December 20, 2014, 10:14:13 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 [4] 5 6 ... 147
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?...

...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.

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.

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.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 03:54:40 PM »

Ahh, but the real money is in lens sales. While there will always be throttled feature sets for up-sell within a brand, the real concern is to lose sales to other competitors.  Canon knows this, and I don't believe there will be a significant premium in price for the next-gen 6D.

No the real money is in Rebel kits, and whilst I am no corporate adviser and I hate when people proclaim what Canon 'need' to do, I would venture that they do need to keep the Asian Rebel/entry market happy and buoyant with new and better mirrorless cameras. The USA and European market can be fobbed off with 6D/5D iterations for years, the Asian and expanding markets will not put up with sub par mirrorless cameras.

Maybe. But what no one knows is whether the Asian and expanding markets are "leading" or "trailing." People assume that the markets where mirrorless bodies are popular are on the front end of the technology trends. But, we don't know that.

Trends and fashions change. It is very possible that after a few years of playing with small mirrorless cameras, Asian customers, especially in China where the economy and middle-class is still growing, will trade in their little mirrorless toys for "big boy and girl" DSLRs. Like customers in Europe and the Americas, they may find that if they want to shoot sports, wildlife and birds it's a lot easier to do that with a DSLR.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 02:04:10 PM »
...I wish Canon had a bit more clarity on their naming/numbering of products...The odd numbers 1Dx, 3, 5D, 7D, ... should be full frame sensors and the even numbers 2, 4, 6D, ... should have been APS-C.  That way you know from the name/number exactly where it fits in the line-up, features, and sensor size.

Maybe it is more about what numbers happened to be available? On the other hand, the 1D, 5D and 7D are all "professional" or top of the line cameras in terms of build quality. 6D build quality is much closer to the XXD family.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 02:00:59 PM »
This real world review of the D750 shows what the spiritual successor to the 5D3 (whatever they name it) needs to target.

PS I'm not interested in a flamewar. Just adding a data point for what the competition's refreshed body is offering.

Perhaps not, but it may begin anyway. :)

Seriously, I have a hard time understanding why the 5DIV would need to "target" the D750. It seems to me the D750 is targeting the 5DIII a few years late. Not seeing anything of significance in the D750 that isn't in the 5DIII and there are a number of things the 5DIII still does better. An "upgrade" of the 5D to that simply reflects the D750, would be very disappointing.

I'd rather see a 5DIII that targets the 70D, 6D and 7DII (Dual pixel autofocus, wi-fi, touch screen, improved autofocus, greater frame rate, etc.) Improve upon the best features of those three cameras and you've got a winner.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 01:52:06 PM »
We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D...
I seriously doubt if Canon has been disappointed with the sales of the 6D.  The 6D is almost certainly the best-selling full frame camera on the market today. Certainly has outsold the D600/610...

Feature and price creep is always a dilemma for any manufacturer. Look at cars. Manufacturers always start out with a budget car and then, in order make it "new" each season they have to add features and cost. Eventually, the budget car become a mid-level car and they have to start over with a new budget model...

The 6DII has to be better than the 6D, but that means it gets closer in features to the 5DIII...

As a counter argument, look at the Rebel (t2i->t5i), features have been going up (not for image quality improvements), but the price has been creeping down.

Yes, I painted with an overly broad brush. There is always some counter-pressure to keep the next model in line with the previous model for pricing purposes (7DI vs. 7DII for example).

The point that I probably didn't make clear enough is that I think there is plenty of room between the 6D and 5DIII price points for a third model. Whether the 6DII stays at the current price point and a new model moves in-between or whether the 6DII moves up in price and a new entry level model is created, really doesn't matter.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 10:22:25 AM »
We’re told that Canon hasn’t been fully satisfied with the sales of the Canon EOS 6D...
I seriously doubt if Canon has been disappointed with the sales of the 6D.  The 6D is almost certainly the best-selling full frame camera on the market today. Certainly has outsold the D600/610.

Either Canon has unrealistic expectations or whomever is "telling" CR guy that Canon is disappointed doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

That said, I can see Canon placing a new full-frame in the lineup between the current 6D and the 5DII. There is a lot of space in there for a D750 competitor. I wouldn't be surprised to see a 6DII that goes up in price, features and build to hit that $2,500 mark and then a new model that is closer in features to the original 6D (8D??) come in at around $1,500.

Feature and price creep is always a dilemma for any manufacturer. Look at cars. Manufacturers always start out with a budget car and then, in order make it "new" each season they have to add features and cost. Eventually, the budget car become a mid-level car and they have to start over with a new budget model.

The 6DII has to be better than the 6D, but that means it gets closer in features to the 5DIII. The 5DIV has to have better features than the 5DIII, but that encroaches on the 1DX. It's a never-ending battle to keep refreshing models while keeping the "budget" version available. It's further complicated now that the technology has matured and the pace of change is slowing down.

It's a myth to think that Canon would be concerned about a stripped-down full frame camera stealing sales from the 7DII (or a 7DII stealing sales from a stripped-down full frame camera). Two different cameras, two different markets and either way, Canon gets your money.

So if I understand correctly, the purpose of incessantly complaining about the lack of DR in Canon sensors is to get Canon to notice, light a fire under Canon's ass, and inspire them improve DR? That objective, by nature, requires repeating the same sentiment (Canon's DR sucks) over and over again on a forum. That action, by nature, is one that many people on this forum find very irritating. Naturally, those people will eventually voice their displeasure.

What I don't understand is that when people happy with their Canon gear voice their displeaser, the pro-DR guys all of a sudden start complaining that they're being bullied, and complain that they're being personally insulted? I'm not saying that personal insults are OK, but seriously, what do you expect? Should I go stand in front of a church, proclaim the virtues of Islam, and expect a welcoming response?

The notion that the pro-DR guys are innocent angels in all this, and only the brainwashed happy Canon guys are throwing the insults, is absolutely ridiculous. You must have missed the posts where the DR advocates state their intentions of saving the anti-DR guys from their ignorance, showing them the error of their ways, and showing them how much happier they'd be if that had equally high standards of IQ and DR. That must constitute objective commentary in your book.

So if I understand correctly, the purpose of incessantly complaining about the lack of DR in Canon sensors is to get Canon to notice, light a fire under Canon's ass, and inspire them improve DR?

I think that if history proves anything with regard to this particular issue -- it proves that this strategy has been ineffective.  Apparently this DR thing isn't producing enough market churn to raise Canon's interest in making a change.  One guy hit the nail on the head, I think, by saying something like "Just because sensor B is only 90% as good as sensor A, doesn't mean sensor B sucks (or is even close to unusable).

That's really the crux of the debate isn't it.

A handful of people (and it really is just a handful) are extremely dissatisfied with one metric.

Unfortunately for them, it is a metric that doesn't seem to be a major concern for most other photographers. The majority say, yes, they'd be happy with a little more dynamic range. But, it's not the major factor we consider when selecting a camera.

Repeating the same points over and over again, berating others for their failure to consider this a top priority, playing the martyr when others disagree and voice that disagreement, predicting the imminent doom of a multi-national company unless they address this one metric and basically discounting every other innovation the company produces as being insignificant in comparison to this one, small, metric – all of these strategies have proven ineffective. Yet, they persist because now, it's no longer about that metric, it's become a religious crusade.

But, something that gets ignored in these diatribes is that there are a whole host of other features that many of us would like to see adopted and we may feel just as intensely about those metrics as the "Dynamic Rangers" feel about theirs.

Interestingly, the Dynamic Rangers seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge the legitimacy of any of these others metrics.

One small example: when the specifications for the 7DII came out, I expressed disappointment that it failed to incorporate touch screen technology. I was informed by the most verbose of the Dynamic Rangers that that was not a professional feature, was useless and essentially implied I was an idiot for thinking it should be included.

There are similar dismissive comments from the Dynamic Rangers regarding wifi implementation in the 7DII.

This isn't a post about the relative merits of either feature, but rather an illustration of how the Dynamic Rangers seem unwilling to accept that any other metric might be worthwhile and that several of them are more than willing to toss about disparaging comments when someone brings up other features.

Have I tried to turn every thread into a discussion of touch-screen technology? Have I tried to raise wi-fi with every post I write?

No, because I understand something that the Dynamic Rangers seem incapable of grasping: Camera manufacturers spend millions on research in order to target their products to specific markets. If a feature I want doesn't make it, it is because the demand isn't yet great enough.

Whining on forums isn't going to change that. Rational, reasonable explanations that can persuade others can be effective over time, but when it comes to dynamic range, the rational, reasonable explanations have all been written and if it hasn't changed anyone's mind by this point, one more post of biblical proportions is unlikely to make a difference.

At some point, it's time to just give it a rest. Maybe in six months, a year or two years, the issue will bubble to the surface and a majority will demand change. Or more likely, Canon will make incremental improvements, the perceived gap will shrink and it will even less of a concern to the majority.

From some Spanish site that I can't understand (used and included on a Swedish photoforum), but it is a bit hard to draw the conclusion that the major segments are in direct relation to the worst image quality.

Whenever this comes out, I am always looking to buy one of those "sin datos" cameras. They seem to always come out on top. They must have great dynamic range. Until I can buy one, I guess I'll just have to settle for Canon. :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Wifi on 5D MK IV?
« on: October 09, 2014, 01:36:09 PM »
For me, I think built in wifi is not only essential, but is an inevitability.

With lightroom and photoshop available on tablet/phone devices, and the speed of connections, it seems logical to me. Take a shot, and back it up to the cloud directly?...

I'm becoming increasingly perplexed by the inability of any camera manufacturer to implement wifi and touchscreen technology at a professional level.

Camera manufacturers are getting their butts handed to them by mobile devices that can take pictures and instantly move those pictures to the internet. Professional photographers everywhere, whether they are shooting a wedding or coverage breaking news, have to compete with amateurs using cell phones to get images posted to the web and they don't stand a chance.

Camera manufacturers simply have to make it easier and quicker for their professional customers to compete in this arena. We should all be able to take a picture, do some quick edits to the jpg using the back of the camera and an in-camera editing program and  instantly post that picture to the web.

EOS Bodies / Re: Scott Kelby Does a Field Report on the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: October 08, 2014, 03:05:40 PM »
I watched almost all of this video last night.

Here is my takeaway.

I truly admire Canon's ability to target products to specific audiences. Regardless of how you might feel about specific features, etc., I can't see how anyone could disagree that Canon is absolutely the best at researching the market and bringing products to market that actually SELL.

I first noticed this with the 5DIII. When it was first released, there was a lot of criticism. Mostly about the price because it was higher than the D800 and also that it had fewer megapixels than the D800.

But, in following this forum and the reaction elsewhere it soon became apparent that wedding and event photographers loved this new body. Some of the comments on this forum were positively glowing about the camera and it's clean, high ISO performance. What I saw was that Canon had targeted the camera to a specific market and the market responded positively.

On the other hand, I was never able to figure out what large market Nikon was targeting.

I'm seeing the same thing with the 7DII. What really struck me was when Kelby was talking about how the 7DII allows parents and others to take pictures at a high school football game and get very similar results to what he gets when he shoots pro football, at a $4,000 price difference.

Lightbulb goes off: Wow! How many helicopter parents out there will gladly buy a 7DII in order to get pictures of their kids at the height of their athletic careers (most won't go on to play college or professional sports). A chance to capture a great picture of their kid playing high school sports.

Then, I think, what about every high school yearbook adviser in every high school in the country who will go to their principal or school board and say, "we need to have this camera to get better pictures of our school teams."

 Now, that's a market.

As I said, I don't think anyone can deny that Canon is the best at targeting and marketing their products.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 08, 2014, 02:37:05 PM »
Does every topic on this forum has to be infected with the DR discussion? If it was religion, we had a nuclear war right now. Stop this useless discussion everywhere on every topic please.  :'(

Although I am sorely tempted to continue the discussion, I have to agree, it won't add anything to what has already been said. I'm going to do my best to abide by this simple request and hope others will as well.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 08, 2014, 10:15:05 AM »

...And if more threads about our questions, knowledge, etc. would be discussed with the same passion, energy and eager as all those sensor, DR and “Canon is behind” threads, you and we all wouldn’t have that kind of fear for death of CanonRumors.

So find new topics, answer the questions and share your knowledge and you’ll see what happens.

Well put. My knowledge is limited, but I will try to share what I have.

As an aside, that's one reason why I am always willing to cut Neuro some slack. He may be a prickly character, but he has the disposable income and inclination to buy and try a lot of products and share his experiences. I appreciate that.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 08, 2014, 09:46:04 AM »
The term DRone, which was originally meant as a joke, has become an excessively derogatory term used explicitly for insult of anyone who isn't satisfied with Canon's status quo.

Sorry, but no.  Many people have expressed dissatisfaction with aspects of Canon's technology or (in)actions without issue.  It's not the what, it's the how.

It's possible to discuss the issues with Canon technology

Of course it is.  But regarding DR, it's been done.  To death.  Beyond death.  Yet it gets brought up...again and again.  A household scene shot with Canon and Exmor, then pushed several stops in post?  Your living different than Mikael's garage.  It's been done.

Have you given any thought to why it keeps being brought up?
Or how you might contribute to why it keeps being brought up?

particularly those in the anti-DR crowd

Anti-DR crowd?  I don't think there is one.  There is general acknowledgement that more DR would be good to have.  However, there are many people who are annoyed by DRoning.  As I's not the what, it's the how.

I'm a part of a number of online communities...this one is becoming one of the worst

Not from what I see.  There are lots of threads where people with questions get them answered quickly and accurately.  There are lots of threads where people post wonderful images.  There are a few threads where people argue about Canon sensors – you can choose to participate in them...or not.

As can you choose how to behave or choose not to behave. When adults start misbehaving and throwing around insults, the community does not become better for it.

I get very nervous when Dilbert becomes the most reasonable person on the forum. :)

Seriously, I think a problem that needs to be acknowledged is that there simply is very little to talk about these days.

DSLR technology has matured, meaning the pace of change has inevitably slowed. There may or may not be fewer new release announcements, but what is certainly true is that the differences from model to model have become much more incremental across all brands.

That's typical with any technology, but it creates problems for a site that feeds on rumors and discussions of recent, new and anticipated releases.

No one who is honest can deny that the scope of the differences between low-end products and high-end products has narrowed significantly in the past few years. Even going to the extremes, the Apple iPhone and the 1DX are much closer today than they were five years ago. And, that compression has occurred across the range.

As the differences shrink the arguments seem to become more intense. It's the old rule that the less you have to argue over, the more bitter the arguments become.

Perhaps what we are watching is the death of a forum that no longer serves much purpose because the world has changed in the past five years.

I don't know the answer and in fact, I'm not even sure of the question, but I wonder if it will be necessary and possible for forum members to embrace the change, devise some new course that is "disruptive" and breathe new life into what seems to be a slowly and painfully dying experiment.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 147