March 02, 2015, 10:35:51 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 ... 63 64 [65] 66 67 ... 150
961
EOS Bodies / Re: 'Revolutionary' Dual Pixel AF Explained
« on: July 26, 2013, 03:33:06 PM »
Am i the only one who prefers shooting with the optical viewfinder, even if live view is tzhe same speed? I think its not long anymore til Canon only releases only mirrorless cameras if the AF speed is the same. And then people like me can pay another 899$ or whatever for an electronic viewfinder :(

No, you are not the only one. But, I am increasingly thinking I am more of a dinosaur than I realize (But then again, that happens every time I look in the mirror anyway).

I get that Canon is trying to make live view as useful and accurate as an optical viewfinder, but I hope they don't start to compromise optical viewfinder performance. Sorry, but I just don't see how live view can ever compete with the ergonomics of a viewfinder especially with longer lenses and in bright light.

This seems to me to be another sign of the convergence of video and stills and I suspect that stills photographers are just going to have to learn to accept some compromises as video starts to rule the world.

962
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - How much will it cost?
« on: July 24, 2013, 09:27:35 PM »
I know exactly how much the 7DII will cost. It will be the price of the D400 plus/minus $100.

963
Canon General / Re: Compact camera for travel/everyday use
« on: July 23, 2013, 08:52:39 PM »
After a couple years of waiting and watching, I just bought a Fujifilm X-20. I am hiking to the bottom of the Grand Canyon in September and wanted something light, as every ounce will count. I'll leave my 7D up top and take this with me.

It just arrived Sunday, and I haven't had a lot of time with it. Still learning the menus, but I did quite a bit of research to find something that would fit my needs.

I wanted an optical viewfinder and an attached modest zoom lens. I have no desire to start a new collection of lenses. There are rumors that Fuji may eventually release an X-100-style camera with an attached zoom lens. If they do, I may move up to that, but in the meantime, I believe this will work for me.

I could not be happier with the hybrid optical finder (it's a true OVF and not an EVF, with the shooting data overlayed.) I wouldn't push it to 1600 and I doubt if I will want to print much larger than 11 x 14 with it.

I also wanted a small camera that I could take with me to work and have with me at lunch time, as I work in a downtown area and like to take walks when I have the time. I was a little surprised at how small it is (not pocketable small, but certainly tiny in comparison to the 7D).

Not perfect (I would have liked a slightly larger sensor and it eats batteries), but after much research I felt it was the right choice for me and after a few hours of playing with it, I'm confident I made the right choice.

Besides it's got that Fuji X-series styling that is super cool. :)

964
This is fun to speculate about, but honestly, if past performance is any indicator of future accuracy, I wouldn't be putting any money on predictions from Northlight Images.

965
Software & Accessories / Re: Who Adopted Adobe CC?
« on: July 23, 2013, 11:24:38 AM »
Moral question - how would feel if a homeless person decided to move in with you - after they have place to live.  Or if someone who was hungry and unemployed/broke came into your home and took food.  Or if someone who was broke took $ out of bank account or you pocket.   Not too happy I'll bet.   In a way you are doing this to Abode.

This isn't the same thing at all. Not paying a licensing fee for a digital copy of a work is not the moral equivalent of taking money out of someone's account or pocket or stealing a physical item.  And while I have not yet licensed PS, I am a paying customer for Lightroom 4 and 5. I make no money for my photography at this time and use PS very little, so to put my situation in terms of your example, I am the roommate who pays rent, but bums some of your food. The real problem with Adobe's pricing in general is that it doesn't work well or at all for hobbyists. They could remedy this in CC better than they ever could before with a real pay-as-you-go plan. They could charge $3-4/hour with a maximum monthly charge of the normal subscription rate.

This just shows that you can rationalize just about anything if you try hard enough.

I've been an early and consistent critic of the CC system, but let's not rationalize away stealing.

I'm sure there are plenty of wedding and portrait photographers who would disagree with the premise that it's okay to take a digital copy of their work and not pay for it. No difference between stealing a company's software than stealing another photographer's pictures.

But, it's okay, because you paid for another product from the same person? Hey, I bought a portrait from you last year, so I should be able to steal these wedding pictures, right?

And, it's okay because you don't make money from photography and only use the product on occasion? Hey Canon, I don't make any money from photography, so it's okay if I steal this 1D-X, especially because I'm only going to use it occasionally.

If you want to steal things, at least be honest about it.

I hate the Adobe CC model. It's a one-size-fits-all solution in an era in which customers are demanding flexibility and customized pricing models. Adobe is swimming upstream against the current with their experiment and there are already signs that it isn't working for them.

You are correct in that one huge problem with Adobe's pricing models is that it doesn't accommodate the "enthusiast" market. Rather ironic, since Canon, Nikon, etc., have all found that to be their most lucrative market. It's a terrible strategy on their part and I think they will regret the decision.

But please, it's frankly too ironic for words for any digital photographer to defend stealing electronic data. What do you think pictures are made up of today? 

966
Software & Accessories / Re: Who Adopted Adobe CC?
« on: July 22, 2013, 10:09:57 PM »
I haven't yet, but I will.

I am going to wait until the last possible moment, then take advantage of the $19.99/month offer for CS6 owners. I'll try it for a year and hope they give in and offer an extended term or other deep discount before next year. If they don't, well...I'll always have CS6.

I'm not sure, but don't you have to give up your perpetual CS6 license to go CC with the $20/month discount offer? Just make sure that isn't the case before you potentially end up doing something very regretful.

I've read their terms and FAQs pretty closely. They say you will always have access to CS6. But, I sure as heck will check one more time before pulling the trigger.

967
Software & Accessories / Re: Who Adopted Adobe CC?
« on: July 22, 2013, 09:40:19 PM »
I haven't yet, but I will.

I am going to wait until the last possible moment, then take advantage of the $19.99/month offer for CS6 owners. I'll try it for a year and hope they give in and offer an extended term or other deep discount before next year. If they don't, well...I'll always have CS6.

968
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 22, 2013, 05:12:18 PM »
I disagree here...

I disagree that you disagree. :)

Seriously, I think we are saying the same thing. 5DIII targeted to a professional market to fit a specific need. D800 targeted to...whom? I've never been sure.

The 5DIII may be $500 more camera, but that's because it has features that make it worth that to a specific market.

969
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 22, 2013, 04:07:27 PM »
The 7d came in substantially less than a new 5d2 came in at, with the "newer" technology.  Why can't a 7D2, having some of the same technology and some "newer" technology come in substantially less than the 5d3?

Agreed.

Too often, people generalize about Canon pricing based on one example – the higher cost of the 5DIII in comparison to the D800. But, that was an anomaly. Canon and Nikon traditionally price their comparable models at nearly identical price points.

They do so because that's what the market demands. A $2,500 7DII would be hard-pressed to compete against a $1,800 D400.

Why didn't the 5DIII follow that pattern?

I have always argued that Canon set a $500 premium with the 5DIII because the 5DIII was much more targeted to specific buyers than the D800. The 5DIII with its high ISO performance is a must-have tool for photographers in a highly competitive field – weddings and events (which also happens to be about the only sizeable professional field left). Canon knew they could charge a premium because their target audience needs the competitive edge that the clean high ISOs gives them.

The D800 sacrificed high-ISO performance for high resolution. Unfortunately, there simply isn't a large professional base of photographers who gain any competitive edge from a high resolution sensor (emphasis on "large" professional base). It's a nice feature and gives some bragging rights to a company that has been perceived as being behind the curve on resolution for several years.  That's not to say that some photographers don't need high resolution, it's just that the target audience is much smaller and the competitive advantages to be gained from the high resolution are much less significant.

I don't understand why people always point to the 5DIII, which was an exception, when every other DSLR Canon makes fits nicely within the rule of consistent pricing with their competitors. Frankly, the relatively low pricing of the 70D should give some reassurance that the 7DII will likely come in comfortably under $2,000

970
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: July 22, 2013, 02:45:30 PM »
I'd be really surprised if it got the 61pt AF system just because they want some seperation between the 7D and 5D MIII.  If they dumped all the latest tech in it and it just came down to one being one being full frame and one not then most would probably go for the cheaper 7D with more fps stealing sales from the 5D MIII, I just don't see them doing that.

The 7D got newer technology than the 5DII. Giving the 7DII equal or better technology than than the 5DIII, but in an APS-C format is consistent with past practice.

Canon doesn't care about "stealing sales" from one model to the next. They care about stealing sales from Nikon.

971
EOS-M / Re: Where is my backordered EOS-M w/22 STM lens?
« on: July 17, 2013, 11:32:53 AM »
If B&H hasn't cancelled the order then I'm not sure what you can blame them for. They don't have any control over when they get a shipment in. What about "expected" is confusing? As long as they are still committed to honoring the order at the price you were quoted, just sit tight.

972
EOS Bodies / Re: Stay with Canon?
« on: July 14, 2013, 05:15:08 PM »
Clearly an inferior sensor. You can't even tell if that mosquito is carrying West Nile!

973
Canon General / Re: fair compensation?
« on: July 11, 2013, 10:19:38 AM »
I'd take the 80 Euro and also ask for a credit line and a couple dozen calendars for you to have for your portfolio.

You're not bargaining from a position of strength. They'd like to use your picture, but if you demand too much, they can certainly find another image to use. I say that because, if they publish the calendar every year, they no doubt have regular contributors and sources for pictures.

Having the picture published and being able to show it around, even if it is only to show your kids and grandkids, will be worth much more than the 80 Euros, which will soon be gone.

974
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Don't buy from getitdigital
« on: July 10, 2013, 08:25:54 PM »
Canon Price Watch.com did some research awhile back and pretty much concluded that Canon is honoring warranties on gray market products, but not publicizing it. I can't put my mouse on the story right off, but maybe someone else will remember.

I still don't buy gray market because I am cautious (and the prices are seldom that much better) but it sounded like, if you had a problem and sent the lens/camera in, Canon would usually honor the warranty (assuming you had the receipt).

Pages: 1 ... 63 64 [65] 66 67 ... 150