Messages

421

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D3200 is likely to be the real market threat

« on: May 09, 2012, 12:58:05 AM »

I think you guys seriously underestimate the sophistication of the average entry level dslr consumer.  A few years ago, that was me.  I didn't know much about cameras back then, but I sure did not go down to best buy and plop down $600 for the first dslr I saw.  I did months of research on the internet first.  Before I purchased I already knew that MP was not as important as IQ (also that MP did not = IQ).  I also understood that buying a dslr means you are buying into a system of lenses and accessories that are at least as important as the body itself.  Maybe all consumers are not as thorough as I am, but I find it hard to believe that the "average" consumer that is smart enough to know they want a dslr is so uneducated  that they are reduced to the levels that you guys on here claim. 

Sub $200 dollar cams are an impulse buy and not subject to much thought - therefore you get very inexperienced people buying them who look at MP count.  Cams above $500 are no longer an impulse buy and the consumers in the market for those cams are more sophisticated than you think.

I agree with you that a 600-1000 "entry level" camera in NOT an impulse buy, and that the "average" consumer has above average intelligence and has done some level of research- even if that means a trusted friend's advice.

But as I stated earlier, I believe the "average entry-level DSLR user" will not advance beyond that camera. They will have no need to, as even an entry level camera is MORE than enough for what they will ever need. As is the perfectly capable zoom lens with image stabilization that came with the kit. They will also get their hard earned money's worth out of it  because chances are it will be the family camera, and wont be replaced till it dies. They won't buy multiple lenses and wont complain when a new version of their camera comes out with one stop more dynamic range in the shadows! They will leave the camera on auto everything and enjoy what they paid for- great photos with the push of a button.

I am not saying entry level DSLR users don't go on to higher-end models, because they do. I had a Rebel XS (cheapest DSLR) 5 years back because that was all I could afford at the time. Before that I had a "full-frame" Rebel G!

There are different markets that overlap within these systems- that is the purpose of different price points and features.

I can't even tell you how many Aunts and family friends I have given photography 101 pointers to who have owned their DSLR for years! And try explaining that their 18-55mm lens is cropped to blah, blah...

422

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D3200 is likely to be the real market threat

« on: May 08, 2012, 07:38:34 PM »

I have an alternate perspective.

Mirror less cameras are not the demise of entry level DSLRs, they are the evolution of Point-and-shoot cameras.

Point-and-shoots needed to advance to offer a point of difference from the camera people already have built into their current smart phone. To convince people they NEED to buy another camera, they had to introduce DSLR-like features into their market. Let's get serious, "mirrorless" cameras aren't a new category- they are just point-and-shoots with interchangeable lenses. And the majority of consumers who buy them and entry level DSLRs never even take the kit lens off!

The only chance for mirror less cameras to erode the DSLR market is for pros to start using them. People buy affordable DSLRs to feel like they have a "pro quality" camera. Most will never bother to learn what an aperture is, nor have any idea how big their sensor is. They basically have expensive point-and-shoots.

I live in Brooklyn, NY. Over the weekend I was at Brooklyn Bridge park with my family- the place was flooded with tourists from around the world. People had cameras around their neck every place I looked. 9 out of 10 of those cameras were Canon xxxD/ xxxxD. The other 1 was split between the occasional Nikon DSLR and Sony NEX.

My conclusion is Canon is doing fine. Nikon is the company that NEEDS to be aggressive to stay relevant.

How many TV shows and fancy directors are shooting award winning films on NIKON DSLRs? Canon doesn't need to advertise. Their free PR is huge! When consumers can afford to buy the equipment that they perceive is capable of shooting an episode of HOUSE, well, it helps.

Another thought:
Why can't people consider the fact that The 5D3 isn't over-priced, but that Nikon is taking a huge hit financially in reducing their price in hopes of taking some of the market back? Competition is great! Canon will continue to push back. They now don't have a choice.

423

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What modes do you usually use on your camera?

« on: May 08, 2012, 11:15:45 AM »

I use M any time I'm working with lights.

Other than that I'm in AV. I find it faster to use AV and then adjust the exposure compensation dial to fit the scene.

I don't really see a difference in AV/ TV and adding exposure compensation compared to using M.

424

Lenses / Re: Canon Refurb Store ... Not Such A Good Deal

« on: May 07, 2012, 02:37:32 PM »

I recently got a 5D2 for 1500 after taxes and shipping. The camera is brand new. Pretty solid deal in my opinion.

425

EOS Bodies / Re: Up the game

« on: May 06, 2012, 06:04:52 PM »

I think the 5D3 is a HUGE upgrade from the 5D2 in every area. To me that is the definition of Canon "upping their game".

I recently picked up a 5D2 because I needed a second camera, and the price was right- It captures beautiful images. But besides that, my 7D destroys it in terms of AF, ergonomics and useful features. I took my new 5D2 to the park today to see if it could keep up with my 2yr old daughter... Not a chance.

I've read all about the 5D2's limitations for years but bought it regardless because I plan to use it with my manual focus lenses and studio work. I got it for the sensor basically.

My point is the 5D3 has turned the 5D line into a real professional camera that can handle a lot more types of photography. The 5D2 wasn't/ isn't even close. That is progress.

Since so many people need to compare it to the D800, besides their sensor, what improvements were made?

426

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5D Mark III: Is it worth it to buy a 3yr extended warranty?

« on: May 04, 2012, 08:56:23 PM »

I think warranties are offered to make money. I'd only get one if I knew I was going to be abusive with my gear and push it beyond it's limits. If you are shooting in a studio, or are a hobbyist that treats your gear with care, I think that price is steep. I'd take my chances or find a better deal.

427

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D4 & D800 issues

« on: May 04, 2012, 11:15:37 AM »

The EOS-3 is a super sexy camera with 1-Series features that can be had for as little as $200! I LOVE mine. You can link the spot meter to the focus points, take multiple meter readings from a scene & average them together, focus with your eyes and swap out the sensor for all different types of effects?!

Welcome to the future!

Enjoy photography

428

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 650D - sensor size?

« on: May 03, 2012, 04:18:24 PM »

I have a feeling Canon will push their entry level DSLR's as hybrid-all-in-one-memory-capturing-and-sharing-devices.

They'll headline the latest HD Video features. Until popular TV shows (like HOUSE), and award winning films start promoting that they are using a Nikon, consumers who want video features are going to buy Canon.

429

Lenses / Re: Canon 85 1.8 vs. Sigma 85 1.4

« on: May 03, 2012, 01:29:54 PM »

The Canon 85mm 1.8 is a beautiful lens at a fantastic price.

I've never used the Sigma version, it's more than 2x the price of the Canon. It could be slightly better, people seem to enjoy it, but is it 2x better? I'd rather go with the proven Canon lens (been around for 20 years), and then use that extra cash for something else like a 50mm 1.4!

430

Lenses / Re: EF 50 1.4 vs. 1.8

« on: May 03, 2012, 12:06:33 PM »

An alternate option is to find a nice condition 50mm f/1.8 mkI. It has a better build quality than the mkII, metal mount, focusing ring, distance scale & made in Japan!

I just picked one up off of ebay for 150 in mint condition and it's 25 years old!

I had the 50mm f/1.4 for a while- there was just something about that lens that bothered me, I couldn't quite put my finger on it. I'm also hoping Canon makes a new affordable 50mm with real Ring USM some time in the near future.


Vi Close by Philip DiResta, on Flickr


Violet by Philip DiResta, on Flickr


Violet Smile by Philip DiResta, on Flickr

431

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF17-40mm f/4L USM

« on: May 03, 2012, 11:45:58 AM »

I've been on the fence about this lens for a while.... Is it actually good on a full frame camera? Or does it just reveal all of it's weaknesses? It looks beautiful on a crop.

432

Lenses / Re: Trouble with my Canon 24.1.4 ii lens at 1.4

« on: May 02, 2012, 01:40:22 PM »

I don't know, to me, this just looks like SUPER SHALLOW DOF where a slight body sway, breeze, or from recomposing is moving the subject out of the focal plane. And also wouldn't shooting completely wide open add just the slightest bit of softness to the image in addition to the sliver of DOF- resulting in a photo that looks OOF.

Have you tried the lens on a tripod photographing a static subject?

433

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The 5D Mark III Fix

« on: May 02, 2012, 01:13:05 PM »

Don't worry all it's "L" series pro-grade tape.

434

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: D800 v. 5D3 threads: What should Canon's takeaway be?

« on: May 02, 2012, 11:19:38 AM »

It isn't that this is something to be agreed with - it's just that your style of photography doesn't benefit from capturing a single frame with a high dynamic range.
[...]
These are big ifs. Just because this is when you put down your camera, doesn't mean it's when I put down my camera.

You are right, this is about my preferences and I did not intent to generalize.

But I'd be interesting to know: what are the practical situations where you'd crave for more DR? I personally never encountered a situation where I thought "uh, if I just had more DR, this crappy picture would have been great".

Cheers, Robert

This shot:


Can turn into this shot:


But even with a fair amount of local NR there's still noise and I realistically have to turn colour NR up a bunch more:


For this shot what I was looking for was getting the castle in the background and the party in the foreground in softer light, but to lift this afterwards. I could have used a flash but I don't think it gives the same look...

I've got a bunch of similar examples - usually where I'm trying to get detail back into a cloudy sky or pull detail back from the shadows on a sunny day   Weddings just don't allow me to be perfect 'cos they happen too quick.

Anyway That's what I'd use it for. I know the landscape guys would like to be able to push the shadows a lot to create single frame HDR and I can see the attraction for that, especially where there's movement in the scene.

I think it's like high ISO - everyone years ago said "you don't need it" but when people had it they started to use it and now they wouldn't want to go back.

I agree more DR would always be nice, as would better high ISO performance, etc. BUT there will always be limitations, even with improvements. In any system when the ceiling is hit, creativity will take you beyond.

435

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: D800 v. 5D3 threads: What should Canon's takeaway be?

« on: May 01, 2012, 07:46:54 PM »

I really just don't get it. Photography is a form of art and creative expression- from a pro photographer to a parent photographing their kids. It has also always been about creative problem solving, that's what makes it so intriguing. You will always find yourself in a unique lighting scenario with a lens that has limits and a film or sensor with limits. If you had Iso 100 Velvia loaded into your camera and only one lens, you'd have to make situational adjustments to make the best possible exposure, and so on.

I see a lot of pissy people that just sit around reading spec sheets and lab reports and complain that their thousands of dollars worth of gear can't accomplish a simple task.