Messages

1006

EOS Bodies / Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 20, 2011, 10:38:19 PM »

Nikon Rumors is reporting that Sony will soon announce a 24mp APS-C Sensor which is likely to become the foundation for the next generation of the D300.

That got me thinking, will Canon continue to up the ante in the megapixel war, or will they, at some point, decide to shift strategies and open up a new front (increased dynamic range, improved high ISO, superior noise control)?

Certainly, they have the technology and expertise to keep increasing the megapixel count, but I wonder if they might decide that a more modest increase (say 22mp) in the next generation of APS-C sensors, coupled with an extra stop or two of speed and improved image quality might be more advantageous.

I'm generally a fan of more megapixels, but I'm beginning to wonder if there is much point to going too much bigger. With a native size of over 21 x 14 inches (at 240 ppi) the current 18 mp sensor is more than sufficient for most needs.

At some point, the trade off in file size outweighs the benefits of a native size that exceeds anything that even most professionals will ever need. (Yes, portrait, wedding and commercial photographers need the larger sizes, but most photographers shooting for publication, either in print or on the web, don't. And, yes, I know that folks like Macfly need the resolution for their work, but photographers at that level aren't ever going to be shooting with an APS-C camera).

Anyone who's read any of my past posts know that I am definitely not one of those "fewer megapixels are better" people. Frankly, I think that is ridiculous. But, I do understand the law of diminishing returns and I can't help thinking that we may be reaching that point.

I have tremendous respect for Canon's market savvy and I wonder if they might decide that they can really shake things up and gain a competitive advantage by taking the market in a totally new and unexpected direction.

1007

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D mrk. II

« on: June 20, 2011, 10:03:23 PM »

With rumors of the 1D going, would it not make sense to make the 7D MK2 APS-H? This way you would have a clear progression from APS-C to APS-H to full frame.

I don't believe you will ever see Canon change sensor sizes within the same series (7D, 60D, 5D, etc.) The consumer confusion and anger it would create would be a marketing nightmare.

I personally don't see the APS-H format being around much longer in SLRs (It could be used, however, for specific applications such as security cameras). I believe that technology is overtaking the format. That is, gains in resolution are narrowing the gap between APS-C and Full Frame and the APS-H format occupies a shrinking niche. The marginal gain in quality may soon be insufficient to justify the expense and effort of maintaining the format.

As it stands, Canon's lens lineup does not support the format at the wide end. I think they will drop the APS-H format and shift sports and wildlife shooters to either APS-C or to a 1Ds model that offers sufficient resolution to allow in-camera 1.3 and 1.6 cropping.

1008

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D mrk. II

« on: June 16, 2011, 12:59:09 PM »

Someone got bored just to yank our chains.  I wonder if people think by starting rumors that they'll actually get Canon to MAKE something that they WANT

this is a wish list.

Right and right. Almost anyone who reads this forum could come up with similar specifications. I doubt that Canon has even started to spec out the 7D II in any serious way. It's at least a year and two other models (5D and 1Ds) away from being released.

At this point their engineers and designers are still working through options and ideas, testing durability and consumer acceptance of features introduced on other models (flip screens). No doubt the 7D team is concentrating on the next generation of APS-C sensors, squeezing a bit more megapixels out while trying to reduce noise, increase ISO and improve dynamic range.

They will wait until the 1Ds and 5D are released and then allow some of the features in those models to trickle down to the 7D after about a year.

1009

Lenses / Re: 24-70L or 100-400L ??

« on: June 14, 2011, 11:05:29 PM »

One last thing. You mentioned a "stick." Do you mean a monopod?

I've used one with the 100-400 and let me tell you it is very useful. Helps hold and steady the lens without being nearly as confining as a tripod. What I like about a monopod is that you can lean your rig up or down or to the side to adjust to the subject and compose the shot.

Anyway. Good luck and have fun.

1010

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II

« on: June 14, 2011, 05:54:51 PM »

Post here from someone who actually owns a 55-250 and shoots a lot with it.

It's one of the great bargains in the Canon lineup.

Excellent comments. I absolutely agree. In fact, I get a little frustrated with all the negative comments about "cheap consumer lenses" that seem to imply that the "average" consumer is a dunce and can't possibly appreciate quality.

This lens does what it does very well, which is consistently sharp pictures at very low cost. On top of that it even offers image stabilization. I strongly suspect that most of the people who are critical of this lens have never owned it.

1011

EOS Bodies / Re: 3D (Again) & 5D Mark III (CR1)

« on: June 14, 2011, 12:02:08 PM »

I wouldn’t discount this one completely

I would.

1012

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II

« on: June 13, 2011, 11:19:10 PM »

With the original 55-250 Canon chose image quality. Frankly, that's a choice I'll take any day. You can compensate for speed

sorry but i strongly disagree the amount of shots i missed because of slow focus speeds is quite large and a USM for a few bucks extra would definitely more then halve the number of missed shots.

the 55-250 is still a sweet lens tho and i love it  but it is just to slow for some shots and you cant compensate for it specialy due to the lack of full time manual focus override wich USM gives.

Okay, that's one of the disadvantages of using a general term like speed. I was thinking in terms of f-stops, as in how "fast" the lens is. And, before people jump all over that, I just mean that you have some options available when using a slower lens, whereas, if a lens is not sharp, there really are no good options available.

You are right in that a lens that focuses slowly results in missed shots that can't be compensated for.

1013

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II

« on: June 13, 2011, 07:05:17 PM »

Not to mention these consumer grade lenses feel really cheap.

Well, maybe that's because they are really cheap 

In a low-cost lens you have chose build quality, speed or image quality. Can't have all three and usually can't have more than one. With the original 55-250 Canon chose image quality. Frankly, that's a choice I'll take any day. You can compensate for speed and you can even compensate for build quality (by not doing something stupid with the lens), but if the image quality isn't there, there isn't anything you can do.

BTW, the 55-250 may "feel" light and cheap, but I had one for over two years, took it all over the country (and outside the U.S.) Didn't "baby" it and it held up just fine. Still looks and performs like new. I replaced it only because I wanted something a little longer. I think we sometimes underestimate the durability of today's materials and construction techniques. (See the incredible Canon and Nikon stress test videos that were linked to this site a few months ago.)

1014

Lenses / Re: 24-70L or 100-400L ??

« on: June 13, 2011, 06:05:33 PM »

I know I'm late to the party but here is my free advice (and worth every penny):

I think it's a no-brainer. Go for the 100-400mm from the refurbished store. It's a great price and a great lens. For a trip like this, having something longer than a 200mm along seems critically important. You've already got the 15-85mm which is the same focal length at the wide end. And, at that wide end, you are losing less than one f-stop with the 15-85 vs. the 24-70.

But, here's the thing: lenses go in and out of stock quickly at the refurbished store. The 100-400 is in stock now but there is no guarantee that it will be in stock in a week or so, so I would not waste time agonizing over the decision or else you may be out of luck when you finally decide.

Frankly, you can use the lens for the trip and then, if you need to, sell it and probably not lose much if anything.

1015

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D focusing question??

« on: June 13, 2011, 05:50:23 PM »

Okay. I was confused too. Because I was also thinking: "isn't that what autofocus does anyway?"

Glad you clarified that. I'm a big fan of the Tokina 11-16. At the risk of unleashing a firestorm of Canon lens fetishists, I have to say I think it's a better lens than the Canon 10-22. I'm going to have to try the center-point focus now. I guess usually, with a lens that wide, I haven't found focus to be as critical, so haven't really noticed the problem. Now, I'm curious.

1016

Lenses / Re: EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS -- update coming?

« on: June 10, 2011, 07:12:47 PM »

There is a rebate on for this lens, as well as a couple of others.

Buy it.

Next to the 50 f1.8 it is the best bargain Canon offers. In fact, it might be a better bargain than the 50 f1.8. It is very sharp, small and light. Downside is it is light and plastic-y. But, I've had one for about three years and never had any problems. I wouldn't do anything stupid with it, but for the price, it is an incredible bargain.

1017

Lenses / Re: Why does not Canon have a 50-150 f.2,8 L is and a 150-300 f.2,8 L is lenses.

« on: June 08, 2011, 10:54:55 AM »

I think i was not too clear with the "if you want to take photography seriously" phrase

Okay, I won't quibble. If the point is that Canon has neglected the EF-S line, that's certainly true. And, really, it would be easy to fix. It doesn't require offering lenses through the entire range of focal lengths, just a better selection at the wide end would cover it. It is frustrating that Canon seems to have ceded much of the crop sensor lens territory to third parties.

1018

Lenses / Re: Why does not Canon have a 50-150 f.2,8 L is and a 150-300 f.2,8 L is lenses.

« on: June 07, 2011, 11:42:04 PM »

"With Canon, you sometimes get the impression that if you're not using a full frame camera, you are a second class citizen."

Its all about money. Its a food chain. The whole point of this, that if you want to take photography seriously, you cant get stuck at APS-C. What do you think, why theres no weather sealed EF-S lens? For the same reason. If you want to go pro, you have to go fullframe.

One of the silliest statements ever. Sensor size has absolutely nothing to do with how serious of a photographer you are. A talented photographer can make great images with a point and shoot. A 1D won't make a no-talent photographer good.

1019

PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot Info

« on: June 07, 2011, 03:16:30 PM »

As if those cameras need a megapixel bump. Beats me why would anyone want a P&S with more than 12MP.

I believe the G11 and G12 dropped down to 10MP. I'm hoping Canon bumps it back up a little, but with improved image quality.

I want a FF G12, and a FF PowerShot

Simple.  Merely alter the laws of physics such that a zoom lens which can project a FF image circle can fit into a P&S-type form factor.  Or, maybe they could do it now with a 35-80mm f/8-16 lens.  I bet that would work for you, right?

Sarcasm not needed. Full frame not likely or needed, but APS-C is certainly doable. Interchangeable lens rangefinder type (similar form to the Fujifilm X-100). A couple of wide-angle and normal primes or a narrow range zoom made especially for the camera, plus an adapter to mount Canon's telephotos would be a dream come true.

1020

Lenses / Re: Why in the hell did Canon make EF-S lenses

« on: June 07, 2011, 02:47:55 PM »

FWIW, you can mount a Tokina 11-16mm on your 1D body, you'll get vignetting a the wide end but it works

Really? I did not know that. Very interesting, especially since Canon is discounting refurbished 1D's for $1,500 off the price of a new body ($3,999 vs. $5,499). Out of stock currently, but they have had them in stock within the past month.

Now, if I just had $3,999 to spend on a camera...hmm...camera or college tuition for my daughters? I guess I'll have to stick with the 7D for awhile longer.