October 25, 2014, 12:11:28 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 ... 80 81 [82] 83 84 ... 146
1216
EOS Bodies / Re: Where the heck is the 70D or 7D mkII?
« on: October 31, 2012, 02:54:32 PM »
The 7D II will be released either in the spring or within one month of the Nikon D300 replacement.

The 70D will be released six to nine months after the 7DII or within one month of the D7000 replacement.

Yes, the 7D is getting a little long in the tooth, but with the firmware upgrade it is still very competitive. By comparison, the 12 mp D300 looks like a dinosaur. I don't know how Nikon manages to sell any of them (or if they do).

As digital technology matures and improvements with each generation become more marginal, expect the refresh cycles for various bodies to extend. What was once a two-year cycle in the 2000s, has become a three-year-plus cycle now. By the end of the decade, it may be four years or more. 

1217
Early 1960s: got a bakelight plastic Agfa box camera handed down from my Granddad;

Mid 1960s: Started borrowing my Dad's cameras. I remember a Twin Lens Reflex, a Tesina and a Minox, but there were others as well. Started developing and printing pictures with my Dad.

Late 1960s: Bought my first SLR, a Konica. First SLR ever with autoexposure. Eventually got a 20mm, 135mm and 300mm. All cheap off-brands. Most used a pre-set aperture ring.

Mid-1970s: Got a job at a small daily newspaper and bought a Canon F1, AT-1 as second body and Canon 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 135mm and Vivitar 100-300 zoom. Eventually bought a Canon 200 mm 2.8. Kept that kit through three kids, two marriages and several career changes. Lack of a darkroom, raising kids and job responsibilities meant little photography other than trips and birthdays.

2000s: Got divorced for second time, bought a Rebel xTi as first digital camera.

Got married again. Bought 7D shortly after it came out. Accumulated a variety of lenses and other equipment since then. 

1218
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 05:04:27 PM »
Seems like the perfect kit lens for the 6D. Don't know why this is a surprise. If you are going to offer an "entry-level" full frame camera, you've got to give people a decent and affordable kit lens to go with it.

Yes, it has to be priced under the 24-105. Doing so would enable Canon to offer a 6D with lens combination in the neighborhood of $2,600.

I do question the "L" designation, but that's just marketing anyway. Slap a red ring and $20 worth of weather-sealing on it and call it good.

1219
Animal Kingdom / Re: Wildlife of the Kruger National Park
« on: October 29, 2012, 05:06:31 PM »
Ivan,

Some very nice images here and on your blog. I'm curious. Many of your city shots seem to be using HDR, but in a very appealing subtle way, instead of "hit 'em over the head with a 2x4."  Also, since they are street shots, I assume you aren't able to bracket exposures. Are you willing to enlighten us on some of your techniques.

Thanks.

1220
Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore
« on: October 29, 2012, 01:05:18 PM »
Read a little further: "As for compact digital cameras, while highly functional PowerShot-series models contributed to healthy sales, unit sales for the third quarter declined from the corresponding period of the previous year due to sluggish market demand."

Also: "Demand for compact digital cameras is anticipated to increase for models offering high functionality and high added value."

Canon is acknowledging sluggish demand for compact digital cameras and targeting higher end models (In particular the G1X and EOS-M). So, yes, they recognize that the traditional low-price consumer PowerShot models are not doing well and they are targeting the higher end.

This is a problem for all camera manufacturers, not just Canon. For years, profits from low-end consumer models have provided a foundation for manufacturers to build off of. DSLR sales remain strong and profitable, but will there ever be sufficient demand to replace the revenues lost from compact digital sales? I doubt it. It would not surprise me to see Canon's imaging business unit (cameras) and similar units within Nikon, Sony, Fuji and others all shrink considerably in the coming years. Bad news for employees who work on the production lines for compact digital cameras. But, since the ultimate success of a company is based more on return on investment rather than gross sales, a smaller, leaner imaging business unit doesn't necessarily spell doom.

Companies get in trouble when they fail to adapt to changing market conditions (Kodak). Those that anticipate and adjust succeed (Fuji).

Part of Canon's (and Nikon's) strategy seems to be to diversify the DSLR product line: maintaining a full range of APS-C models while expanding their Full Frame offerings. But, the DSLR market is fairly mature, so they also need to capture new customers with the high-end compacts. Manufacturers must navigate generational and cultural differences and the high-end compact offerings are part of that strategy.

There is absolutely NOTHING in the report that supports many of the posts on this thread. It might be fun and personally satisfying to misread this report to confirm pre-conceived ideas of what Canon's pricing strategy should be for a product that a forum participant happens to think costs too much, but the financials simply don't support any of that wishful thinking.

1221
Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore
« on: October 26, 2012, 04:16:09 PM »
Please read the !@#$% report!

http://www.canon.com/ir/results/2012/rslt2012q3e.pdf

"Demand for interchangeable-lens digital cameras continued to realize robust growth in all regions while the market for compact digital cameras shrunk due to the stagnation of the global economy."

"Within the Imaging System Business Unit, despite efforts to achieve sales growth with the competitively priced EOS Digital Rebel series along with the EOS 5D Mark III and EOS 60D advanced-amateur models, sales volumes of interchangeable-lens digital cameras decreased from the year-ago period due to a delayed new-product launch."

Why would anyone want to waste their time reading the report, when they can spend it writing uninformed comments that bear no relation to the facts?

1222
EOS Bodies / Re: Is 22Mpx Really Enough?!!!
« on: October 25, 2012, 02:08:16 PM »
Why is it that so many people act as though Ansel Adams is the standard that all photography should be judged by?

Yes, he made many great images, but that was 70-80 years ago. There is nothing wrong with trying to emulate an artist from the 1930s and 40s, but you do yourself an injustice if you don't progress beyond that. So much has happened in the photographic world since.

Do yourself a favor. Go to a library and take a look at what has been happening in the past half century. You are cheating yourselves if you don't know anything about Frank, Arbus, Cartier-Bresson, Shore, Friedlander, Meyerowitz, Gowin, Eggleston, Winogrand, Uelsmann, Christianberry. After you've spent some time with these masters, start exploring what some contemporary photographers are doing.

Ansel Adams was great, but really, who wants to live in the past? (And, frankly, Edward Weston was better)

1223
Lenses / Re: EF-S 15-85mm
« on: October 25, 2012, 09:56:20 AM »
I'm always curious what people mean by "L Build Quality." I have three "L" lenses (70-300, 100-400, and 100 macro) and I have rented two others (300 f4 & 400 f5.6). I'm hard pressed to see any consistent or practical difference in the build quality between these lenses and the 15-85 EF-S.

First of all, Canon has no consistent standard for its L lenses (other than price) so I'm not sure what defines "L Build Quality." Second, I have the 15-85 on my 7D about 90 percent of the time and it gets a fair amount of banging around with no noticeable effect. It is a heavy, very robust lens. Certainly handles and feels no different than any of the "L" lenses I am familiar with. (Yes, it does have that "self-zooming" feature that can be annoying, but I consider that just a characteristic of this particular lens). 

So, what is this supposed build quality that "L" lenses all have that the 15-85 lacks and is it practical or theoretical?

1224
Canon General / Re: Does Minimum Advertised Price apply to auctions?
« on: October 23, 2012, 04:12:59 PM »
Lots of confusion parading as truth on this thread, in part because people are mixing MSRP and MAP. Two different things. 

Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price is the price the manufacturer recommends that a product sell at. Traditionally, in photo equipment there has been wide variation between MSRP and street price (actual price generally paid). The difference has narrowed in recent years. Purpose of MSRP is to give retailers an idea of what the product should be selling for, according to the manufacturer. Depending on the manufacturer this could be accurate or a total fiction. Sigma, for example, tends to set an unrealistic MSRP on their lenses, that almost no retailer honors.

MSRP is just as the title says: "suggested."  My understanding is that in the U.S. at least, there are legal restrictions that prevent manufacturers from enforcing the MSRP as a firm rule. Thus, the growth of MAP or Minimum Advertised Price. MAP says the retailer cannot advertise a price below a certain number.

MAP is designed to help smaller retailers compete. I don't know the specifics of either Canon's or Nikon's dealer agreements, but it appears they enforce the MAP during rebate times (which have become almost year round). No retailer can advertise an item for sell at less than the MAP and still participate in the rebate program.

The issue, of course, is what constitutes an "advertised price." Again, not knowing the specifics of the agreement between the manufacturer and the retailer, I can't say for certain. But, it appears that there are some exceptions. As the OP suggested, it appears that MAP does not, in some cases, apply to auction sites. Similarly, it appears that there are exceptions for direct links from websites. For example, both Canon Rumors and Canon Price Watch have occasionally offered special links for discounted prices from either B&H or Adorama. In those cases, if you follow the website link, you receive a lower price than if you go directly to the merchant's web page.

I don't know if these special deals and auctions violate the MAP agreement, but I suspect that the big merchants like B&H and Adorama wouldn't use them if the did – too much at risk.

Is MAP price-fixing? I doubt it. Again, not knowing the specifics of the agreement, makes it hard to know. But, from what I understand, MAP is linked to a benefit given the retailer. For example, if you want to participate in the rebate program, you have to adhere to MAP. The retailer has the choice, they could turn down the rebate program (of course no one would do that), so it's voluntary and not mandatory. Similarly, most manufacturers offer "co-op" programs for advertisements (If you advertise their product, using their suggested marketing materials, they compensate you in some way) Again, it is not coercive, but it is a strong incentive to adhere to the agreement.

The voluntary nature of the agreement probably keeps it legal. If there would be a successful legal challenge, I suspect it would require proving that the agreement is not truly voluntary, but is so coercive that it is in fact price-fixing.  However, one thing the manufacturers have going for them is that they are clearly in a competitive market. Canon is not colluding with Nikon or Sony to fix prices, they are simply using incentives to keep their prices consistent among retailers.

The above is based on my understanding of typical retail practices and isn't meant to imply I have first hand knowledge of the specifics of the agreements between Canon and its retailers. Nor do I pretend to be a trade attorney (although I did stay at a Holiday Inn recently).

1225
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EF Lens Speculation [CR1]
« on: October 23, 2012, 12:56:34 PM »
I would hope that if the 135mm gets an update, that the 200mm 2.8 would also be in line.
The beauty of the 135L is amazing IQ, very nice reach for a lot of situations, and an already-awesome f/2 max aperture, all in a very portable & affordable package.
See, the thing is, the major advantage to the 135L and the 200mm f/2.8 right now is that they are dirt cheap compared to their quality. You can get 70-200L level results from each for <1/2 the price. Once you update both, especially if there is IS, the price moves a lot closer to the 70-200L. Especially for the 200mm f/2.8, when its street price is <$800, I can't see anyone buying the updated IS version for $1500 or so.

I can see the 135L getting that update, because the f/2 is an advantage...the 200mm I hope doesn't get updated, because that means there is always that cheaper option around
Well obviously I disagree. I don't have much interest in a zoom at 200mm or less. So a light, small 2.8 prime with IS would interest me much more. Even at double the current price I'd be interested. Different strokes.

1226
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EF Lens Speculation [CR1]
« on: October 23, 2012, 11:42:55 AM »
I would hope that if the 135mm gets an update, that the 200mm 2.8 would also be in line.

1227
I assume you did also notice that that the site references Photoshop plug-ins for sale: www.fashionactions.com

1228
Ok, say there's no difference inside at all, other than the one port we know about.  That means Canon is charging a 91% premium for code that offers critical features for a certain group of users.  Why are people up in arms about this?  Adobe is charging a premium for Photoshop CS6 vs. Elememts, for the same thing, code that offers critical features for a certain group of users. But, Adobe is charging a 459% for their code.  ;)

Or you can buy a competitor's product (Corel Paint Shop Pro, for example) but no one does that.

Neuro's point is spot on. Who cares if the difference is in the hardware or the software? It's all in the "perceived" value and we have been programmed to perceive that physical differences in products are worth more than programming differences.

Ironic that this is a topic on a photography forum. Who should charge more? A chimpanzee using a 5DIII or a professional photographer with 30 years of experience using a 5DIII. The only difference is the programming.

1229
If you like video training (I don't. I'm old fashioned and prefer a book) then Lynda.com is very good for web programs like Dreamweaver, Flash, InDesign, etc. Not sure about general photography training. (Oh, and Lynda.com books are also quite good.)

1230
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon is on top again!
« on: October 17, 2012, 06:22:50 PM »
Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?
Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?
Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?

Were you dropped on the head as a baby?
Did your parents never teach you any manners?
Are you just a jerk?

Still searching for our personal style, but I'm glad we're using Canon:


Nightbreath, two questions:

What are those things in the background? A giant horse and some sort of Tiki Head? They are certainly the Punctum in that picture (obscure reference to Camera Lucida).

Seriously, I've looked at your website before. Very impressive. Just curious, are you in Russia? Ukraine? someone else in the former Soviet Union?

Pages: 1 ... 80 81 [82] 83 84 ... 146