November 20, 2014, 10:14:31 PM

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 - brad-man

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 51
EOS-M / Re: Anything new on EOS-M3? How it may compare to A6000?
« on: September 04, 2014, 06:22:06 PM »
I hope Canon continues to develop the M system. I have the acclaimed 11-22 on the way from Japan. Although I got it as a "bulk package" item for a big discount, it is still by far the most expensive item of my "system" (1 M body + 22mm + UW + standard zoom). I wish we could get some reviews and testing of the Tamron 18-200 as well as the EF-M 55-200, though I think from now on I'm only really interested in faster primes with AF. Canon? Sigma? Anybody???

Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 25, 2014, 06:18:28 PM »
I guess I'm the only one hoping for an EF-M pancake. I certainly don't expect it, I just like the idea of having another pocketable lens for my little friend.

EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 25, 2014, 05:45:39 PM »
I think that the number of iPhone photos that are being published are a strong indication that the sensor is far less important that the photographer.

 I think that the number of iPhone photos that are being published are a strong indication that the old adage "the best camera is the one you have with you" is true...

The sensor alone does not "make the camera." However, everything else in the camera is there to direct the intended photons to the sensor (other than memory cards).

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 20, 2014, 06:27:51 PM »
Oh dear there's going to be terrible anguish, spitting feathers and general sabre rattling if the 7DII doesn't have some sensor fabrication advance similar to the Exmor. But you know I'm not really sure how much pressure there is on Canon to catch up on this. It would seem that 99% of Canon users (generically speaking) are not bothered about that particular aspect of the sensor, including many well respected professionals; certainly judging by sales there are many other features which the buying public seem to want. Certainly the amount of people using variable ISO now surprises me, but on the other hand given the performance of a camera such as the 6D I suppose that shouldn't be surprising. And when using variable ISO who wants their DR to drop by a stop or two between ISO 100 and 800 ?

That is because those who are bothered by it will be/are moving to other manufacturers. If Canon are fine with bleeding off their market base, then sure, they won't care. If all depends on if the assumption that Canon are cool with losing market share to more progressive manufacturers is true or not.

I suspect they are not cool with that happening.

You skipped a step.  No, Canon doesn't want to lose market share. are assuming they are, in fact, losing market share.  Where is your evidence to support that assumption?   It seems equally if not more likely that those who are bothered by a ~2-stops less low ISO DR and switched from Canon to Nikon are outnumbered by those Nikon users hoping for the true replacement to the D700 that never came, and so bought a 5DIII instead. 

As for 'more progressive manufacturers', your definition of progressive is almost as biased as DxO's Scores.  DPAF...not progressive?  Fluorite elements in supertele lenses, you'd think a progressive company like Nikon would have used them decades ago like Canon did...instead Nikon called them too fragile, only now they're touting the benefits of fluorite in their newest supertele lenses.  Limiting the definitions of 'innovative' and 'progressive' to mean achieving more low ISO DR is typical of the biased DRivel posted by the crew of CR Forum DRones.

In the course of my work I come across a lot of people with cameras, and not many of those are true professionals. Some are just happy snappers, or tourists, or teenagers aspiring to a better camera. The odd one is a highly successful pro who buys £250,000 yachts with loose change ( seriously). ( zigzagzoe's got a long way to go to catch up).

Often these people will chat to me and I'll ask them why they chose Nikon, or Canon or Sony ( 'cos it's always one of these). I've never had one single person say they chose Nikon or Sony because of the extra DR that the sensor offers, or that it has more latitude and can lift shadows by five stops without seeing ugly noise. Not one. Ever.

So although those factors are the number one priority for some, generally very vocal people, and they will move away from Canon, I would suggest they are just a drop in the ocean compared with everyone else. So although I read on CR that Canon is using the same sensor fabrication that Noah had on his Ark, I'm really not sure that Canon are going to see this as a really high priority, especially given the fact that their sales are not declining in relation to Sonikon.

People do have issues with things like trying to focus in movie mode with a dslr for instance, and Canon have done something about that. I've been surprised by the number of 70Ds I've seen given that the camera hasn't been out that long. I would say that the vast amount of casual users are going to appreciate that more than lifting underexposed areas by five stops, and they are the people who are buying most of the cameras.

So what I'm coming round to say is I don't think the 7DII will have a radically different sensor fabrication, and I anticipate the howls of derision that are going to fill these pages from the usual sources.

It would be interesting to find out what percentage of DSLR owners even attempt to do PP, either in jpg or RAW. I suspect the number is rather low (particularly within the single lens crowd). I am hopeful that Canon will incorporate genuine "new and improved" sensor technology in the 7D's replacement as a matter of pride, as well as an effort to maintain market share. I guess I'm just a romantic.

Photography Technique / Re: APOLLO missions - image inconsistencies
« on: August 17, 2014, 11:17:47 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...

I was wondering where my cat went! Lost him shortly before Apollo 11 lifted off. ;D

He went Hollywood...

Yup. I'm more than satisfied with my 16-35 f/4. I also await the 85 as well as the 135 Art. I wonder if they're also working on a 200?

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 15, 2014, 07:55:31 PM »
This is probably the truest statement anyone has made about the 7D II so far. ;) I've tried and tried to demonstrate to everyone, through theory, math, and even some visual examples (of which I clearly need to do more) that an APS-C sized sensor will NEVER perform as well as a FF sensor (all else being equal). The 7D II may close the gap, temporarily, between the 7D line and the 5D line, but it won't overtake the FF in terms of IQ.
and even if there was some new magic technology that allowed the 7D2 to outperform the 5D3, you can bet that the same magic technology would be rushed through development and we would see a 5D4 that restored the FF advantage....

This is my assumption as well. This new sensor will likely indicate the future of the next generation of Canon's SLR sensors. Canon has been relatively stagnant on sensor evolution for too many years, and I feel that their reputation as an innovative camera company is on the line. If half of these specs are true, I can see why this new camera won't be called mark ll. New body style, new sensor, new AF system, new camera. Not a mark ll anything.

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 13, 2014, 05:50:43 PM »
As long as canon and all other digicam makers are able to put wifi and gps into quite a number of measly and cheap 1/1.7" and 1/2.3" dwarf-sensored compact and bridge cams .. Powershots, elphs, coolpix ... And are able to get regulatory approvals for those pieces of junk around the world ... There is no excuse on earth for not putting wifi, gps and rt flash commander into every single dslr they make.

Actually, there is one reason. Marketing. Canon obviously has the tech skills to put pretty much put whatever they want into a DSLR ( except perhaps a clean low ISO, high resolution & DR sensor :) ). They choose not to...

Plastic zoom and focus rings, hmmmm, that's first in the the L world with a full plastic outer shell.

Have a look at this little gem that's been out for over four years:

OK, it doesn't have a plastic zoom ring 8)

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 7D Replacement Info [CR2]
« on: August 11, 2014, 05:00:04 PM »
While I would certainly like/expect WiFi, I have yet to use it on my 6D. I will, however, be disappointed if it does not have a touchscreen like the M. I really just want to see this newly designed sensor and and see what implications it has on the future of Canon's cameras...

Canon General / Re: Neutral Density Filters - HELP !
« on: August 01, 2014, 09:57:23 PM »
As you have supplied wonderful photos of Lees shoddy workmanship in the manufacturing of your filter system, could you please supply a photo that was ruined by this inferior system?

No? I didn't think so.

Some expect a bit more of the gear they with their hard earned money buy, I guess. Like something they come to expect from other manufacturers: deliver flawlessly when it comes to such things as basic chemical treatments to an adapter ring. Never had that from any other manufacturer.
Let's say it this way: If you buy a car and it already has markings on the finish and the window is a bit broken or you can't get some color finish off of it, then you take it home anyways without questioning that for a second? Really odd attitute I must say. What "show me your pics" has got to do with that, is beyond me...

I did send the ND glass back for a replacement. Fingers crossed...

Reading your post made me examine my one OEM Lee adapter and it also has the marks from anodizing. I would never have noticed them otherwise. I do not feel that they will effect the performance in any way. The adapters are, however, completely overpriced. If you decide to keep the system (which I would strongly recommend) you can purchase additional adapters of various sizes for different lenses from "the filter dude" on ebay for $25. They also have marks (as do all anodized products if you look closely enough) but no "worse" than Lees.
I have never needed to use Lees warranty, but have never heard any complaints, so I'm sure they will send you a new filter.

Canon General / Re: Neutral Density Filters - HELP !
« on: July 31, 2014, 06:19:12 PM »
I just bought a Lee filter system and I am really shocked about the build quality of that system. The adapter ring has a faulty finish with markings on it, which then were fixed with a pen as a cover up. After returning that adapter ring I got another one just like it. I conacted the manufacturer which explained to me that these markings are caused in the manufacturing process, quote: "The marks inside the ring are voids left during the anodising process. The rings are suspended in the solution by small wire 'hangers' and these leave voids where they touch the metal."
This I never have seen from any other manufacturer.
See picture for this.
Above all my 0.9 ND pro glass came with tiny specles of yellow finish on the glass right under the yellow label. This goes well 30mm into the middle of the glass. On a glass worth of 200 Euros. Also not what I would call high end. This is just bad quality so far. I haven't given up on it completely but one more of this stuff not gone through the quality control or badly produced and I will send the whole shabbang back.

As you have supplied wonderful photos of Lees shoddy workmanship in the manufacturing of your filter system, could you please supply a photo that was ruined by this inferior system?

No? I didn't think so.

@ OP: Agree with others who recommend Lee Filter System. Though they are pricey at the start, if you're in this picture thing for the long haul, they are actually the best investment for quality and versatility.

Hi folks.
There is a water and object ingress standard at least in Europe, IP XX, where the first number stands for objects and the second for water, I  think it was something like IP 00 means you can get an industry standard finger in there, and water that runs in runs out and IP 67 means that dust has to be below so many microns and you can pressure wash the item and water won't get in.. This is just from memory so feel free to correct me!
Anyway back to the point if it doesn't say IP XX on the label it isn't weather or water resistant!

Cheers Graham.

Agree. That is the standard most commonly used in America as well as internationally. Most of my flashlights are IPX7 ;D  Camera manufacturers simply choose to not use them.

 IPX Standard Code Meanings

 IPX-0     No special protection
 IPX-1     Protected against falling water Equivalent to 3-5mm rainfall per minute for a duration of 10 minutes.
 IPX-2     Protected against falling water when tilted up to 15 degrees – Same as IPX-1 but unit is tested in 4      fixed positions – tilted 15 degrees in each direction from normal operating position.
 IPX-3     Protected against spraying water – Water spraying up to 60 degrees from vertical at 10 liters/min at a pressure of 80-100kN/m2 for 5 min.
 IPX-4     Protected against splashing water – Same as IPX-3 but water is sprayed at all angles.
 IPX-5     Protected against water jets – Water projected at all angles through a 6.3mm nozzle flow rate of 12.5 liters/min at a pressure of 30kN/m2 for 3 minutes from a distance of 3 meters.
 IPX-6     Protected against heavy seas – Water projected at all angles through a 12.5mm nozzle at a flow rate of 100 liters/min at a 100kN/m2pressure for 3 minutes from a distance of 3 meters.
 IPX-7     Protected against water immersion – Immersion for 30 minutes at a depth of 1 meter.
 IPX-8     Protected against water submersion – Equipment suitable for continual submersion in water under conditions as specified by manufacturer.

Canon General / Re: What do you Cheap Out On?
« on: July 28, 2014, 11:28:27 PM »
Somebody make some popcorn...batteries. I have 4 genuine Canon LP-E6s and 4 or 5 generics. With the exception of one clone prematurely wearing out, I am unable to see a difference in performance that would in any way justify the price difference.

Software & Accessories / Re: RRS or Markins?
« on: July 28, 2014, 04:55:18 PM »

Markins generally is thought of as not playing well with other gear. 

I have the Markins Q3 on Gitzo monopod and the Q10 on Gitzo tripod. 7D with RRS L-Plate and 2 lens with collars and RRS lens plates and never had an issue with compatibility.

That quote is completely unfounded and undoubtedly came from someone who has never used a Markins...

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 51