July 26, 2014, 09:21:20 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 - Don Haines

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 187
226
EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Replacement Buzz Going Around [CR2]
« on: June 09, 2014, 10:19:39 AM »
I find the naysayer's comments to be quite entertaining....

I expect it to be to the 70D, like the 7D was to the 60D. Better AF, better sealing, a bit faster, and about twice the price. Anything more will be a bonus.

Since my 60D is getting long in the tooth, for me the time is right for an upgrade.

227
Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: June 09, 2014, 08:11:56 AM »
And to all you southerners, this is the strait between Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, two days ago....

228
EOS Bodies / Re: Reports of EOS 7D Reaching End of Life [CR2]
« on: June 05, 2014, 02:49:26 AM »
Not surprising..... Sales of the 7D have plummeted since the 70D came out and my guess is that they have jot made new ones for a while and internal stock is low. With the delays in the 7D2, there might even be a gap between when they run out of 7Ds and the mark 2 version is released...... That would certainly get the  comments flowing from forum members....

229
EOS Bodies / Re: Can Canon deliver a FF sensor that is class leading?
« on: June 03, 2014, 05:38:14 PM »
Guys, didn't you read DxOmark? Just downsample your images down to 8x12" and print it. Then you gain at least 2 stops of dynamic range. And if 14-stops isn't enough then just downsample some more.  :P
OK.
I downsampled this picture of my cat to 16x16 pixels, how much dynamic range should I have?

230
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Answer to Everyone's Complaints
« on: June 03, 2014, 04:16:31 AM »
If Canon were somehow able to poll every one of their users and publish the results, we would see that pretty much everyone is happy with the Canon options out there right now.


I am a happy camper.

I like my 60D. I should have gotten a 7D, but that's my fault, not Canons....

I will be happier when the 7D2 comes out.


BTW, I picked Canon over Nikon for three reasons. First was the ergonomics, second was the 70-200F4IS, and third was the 17-55F2.8. In other words, user interface and glass mattered far more to me than sensor and when the appropriate time comes, the body gets upgraded and I still have that great glass

231
Lenses / Re: purchasing 70-200 f4 IS now?
« on: June 02, 2014, 03:43:24 PM »
you may want to wait a bit longer, since it is said to be updated very soon.
I have it and also Sony Nikon 70-200mm f4G lenses and I compared them side by side many times, in absolute term the Canon f4LIS is still a good lens but it shows its age compared to the Sony and the Nikon,espeically to the Sony.
and imho, the Canon f4LIS and Nikon f4VR are overpriced compared to the excellent Sony 70-200mm f4 SSM , the Sony comes with tripod mount and it is about 100US cheaper than the optically inferior Canon f4 70-200mm and the Optically as good but heavier Nikon..
I tested them all on my A7R and see the differences, the Sony was clearly sharper than the other 2 at 70 , 100, 135mm wide open , but at 200mm end , the Nikon was the better lens  at f4 , but stopping down to f6.3 , the Sony becomes better than the other 2 again.    I also compared the build quality of the 3 lenses, to me the Sony seems better made lens but a bit bigger than the Canon, the biggest one is the Nikon f4 and it is a bit longer than the Canon and the Sony.  But honestly I prefer the look of the Nikon lens since it is black and less conspicuous in public.   but if do not  care about the color of the lens, but only optical quality and AF accuracy , then the Sony wins hands down here.  and  after comparing the 3 , I am quite sure, the Sony and Nikon 70-200mm f4 are quite a bit better than the Canon one, and I am sure Canon must update it with better IS and better anti-flare coating very soon to be competitive.  the Nikon has almost 5 stop effective VR , and it focuses very very close, so personally I do not buy the Canon f4 70-200mm IS lens now , and I do not need f2.8 any more in this range(I use the Zeiss 135mm f2 APO instead). So if I need the best 70-200mm f4 zoom now , I will go Sony or Nikon. If you can wait , wait a few months , I am quite sure we will see a new 70-200mm f4LIS lens from Canon at Photokina(it does not mean we can actually buy it very soon , though).
All that having said , the best 70-200mm zoom is the Canon 70-200mm f2.8LISMK2 USM lens.
Your post sounds like that of a lens snob - this is one of Canon's best lenses and other than the aperture being slower than the f/2.8 versions, I have yet to hear anyone complain about this lens.  Besides, there are exactly zero rumors (on CR) about this lens being replaced so I don't know what you're talking about. 

ATC, this is a phenomenal lens, you won't be disappointed with it.

This lens is ALMOST as sharp as the 2.8IS version.... They are so close that with the lens to lens variations one would expect to see, they almost certainly overlap. It is a phenomenal lens, quite possibly the best " bang for the buck" of any canon lens. You would need laboratory testing with test charts to tell the images from the F2.8IS version, yet at half the price and weight it is a lot easier to afford and much much easier to carry and to operate. That extra 2/3 of a stop comes at a big hit in weight and dollars.

232
why isn't Canon focusing some efforts on creating sensors able to capture at least closer to the 24 stops the human eye can see?

Yes, the human eye is capable of seeing 24 stops of light... but even my 60D can see 40 stops of light.... (3 stops of aperture, 7 stops of ISO, 18 of shutter speed, and 12 stops of DR).... but only about 12 at a time.

And similarly that's how the eye works. You do not see the whole 24 stops at once. The iris adjusts to let light in, giving several stops of range, and in dim light you go to a very low resolution B+W sensor. Note how your eyes take time to adjust as you go from bright to dim areas... And on top of that, your "video feed" from your eyes is an incredibly processed predictive feed where the output is based on past events and not what you actually see, plus the resolution is highest NEAR the centre, falling off severely at the edges, and blank in the middle (blind spot). The mind takes this incredibly lousy video feed and processes it into what we perceive as vision.

In short, just about every camera out there has superior resolution and DR than the human eye.

I'm thinking of strapping a pair of 1Dx onto my face, I can always see better through the viewfinder, age related no doubt.
Seriously though.... ever used a night vision headset? You can see great in what appears to be complete darkness... imagine a camera like that... ISO 26,214,400?

233
why isn't Canon focusing some efforts on creating sensors able to capture at least closer to the 24 stops the human eye can see?

Yes, the human eye is capable of seeing 24 stops of light... but even my 60D can see 40 stops of light.... (3 stops of aperture, 7 stops of ISO, 18 of shutter speed, and 12 stops of DR).... but only about 12 at a time.

And similarly that's how the eye works. You do not see the whole 24 stops at once. The iris adjusts to let light in, giving several stops of range, and in dim light you go to a very low resolution B+W sensor. Note how your eyes take time to adjust as you go from bright to dim areas... And on top of that, your "video feed" from your eyes is an incredibly processed predictive feed where the output is based on past events and not what you actually see, plus the resolution is highest NEAR the centre, falling off severely at the edges, and blank in the middle (blind spot). The mind takes this incredibly lousy video feed and processes it into what we perceive as vision.

In short, just about every camera out there has superior resolution and DR than the human eye.

234
Class leading for what?

Everything is a mixture of inter-related tradeoffs... nothing can or will do everything better than the rest.

235
Lenses / Re: Tamron 150-600 with 2X converter? any success?
« on: May 30, 2014, 01:25:40 PM »
I don't need to have experience with that particular lens and any 2x extender. I don't need to bother with the question wether that will focus or not. I can tell from what has been said about the quality of the bare lens at 600 mm that putting a 2x extender on it doesn't make any sense, except maybe for shooting video.

There are few lenses where a 2x Extender makes sense at all. Without any extender, those have to outperform the camera sensor. From what I hear, the Tamron 150-600 doesn't do that at 600 mm. So with a 2x extender you are basically magnifying the image, but won't record any additional information.

And by losing 2 stops, you probably will add some motion blur to the image.
The first time I tried teleconverters on the 150-600 was today to see if they would focus. Although the will focus SLOWLY in "live view", the degradation of the images is such that you can resolve more detail without them. In short, I agree with Aichbus in that it does not make any sense.

If you are going to use a teleconverter, you need a VERY sharp lens. Even a 70-200 degrades with a 2X teleconverter.... you need a $5000+ "big white" to get any real value from them.....

236
It seems that many people are interested in film in part because it captures light with a similar range to the human eye.  Between that, the wide utilization of RAW, and just the general issue of needing HDR or some other technique to balance many scenes, why isn't Canon focusing some efforts on creating sensors able to capture at least closer to the 24 stops the human eye can see?

I shoot in very high contrast areas with poor lighting (abandoned buildings), and dynamic range is actually the trait I care more about than any other at the moment.  Canon has only reached 12.1 EV, while Nikon is at least hitting 14.2 EV.

Fujifilm had that one DSLR back in the day that could recover an insane amount from the highlights.  I remember hearing it had something to do with a grid of different sized holes over the pixel array. I'm surprised no one has looked to challenge that technique.

So they are hitting 14.2 EV with a 14-bit ADC you are saying?
And you wonder why people question DXO?

237
EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in Testing? [CR1]
« on: May 30, 2014, 12:06:49 PM »
I find it inconceivable that there would not be a new FF camera in testing....

hopefully you do know what the word inconceivable means even if a certain someone in a certain movie did not
otherwise canon has lost the plot
not conceivable, unimaginable, incapable of being conceived, imagined, or considered....



I find it inconceivable that any thing(noun) or verb(action) could be correctly described as inconceivable, …it having been conceived already in order to be used as the subject of the description.  ;D

Anything truly inconceivable will never be a subject of discussion!
+√∞ :)

238
Lenses / Re: Tamron 150-600 with 2X converter? any success?
« on: May 30, 2014, 10:51:18 AM »
I tried the 150-600 with Sigma extenders on a 60D

No extender - Focuses in normal and Live View

1.4X extender - Normal view does not work and focuses past infinity, live view works and focuses slowly

2X extender - Normal view does not work and focuses past infinity, live view works and focuses VERY slowly


239
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Artifact caused by bad memory card?
« on: May 29, 2014, 01:13:42 PM »
Thanks for the reply. I'm new here and not very knowledgeable.   Can you reformat a card that has "gone south"?
Personally, I would not trust that card anymore.....

240
EOS Bodies / Re: New DSLR and PowerShots in May [CR2]
« on: May 29, 2014, 08:59:51 AM »

We’re told to finally expect some significant camera announcements from Canon in May. There will be a couple of PowerShot’s announced, most notably the SX60 IS and its 100x zoom, as well as a DSLR. The assumption on the DSLR is that it will be the follow-up to the EOS 7D.</p>


So, today or tomorrow, right?   :o
I'm leaving on a trip tomorrow morning.... do you think the 7D2 will be ready in time? :)

If you go to Brasil, sure it's there  ;)

So no world cup photographers who went to Labrador, Canada, instead of Brasil???? Darn! Perhaps I can take a slight detour.....

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 187