July 30, 2014, 03:47:30 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 - unfocused

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 128
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: Today at 01:55:46 PM »
Another opportunity lost when neither side understands the other, and so chooses to interpret what he doesn't understand as a personal insult.  Remember, folks: the interwebs does not have non-verbal cues (facial expression, tone of voice, thoughtful sip of beer) to help with context.  Try to be generous in your parsing and interpretation of the words from the other end of the tube.

How dare you say such a thing! Clearly you are an idiot!  (note to moderators, this is what is called being facetious)

On an only slightly more serious note, after following this thread through page after page, I find nothing that would make me change my earlier opinion. People use personal, subjective results to support blanket statements masquerading as facts.

Mr. Agar is clearly a very successful photographer. I don't know of many photographers who pull down more than $300,000 a year, which is what he indicated he is earning. And, yes, in my book, that does warrant some consideration and respect.

On the other hand, I refer again to the parallel post discussing Zach Arias' amusing rant http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21991.msg419168#msg419168 on sensor size. I suspect that Mr. Arias might be close or even exceed Mr. Agar in income, so here we have two highly successful photographers who appear to have reached nearly opposite conclusions.

I have to say that in my experience (subjective observation acknowledged) from reading articles by commercially successful photographers, the bulk seem to fall more on Mr. Arias' side than on Mr. Agar's – that is, most tend to write that the differences between brands and formats are marginal.

I don't doubt that Mr. Agar made his decision to switch systems after carefully considering what was better for him. I simply doubt that his personal decision can then be transformed into a blanket and objective assessment of the overall quality of either Nikon or Canon products.

As was discussed earlier, confirmation bias is a powerful thing and we are all slaves to it.

On a much more random note, I am fascinated by the shadow pattern that Mr. Agar showed in that model's arm. I've never seen anything quite like that and I notice that it seems to appear throughout the image in the shadows. It's very bizarre and since I have no experience with it in my own photographs (which certainly have their share of shadow areas) I can't venture a guess as to what caused it to occur. But, of course, because I too am a slave to my own experience, I have a difficult time believing that it represents some flaw or issue with the sensor in that camera. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: July 29, 2014, 09:35:40 PM »
if I'm honest with myself I'd be hard pressed to think of an image that I've shot with my 5DIII that I couldn't have shot a year ago with the 7D.
I have issues with your comparison.7D iso over 6400 anyone? I don't get that noise until I hit 25k on the 5D3. to each their own but my 5D3 and 7D images are night and day.

I think that's unfocused's point -- the 5D3 may be better, but maybe not for what he shoots or how he shoots it.  What if he doesn't need ISO 6400, for instance? 

Arias' only argument in that video that I'll back him up on: the limiting factor is usually our ability, camera know-how, composition skills, etc. and not our hardware. 

That said, I do need ISO 6400 and I love my 5D3 for it.   ;)

- A

Yes. Most of my photography falls into two categories. Things I shoot for myself for my own pleasure and personal expression and things I shoot for others. Not commercially, but generally as a favor to others who can't afford to pay (head shots for starving actors, senior pictures for kids whose families don't have a lot of money, family member portraits, etc.)

I seldom shoot over ISO 400 if I can avoid it, especially when I'm shooting for myself – which are the images I really care about. But, there have certainly been times when I have needed and appreciate the high ISO capabilities of the 5D3. But, few of those high ISO images are ever going to go in my portfolio, so what I was really referring to was the images that I am most proud of.

Just trying to bring a little perspective to things, I guess. I don't think Arias' point (nor mine) was that there is no difference between formats, but that the differences are not nearly as great as people make them out to be.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 29, 2014, 06:47:04 PM »
And, I suppose the five or six people who actually can earn a living shooting large scale landscapes might want to move to Nikon

You're right about five or six people compared with wedding photographers, maybe less, but one of those is a British guy called Colin Prior. He is one of the world's best known landscape photographers and ... in mid 2013 he began using digital - FF - and Canon at that, 1Dx and 5DIII. He is on record as saying the files from the 5DIII are the cleanest he's ever come across.

Yeah, well, looking at your website, it's pretty obvious you're no slouch when it comes to landscape/scenics. Makes me think of one of my goals when I retire – contact some of the pros on this forum and ask to be a free assistant for a few weeks.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: July 29, 2014, 05:51:09 PM »
I like ZA, but this isn't his best work. In a few months, he'll look back at this and be embarrassed.

Probably embarrassed all the way to the bank.

It's quite a bit over the top, but I think his point is legitimate. People obsess over sensor size and convince ourselves that it makes a huge difference. I'm as guilty as the next person, but if I'm honest with myself I'd be hard pressed to think of an image that I've shot with my 5DIII that I couldn't have shot a year ago with the 7D.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 29, 2014, 05:43:02 PM »
Hmm, I smell a troll ;-)

I think you smell someone who blew £19,000 changing and is determined to believe it was worth it.

I honestly can't get my head around why anyone would chuck in a full kit of either Canon or Nikon to swap to the other, the gains to be had are just not worth the hassle...

If they wanted to sponsor me, I'd switch. :)

Seriously though, I absolutely agree. And, while I'm convinced that the refresh rates of DSLRs will be extended with maturing technology, they are still not exactly long-term investments. So switch today and then when the next model comes out, what? Switch back?

When the Canon 5DIII came out with its high ISO performance, I could understand wedding photographers who live in low light and cutthroat competition switching because every little advantage is important. And, I suppose the five or six people who actually can earn a living shooting large scale landscapes might want to move to Nikon, but for most people, I just don't get it.

Chasing shiny things -- the same reason people...change spouses once the "magic" is gone (i.e. after hormones have diminished)

At least changing your kit is just money, though more than I'd want to spend.

I've changed spouses twice in my life (once my choice, once her choice). Talk about money...

I'm hanging on to the current one...third one the best ever and worth the wait. Besides, I don't imagine I have that many years left anyway. :)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 29, 2014, 02:05:23 PM »
Except reproducible double-blind experiments.

As an example of how "experts" can be fooled: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/10/you-are-not-so-smart-why-we-cant-tell-good-wine-from-bad/247240/

These types of experiments have been replicated many times, and the summary is that you can't trust your own perceptions.  Show me objective tests, or you've shown me nothing.

Exactly.  Sometimes people believe what they want to believe.  Your expectations shape reality.  Hence the quest to find some definitive source that can tell them what really is good and what's junk.  The problem then lies in whether or not you truly trust the source of this information.

Yes, almost all the threads on this forum are filled with endless examples of confirmation bias.

If I spent $12,000 switching camera systems, I would swear on a stack of bibles that I could see a difference in the results. And, I would really believe I could.

Neuro used to argue incessantly that there was no discernible difference between APS-C and Full-Frame. Then be bought a 1D-X and now he argues the exact opposite. It's not hypocrisy. It's not enlightenment. It's just that everyone sees what they want to see.

There's another thread started here referencing a Zach Arias rant on APS-C vs. Full Frame. Amusing, but makes valid points about how little difference there is between the two format sizes http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21991.msg418802#msg418802 yet the response that really struck me was that this was just a "Fujifilm commercial."

Point being we all selectively hear and see what we want.

This forum works and generates the traffic that it does because the selective use of facts, confirmation biases, pseudo-scientific testing, etc. etc. that everyone likes to quote or argue about is never truly objective and never completely accurate, so the arguments can just go on and on forever.

I've outlined the legal issue. Now, let me give you the marketing advice. If I were you, I'd go to the Local and tell them:

You were really excited to see they used your picture. You would have liked to get some credit, but that's water under the bridge. What you'd really like to do is get in a position to be the Local's primary photographer.

Because you are a union electrician, you understand the jobs better than any outside photographer can. That means that when you take pictures, you will notice things that a typical photographer won't. Which means less risk of an embarrassing mistake or having to do a re-shoot.

You are concerned about the compensation because, as a union guy, you 1) need the money you get paid on jobs and can't afford to take lots of time off from paying jobs to do the photography and 2) you are sensitive to the idea that workers shouldn't be undercutting one another by doing jobs "under the table" etc.

However, you are doing this with an eye toward the future and gaining experience, so you want to be reasonable and practical about what the union can afford – maybe suggest that they pay you at the same rate as you would be getting on a union electrical job.

Oh, and you've got some ideas that they might want to consider:

How about they pick out four or five of their best union contractors and you shoot portraits of the owners or top managers to go with quotes about why they use union labor. "Here at XYZ Construction, we place an emphasis on getting the job right the first time. We never cut corners and that's why we use 100% union labor."

Meet Joe Smith. He's a union electrician and here is what the means to you.

Do a profile of an African-American union electrician that the union can use in their literature to recruit minorities.

Similarly, do a profile of an Hispanic union electrician that can be used to recruit Hispanic apprentices.

Do a brochure on what homeowners should look for in their basements, etc., for signs of wiring that is improper or unsafe.

Anyway, you get the idea. Go to them with four or five ideas of how they can use you and why you are best person for the work. Don't dwell on this incident, but use it to open doors. Maybe you become the go-to photographer for all the Locals in the area.

You took the photo with your gear so the photo belongs to you. Doesn't matter if it was on the clock or not. It is your work.

No, that is just flat out wrong. In the U.S. at least, your employer owns anything you produce on the job and oftentimes even has a claim for something you produce on your own time. (For example, if you wake up in the middle of the night with an inspiration for a product improvement, your employer has a claim to that.)

Whether or not the job is performed with your personal equipment is irrelevant. Many union electricians own their own tools. That doesn't mean they own the work they produce with their tools. Same applies to photography or anything else.

This is a little unusual here because a third party (the union) appropriated the work from the employer. Technically, I would imagine the employer could seek compensation from the union, but I don't see that happening. I doubt if a union employer wants to get crossways with the union over a picture.

The union took advantage of you, that's clear. But, you really don't have much recourse. Maybe before giving them any more pictures tell them you want credit on anything you produce.

BTW, does the union have releases from the guys in the picture?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 27, 2014, 11:10:43 AM »
Why does everyone respond to dilbert's nonsense? Can't we just ignore his posts and hope he goes away? It would make this forum much more enjoyable.

It is bit extreme to stop anyone from posting their viewpoints.

The fun part is trying to get jrista/neuro to be open with people rather than hide their viewpoints and thoughts. "DxO and Nikon are joined at the hip". How many times has that been repeated now but no substance has been given as to why anyone should think that but yet nobody wants to back away from saying that.

An alternative explanation is that most people really don't care one way or the other.

The inconvenient truth is that DSLR technology has progressed to the point where differences between brands and even between formats is so insignificant that it seldom, if ever, has any real world impact on the final product – the photograph.

This forum provides daily proof of Sayre's law: "the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake."

Perhaps DxO is biased. Perhaps Nikon and Sony have decided to "build to the test." Perhaps the differences being tested are so insignificant that the ratings have only academic and no real-world application. Most likely it's a combination of all three.

It's not like the scores have the tiniest bit of impact on the market. So really, who cares?

I agree this sounds less like a scam and more like a massive screw up, complicated by some fairly serious errors/omissions on the part of the buyer. With the additional complication that the seller is also a known problem seller.

First, the buyer says on his blog post that he paid for the camera with two credit cards on Pay Pal and bought the item on eBay. That's about four levels of protection and he needed to pursue each one immediately. Contact the credit card companies, contact Pay Pal and contact eBay.

(The link he offered to the eBay resolution center doesn't work for me. I assume because it is only available to the involved parties. So it isn't possible to see why they may have rejected the claim or even what the status of the claim is.)

I'm concerned as to why he waited so long to pursue this. If I receive the wrong item, I contact the seller immediately and directly (which is what eBay always says to do first -- contact the seller through eBay so there is a record of it with eBay). To me this sounds like a shipping department error and the seller should be able to track that down and determine that. However, given this particular seller's reputation, getting them to own up to the mistake could be a problem.

In the meantime, open up cases with eBay, Pay Pal, both credit card companies and the shipper, so you are on record with all of them and they start their processes.

Other than waiting so long, the other concern I can see is that the OP was not the original recipient of  the package. Since the chain of custody has been broken, I don't know what problems that could present. The person who originally received the package may need to be the point of contact. In hindsight, it would have been better to instruct the person he had receive the package to open it and inspect it before shipping it on to him. Perhaps some sort of a signed and witnessed statement from the addressee that they received the package and immediately forwarded it without opening might help. Hopefully, the original tracking number is still on the box.

As for the reputation of the seller: if you check CanonPriceWatch.com, the complaints about this seller focuses on the item not as advertised. Mainly, the seller claims an item is USA warranty and then ships a grey market product. In the case of this particular seller, there was a scathing, but now-removed blog post that pretty much spelled out that the company lied to CanonPriceWatch.com.

Contrary to urban legend, there are very few cases of outright fraud on eBay. They do a good job of policing their sellers and even CanonPriceWatch.com recommends going through eBay so you have the added level of protection if something goes wrong.

For reference, here are several relevant posts from Canon Price Watch.





Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 24, 2014, 11:35:37 PM »
This really isn't a surprise. DxO and Nikon are inseparably joined at the hip.

Do you have any evidence of this?

All of this (everyone's comments) just sounds like more sour grapes from Canon fans because their cameras don't score as well and it is well recognised that Canon's sensors aren't as good.

Does anyone complain that the scores for Canon sensors are too high?
Or that DxO incorrectly says that Canon camera X has a better/worse sensor than Canon camera Y?

^--- This ---^

Isn't a surprise, either. :P  ;D Our resident Nikon foreverfanboyyayz!

BTW, Dilbert...are you ACTUALLY asking me if Nikon and DXO are "literally" joined at the hip?   ???  I mean, your asking for "evidence" of that...I've been racking my brain for a way to describe how organizations and companies have "hips", conjure up some kind of...evidence, for that...but I'm at a loss for...anything...here...... :P

I hear in a song once that hips don't lie.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 24, 2014, 10:38:06 AM »
Let's stop obsessing over trees (especially since they are machine-translated, massively garbled trees) and look at the forest for a minute.

The point is that very few DSLR buyers ever go on to buy another lens other than what came with their camera. Canon's new 10-18 STM lens is an effort by the company to entice those one-lens one-body owners to actually take the lens off the camera and play with an ultra-wide to wide lens.

It's a smart and innovative strategy to deal with a market that has become saturated.

The really interesting thing here should be that Canon is innovating on several fronts while their competitors seem to be stuck in the same old ruts.

They are kicking the competitions' collective rears in the full frame market with both the 5DIII and the 6D; the SL1 is the only DSLR of its kind available; their cinema line is unique and highly successful; they continue to produce and release some of the best lenses in the market and they are making a big move in the high growth security market to name just a few areas.

For five years they've had to industry leading APS-C body in the 7D and in a little over a month we'll see what the next generation of that camera is like – which will help us see where they believe the market is heading.

People on this forum constantly gripe about Canon, but an interview like this (even as garbled and confusing as it may be) is just one more reminder that they know a heck of a lot more about their customers than anyone here ever will.


Lenses / Re: Buying a used lens from Adorama
« on: July 23, 2014, 10:52:06 PM »
The street price for a new 24-105mmL from a Authorized dealer is $660.

Don't pay more.  It might indeed be a kit lens, they are exactly the same as a retail lens, and have the same warranty.

From Canon Price Watch.

We estimate a street price of $659.99 on this item brand new from an authorized dealer with full Canon USA Warranty and free shipping.

Fill out this form to get in touch with CPW for assistance in obtaining this price.
You can also read more about street prices.

What Mt. Spokane says. Canon Price Watch street price deals are all for U.S. warranty new lenses and bodies.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 23, 2014, 10:46:31 PM »
no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS".  We are all looking forward to that.  This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are.

Pretty much my thoughts.

This guy is a lens designer. Naturally, he wants to and tries to design lenses with the maximum resolution possible. A lens designed today needs to stay current for 10-15 years or more. Must be a real challenge.

I got the feeling from the interview (and I readily admit I found it very difficult to comprehend the machine translation) that this wasn't a prediction, but rather just an indication that the lens designers are trying to keep pace with sensor improvements.

I don't know how long it takes to design a new lens, but I would expect that they start working on new and improved designs years in advance of new sensor developments.

EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon
« on: July 23, 2014, 10:35:28 PM »
I think that the interpretation of the interview is that 4 to 5 percent of canon buyers buy additional lenses and that the other 95 percent just stick with whatever was in the kit that they bought. The math supports this view.

That's my interpretation as well. Honestly, I would have expected it to be higher, but then it just shows how abnormal (in so, so many ways) forum readers are.

Of course it fits in nicely with my personal theory – which is that one of Canon's strategies for the mature DSLR market is to pivot from selling one DSLR each to lots of people to instead start selling lots of cameras and lenses to fewer people.

Makes sense. With the world's largest installed base of DSLR owners, and in a saturated market where the cost of capturing new customers is growing, they are likely to be focused more and more on up-selling existing customers.

If I'm reading the interview correctly, they believe an inexpensive ultra-wide lens for APS-C buyers is one way to reignite/revive interest among Rebel owners and get them using their cameras in new ways. Pretty clever really.

That's one reason I've been saying the 7DII is likely to be 24 mp or more. Canon doesn't want an APS-C body to compete with the 6D or 5DIII, they want a body that complements their full frame offerings, so we all feel the need to own two bodies – if you want reach and high resolution, you need an APS-C body and if you want low-light performance and low noise you need a full-frame body.

With the right mix, they have the potential to significantly increase their sales of DSLR bodies even if the customer base remains stagnant.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 128