample pictures look really great. Especially high iso looks impressive. Says he also worked with the 5DIII and that it does not compare for his work (weddings).

Agree with reviewer that Canon has work cut out for them selves trying to make the 5DIV competitive (either by slashing the price range or jumping the specs).

All the better for us that Canon is under stiff pressure to deliver this time around. This time there will no excuse that Nikon pulled a rabbit.

1. Of course the D750 is better than the 5D III. But who cares?
2. I know Ross's website says he is the best photographer is the world, but I hate his framing. His style is annoying.
3. The 5D IV will be far better than the D750. So, what matters? This is what happens with model year differences.
4. It is highly improbable that anyone could easily come up with any way in particular in a real world meaningful way how it is better. This is not the D300 vs. the 20D.

25
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 7D MK2 RAW Files
« on: September 23, 2014, 10:14:25 AM »
I don't shoot in jpeg.

Well, then you should be able to do even better then, right?

No. To get the kind of detail I want, you cannot shoot crop RAW at these ISO's.

The 5D III, 1Dx, and 6D will.

They said the same about 4'x6' vs. 35mm film for the longest time...

26
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 11-24 f/2.8L Coming [CR1]
« on: August 07, 2014, 05:52:03 PM »
DUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuudddddddddddeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.................................

This is totally up to eleven!!!

I'm pretty sure this might happen, I hope!!!

27
Photography Technique / Re: How to get eyes tack sharp?
« on: August 02, 2014, 02:42:05 PM »
Bird Photography is my main area: post some pictures, and the settings also, and I will likely be able to tell you what went wrong.

28
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM For Sale
« on: July 02, 2014, 11:25:46 AM »
I'm quite content using the 600mm II + 2x III.  Sure it is f/8, but I bet the image quality is better than the bare 1200mm.

I'd guess you're right. The 600 II is a very capable lens, and IS, even when tripod mounted is very useful with lenses this long.

What we need is Bryan over at TDP to get a 1200/5.6 in for review, then we can all learn from his test chart shots :)

He already did. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-1200mm-f-5.6-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

29
APS-H would be interesting, yet it would surely cost more, and seriously not be a 7D... If they will make the 7D mk II a  pro style body, I will surely get  one anyway, though I may need to mine for gold or sell a car or something...

30
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D mark 2 crop vs full frame
« on: June 27, 2014, 08:15:24 PM »
I don't get why internet experts think that the 7D mk II needs to be FF. It is preposterous, as FF and crop are two totally different tools, and crop is a better tool for nearly everything.

The 7D mk II will be a APS-C camera, the FF 7D 2, if you will is called the 1DX.

Sorry, but I completely disagree with the highlighted bit. Crop and FF both have their place, and there is no way crop is a better tool for "nearly everything". For that matter, it's debatable whether crop is better for even a slim majority of things. FF does better in almost every circumstance. It is larger, so gathers more total light. Usually has bigger pixels. Usually has more pixels. Allows thinner DOF with lenses of any given aperture. Allows for truly ultra wide field of view, much wider than anything available on APS-C (i.e. 8mm fisheye is only a true 180 degrees on FF...on APS-C, that true fisheye view is...cropped!), allows you to get closer with any lens when filling the frame (ideal for portraiture and macro photography, especially macro w/ extension), etc. etc.

The one primary case where crop is better is when you need reach and spatial resolution. Crop "gets you closer" when using longer lenses. That will remain true so long as crop sensors have smaller pixels than FF sensors. Someday, however, it is entirely possible that a larger sensor will come along with pixels just as small as crop, with just as high a frame rate. When that happens, the one true advantage of crop will evaporate, and there will be no reason to use it. The FF image would simply need to be...cropped.

Agreed.  IMO, the main thing at which a crop sensor is better is being in a more affordable camera body.

Aye. There is that too! That is probably the single most important factor for crop...reach would be secondary, although still very important. (Heh, I rarely take cost into account...only time I really have is the 1D X...so I usually don't care about cost.)

and portability.... I must confess to being tempted by the M for portability.....

I think that would be  mirrorless vs. DSLR argument. My 7D is roughly the same size as my 5D III. Slightly thinner, slightly taller. Overall they weigh about the same, feel about the same, work mostly the same, the major differences are the AF system, frame rate, and frame size. I wouldn't say the 7D is more portable than the 5D III, though.

The lenses are more portable... Or, could be, if canon would actually make anything beyond 18-xmm zooms... Mirrorless is seriously catching up here...

And as far an  7D lacking IQ, the answer is exposure to the right.  With good exposure practices, the 7D performs quite well at 3200... At 6400, things get sketchy, b ut are rescuable with care. Compared to the 5D MK III the 7D will surely look bad, but it is merely showing its age.

And, I love 7D color! I almost never change it, and I always use AWB. I may occassionally tweak shadow color, or selectively saturate a color, but overall, it does great!

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 50