Messages

76

Lenses / Re: About to buy the 135L, and then saw this....

« on: October 02, 2012, 04:02:29 AM »

....In the case of lenses, they are reporting resolution as a peak measurement - the highest resolution measured at any location in the lens' FoV, at any aperture setting, and for zooms at any point in the focal range.  Maybe the lens is crap wide open and crap through most of the zoom range - DxOMark's resolution score doesn't care....

So they measure the wrong thing then. Any chinese $50 lens maker can make a lens that has spectacular resolution at *one* point in the field and at *one* aperture setting. Silly DxOMark.

....the real problem with the DxOMark scoring ....they make it far too easy for human nature to pounce on that number and say, "This one is the best." 

To sum up, IMO, DxO's Measurements are valid and useful, their Scores are meaningless, and the inappropriate interpretation that many forum posters apply to their conflated scores is reprehensible.   

Nah sorry, if they publish data that is inconsistent with human nature, then I don't know what species they think they are talking to!

And I wouldn't blame forum posters for 'inappropriate interpretation' in this case. If DxOMark publish a number called 'resolution score' which makes good lenses look bad and bad lenses look good, then I will accuse them of 'mischievous obfuscation'! And that's being kind; I could have accused them of deliberate deception and spectacularly incompetent data presentation.

77

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???

« on: October 02, 2012, 03:34:18 AM »

For all-round general purpose flexibility and a 28mm sensor,

EF-S 10-22mm

EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS - mounted on the camera!

EF 70-300mm L IS


However if macro is a serious priority,

EF 100mm f2.8 L IS - doubles as a portrait lens

EF-S 15-85mm IS

EF 70-300mm IS

78

EOS Bodies / Re: mhm... open letter to canon?

« on: September 27, 2012, 09:31:22 PM »

DKN, you are diverting discussion from your original claim that Canon's claim the 6D has good low light AF is 'bull'. I can't see why you doubt it.

79

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 27, 2012, 09:26:04 PM »

...I am happy with my 5D3.  However, I also agree Nikon has better sensor. ...

Nikon don't make better sensors, though. It's an open secret that Nikon uses Sony sensors.  This means if Sony catches a cold, Nikon develop pneumonia. If Sony has a production problem, Nikon has a supply problem and a recall problem. If Sony's FF sensor production stalls or has issues, how much will it hurt Sony? Ah, but how much will it hurt Nikon?

Also, Nikon are therefore losing their in-house sensor capability. If Canon have a particular area they want to research and develop their sensors, they just power ahead and do it. If Nikon have a similar wish, they write a begging letter to Sony. If Sony's imaging priorities start to diverge from what Nikon would like, too bad, Nikon products will suffer.

And this flows on to the issue of integration. By controlling all aspects of product development, Canon can develop fully integrated products. One can expect them to use this to make better *cameras*. A sensor is not a camera.   

If you are wondering if this is terribly important, ask Apple. Nikon are becoming the PC of cameras next to Canon's Apple. The PC might have a CPU with a few more 0.1 GHz and an extra MB of cache, but in terms of integrated performance for the end user...... It is impossible for them to keep up for long while they have to take what Sony delivers and built a camera and processor around it with falling in-house sensor tech capability. IMHO.

80

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D!

« on: September 23, 2012, 09:23:04 PM »

....So basically to get a true comparison I need to photograph one subject with both cameras but with the 40D zoom to 180% to get the same magnification to accurately compare?...

Mate, are you a camera reviewer? What's the point? Go read a real reviewer's test of the 7D  e.g. dpreview.com: they thought the IQ was fine.

81

Lenses / Re: Photozone's review of the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is up

« on: September 23, 2012, 09:08:02 PM »

I guess I can't comment because I am perfectly happy with my EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS. Which, BTW, PZ rated more highly for optics than the new 24-70. (strictly being mischievous here  )

82

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D!

« on: September 17, 2012, 10:35:59 PM »

May it be APS-H 

I pray not. My 10-22 and 17-55 are much loved....

83

Canon General / Re: Loving Canon right now.

« on: September 17, 2012, 10:34:18 PM »

I'm upset, not because of the 6D, but what it could have been.....I expected more. I will never expect anything 'exceptional' from Canon again.

Ah, unrealistic expectation resulting in upset.

For me, it is a very pleasant surprise. A more affordable FF Canon. Just what is needed.

It should be a very nice camera. Can't wait to see a full review.

84

EOS Bodies / Re: Is a 46mp Canon EOS-1 on the Way? [CR1]

« on: September 10, 2012, 08:46:54 PM »

....In development announcements seem to be getting more popular with Canon and their high end products. ....

Do you think that this trend to 'in development' announcements is restricted to relatively new products? Ones that won't necessarily affect sales of existing Canon products?

85

EOS Bodies / Re: Is a 46mp Canon EOS-1 on the Way? [CR1]

« on: September 10, 2012, 08:32:08 PM »

There's been no evidence of a mass exodus to the dark side due to the D800, there's always far more talk of switching, than actual switching.  ....

Makes one wonder whether they are in competition, or just coexistence? If it is so hard to win some sales from the other company....

86

EOS Bodies / Re: Who is waiting for Canon Mirrorless?

« on: May 29, 2012, 12:00:39 AM »

....i hope they really use this as a complete new form of camera.. and get edgy and experimental....

You must know a company called Canon that I dont!  (P.S. Nikon did that, I think, with the '1'. And people are so harsh...)

Canon have always been proud of their full systems. I think they would be reluctant to release an all new system and be choked by a weak link like poor range of lenses.

It is POSSIBLE that their delay in entry has been to prepare a decent full system. They have the resources and the reputation .... but they would have to be sure that this is the future of the consumer camera.

I think micro 43 is the right-size package, combining body size, sensor size and lens size. In my dream Canon would release a m43 compatible series, because they think it is so important to have a full range of lenses available. Then they could start releasing Canon m43 lenses that only work on the Canon bodies.

87

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D full frame

« on: May 28, 2012, 11:41:08 PM »

I would like to see 7D2 have a switchable viewfinder OVF/EVF. On EVF mode you can have better nighttime vision, super-fast shutter operation, and better hand-held videoing.

88

Lenses / Re: What lenses are you missing in the line up

« on: November 07, 2011, 09:06:03 PM »

some non-exotic high quality EF-S wide/standard primes:
11mm f2
15mm f2
21mm f2
28mm f1.4 IS
35mm f1.4 IS

89

EOS Bodies / Re: The 60D Needs AF Microadjustment

« on: September 07, 2010, 09:54:41 AM »

It seems an easy thing to 'manage the risk'. In stages.

Firstly, it is adjustable, just not by the user. It's a Canon service item.

So, if it's the body, it's a free fix under warranty.

If it's a Canon lens not focusing and lens is under warranty, see above. Send body and lens to Canon.

If Canon lens is not under warranty, cheapest option is to sell it and buy another used sample of same lens. It will most likely be fine. Or, spend a bit more, pay Canon to adjust it (camera or lens, whichever).

If it is not a Canon lens, sell it and buy another used sample of same lens. Or replace it with a Canon lens. 

Simple strategies to follow, if, if, if and if, the various possible and unlikely scenarios start to cascade up for you. Most likely none of it will even be relevant.

People seem to be talking about existing lenses they own that they know to not focus properly. Sell 'em, or buy a camera specially for 'em. But why criticize a camera that isn't specially for such lenses?

Seriously, I wonder how many owners who *think* they are advanced camera geeks have made things worse by fiddling with the MA on their cameras? And don't even know it? 

90

EOS Bodies / Re: The 60D Needs AF Microadjustment

« on: September 07, 2010, 12:03:21 AM »

Are ANY of the posters above, who are complaining about the lack of MA on the 60D, both in the market for the 60D and currently utilising MA in their current camera or in need of MA because they are experiencing focus accuracy problems with their current camera?

i.e. are you actually experiencing a problem?