April 21, 2014, 12:21:04 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 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 118
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: March 27, 2012, 05:07:38 PM »
There is plenty of pricing and design room for a 7D Mark II. It would stay as the top prosumer camera. There are features that would make it attractive for action shooters that could be added w/out damaging any of the DSLR line: better low light performance (less noise), improved IQ, 61 AF metering system, match the 5D Mark III video, and a faster focusing system. I would be queued up right away at $1,600.

That sounds like way too many features to fit a $1600 price point. I think if they were to make a detuned aps-c version of the 5DmkIII it would have to be at least $2500. Also, with all those features and a $1600 price tag, don't you think that would hurt sales of 5DmkIII's and even 1DX's? There would be a ton of people choosing the 7D over a 5 or 1 series because they believe it's the better bang for your buck.

$1,600 is probably too aggressive, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something around $1,800-$2,000. Not necessarily with quite those specs, but some incremental improvements over the current model with most of the emphasis placed on sensor improvements.

As far as hurting sales of the 5DIII or 1Dx, Canon doesn't seem to be overly concerned about cutting into sales of one model with another. They would have never released the 5DIII with the features it has if they were worried about protecting the 1Dx.  And, look at the clustering of Rebels and the 60D – barely any differentiation between those models.

In the current competitive marketplace, making sure they have an model that can retain existing customers and draw new customers from other brands seems to be taking precedence over protecting one model over another.

Third Party Manufacturers / How About This Canon?
« on: March 27, 2012, 01:17:38 PM »
This is a camera I'd love to see Canon make. (Well not at $6,000 obviously)


Seriously, a digital panoramic would be terrific. Fuji has a panoramic option for in-camera stitching with the X-10 which is the second best thing. I'd much rather have a panoramic option than the "double-exposure" thingy that Canon has been adding.

What do others think?

Site Information / Bring Back Karma – NOW!
« on: March 27, 2012, 01:07:29 PM »
I just spotted this on another thread:

Gee I miss the karma system... some of the comments are just getting out of hand -_-

I too have noticed the amazingly rapid degeneration on this site since Karma was dropped. People suddenly feel the urge to insult one another, use negative stereotypes and call each other names. I'll bet if you did a word search on "fanboy" in the last week you'd find the frequency about 10 times what it used to be.

In less than two weeks this site has gone from one of the most civil and helpful forums on the web to sinking down there with so many other sites on the web, where drive-by comments, name-calling and denigrating other users is the order of the day.

Time to admit the experiment was a failure and bring back the Karma. Whatever its flaws. It worked.

EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: March 27, 2012, 10:29:29 AM »
why couldnt the 70D fit in as top of the line?

Because the 7D is already the top of the line.

Lets say the 7D replacement comes with all sorts of upgrades that make it better than the mkI but it happens to be branded as a 70D. What's wrong with that? Why would the badge make it less desirable?

Who really knows though. We could both be way off and Canon could throw another curve ball.

Well, certainly it doesn't matter what any model is called. My (over)reaction is to the minority of commenters who seem to feel that the bigger the sensor they have the more of a photographer they are.

For the sake of argument though, I just don't see Canon re-branding the 7D as a 70D. Manufacturers don't usually take an existing product and down-brand it. They've spend the last 2 1/2 years building the 7D brand and have done a very good job of it. The 7D is a very well-positioned product that has had remarkable success and customer satisfaction. Having invested a significant amount of resources into the brand, I don't see them throwing it away.

However, you are right about the curve balls. Canon has thrown so many in the past year, I really will not be surprised by almost anything they might do.

Although I have found it's usually not a good idea to bet against CR Guy's sources, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the "entry-level DSLR" concept.

But, looking at it from Canon's perspective (not from the many wish-list comments I've read) I can see it under these circumstances:

Manufacturing three full-frame sensors is inefficient and ties up fabrication resources that can be better used for other purposes. So, instead of continuing to make the 5DII sensor, maybe it makes sense to switch to the 5DIII sensor (Assuming production costs of the new sensor are not much different than those of the older sensor)

Canon does like to re-use its sensors, as evidenced by the APS-C line, so having one sensor in at least two full-frame bodies makes some sense.

Same with the DIGIC chip. Probably cheaper to just use the DIGIC V, instead of keeping an old chip alive.

Apparently, again judging by the APS-C lineup, the incremental cost of slightly different models is not significant, so perhaps Canon would like to stretch its full frame development costs over more bodies.

Canon doesn't seem to be concerned about cannibalization of sales from one body to another (Again, note the clustering of features with the APS-C lineup) so they may not be concerned that a less expensive full frame will cut into 5DIII territory (They don't seem to be concerned that the 5DIII will hurt the 1Dx.)

The question, I think, is autofocus. Do they recycle the original 5D autofocus one more time? Or, do they spend the money on a new autofocus that is improved from the 5DII but not up to 5DIII standards? I'm guessing the latter, just because they probably don't think they can get away with using the same old autofocus one more time. But, that does create new costs.

Then, it's just a matter of picking and choosing which features to leave off and which ones to keep. Probably a mixture based on the incremental costs/savings from each feature. One thing they definitely will have is video capability. Anyone who thinks we will ever see a stills-only camera again is crazy. The incremental costs of video are small, but the risk of lost sales by leaving it out are huge.

So, maybe a rebranded 5DII with a 5DIII sensor and processor, possibly with a different autofocus or possibly with the same 5DII autofocus.

Price: I would say that without a new autofocus they might bring it in for $2,200. With a new autofocus, maybe closer to $2,500. I think an under $2,000 full framer is very, very unlikely.

Will it replace the 7D? Not in a million years. This obsession that full-frame fanboys have with APS-C is just ridiculous. APS-C fills a much-needed niche that has only gotten more significant with the killing off of the APS-H sensor.

Perhaps in five years the technology will have advanced sufficiently to offer an all-in-one DSLR that can shoot both formats, but it isn't there yet.

There will definitely be a 7DII and there may even be a 7DX (Enthusiast version with add on grip/Professional sports and wildlife version with one-piece integrated body and grip).


The debates on this forum remind me of Sayre's Law: "Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low."

... "low stakes" is relative: Spending a good part of your savings for your recreation is a serious thing to some (including me), and for professional photography it's worth money and concerns your future to have an edge.

That was not the point. I believe he's referring to the stakes of forum arguments.

Exactly. Thanks EYEONE. Plus, the stakes are low because the technology these days is so good overall that most of these comparisons are equivalent to splitting the hairs on a gnat's knee.

Canon General / Re: Is it worth *really* studying photography?
« on: March 23, 2012, 01:53:20 PM »
Good comments here. I will just add another thought.

There is a lot of emphasis here on the technical training, but a good education is also critical for aesthetic training as well. Learning the history of photography, becoming familiar with the work of someone other than Ansel Adams, and having instructors and fellow students discuss and critique your efforts presents opportunities that you may seldom have again once you begin a professional career.

Although I make my living outside of photography today, I still draw on the lessons I learned back in college every time I take up a camera. Carrying around in my head iconic images from Walker Evans, Robert Frank, Garry Winogrand, Edward Weston, Nathan Lyons, Lee Friedlander and literally hundreds of other incredible photographers helps me every time I look through a viewfinder and compose a shot.

Most importantly, it reminds me that f-stops, pixel counts, dynamic range and all the other technical matters that get discussed ad infinitum on this and other forums are insignificant if there is no vision.

But in the end, i think image quality on all these upper tier cameras are getting so good across the board that we are really splitting hairs with these numbers

True that. In fact, I'd say that's the case with almost all the DSLRs, even the Rebels. Make a 16x20 print from any Canon or Nikon and for 99% of shooting conditions, no one will be able to tell the difference between the $700 and the $6,000 camera. 

The debates on this forum remind me of Sayre's Law: "Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low."

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Defective 5D MK III.....
« on: March 22, 2012, 06:54:35 PM »
Okay, I think we've beat this dead horse sufficiently.

I was skeptical at first, but I trust the OP. We do get some hysterical folks on the forum at times, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

To me, this illustrates the difficulty of diagnosing problems over the internet. So many variables, so many different opinions.

It seems that in this case, the camera was very likely defective. There will always be a few and someone has to get the defective ones. No reason to doubt it in this case. The OP was right to take it back and exchange it. Now, if the next one has the same problem...well...then it might be something else.

Lenses / Re: Worth upgrading from 100mm macro to version II?
« on: March 22, 2012, 04:26:18 PM »
No experience with the non "L" version. I own the "L."

Here is my opinion: Image stabilization is good for hand-held shots at close up (non-macro) range but not so much for true macro. For 1:1 or similar magnification, it's almost impossible (for me at least) to keep the critter in focus handheld at high magnification.

I love the 100 "L" and I love the IS, but I love it as much for its versatility as an all-around short telephoto as I do for its macro abilities. I've shot dragonflies, spiders and other smallish critters handheld, but not at true macro. If you really need or want 1:1, I'm guessing you'll usually want a tripod and will need to turn off IS.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 bug pool?
« on: March 22, 2012, 04:16:19 PM »
Not sure what the original poster is suggesting, but this hardly seems like an appropriate forum to report "bugs."

I agree with Mt. Spokane, it could quickly become a magnet for trolls, complaints and uninformed, undocumented opinions. In addition, I can't imagine what the benefits would be, as this is not an official Canon site, so there is no action that can be prompted from this site. I think people sometimes forget this is just an entertainment site designed for people to express personal opinions and share their own experiences.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Defective 5D MK III.....
« on: March 22, 2012, 02:36:24 PM »
Should the camera store take it back? Yes, if you feel it is defective, I can't imagine any reputable dealer not accepting the return.

Is it defective? Honestly, as others are saying, it's pretty hard to tell from your examples, but it looks like you are showing us crops that represent 5% or less of the total frame. Have you compared these images to similar crops from your previous camera? Is it less sharp than what you had?

This reminds me of a thread awhile back from someone who felt his 7D wasn't performing up to par and no one else could see any problem. Bottom line is, if you aren't satisfied with it, there is probably nothing that people on this forum can say to change your mind so you may be better off returning it and either getting a different body or reconsidering if this is the camera for you.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: will a hot car hurt my gear?
« on: March 21, 2012, 04:10:04 PM »
I found this on the Canon Europe Website (Couldn't find a similar story on Canon USA)

Professional EOS digital cameras cope very well with hot and humid conditions. They can handle temperatures of up to 45°C and humidity of up to 85%.


I think that translates into 113 degrees Fahrenheit.

I believe I have read before (but can't find it now) that the heat can affect the lubricants, but that once they cool down the are usually okay. Main problem is one of using the camera while it is hot and the lubricants aren't effective. But, I think I have also read that modern lubricants are less of a problem. Similarly, I believe that the heat can temporarily result in sensor problems, but again, should be okay once things cool down.

My thought for Michigan: leave the camera at home on 90 degree plus days. Keep it in the trunk on other days. (Trunk should be cooler than inside car and safer too. No greenhouse effect in the trunk and no one can see what's in there.) To be safe, you might want to throw a thermometer in the trunk a few times and just check after work to see how hot it gets in there.

Site Information / Re: Disappointed and goodbye
« on: March 20, 2012, 11:56:56 PM »
Hopefully with the removal of the Karma system, there will be fewer newbies hurt by a (trivial) scoring system and we can concentrate on the comments and discussions themselves.   

Sorry to see you go, and hope to see you back some time when the 5D III whining has ceased!

Just the opposite. Things have definitely taken a turn for the worse in the few days since Karma was removed. I predict it will only get worse. Like it or not, Karma worked. It helped keep people in line and was a way for the entire community to police one another.

Things have already started to degenerate and unfortunately it appears removing the Karma system will be a big contributor to the problem.

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 118