Messages

16

Lenses / Re: Your "precious" lord of the red rings is?

« on: January 07, 2013, 04:51:37 AM »

People, seriously? Discussing what your favorite 2 lenses are in the context of a house fire? What next - a thread where you're in a sinking ship and what lenses you'll save?

Whereas some people would take photos in their spare time, some think about what lenses they'll save in case their house burns down. Ha, that's why I love this forum.

17

Technical Support / Re: IS to control SUBJECT motion???

« on: January 07, 2013, 04:39:07 AM »

Yep, they have a proprietary IS algorithm that predicts what your subject will do next, and the sensor compensates for this movement by shifting its focal plane.

Actually, my sources say that the tech traces its roots to Einstein, and the camera sort of 'freezes' time to keep your subject still. They are even saying that the camera can 'see the future' and will be the precursor for time travel.

Nikonistas are secretly rejoicing as this next generation Sony sensor will finally mean the downfall of Canon.

18

Lenses / Re: Your "precious" lord of the red rings is?

« on: January 07, 2013, 12:54:16 AM »

Obviously he just wanted us all to know that he has two very expensive lenses!

+1

And he didn't take a body with him. Pointless, no?

19

Lenses / Re: Your "precious" lord of the red rings is?

« on: January 07, 2013, 12:16:54 AM »

2 Lenses? In the movie, there's only 1 'precious' ring.

You asked for 2, but you gave 3.

Then you say you have insurance, so it doesn't really matter what you take or not take.

What's this question about?

20

Software & Accessories / Re: What printer paper do you recommend, and why?

« on: January 03, 2013, 03:28:12 PM »

Hobby-level guy here, I use the Canon paper with my Pro 9000 II.  The paper is cheap and the profiles are built into the driver, so no worries.

The paper is by far, the cheaper part of the expense as compared to the ink, so I just stock the Canon paper whenever I find it on sale.  13x19 $1 a sheet usually, and 4x6 paper for proofs/giveaways costs less than a nickel when you buy the 400 pack.

The ink, however, wowsah...$$  I'm just too chicken to try the messy injection or potentially disasterous bulk kits.

i'm using top-of-the-line 3rd party ink, refilled cartridges, and custom profiles for all my papers. It's not disastrous, far from it, if you do it properly. The cost of a spectro to make your own .icc paper profiles is peanuts compared to the money you'll save on ink. Also, you're free to use any paper you see out there and still get the best results.

21

Software & Accessories / Re: What printer paper do you recommend, and why?

« on: January 03, 2013, 01:09:34 AM »

Given your usage, anything beyond the good quality staples and kirkland photo papers will just be a waste of money. More than the paper you use, you will get the best results by making sure you have matching .icc profiles. If you can get your papers custom profiled, including the staples/kirklands mentioned, the results will blow you away even more.

22

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Red Dragon Sensor

« on: January 01, 2013, 08:49:51 PM »

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92158-Enter-the-Dragon

"This is a dirty debayer with no black calibration, no offset correction and no processing on a special 21 stop DR Chart"

21 stops of DR at 6k resolution capable of doing 80fps. Methinks Canon is gonna be lowering the prices on their Cine line in the next year

Huh? What's your opinion based on? Canon and Red aren't even competing in the same category, much more on price.

23

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Body Rumors for 2013

« on: January 01, 2013, 05:14:38 PM »

The big megapickle camera will not be branded as the 1DSx, for the exact same reason that, lo these many years ago, the compact Mac with a 68030 CPU was branded an SE/30 instead of, in keeping with the IIx and the IIcx, the SEx.

How about 1D Xs?

If only because Canon didn't learn from the naming confusion between 1Ds and 1D then yes.

Pity that when it comes to camera names Canon are incredibly so unimaginative.

Confusing only for the people who couldn't afford to buy it. I don't know anyone who mistakenly bought one for the other.

So what do you suggest Canon name the new body?

24

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Body Rumors for 2013

« on: January 01, 2013, 05:00:21 PM »

The 1Dsx will do for me provided Canon manage to leapfrog Nikons current world beating performance with the 800E. If they can achieve that, then I will be in heaven, if not, then its goodbye Canon. I'm not hanging about if they continue to produce cameras with noise and banding issues but with excessive ISO figures.

Having said that, my present 5DII is OK for the moment, so I would rather they spent more time getting it right than a rushed "knee jerk reaction".

Just interested, what do you think an $8,000+ 38+MP camera will do for you when you can currently live with a $1,300 21MP 5D MkII? What do you shoot now, and what do you do with your output that would necessitate such an upscale?

Pixel-peep and read DxO charts. That's the current trend for 'photographers' these days, at least from what I've been seeing in here.

25

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 31, 2012, 07:27:38 AM »

Yep, I'm happy with my inferior Canon sensor because I actually shoot and make a living off my photos, and there are a lot of other things more important than sensor tech that make a big difference on my work and income.

So before you Nikon sensor experts make a comment about who I am and what I think, you better have a portfolio and credentials to match your inexperienced egos.

26

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 31, 2012, 07:01:36 AM »

Oh yeah, the sensor thing. When was the last time big name pro photogs complained about Canon's sensor tech? Wait, I think it's because Canon actually listens to what most people want in their cameras, not just the pixel-peeping minority who have nothing better to do than read DxO charts and zoom in 100% crops instead of actually shooting photos.

Until some printer manufacturer creates a printer that can output 16 billion colors and a paper manufacturer creates media that can display 14 stops of DR on print, I'm perfectly happy with my inferior Canon sensor.

27

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 31, 2012, 06:07:45 AM »

I suspect that the figures are more representative of vendor-lock-in through lenses than anything else (note that 3rd party lenses doesn't change this.) If swapping vendor was a $5 or $10 per lens penalty, things would be different.

A lesser product doesn't necessarily result in it being returned and for those that buy over the Internet, the hurdle is rather high so the product needs to be obviously bad rather than just "not as good."

Your 'vendor lock-in' applies to Nikon users as well. If swapping vendor was a $5 or $10 lens penalty, things would be different - for sure Nikon users will be switching to Canon just as easily.

A lesser product, E.G. NIKON, doesn't necessarily result in it being returned and for those that buy over the Internet, the hurdle is rather high so the product needs to be obviously bad rather than just "not as good."

So what's your point?

28

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 31, 2012, 03:45:45 AM »

But.....but.....Nikon is "better," isn't it?  DxOMark says so, it must be true.  What am I missing?!?  Oh, wait, I know....REALITY.

So?

Sales numbers are not and never have been an indication of quality.

Quality? You talk as if Nikon has quality and Canon is crap. Both have quality mind you. And contrary to what you think, sales figures ARE an indication of quality. Rarely would people buy crap products, especially when you can easily walk back into the store and get a refund.

Well, all this just as I predicted. Defeated nikonistas will never accept Canon being better regardless of the statistics. Yet if these same statistics showed Nikon sold more, they would use the same arguments us Canonistas are using.

So what are you Nikonistas banking on now? Segment the sales numbers until you find a category Nikon leads Canon? Make an argument that Nikon gained market share vs Canon? Plot a historical trend to show Nikon's yearly sales are increasing? Make a list of all the awards received by pro photogs shooting Nikon?

29

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 30, 2012, 07:58:16 PM »

No, they're not savvy enough. Even shop assistants who advise people are not savvy enough.

By definition, masses of people can't be made of experts. It's quite clearly a paradox.

In fact, if we go by the number of units sold, then the 18-55 IS and the 50/1.8 are likely to be considered as the best lenses ever. Or in the same way, if Canon sells more rebels than 1DX, then Rebels are better.

Quite a childish way of reasoning.

Wow, take it to the extremes would you. If you're going to compare sales, then at least do so within the same category. 'Cause by your same reasoning the best cars in the world are the Toyota Corollas and the Honda Civics - forget the Porsches, BMWs, Bentleys, and the like.

And if I recall, wasn't it just recently that someone posted Nikon sales figures besting Canon's to flout Nikon as being better?

I knew it was just a matter of time before someone here responded that Canon sales figures mean nothing. Well Nikonistas, if you can come up with hard, verifiable numbers to back up your claims that most people believe that your Nikons are better, I'm all ears. Until then, sales figures are king.

30

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

« on: December 30, 2012, 06:41:44 PM »

The majority has spoken.

I'm a believer! 

Yes, this is a glorious day for Canonistas in this forum. Better make this post sticky for future references for those who dare bash Canon again...