September 23, 2014, 12:40:18 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 - heptagon

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 11
91
EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 04, 2012, 02:54:12 AM »
I would rather have a good 1 point AF sensor than 9 bad ones. I would rather than 22 good mega pixels than 36 bad ones. I would rather have good menu system than sensor specs. I would rather have integrated WIFI and GPS units than not. I would rather have the EF lens support than not. I would rather have good customer support than not. I would rather have my Canon than not!

Actually I'd rather have a dozen good AF sensors instead of 9 mediocre ones and 36 million good pixels instead of 22 million mediocre ones. Where do i get that? Oh right, Nikon has it.

92
I've always thought the smartest thing for Canon to do would be to have official plug-ins for that sort of thing. Maybe provide your camera serial number, pay $25 and get a file that's either flashed into the camera or loaded to a special folder on your cards via DPP.

Even better an app store, it wouldn't be too hard for them to vet code to only use official APIs like Apple do so there's no chance of damage to the camera and have rules on how much CPU they can use etc. Bit of extra cash for Canon, a bit of extra cash for thousands of developers and the ability to get just about any feature you could dream of for end-users.

As for warranty / support just have a quick and official way to disable the plug-ins so they can quickly work out if problems are with the base firmware / camera or some sort of add-on.

The 6D has WiFi internet access. I'm waiting for the Canon App Store.

93
Instead of the 7D or the extender you might consider the 550D/T2i which has the same sensor. You get a slower framerate, no sealing, only center AF but essentially the same image quality. For occasional wildlife this might just be enough. And you have 2 cameras at hand. The 5D iii below 100mm and the crop camera above 112mm equivalent.

94
Canon General / Re: Lens Rebates Extended & 5D Mark II $400 Instant Rebate
« on: September 30, 2012, 12:24:15 PM »
I'm a bit confused; Is the 5D2 after rebate 1299$ or 1799$?

It's 1799 with the rebate.

Oh, i almost got my hypes up.

95
I also have heard that they do allow slr's but the white zooms are persona non grata.

Once again the Nikon-Crowd wins!

96
Canon General / Re: Lens Rebates Extended & 5D Mark II $400 Instant Rebate
« on: September 30, 2012, 07:37:01 AM »
I'm a bit confused; Is the 5D2 after rebate 1299$ or 1799$?

97
EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 26, 2012, 12:04:21 PM »
Canon's pricing strategy with 5DMKIII proved to be fundametally wrong, so I really hope they learned their lesson...
Just curios, did you see sales numbers?
Did you see them?

98
EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 04:52:10 PM »
I'll believe it when i see it.

99
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D at 46.1mp Next Month? [CR1]
« on: September 25, 2012, 10:32:44 AM »
Please be sub-4000$.   :-\

lol.  Yeah, let's call it the 5.1D then.  With Canon's pricing strategy, $4,500 is almost a guarantee.  6D -> 5Dm3 -> 3D -> 1DX.  $4,500 fits in there nicely.

Does Canon even make a lens that can resolve 46MP?

Yep, The 100L & 135L are beast. Perhaps the New 24-70 II?

Any Canon Lens, that can take a 2x Converter with 18MP APS-C can not only resolve 46MP Full-Frame, but up to 120MP Full-Frame. Resolution-wise we're not done until reaching pixel sizes of about 0.25 micron.

100
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II, EOS 70D & 700D in 2013? [CR1]
« on: September 23, 2012, 02:04:57 PM »
Let's hope they get their 80MP APS-C sensor out. That could be run at 20MP (2x2 downsample), 9MP (3x3 downsample) or 5MP (4x4 downsample) in low light mode. They have the technology, they just need to build it.

101
EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]
« on: September 22, 2012, 04:22:55 PM »
At least this promises to gain back some DR in print.

102
Lenses / Re: Photozone's review of the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is up
« on: September 22, 2012, 03:29:22 PM »
Interesting to see how the Photozone resolution figures are very different to those posted by Roger at Lensrentals.com.

I suspect that all manufacturers have major quality issues with the new lenses due to very low tolerances acceptable. Maybe Zeiss can come up with high enough quality standards but Zeiss also has a high enoug price for that. I guess it's up to the user to put each lens through a test and send back the broken ones (which will be delivered to other customers).

Canon should make a LT-line with the T meaning that it's really quality tested and up to the standards advertised.

103
Lenses / Re: Quality control issues with the 24-70 L II?
« on: September 21, 2012, 10:48:37 AM »
@Viggo: Yes, Phase-AF is a big problem. But Lensrentals found out that New Cameras with New Lenses can have a very good phase-AF. (Look for part 2 or 3 of the story)

However, what the test of the two lens samples shows are much bigger variations. Other manufacturers are even worse than that. Maybe Tamron gets tested 3 times and the worst is used while for canon it's the best sample.

For the new lenses it gets harder and harder to achieve near-perfect manufacturing because the tolerances required to achieve the high quality results get lower and lower. This is not an easy problem to overcome. Lensrentals are the only site which sometimes tests a number lenses from one batch. They could provide some numbers on the rate of bad lenses per model. Other sites which only test a few samples cannot provide conclusive evidence on how high the rate of bad lenses is.

104
Lenses / Re: Quality control issues with the 24-70 L II?
« on: September 21, 2012, 02:54:51 AM »
For the price of L-Lenses, Canon should do 100% testing. Especially early in the production.

TDP usually does a pretty good job in testing lenses so i guess that the second lens really shouldn't have been sold.

105
Lenses / Re: Quality control issues with the 24-70 L II?
« on: September 19, 2012, 03:52:21 PM »
Something seems off.

True, there was some image misordering or something really strange about lens 2...

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 11