August 20, 2014, 11:36:16 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 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 196
241
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's D800E 30% sharper than D800
« on: July 07, 2014, 09:48:01 AM »
Just because someone claims something does not mean it is true.

Take a look at the reports coming out of the "ponds institute" and the claims with beauty products..... "30 percent brighter", "reduces the look of winkles 70 percent" etc etc etc.... I put the DXO claims in the same category.... and don't call me a Canon Fanboy because of that... All their claims are tainted and it does not matter who made the gear.

As had been said before, any attempt to reduce a complex system used for diverse goals to a single rating number is doomed to failure.

242
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Announcement September 5, 2014?
« on: July 07, 2014, 09:15:12 AM »
About time! I am sure there will be a sudden burst of sales....

243
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 07, 2014, 06:42:10 AM »
This is different from your use case, but I recently became "bi-cameral" myself. Been switch-hitting for about 8 months.

I own a 1980's vintage Tamron Adaptall 300mm f/2.8 lens. For those unfamiliar, the Adaptall series of lenses were sold "mountless" and were purchased with whatever auxiliary mount was needed for your system (Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, whatever). I tried a couple of their lenses in the 80's and found them optically quite good, but the deal breaker was that they focused "backwards." At the time, I was a Nikon shooter. Since I am now a Canon shooter, it's no longer backwards to me, and when I saw a mint condition copy of this lens for about 700 bucks, I waffled for a few weeks, but finally bit on it.

Of course, it's a manual focus lens. But I'm old, so I can do that.

To make a long story slightly shorter, the so-so quality of the "fourth-party" lens adapter (Tamron never made one for EOS), plus the need to stop-down meter due to the Tamron's lack of electronic aperture, made the user experience a bit dicey. So finally, I broke down and bought a Nikon D7000 and Tamron Nikon AI Adaptall mount. Since even a relatively new Nikon "understood" the old non-electronic AI mount, stop-down metering is avoided, and there were none of the little electronic glitches I got with the no-name Canon adapter.
Are you sure Tamron never made an EOS adaptor? I have one......

244
EOS Bodies / Re: The Always Hidden Camera at the World Cup
« on: July 06, 2014, 09:05:52 PM »
It was raining in the matches today or prior, but what I found interesting was what looked someone shooting with a sx50hs on a monopod. Seems like an odd camera for a pro at a night game
It could be the rumored SX-60..... Perhaps that is the secret camera that Canon is testing and not a 7D2 :-)

LOL  Wouldn't THAT make the forum run red with blood and fury!!!!   :o ::)  LOL
Yes...

SX-60...
20-1500mm equivalent...
DPAF
digic6 processor
gps, wifi and touchscreen
and even 4K 24fps video :-)

I bet they would sell WAY!!! more of those than the 7D2 and 5D4 combined....

245
EOS Bodies / Re: The Always Hidden Camera at the World Cup
« on: July 06, 2014, 12:07:48 PM »
It was raining in the matches today or prior, but what I found interesting was what looked someone shooting with a sx50hs on a monopod. Seems like an odd camera for a pro at a night game
It could be the rumored SX-60..... Perhaps that is the secret camera that Canon is testing and not a 7D2 :-)

246
EOS Bodies / Re: The Always Hidden Camera at the World Cup
« on: July 04, 2014, 03:21:24 PM »
Are you sure it's not a Sony and the photographer is ashamed of it :)

247
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV To Feature 4K Video?
« on: July 04, 2014, 01:23:55 PM »
This "protect the higher cameras conspiracy theory" is bunk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

Yes, and all the same they still clearly, over the top protect their high end video and DSLR, even when it comes to silly little things (witness AFMA left out of 40D and 60D and the silly AutoISO saga where they still only allow it to fully work on 1DX).
good points! Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle....

248
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV To Feature 4K Video?
« on: July 03, 2014, 05:03:20 PM »
This "protect the higher cameras conspiracy theory" is bunk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

249
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV To Feature 4K Video?
« on: July 03, 2014, 09:51:41 AM »
I didn't know there is video feature on 5D  :o
started on the 5D2...1920x1080

250
<ERROR>
Camera 2.13.4321 is incompatible with Windows Media Player 12.962. Please upgrade your copy of Microsoft Office to the latest version.

251
This is going to appear as part of the new user interface on the 7D2.

It will greatly simplify taking pictures.

Turn on 7D2
wait 8 minutes for it to finish booting up
log in with user id
wait another minute
select camera app, click on "yes, I am sure that I wish to allow this program to make changes to camera"
wait for camera app to load
click on "use previous camera settings"
click on focus
click on shutter
click on "yes, I wish to store picture"
select directory
enter file name or click on default
click on "Yes, I wish to store (filename) in (directory)
enter administrator authorization password

and that's all!

252
Yep, it's a rumor site, step right on through the mirror...

But then what's the point in talking about any rumor here?

let's just strip it down to "a camera and a lens will be released, probably in September". That's pretty generic and hard to refute until September.

But if you say "APS-C and telephoto" I should think a full frame camera and a wide angle zoom are in the works, possibly?

Seems to me you're trying to butter both sides of the bread.

There were rumors a while back suggesting a new wide angle lens would be released...and now we have the 16-35mm f/4L IS.  According to your viewpoint, the rumors were flat out wrong because the 16-35/4L is not a wide angle lens, it's a ultra-wide zoom lens.

The point is, construing a rumor stating 'telephoto lens' as excluding the possibility of a telephoto zoom lens is not logical.
agreed!
And even if we were to say that the Canon website listing the lenses was the ultimate authority....note that the 200-400 is listed as a super-telephoto... not a super telephoto zoom, and not a telephoto zoom...

I hope this sufficiently confuses the issue :)

253
I'm thinking a slightly different recipe for the telephoto...200-400 f/5.6 sans the built in converter obviously.

Was chatting to a few of the guys I know who predominantly shoot wildlife and very few use focal lengths shorter than 200mm.

And yes, if the performance at 400mm is better than that of my beloved 400mm f/5.6, I may just upgrade :D

Dunno why I'm sitting here trying to image how Brian will review a lens I just conjured up in my mind?!

We have 24-70..... a couple versions... all great lenses

We have 70-200... a couple versions... all great lenses

We have a 200-400.... only one version, very expensive

It seems natural (to me) to have a 200-400F5.6 as a "lower priced" 200-400 option. the narrower zoom range makes it easier to keep great image quality.... after all, the more the range, the more compromises you have to make, and the worse the lens performs...

254
Now that's starting out in style!

Great shots and welcome to the forum.

255
CR3 makes this near real...right?

Real.  Just like aliens.

Aliens are real; the people who report seeing them, but consistently fail to get high-quality photos/video, despite the near-ubiquity of adequate-quality recording equipment, are not.   :P
Alien spaceships travel by projecting a tiny black hole in front of them and use the gravitational attraction to accelerate their spaceships. These micro black holes cause the space-time continuum to warp, and that warping disrupts the flow of photons.... and that is why all photos of flying saucers are blurred....

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 196