August 22, 2014, 05:59:55 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 ... 133
1
To be honest this is still much closer to what I was expecting - 7D build/ergo, 70D sensor and a couple of genuinely impressive head-liner specs (fps/af), price probably just north of the original 7D price I'd imagine.
Still a heck of a camera

Agreed.

It's time for the real to replace the fantasy and of course that means much whining on this forum about how Canon is failing -- meanwhile it will be a big seller in the real world.

My two cents:
Agree with others that I hope there will be f8 autofocus;

I actually like the CF and SD card options. In my 5D I mostly use the CF slot, but I like having the SD as a backup and, honestly, when I'm traveling knowing that I can pick up an extra SD card almost anywhere is great for peace of mind. This is one of those features that forum participants may not like, but consumers do;

I'll still be surprised if there is no touch screen. Especially if they are introducing new STM lenses. The STM lenses would indicate video, but why optimize a camera for video and then not provide touch screen controls?

A little surprised at the sensor, I really thought Canon would go for 24 mp. Not a huge deal to me, just a bit of a surprise;

If Electronic MF really means micro-focus adjustment that would be huge.

Overall impression: If correct, this seems to me that Canon is keeping the 7D II targeted to the same audience as the original 7D -- enthusiasts who want a feature-rich camera, rather than focusing on pixel-peepers and DR fanatics.

In the previous chain about the 7DX specs better DR, IQ, and less noise are the overwhelming drivers for interest here...But I'm not convinced Canon could make such a miscalculation.

No miscalculation. What people on gearhead forums want and what the bulk of customers who will actually buy the product want are two entirely different things.

2
Lenses / Re: Canon EF24-105mm f4 IS USM time for a refresh?
« on: August 21, 2014, 07:45:39 PM »
I too would like this update lens to have internal zooming... I had an issue a few months back where the lens got knocked while zoomed out (walking around with the camera strap on my shoulder on a day out with the family and that lens is notorious for the zoom creeping like that) and after that it wouldn't retract... Had to send it to canon and $300 later it was fixed...  That was after the CPS discount.


The 24–105 L shouldn't creep—mine certainly doesn't.  The problem is usually easy to fix, though:

http://www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=1182560


Zoom creep? Try the 15-85 EF-S for awhile and then you'll know what zoom creep is all about. :)

3
Lenses / Re: Canon EF24-105mm f4 IS USM time for a refresh?
« on: August 21, 2014, 02:23:24 PM »
I don't think the Sigma 24-105 delivers significantly better IQ than the Canon 24-105, and the Canon is cheaper (as a new white box lens).

I agree, the 24-70 IS is a poor replacement for the 24-105, the loss of range is nowhere compensated by the gain of a special macro mode, and a minor increase in image quality.

However, to approach the IQ of the 24-70 with the longer FL of the 24-105, it will be very expensive...

Those are your answers.

Technically, this lens retails for more than $1,100 in the U.S., but no one pays that much. In a kit or as a "white box" it goes for about half that amount. It is one of the best bargains available and the incremental cost for improving it would be higher than most people are willing to pay.

4
Post Processing / Re: Photoshop eye retouching
« on: August 20, 2014, 02:36:05 PM »
Looks like a high pass filter to me.

Make a duplicate layer and add a high-pass filter. Select the "hard light" blending mode. Use a black layer mask to mask off everything in the layer and then paint the eyes with a white brush so only they show through.

I'll usually paint in some of the hair as well and maybe the lips or teeth if they need a bit of a punch.

In this case, it looks like they had the filter set to fairly high pixels (usually you only want to set it to about 2-4 pixel range.) You can reduce the opacity of the layer if the hard light looks too unnatural.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 20, 2014, 02:25:15 PM »

Saw this picture today in a story at The Phoblographer:
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/08/20/review-sony-vgc1em-digital-camera-battery-grip-sony-a7a7ra7s/

And I think it's a stimulating photo to windup this discussion.  Do you believe this is the future, or do you believe this is mirrorless trying to be / to do too much? 

- A

LOL, that seems to negate the biggest advantages of mirrorless!...


I had somewhat the same reaction. What's the point? Once you put a viewfinder on a mirrorless (and I wouldn't want one without a viewfinder) they start looking a whole lot like a DSLR.

To answer the question: It might be the future, if...electronic viewfinders can improve to the point where they are actually better than optical viewfinders. But they have to be better, not just equal or comparable.

I think that when and if mirrorless cameras replace DSLRs, they are likely to look very much like DSLRs because the basic form factor (a box with a viewfinder to look directly through to see the subject) has evolved into the easiest to use format for cameras available. Stepping backwards to the old view camera model where the photographer looks at a screen on the back of the camera may be fine for subjects that don't move much, but just isn't very convenient for accurate and quick composing of photographs.

My guess is that the transition will be gradual and if I were placing bets, I'd bet we are at least two to three generations away from a 5D Mirrorless.

Alternative theory: Mirrorless will evolve into something that looks very different from today's cameras. All cameras today are based on the idea that the photographer holds it close to his face with the viewfinder to his eye. Even cameras without viewfinders are based on that model, which is why they are so clunky to use. They ask you to take a design that was meant to be held close to the face to keep steady and then hold it away from your face, making it hard to compose, hold it steady and operate the controls.

Ergonomically, a smart phone is actually better to use than a camera without a viewfinder. It's small, light, fits naturally in one hand and is a lot easier to balance. Plus, you can hold it in one hand and use a finger to touch the focus point without shaking it.

I'm thinking that an innovative camera designer ought to be look at how people hold and use their smart phones and start designing cameras to take advantage of the smart phone model. Of course, I'm guessing that for the near future, that would pretty much preclude the idea of large sensors and large or long lenses.

6
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 19, 2014, 06:05:35 PM »
And, while we are on the topic of innovation, is there any other manufacturer making a flash with radio trigger built in?

7
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 19, 2014, 06:01:33 PM »
EF mount and the Rebel line are the only innovations you can think of?

How about image stabilization, ultrasonic motors, a relatively inexpensive full-frame digital body, and high-def video in SLRs?

How about eye-controlled focus, and diffractive optics?

How about DPAF?  Etc.

I think AvTvM's definition of innovation means making the exact specific camera he wants...

He also skipped over the AE-1. Not the first SLR with auto-exposure, but the first one that was successful at it. Canon saw the future and put it into their cameras at a time when all the other major SLR manufacturers thought just having a meter in the camera was cutting edge.

8
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 19, 2014, 04:40:54 PM »
+1 to Jon's points.

I would only add that Canon is not some new tech startup that is trying to cash in on unrealistic market expectations. They are an innovative, but generally conservative company that has slowly, over decades, built themselves up to become the market leaders in a highly competitive and at times very crowded field.

I'm old enough to remember the days when Canon was just one of a dozen or more consumer SLR manufacturers on a par with Miranda, Mamiya, Pentax, Konica and many others. They methodically built their brand, first by replacing others as the chief competitor to Nikon for professionals.

They managed to outlive almost all of their consumer competitors, most of whom ended up going out of business and selling off the brand name to new investors.

They set about displacing Nikon as the top brand. To anyone who was alive in the late 1960s or early 1970s, the thought of Canon eventually outpacing Nikon seemed impossible. But they did it. Not overnight, but slowly and deliberately.

Comparing them to flash-in-the-pan tech companies that were conceived, born, lived and died in a fraction of the time that Canon has been around, is a gross underestimation of the skill that Canon's management has developed over the years.   

9
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why the delay for the Tamron 150-600?
« on: August 19, 2014, 04:25:55 PM »
I think they underpriced it hence the heavy demand.
+1. They have also introduced several other lenses. Most notably new all-in-one zooms for APS-C and Full Frame plus their 24-70 and 70-200 zooms.

In fact, I'm a little worried that they may have overextended their capacity. I hope it doesn't affect quality control. I'd rather see delays in shipment than problems with maintaining the quality of lenses.

10
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 18, 2014, 10:17:52 PM »
What concrete evidence do you have that the Canon marketing department had "them" do anything? That makes no logical sense. I've worked for a number of very large companies, and dealt with marketing people. NOT ONCE has a marketing person EVER told me what to do. The politics in most large companies simply won't allow that kind of thing to happen. Such a demand would have to go through umpteen channels, up then down then up again when the demand steps on someone elses turf and gets kicked back.

Sorry, but I find the whole notion that Canon Marketing is making demands of the engineering or product development side of Canon to be laughable.

Most people haven't any idea whatsoever what marketing departments do. They just repeat myths because they think it makes them sound pure or superior.

It's particularly ironic for any photographer to demean marketing because, with the possible exception of a few highly technical applications, photography is all marketing all the time.

In any well-run enterprise, and I consider Canon a well-run enterprise, the marketing department is the biggest customer advocate you can find. 

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 18, 2014, 06:55:24 PM »
Again, I'm not arguing for Canon/Nikon to avoid this market, but it makes some sense that they let this chaotic primordial ooze of a market evolve further before trying to conquer it.

Correct.

It's a small, immature and volatile market that is very overcrowded right now. The technology still leaves much to be desired. Most of the buyers will never own more than one lens (heck most DLSR buyers never get more than lens) so it's not like people will be locked into a particular system.

Canon and Nikon have the resources to take it slowly and see what develops. They haven't ignored the market, but they aren't as desperate as the other players, so they have the luxury of waiting and watching.

If they see the market growing, they will pounce. But for now, I can't blame them for not wanting to join the little guys who are bleeding to death.

12
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 18, 2014, 06:09:00 PM »
In the first case it's a direct quote from a Canon guy at a show in Europe.

I'm not doubting that a Canon employee at a trade show might say something like that. I just doubt that he would have any access to the information to justify such a statement. Canon has never been enthusiastic about AFMA. I think they see it as a way for customers to really screw up their camera settings and create extra work for their service centers. I think they dropped it from the 60D because they viewed it as a consumer product and didn't want the headaches. I suspect they took so much grief for doing that they they decided with the 70D to just bite and bullet and include it.

In the second, maybe the EOSfun guy was full of it, but he a history of popping up right before an announcement and dropping hints that always turned out to be true.

Except the statement isn't even true. This forum was filled with rave reviews from actual users (mostly wedding and event photographers) about the incredible improvement in high ISO performance offered by the 5DIII when it came out. I'm not interested in re-opening this old debate, but there are plenty of people who think the 5DIII sensor was a vast improvement over the 5DII.

In the last case, the guy is a verified Canon employee (NOT in the camera division though)...

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Canon basically said to their non-imaging employee: "that's nice, we have an entire engineering department to do this work. Please go back to doing what we are paying you to do."

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 18, 2014, 04:41:18 PM »
I'm probably in the minority here, but I think everyone who wants a soup-to-nuts 'yes, we offer that' in mirrorless would be wiser to leave Canon/Nikon immediately.  Fuji, Sony and the m43 gang will far, far better support your ambitions.  They have multiple mirrorless body price points and all sorts of tiers of tiny/average/big sensors and cheap/okay/semi-pro build qualities.  Plus, they have a ton more lenses that are native to the mount than with EF-M.

I also do not understand why folks want reach for these microscopic bodies.  I might be way off here, but mirrorless needs to be small.  Period.  The minute the camera gets above length X with lens attached -- let's say 6-8" -- I think the upside of that tiny body is lost...

But if you want Canon/Nikon to evolve all their hardware -- lenses, bodies, flashes, etc. -- into the smaller format, give up now.  Won't happen for years and years.  Again, consider a company like Sony/Fuji/m43 who is actively trying to build up their mounts with more options.  You'll find more joy there.

- A

I kind of agree with this. Since any mirrorless is going to require a new lens system regardless of whether you stay with Canon or Nikon or go with some other brand, I don't get all the angst over Canon not rushing into this market.

Honestly, if I were dying for a mirrorless I would buy a Fuji. (Mostly because they are cool.) But, I also have never gotten why a mirrorless camera needs to have interchangeable lenses. As "A" says, the usable range for mirrorless is about 24-85 (I might suggest it could be a little longer, but not a lot -- maybe to 110mm or so)

If Fuji were to come out with a fixed lens zoom in that range or if Canon would improve a little on the G1X, I really think those would be better options.

14
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 18, 2014, 03:34:13 PM »
Thanks Danuiela. I believe that perfectly describes current Canon thinking. However, as opposed to Canon and their analysts I am convinced this ignorance and arrogance towards their customers will cost them dearly.

Information from Japanese Canon fan girls, who are working @Canon:

Information about the successor of the 7D and the 5DIII are under total NDA. And total means total. There is just an small circle of engineers and managers who know all of these Cameras.

Canon is still thinking that they do not have to produce the best and most innovative products in the low and mid price segments. Sales figures show that the market analysts are right. Canon is still the best power seller on the market...
...The slow reaction on the D7100 and the still "no reaction" on the excellent D800/810 is well calculated. No need to hurry, Canon products are still sold well. There are not many persons switching to Nikon
I find the frequent assumption that any forthcoming Canon must be a mirrorless camera to be noteworthy rather presumptuous.  There seems to be a vocal crowd that goes to any product forum, even a product that is almost certain to be a DSLR, and then issue a series of threats and ultimatums that the product had better be mirrorless or else it will show that Canon disrespects it's customers.  I find it quite odd.  It's like there is an automatic assumption that mirrorless cameras are the ONLY sort of interchangeable lens camera that is viable, which is simply nonsense of course.

I always find it amusing when forum participants seem unable to separate their personal tastes from marketplace demand.

It's not like mirrorless cameras are taking the world by storm. All mirrorless sales (not just Canon) have done poorly in western markets.

While they have done better in Asia, the unknown (at least to us) is whether the Asian market is a leading or a trailing market. Too many on this forum assume it is a leading market (that is, other markets will follow the trends there).

But, we don't know that. Strong mirrorless sales in Asia may be either an anomaly having to do with cultural differences, or it could very well be that in China, at least, strong mirrorless sales may be a precursor to DSLR sales (people buying mirrorless may, as they get more serious with the hobby, ditch their mirrorless for DSLRs which offer many advantages for wildlife, sports, action, etc.)

Canon is the only company that has innovated when it comes to DSLR form factor – SL1. They may have the market research to know that a smaller form factor in a DSLR is an effective competitor to mirrorless. (I know I personally would consider an SL1 but not a mirrorless).

Of course we don't know anything about these "Japanese Canon Fan Girls who are working at Canon" or if their claims are accurate or even translated properly (I have my doubts about both).

But, I did highlight one point:

Quote
Canon is still thinking that they do not have to produce the best and most innovative products in the low and mid price segments.

Well. duh. Market leaders never have to produce the best and most innovative products in their lower- and mid-price lines. That's true in any industry.

First of all, market leaders have a brand identity to protect and that requires a conservative approach to product releases. Nikon's recent and very expensive fiascoes are clear examples of the risk of premature releases. When you have a brand name build on reliability you must be conservative with your releases.

Quote
I am convinced this ignorance and arrogance towards their customers will cost them dearly.

It is hardly ignorant or arrogant for a market leading company to take a conservative approach. The best way to respect your customers is to make sure you stay in business for the next 20-30 years. Canon is respecting its customers by protecting their investment in Canon equipment. 

People talk about being "trapped" by their investment in Canon. But, frankly, I'd much rather be "trapped" by Canon or Nikon than have all my equipment lose its value when Sony decides they can no longer afford to support its camera division so they sell the division off to some investment group which starts piecemealing it out.


One of their reps flat out said they removed MFA from the 60D simply so they could make it a 'new' selling point again for the 70D...

An EOSfun poster...said Canon left the 5D3 sensor old school since the marketing guys wanted to push new boundaries in profit margin per body with the 5 series and felt that adding the new 1 series AF would mean they could get away without really bothering a lot with the sensor.

A Canon guy in Australia said the DSLR division in Japan didn't seem to care a whit when their division sent them some scheme to improve DR and basically told them to get lost.


Sorry, but these all sound like goofy, water-cooler conspiracy theories.

15
Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 17, 2014, 03:47:22 PM »
Do you have an alternative explanation?  ...  Something fairly compelling must have lead them to decide to leave this feature out...

At this point, the postulate of the good Friar William – he hailed from Ockham, incidentally – still holds.  The simplest explanation, which is usually best, is that omission of a touchscreen from the 7DII Is just a rumor, and therefore quite possibly false.

Well now that we've concluded the discussion of a touchscreen – which might be defined as "merely trivial," it appears we can get back to the discussion of dynamic range, which would fall into the category of "manifestly trivial."

Have at it guys. On this issue I couldn't care less.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 133