December 18, 2014, 10:37:43 AM

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 - hoodlum

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
EOS Bodies / Re: Sony Sensors Coming to Canon DSLRs? [CR1]
« on: December 15, 2014, 05:51:02 PM »
I think it would be a mistake for them to surrender chip design--both for Canon and for the users.  There needs to be MORE sensor competition--not less.

Samsung is becoming the new competition for Sony sensors.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2014, 11:11:41 AM »
If it has a 1" senor and no interchangable lenses, then it isn't a competitor to the GH4.

This is very true. I got excited by the headlines but immediately disappointed when I read 1" sensor.

But think of the positive: If Canon is getting closer to the 4K consumer level territory, then maybe they can introduce solid 1080p in their DSLRs or even 4k by 2020.

The difference is that Canon is getting the 1" sensor from Sony while the DSLR sensors are in-house.  Canon's sensor design is still the limiting factor as you need faster readout for 4k video and this is where Sony still has a large lead.

What Canon is able to do with the 1" sensor has no bearing on what they can do with their DSLRs.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon to Target The GH4 With New DSLR Type? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2014, 10:26:33 AM »
1" sensor? Are you sure of the swapable lens? Does 1" sensor + EF/EF-S makes any sense?
Even with EF-M (all STM for video), the 22m f/2 turn into a 60mm equiv. lens and the 18-55mm turns into a 50-150mm
More reasonably (Canon style), a link with this?
RX10 and FZ1000 are somehow "a different style DSLRs"  ;D

That link is what I was thinking of too.  But that would make it more a competitor with the FZ1000 which supports 4k video, not the GH4 which has a larger sensor and interchangeable lenses. 

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Reviewing Olympus 40-150/2.8
« on: December 11, 2014, 08:35:00 PM »
I found this review that mentions stabilization at 100mm was measure as 4 stops.  Better than I expected for in-body IS at a longer focal length.

"We reviewed the image stabilization at a focal distance of 100 mm. It surprised us yet again how efficient the in-body image stabilization of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 is. From our Imatest measurements, it appears that the shots made with image stabilization at a shutter time of 1/6 sec were just as sharp as shots without image stabilization made with a shutter time of 1/200 sec."

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Reviewing Olympus 40-150/2.8
« on: December 10, 2014, 11:37:21 AM »
What is interesting is that Fujifilm just released their 50-140mm f2.8 and Samsung their 50-150mm f2.8.  They are also showing very good results.  So there are a few options in this range for mirrorless mounts.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 09, 2014, 09:37:21 PM »
At least this would suggest Canon is working on a more serious EOS M body with built-in EVF.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Reviewing Olympus 40-150/2.8
« on: December 09, 2014, 02:40:01 PM »
I am actually interested in seeing how the Olympus 300mm f4 performs when it starts shipping next year.  This combined with the recently announced 1.4tc could be a nice light birding solution with an 840mm FOV.

Lenses / Re: Danny Green Talks the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 12, 2014, 11:09:24 AM »
Danny also mentions that the 100-400 focuses as fast as the 500mm f4 ii.

Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 08, 2014, 02:15:02 PM »
Slightly bigger and 15% heavier than the older 100-400.  I guess this was required for the upgraded IS.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 07:42:44 AM »
Now we have the specs.  The only thing missing is weight and dimensions.

- One fluorite lens, the one Super UD glass to use
- For the first time adopted a new development of the Air Sphere coating (ASC)
- IS unit effect of a shutter speed four stages
- Equipped with the IS mode 3 for sport shooting
- A minimum focusing distance of 0.98m
- Maximum magnification of 0.31 times
- The diaphragm blades nine circular aperture
- AF motor the ring-type USM
- Rotate zoom
- Zoom touch adjustment ring
- Detachable tripod mount
- Dust and water structure
- Fluorine coating

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 04:30:50 PM »
Just speaking for me (hobbyist bird and insect photography), if this lens has a minimum focusing distance that is relatively close to the 300 f/4 (which I don't own), then it would be a terrific lens for both birding and insect photography. If the MFD is far like the 400 f/5.6 (which I do own), then there's one less reason for me to swap out the 400. But, if the image quality is on par with the 400 and the IS is as good as I expect, then it is still a tempting upgrade for me.

I suspect it will have a low minimum focus distance but that would also involve significant focus breathing so the actual focal length at short distances will be much less than 400mm at the long end.  This seems to be the norm with most tele zooms these days as they try to make them more compact.

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon PowerShot SX60 HS
« on: October 27, 2014, 08:34:16 AM »
The Superzoom comparison post by IR over the weekend is quite interesting.

EOS Bodies / Re: Multilayer Sensors are Coming From Canon [CR2]
« on: October 08, 2014, 04:44:19 PM »
I don't expect this sensor to be used in a high speed body due to the low sensor read-out speed of a stacked sensor.  That would also explain why the 7Dii was just replaced with existing sensor tech.  I could see a totally new body announced as a niche for landscape or other areas that require greater detail without the need for high FPS.  Video would also not work very well with this sensor due to the low read-out speed.

EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 09:00:12 AM »
I hope that they don't bring that to higher models.... Isn't EVF that type of VF in the Point and shoots? If so, that is awful.

The latest EVFs would be much better than the existing pentamirror viewfinder in the lower end Rebels. 

It would be a bit sad if a Rebel gets a built-in EVF and split pixel sensor before the EOS-M. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7