August 20, 2014, 01:48:54 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 - unfocused

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 132
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?

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.

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.   

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.

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. 

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.


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.

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."

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 17, 2014, 02:27:27 PM »
Okay, I really didn't mean to turn this into a "touchscreen thread."

But, the more comments I read the more I am coming around to the view that either this piece of the rumor pie is wrong or Canon has something quite different in mind for the 7DII.

To recap:

Touchscreen is a not a new technology. It's been used commercially for 20 years or more. It's ubiquitous. Anyone who has a smart phone has touchscreen technology. So, it's not like implementing it would be difficult or require major new research and development.

Canon has already implemented it in other models without any major issues.

The durability argument doesn't seem to hold water, since there should be no reason why a touchscreen is any less durable than an LCD screen.

It's a redundant interface, so if there are certain conditions where it might not work as well (rain, cold, etc.) it doesn't really matter because one can always revert to the button, joystick, click-wheel methods to accomplish the same things.

Not implementing a touchscreen will be a major drawback for video production. Canon's dual-pixel sensor technology is highly dependent on touchscreens and loses much of its functionality without a touchscreen.

Weather sealing of a touchscreen is much easier and much more reliable than weather sealing buttons, joysticks, clickwheels, hot shoes, etc. etc. These components are much more likely to fail and leak when exposed to moisture than a well-sealed touchscreen.

Touchscreens are the preferred and expected interface for many customers, especially for customers who use tablets or smart phones.

None of us has access to Canon's marketing or engineering research. So, of course, all of this is only speculation until we know for sure what technology the 7DII will actually incorporate. But, as the primary purpose of all this speculation is largely entertainment, I would say that if I were to place a bet, I would still bet on a touchscreen and if I'm wrong, it will be fascinating to learn why they did not implement this technology.

I think Marauder sums it up quite nicely:

Something fairly compelling must have lead them to decide to leave this feature out, given it's considerable popularity on the models in which it appears.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 No Longer in Production
« on: August 17, 2014, 12:29:22 PM »
There are dozens of logical explanations for this (the clerk didn't know what he was doing; somebody mis-typed a number; an arbitrary date chosen far into the future for inventory control; etc. etc.)

The only explanation that is not logical is that Best Buy's inventory control system is directly linked to Canon's production line. Yet, that's what would be required for this to be plausible.

We can safely file this under "goofy" and move on.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 17, 2014, 10:24:12 AM »
This has been a nice discussion about the durability of glass, but I have to wonder: what's the difference between the glass used for a touch screen and the glass used for the ordinary LCD display on the back of every DSLR?

If it is the durability of the glass that's an issue, how would it be any different if a touch screen is implemented versus the traditional display?

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 11:34:43 PM »
if you were out shooting in the rain th touch screen would be the first to die.

That's why ATM machines are always inside...oh wait, they're not.

Canon General / Re: A Rundown of EOS 7D Mark II Information
« on: August 16, 2014, 11:17:49 PM »
I think jrista's whole point was essentially that at THIS level of the Canon spectrum, cool features should play second fiddle to fundamentals. And I agree. If Canon is trying to make a paramount pro-level crop, keep pricing reasonable, and focus most consciously on the things that matter most to the target market they're after on the broadest scale possible....then they (and we) should be clamouring for solid and unmatched fundamentals. Maybe some analogies were misaligned but I appreciate his take on this.  I've been Canon since I was five years old holding dad's A1. I still have it.

The 70D fills the upscale consumer market. The enthusiasts and the crossover videographers. Feature rich with touch and wifi.

The 7DX is for a more discerning palate looking for solid build (1DXish) in a crop that can handle harsh conditions if need be and deliver 1DXish AF and FPS.  If engineering such a beast negates the use of touch and wifi, so be it. I agree that I do not believe Canon would cut such features without serious reason. One of which may be price considering everything else they wish to accomplish.

I can live fine without either. I won't miss them. I know how to toggle a canon menu well enough. So do most of the pros who would be considering this grade of machine.

In the end, all this is little more than enjoyable conjecture and academia. We don't and won't know anything til the proverbial S___ hits the fan next month :-)

Yup, this is it exactly. As I said, I don't care if they do include a touch UI, SO LONG as that does not mean they don't deliver a significantly improved sensor, significantly improved AF system, and also an improved metering system. If the 7D II hits with a consumer-grabbing tough UI, and none of the above...well, I'd perceive that the same way so many other people perceive Canon these being obsessed with video and consumerism, and having lost interest in the true photographer, in solid image quality from top to bottom.

Okay. Time out guys.

Perhaps that was your intent Jon, but using condescending and inflammatory comments obscure that intent:

Comments like this make me think people don't know how to use a DSLR.

Who in the world, ESPECIALLY pros, want to pull the camera away from their face so they can fiddle with a clunky touch screen?

It's sad how smartphone mentality is invading every other area of our lives...

in many cases, a touch screen is the primitive configuration device

Touch screens on professional grade devices designed for use by people who know how to train muscle and procedural memory, and prefer instantaneous access to many features of the camera without the need to look at anything, or remove their eye from the viewfinder...are quite frankly the most confusing "innovation" I can think of.

If you are going to throw bombs, make rash generalizations and denigrate anyone who has a different opinion than you, then please, don't act like the wounded child when people call you on it and demonstrate clearly that you were mistaken.

Honestly, what's wrong with a simple acknowledgement of a mistake. There have been many times on this forum when I've been shown wrong (often by Neuro or Jon) and I've readily admitted it. Shouldn't we all be adult enough to just say: "I should have thought more about it before I went on a rant."

Really, the point of most of us who have been discussing touch screens seems to be one of questioning why a proven, mature piece of technology would be omitted from an upcoming camera body.

Neuro seems to be of the mind that that suggestion calls into question the accuracy of the rumor. I kind of hope he is right.

I have expressed surprise at it, because I can see the value of the option in my photography (particularly when trying to adjust a series of 600 RTs on the fly -- something that I can't do while looking through the viewfinder, but perhaps that's just because I don't have enough "muscle memory" to be able to set A-B:C ratios without being able to see the screen.)

In thinking about it, I simply asked if there might be some engineering reason why it would be excluded, since I can see many disadvantages to leaving this feature off, and frankly, no advantages to not having it.

There has been a good, healthy discussion by many as to whether or not there is any engineering reason for leaving the feature off. That discussion has been both informed and informative. We will know soon enough whether the rumor is true or not.

Almost everyone has said it won't be a deal breaker (unless they shoot video) but it will be one thing that will be on many people's checklist. The suggestion that it is not a legitimate feature to consider, and that anyone who would find it significant is somehow less of a photographer, is incomprehensible to me; and what I take issue with.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 132