October 26, 2014, 12:48:31 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 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 225
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 18, 2014, 09:34:31 AM »

Another salient point, the camera must be a LONG way out from delivery if they haven't already started printing brochures, manuals and boxes!  That material doesn't just spring into being in the many thousands of copies needed overnight!

The contract to print for Canon must be worth a fortune! If they do it in-house, then they have control over leaks. If it is contracted out, there is undoubtedly a penalty clause for leaking info, plus that would mean the loss of your biggest client and that nobody else in the industry would touch you again... That would be the death of the company, so anyone printing the info would keep things absolutely quiet. Anyone who leaked the info would loose their job and get sued for millions.... it is not worth it!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Switch from Ds3 to 7d Mk2
« on: August 18, 2014, 09:26:16 AM »
My only lens for macro is a 180mm which manages to cough out superior images in spite of my ineptitude.
What would be the results if I were to use that lens on a new 7D Mk2?
Things like...minimum focusing distance, increased magnification due to smaller field of view, and whatnot.
I can't speak for the 7D2 as it isn't out yet.... But I find that I greatly prefer using the 100L macro lens on the 60D instead of the 5D2... it works the same on either body but the 60D gives more pixels on the target and the appearance of greater magnification. I would suspect the same for the 180 macro....

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:31:10 AM »
One of my uncles worked on the Lunar Lander project and keeps saying that when you look at the moon that you can see his work....

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:26:23 AM »
Who was panning the camera when they took off from the moon to come home? Was that remotely controlled by NASA?

Yep, NASA, by remote control - the techician who did it having practiced before the event with a simulation into which the comms delay caused by the Earth-moon distance was built, so that he could get used to anticipating the delay.

I thought it was the aliens in Area51 who did the filming... I guess I was wrong. I am glad to read Canon Rumours, you learn something new every day.... The truth is out there :)

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:21:04 AM »
The absence of a new lower end APS-C camera (xx0D) makes for interesting speculation that they've held off releasing a new camera because they realise there's no point in making it as the 7DII will make it seem irrelevant.


You realize that the best selling Canon camera is the T3.... and that it outsells every other camera Canon makes combined! This is because you can get the camera and lens CHEAP!. Apparently, for the masses, cheap beats IQ hands down...

So somehow a 7D2, probably for $2500 WITHOUT a lens is going to somehow mean that there will be no more demand for a $400 camera with lens, when price seems to be the dominant market force for the masses?

Are you sure of your logic?

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 18, 2014, 06:42:09 AM »
I also like the part about how it was too dangerous so it would not have been done for real....

Imagine sitting on the top of a 363 foot high tube filled with 6,030,000 pounds of high explosives, knowing that someone was going to ignite it and the blast would send you into orbit. That takes real bravery. If they are prepared to accept that, then they were probably ready to accept a bit of radiation... The plan for a solar storm was to shelter behind the heat shield of the re-entry module and if a solar storm happened while on the moon, to abort the landing mission and return to the orbiter.

These people were prepared to die, but hoped that they didn't. They had seen friends die in rockets and they went anyway.... and then someone in their nice comfy chair says it must be faked because it was too dangerous..
Show some respect!

Canon General / Re: Canon lens comparible to a 150-500 or 150-600
« on: August 17, 2014, 10:17:21 PM »
Generally, Canon, and Nikon do not try to compete with the low cost lenses.  They can't compete.  Their entire system from design thru production is based on high end items aimed at professional photographers.

This has been the case for 50+ years.

They do have consumer grade lenses, but also avoid competing with their high end stuff.  They also limit the minimum aperture to f/5.6, which is the specification for fast and reliable autofocus for consumer cameras. 

We might see a new 100-400L for $2200, a 150-600mm f/5.6 zoom when done right is going to be big and expensive.
Even if you forget zoom lenses and stick to fixed focal lengths, which should be a lot less expensive, a 600F5.6 should be the same cost as a 300F2.8, or around $7500 to $8000. A 500F5.6 should be a lot more affordable, only around $5000 or so.... Either lens would have IQ that would embarrass the Tamron, but for 5 times the price it should.

If we see a new 100-400F5.6, and probably for $2500, it will probably resolve more distant detail at 400mm than the Tamron does at 600mm, but once again, for twice the price.

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 17, 2014, 09:19:59 PM »
I also believe that numerous lunar orbiters have since photographed the site.
yes, but photos can be manipulated :)

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 17, 2014, 09:04:45 PM »
and as has been posted before..... proof that it was faked because if you look carefully in the left hand corner of the picture, you can see a housecat...

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 17, 2014, 09:01:21 PM »
I was impressed with the "flag blowing in the wind" sequence and how it is proof that it was done on a soundstage... except, of course, there is no wind on a soundstage unless you get some "honking big" fans and turn them on.... this is not something that would go un-noticed....

PowerShot / Re: What Else is Coming for Photokina? [CR2]
« on: August 17, 2014, 07:14:04 PM »
So the rumour is that Canon will have something at Photokina...but nobody knows what it is or even if it is....

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 17, 2014, 07:00:29 PM »
In case someone doesn't get it:

You won't see more steps in a shot of a transmission step wedge by downscaling, the downscaled image will look exactly the same unless you downscale so much that you see pixelization. If  you compare a shot taken with a 8mpix sensor against shot taken with a 36mpix sensor where each pixel has exactly the same DR in both sensors however...

You will see the exact same DR in both shots. No different then if you shot 8x10 Velvia 50 and 35mm Velvia 50 and compared them in terms of DR.

First of my examples yes you will same DR, second of example wrong, you will see different DR and that is precisely why comparing print DR makes sense and screen DR is of limited value. If signal to noise performance per pixel is equal, a higher megapixel sensor will always capture more information. Why this happens is already explained in one of the other 2000 DR threads here.

As dtaylor previously stated, there's a difference between the generic definition of dynamic range (as applied to signals of all types) and the meaning of photographic dynamic range.  Get a Stouffer step wedge and a light table and try it out...
such is the fun when an analog system (film) goes digital and confusion about measurement and calibration multiplies.....

I come from an electronics background and to me, it's SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) to measure performance of electronics, not DR. I have always thought of DR as the equivalent of "stops", an observed/perceptual scale, not a measurable scale with electronics test equipment.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 17, 2014, 06:04:54 PM »
Sales are declining so the challenge is to sell more units.

The best way to sell more units is to make the unit more attractive to buyers.

New features, be they software or hardware are a good way to make something more attractive to buyers.
so simple and so true.....

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L For Sale
« on: August 17, 2014, 05:52:45 PM »
Sneaker Zoom is quite a bit cheaper

Not if you want to shoot extraterrestrial objects (the moon, other planets, etc.).

Fortunately for me, I am tall so I can get my camera closer :)

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 17, 2014, 04:30:28 PM »
To get us back on topic, a rundown of EOS 7D Mark II information.....

What we know so far is in the list below:

Point 1: We don't even know if it will be called the 7D Mark II

That's it! That's all we know! ...... but let's see if we can get over 1000 posts to discuss this wealth of information...

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 225