November 27, 2014, 11:47:40 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] 4 5 ... 147
31
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 19, 2014, 02:10:34 PM »
I know this is the internet, people like to make things up and it's probably futile to try to correct the myths, but...

...it is absolutely wrong that the 6D has not been a good seller for Canon or that there is any way Canon could be disappointed in its sales.

Until recent weeks, the 6D has consistently been the best selling full-frame DSLR on the Amazon best sellers ranking. Only in recent weeks, with the introduction of new full frame models from Nikon (which are likely selling as a result of pent-up demand from Nikon users), has the 6D dropped. But, it still sells very well (No. 12 as currently). Once the pent-up demand from Nikon users subsides, and holiday sales begin, it's very likely the 6D will again take over as the sales king of full frame DSLRs.

People can dispute the list, but I've yet to see any other independent ranking that shows the relative sales of camera models.

You can complain all you want about the 6D and its features, but unless you can produce better numbers, don't think for a minute that it hasn't been a great success for Canon.

32
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 18, 2014, 10:20:53 AM »
...my pride won't let me release ANYTHING that hasn't been looked at up-close on a large monitor. Further, if I put up more than one shot of an event, it really needs to "tell a story", the pictures need to give each other context.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd.............we have a winner!

+1

That professional photographers might lose business to iPhone shooters due to the speed of posting on Facebook is just laughable.  There's a reason pro photographers exist, and this is it.

Resisting and denying change is such an effective business strategy.

33
EOS Bodies - For Stills / LP-E6N Backwards Compatible
« on: October 17, 2014, 03:16:49 PM »
Has anyone seen any information from Canon as to whether or not the new LP-E6N is compatible with older model cameras, such as the 5DIII and 7DI?

They made a point of saying the 7DII can use the old batteries, but other than one video preview from a camera store, I have not found anything saying if the new batteries can be used in the older cameras.

34
My first reaction was: Sounds like you should buy a 5D.

With a 6D you get half the features of a 5D. With a 7D you'll get another half of the features of the 5D. Why not save yourself some money in the long run and just get a 5D to begin with?

35
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2014, 11:24:22 PM »
I think this discussion has about run its course and I'm not interested in becoming the next variation of DRone.

But, just to add to the comments of Good24 and StudentofLight, I think you are actually making my point. Of course, with enough money and labor almost anything is possible. I'm simply suggesting that the camera manufacturers could do a better job of making it easier and much cheaper.

The local newspaper photographer does not have the resources available to those covering the Olympics and not every wedding photographer can hire one or two assistants to help them process and post pictures during a wedding.

I'm not sure how many different ways one can say this, but it seems unfortunate to me that a photographer paying $1,500 to $3,000 for a camera body should not be able to have the same accessibility and usability that others get for a few hundred dollars (or even free with a two-year contract) from a cell phone.

It all seems a bit absurd. Camera manufacturers have seen their market absolutely crushed by devices that offer instant editing and instant connectivity to the internet, yet they have almost universally been painfully slow on the uptake. It's as though they are incapable of comprehending that the features that have caused an exodus from their devices might actually be features they should consider improving upon.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2014, 08:05:57 PM »

All I can do is shake my head and LOL.

Carry on.

There is none so blind as those who will not see.

37
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2014, 05:07:39 PM »
...But right now when data plans are in the single to tens of GB and now you want to load raw files to the cloud for processing/social consumption... 22 to 40 MP files are going to eat into that capacity quickly and we're just not there yet where the infrastructure can support that at a reasonable cost.  Stuff packaged for iPad/cell phone consumption are low res to save space.

Yeah, I don't see it as a replacement for how we process and save files today. I'm just suggesting that having the ability to edit and upload a few JPEGs in real time could give some photographers a competitive edge.

I know many photographers dread the thought of having to worry about posting images while an event is still going on. But, I don't think the pressure is going to go away; I think it will only get stronger. It's nice to say that clients should just be patient and wait for our brilliantly composed and edited pictures, but the reality is they won't.

All I'm suggesting is that camera manufacturers need to make it easier for photographers to deliver some of those brilliantly composed and edited pictures sooner.

38
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2014, 04:56:46 PM »
I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing fantasy that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business.

I think you meant, "fancy" but the typo is appropriate.

I know a few people that "used to" be active on Facebook, and who now use it very rarely.  I just skipped the intermediate step.

Ha! Thanks for catching that, I will correct it.

Facebook is fast becoming institutionalized and commercialized, no doubt about it. But, I study the trends pretty closely and it's definitely a medium that is here to stay. People have incorporated it into their daily lives and routines. Within a few years, it could supplant websites as the primary destination of people using the internet.

39
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 16, 2014, 03:26:19 PM »
Anyway, unlike some, I find the extra "reach" to be real and advantageous.

Got any comparison images to back that up Bob?

Interesting debate. I go back and forth on this.

Since buying a 5DIII about a year ago, I admit my 7D has pretty much been sitting, gathering dust (although I keep it as a back up). But, in the past year, I've had very little time to shoot distance-limited subjects as demand for portraits seems to take up most of my spare time these days.

But, I can't quite understand how a crop sensor would never provide an advantage in distance-limited situations. I'm certainly willing to agree that if you crop the full frame down to the same framing as a uncropped APS-C image, you won't lose much, if anything. But, intellectually, I can't get my head around the idea that if I need to crop the image much more significantly, having the extra pixels of a crop would not be an advantage.

Being math-challenged doesn't  help, but it certainly seems from a logical point-of-view that eventually, as you slice and dice away pixels, you'll reach a point where the full frame image loses too much resolution and you'll be better off with the crop sensor's greater pixel density.

It might require some pretty radical cropping, but then again, I've been in situations that require radical cropping (A California Condor perched on the top of an outcrop at the Grand Canyon – absent the ability to fly, you can't get any closer than the edge of the Canyon.)

40
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2014, 02:53:33 PM »
That gets the heart of the question -- doesn't it?  People pay a lot of money for cell phone network/data access.  I can't see many people paying a similar fee for a camera in addition to the cell phone that they already have...

Well, I don't pay extra for my iPad. It's included in my data plan. No reason why a camera couldn't be as well.
But really my main point is quite simple- there are a lot of things camera makers could do to help their professional customers gain an edge in today's highly competitive and interconnected world.

I'm not saying it's for everybody but I don't get why some folks feel threatened by it. Well maybe I do...keeping up with fast changing customer demands means you have to work harder and those who cling to the old ways risk becoming obsolete.

41
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2014, 02:13:08 PM »
I'd much rather manufacturers continue to stay focused on the photograph and not the business of photography.

I'm not particularly interested in extending this debate. Especially since your response is so filled with sarcasm in an effort to mask the lack of substance.

But, I will say your last comment really gets to the heart of the matter. First off, camera manufacturers who survive have never remained content to focus on the photograph and ignore the business of photography. My criticism is that they are failing to recognize the changing nature how photographs are used today.

I happen to think that any camera manufacturer and any photographer who sticks their head in the sand and pretends that social media is some passing fancy that is only for the "Hello Kitty" crowd, as you so disparagingly refer to it, is just asking to be put out of business.

So what is it exactly that you want, what needs to be added to a camera to compete with Hello Kitty?  A cellular 4G radio?  Should it also make phone calls, perhaps to call our editors and beg forgiveness for the few minutes delay?  Instant cloud upload?  A Facebook, Twitter, Instagram app, a contacts list complete with social media addresses of all customers?

That's a pretty good start. I've crossed out the phone, because I'm not sure that's necessary, but I would entertain it. But, certainly a usable wifi interface and the ability to do some quick edits in-camera at a minimum.

Once we stuff all of that into our cameras, will it still be simple and ubiquitous?

I don't know. Have you ever used a smart phone? They seem to be quite a bit smaller and most people seem able to manage the apps on the phone. I guess I assume photographers aren't any less smart than the average phone user. Perhaps you disagree.  (BTW, I don't think ubiquitous means what you think it does.)

42
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 15, 2014, 05:56:35 PM »

Some reasons.
1. A DSLR won't fit in your pocket/purse.
2. A DSLR won't post a photo to Instagram or Facebook.
3. A DSLR doesn't have apps like Snapseed or Perfectly Clear available.

Nothing can be done about 1, but there is no reason that a DSLR could not do 2 and 3.

A point I've been trying to make as well. Camera manufacturers are behaving like dinosaurs when it comes to social media and connectivity.

Said it before and will say it again – it's pathetic that no manufacturer has produced a DSLR that gives the professional photographer a fighting chance to post pictures from the wedding before the guests do with their iPhones.

We expect brides to pay thousands of dollars for a wedding photographer and then the pictures on her Facebook page are a bunch of shots from camera phones because they can be uploaded instantly.

Until a paid photographer has the tools to post pictures straight to a customer's Facebook from the back of the camera, manufacturers are failing their customers.

Yeah, and a lens on the back for selfies too please?

I do hope this was a post made with sarcasm in mind, if not can I just say  ::) ?

Hardly.

Any photographer who hopes to make a living in the business needs to be mindful of what the customers want. Like it or not, many customers want and expect instant gratification. They have grown up with social media being the primary form for sharing photographs.

If you have not met someone who carries their entire family album on their phone, you live a very sheltered life.

I'm merely suggesting that competitive photographers tend to be mindful of their customers desires, and camera manufacturers who hope to serve their customers (photographers) need to make that easier to do.

I used a wedding photographer as an example, but there are many others. A sports photographer shooting a high school game, a photographer covering a breaking news event, almost any situation where the photographer needs to get an image posted (which is today's equivalent of publication) quickly.

Let's imagine a little story: A state legislative committee is conducting a hearing on a controversial measure. The hearing room is packed. The "professional" photographer is clicking away at the person at the witness table. Someone else pulls out an iPhone and snaps a few pictures. The iPhone user then uploads the pictures to his Twitter feed.

The "professional" photographer goes back to the office, where he is met by his editor who says, "never mind, we already posted a picture that some guy took at the hearing and put on his Twitter feed. Oh, and the publisher has decided that it will be cheaper to just give iPhones to the reporters covering these things in the future. That means we don't need the photo staff, so here's your two week's severance pay."

Perhaps you are so successful and confident that your customers will gladly and patiently wait for the pictures you shoot, but I strongly suspect that there are many photographers out there that need the competitive edge that having the ability to edit a few shots in camera and post them to a client's social media in real time would give them.

Obviously, there is nothing that compels anyone to use the features if they become available, but manufacturers are not serving their professional base if they can't offer this simple and ubiquitous technology to their customers.

43
This is what I don't understand about the photography "community".

Some guy decides to switch camera companies.  He is not saying that his previous camera sucked, nor is he saying that he thinks that every other photographer needs to follow his lead.  He simply made a choice.

But, when the story is posted, look at the defensive (and sometimes offensive) posts. 

Who cares if this person switches camera systems?...
+1000

...until someone invents a camera that meets a multitude of conflicting requirements, people will choose what works best for their criteria.... and to those people I say "Go for it!"

+1000 to you both.

...He didn't sit around complaining about one brand or another, he just switched...

...Maybe at some point I will become less satisfied and look elsewhere, or be lured by some other system for some specific reason. That doesn't seem like something that should make others angry or hurt.

While I understand your points, let's remember that most of these people don't simply "switch" and then go about  their business. They seem compelled to rush out and make videos justifying/rationalizing their conversion.

Every day, there are probably a thousand people who are like those you describe. They switch brands because it works for them. That's fine. But most don't make videos about it.

If you are going to turn your private decision into a public one, they I think it's perfectly legitimate for people to critique your reasoning. I don't think people get offended, they just disagree and want to say why they disagree. Nothing wrong with that.

44
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:04:08 PM »

Some reasons.
1. A DSLR won't fit in your pocket/purse.
2. A DSLR won't post a photo to Instagram or Facebook.
3. A DSLR doesn't have apps like Snapseed or Perfectly Clear available.

Nothing can be done about 1, but there is no reason that a DSLR could not do 2 and 3.

A point I've been trying to make as well. Camera manufacturers are behaving like dinosaurs when it comes to social media and connectivity.

Said it before and will say it again – it's pathetic that no manufacturer has produced a DSLR that gives the professional photographer a fighting chance to post pictures from the wedding before the guests do with their iPhones.

We expect brides to pay thousands of dollars for a wedding photographer and then the pictures on her Facebook page are a bunch of shots from camera phones because they can be uploaded instantly.

Until a paid photographer has the tools to post pictures straight to a customer's Facebook from the back of the camera, manufacturers are failing their customers.

45
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 04:34:50 PM »
The sensor...

Absolutely wrong answer. There isn't an APS-C or Full Frame sensor made today that is not "pro quality" and most other sensor formats today are pro quality under the right conditions, even camera phones.

The person holding it.

That's the right answer.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 147