Messages

991

United States / Re: Who inspires you?

« on: July 26, 2011, 05:26:51 PM »

Can't resist this one.

Robert Frank, obviously, since he is universally acknowledged as the most influential photographer of the second half of the 20th Century. (alive, but no longer active. He said what he wanted to say in "The Americans" and then pretty much moved on. I admire that.)

Any of the New Topographics photographers, but especially Stephen Shore, Lewis Balz and Robert Adams. Adams and Shore I admire for their writing as well as their photography. Good photographers are seldom good writers. They are both the exceptions.

Elliot Erwitt. One of the few photographers to master visual humor.

Jerry Uelsmann, Emmet Gowin, Nathan Lyons, William Christenberry, Lee Friedlander, William Eggleston, Joel Meyerowitz.

Many others, but that's a good place to start.

992

Lenses / Re: why????

« on: July 25, 2011, 06:21:05 PM »

Now your just getting carried away ;-)

+1

I don't even know what this is such a sensitive subject. Are people that invested in their full frame cameras that they can't bear the idea that maybe Canon's lens division ought to do a better job of developing EF-S lenses?

That's all the OP suggested and it's a reasonable request.

eventually they will take control of the world, and enslave human beings

I don't know about taking over the world, but reading some of these posts it's pretty clear they've already enslaved a lot of human beings.

let's compare the Canon 300mm f/4L IS to the Pentax Pentax DA* 300mm f/4 (the latter being an APS-C telephoto lens with weather sealing, high-end coatings including fluorine on the front like the newest Canon lenses, low-dispersion glass, etc.).

As I expected, some can't resist arguing over a simple illustrative and hypothetical example.

So, I might counter with a question: Would that be the Pentax lens that is $400 less than the 100-400 Canon, about $200 less than the Canon 300mm f4 prime and $300+ less than the new Canon 70-300 zoom?

Or, instead let's compare Apples to Apples. 400mm on a crop sensor is 640 mm on a full frame. Canon's newest 600 mm f/4 full frame lens is $13,000. Sure seems like there is a lot of room for Canon to position a 400 mm APS-C lens that will produce images of comparable magnification.

FWIW, 100-400/4 would have a 100 mm front element regardless of its imaging circle.  Huge size+price jump.  Sigma's new 120-300/2.8 OS has more than a few folks salivating though.  Now there's a sports+nature lens.

Okay, now that's a reasonable criticism. If my particular example is impractical I'll take your word for it. But, it was just an example. Although I can't help but think there must be some advantages to EF-S at the longer focal lengths.

IMO an EF-S 55-135/2.8 IS is sorely needed.

Well, Sigma's announced a 50-150 f2.8 IS for APS-C cameras. Of course right now it's just vaporware. But maybe they'll actually get it to market one of these days.

993

Lenses / Re: why????

« on: July 25, 2011, 12:40:08 PM »

I disagree with the thought of the crop sensor cameras going away any time soon.

Absolutely correct.

When (becuase it's not 'if' it's 'when') full frame sensor cameras drop down into the sub-$1000 range and thus into the mainstream consumer price range, APS-C will die off.

What evidence can you possibly point to that would indicate that full frame sensor cameras are going to drop below $1,000 in price?

It takes much less imagination and there is much more evidence to support the opposite conclusion: when the rapidly narrowing gap between APS-C and full-frame sensor quality becomes virtually indistinguishable full frame sensor cameras will go the way of 8x10 view cameras, 4x5 Speed Graphics and Rolleiflexes.

Now, don't get your panties in a bunch. I'm not suggesting that full-frame will become obsolete in the next two-three years. I'm just saying that there is more evidence to support that conclusion than the idea you're suggesting.

There is absolutely no objective reason to think that APS-C is going anywhere, or at least that it is going to be done in by an older and more expensive format. All the trends point toward shrinking, not growing, sensor size technology. (And, for those protesting that full frame will always be better quality than APS-C...well...junkyards are full of technologies that were better quality, while "good enough" technology laughs all the way to the bank.)

I would certainly hesitate to predict what cameras and lenses will be like in a decade. Perhaps the SLR with its interchangeable lenses will still be around, but it's entirely possible that we'll all be carrying around tablets that zoom digitally with resolution far beyond anything that can be found in either full-frame or APS-C cameras today.

Instead of this goofy "I've got a bigger sensor than you" discussion let's get back to the OP's original point.

To the OP: I'm not sure about the specific lens you suggest, but I certainly agree that the Canon lens division has not done justice to the APS-C market. They've left the innovation to third parties who are poaching customers.

The three higher quality APS-C lenses that Canon makes all have their problems. The 10-22mm and the 15-85mm are too slow. The 17-55mm is better at 2.8, but it's neither wide enough at the short end nor long enough at the long end. (I'm hoping they come through with a 15-65 mm 2.8, which would be a killer lens)

I'm generally a defender of Canon, but I am really having some doubts about their lens division. I'm just not sure it shares the same vision as the rest of the SLR unit. Seriously, look at the lenses they've chosen to introduce over the past few years: updates of massive supertelephotos that fill a tiny niche market, a nice quality 70-300 mm L zoom that the jury is still out on whether there is any market for it; a specialty fisheye zoom that also fits a narrow niche audience and which they can't even seem to bring to market anyway.

In the meantime the SLR division brought out the 7D and 60D, two higher-end APS-C bodies, and aside from the 15-85 mm zoom, there have been no corresponding lenses released.

Imagine the sales jump they'd have if they introduced an EF-S 100-400mm f4? Lighter, faster and about the same price as the current full frame 100-400. Sports and wildlife photographers would be lining up to buy that lens and 7D combination. (Now before all the nitpickers start picking away, this is only an example of the creative options that the lens division could be following if they were to get with the EF-S program like their SLR brethren have gotten with the crop sensor program.)

I have to wonder if the lens division needs more forward-thinking management.

994

Canon General / Re: Switching to Nikon

« on: July 22, 2011, 05:36:24 PM »

i wonder how many people read the post instead of just reading the title and getting enraged automatically.

I'm not enraged. Just old and cranky. I've been reading and participating in this forum for quite some time and I guess I get a little bored with the endless variations of the same questions/complaints which have answers that are self-evident.

When I read the OP I thought to myself: "What 'Platinum' user of Canon Professional Services would need to turn to this forum to be told to go rent a camera and try it out?"  and "What other advice could anyone possibly give that would be of any use, since the preference for a particular camera brand is totally subjective?"

I refrained from responding to see if there would be something I was missing. There wasn't.

I guess I'm just a little cranky because it seems like an awful lot of time is spent on this forum endlessly revisiting the same old debates. Okay. I've vented. Now I feel better.

995

Canon General / Re: Switching to Nikon

« on: July 22, 2011, 10:50:42 AM »

yes i do have a problem if you wanna switch just switch don't go seeking attention in canon forums I'm sick of it

I agree. I really don't care what camera anyone uses. My first reaction when I read the original post was: "Go tell someone who cares." If someone wants to switch camera brands, that's their choice. I'm not going to try to talk them out of it. It's a personal choice based on all sort of rational and irrational factors.

Besides, there is absolutely no possible useful advice anyone on a forum can give beyond: "go rent the other brand for awhile and try it out."

In fact, I would suggest someone set up a internet robot that automatically writes that response anytime anyone on any forum asks about switching brands.

996

Contests / Re: Holga Giveaway

« on: July 19, 2011, 10:00:24 AM »

Comment.
 
(You did say to leave a comment in the forum thread, correct?)

997

Canon General / Re: Portrait photography - suggestions

« on: July 18, 2011, 11:13:51 AM »

Okay, I was typing while some others were posting. I think we are on the same page.

Portraiture is all about two things: the subject and the light. Neither one is going to be affected by a different camera body.

The first thing you have to do if be able to fire the flash off-camera. The only reason to move to a 7D would be so that you can use the built-in infrared transmitter. But, you can do the same thing by buying an ST-E2 or one of the Chinese knock-offs.

You need to modify the light. The simplest and easiest way to do that is with an umbrella. Very easy to use and gives very nice, soft light. Buy one that allows you to convert from shoot-through to reflective, so you can practice with both techniques.

After a few weeks with one strobe and an umbrella, you'll want a second and then a third strobe. Then you also start wanting other light modifiers (soft boxes, snoots, bounce adapters, etc. etc.).

Personally, I'd recommend the 580EXII for your next strobe purchase, primarily because of the availability of the accessory battery pack. It's very frustrating and embarrassing when your strobe can't keep up with the pace of the shooting and you can avoid that with the extra speed and boost of the battery packs.

Spend a lot of time reading and experimenting. The Strobist website is a good place to start. Photoflex also sends out lighting lessons to people who sign up on their website. They are very good. And, Joe McNally's books are entertaining and good as well.

I'm not saying don't upgrade you camera at some point, but if you really want to learn about portraiture, you'd be better off investing in lighting equipment at this point. Camera's change all the time, but the basic design of an umbrella hasn't changed in probably 50 years.

Finally, while the light is important, it should really be all about the subject. The skill you really need is the ability to put your subject at ease and make them comfortable and natural while shooting. I used to work with a photographer who was very good at lighting, but couldn't relate to the subjects. I found I could get better portraits with a simple setup (often just a single light bounced off an umbrella and then concentrating on talking to the subject and making them feel at ease).

Bottom line: portraits are about people. Lights, cameras and equipment are just accessories.

998

EOS Bodies / Re: New Canon 5D Mark III rumor

« on: July 08, 2011, 04:13:03 PM »

Well, if you plug the description into Google Translate you get: "Fictitious advertising - ÃœBA project during the June / July 2011 with Anton"

You think that might be a hint?

The giveaway for me was promoting the "Digic V Processor." Nobody but techno geeks cares about what number a processor is or even if a camera has a new processor.

999

EOS Bodies / Re: Test

« on: July 07, 2011, 01:55:07 PM »

Interesting. Looks like you've got sort of a Duane Michals thing going on there.

1000

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D mrk. II

« on: July 03, 2011, 12:07:02 AM »

Just to clarify.

I was not referring to development, but rather to assigning specific specifications to the 7D Mark II – as in determining what the specific feature set of the new body will be.

The OP listed some very specific specifications, many of which can easily be changed (and probably will be changed) during the year prior to the release of a new body. These are already developed features and the final determination of what goes into the camera will be made based on market research and conditions closer to the time when actual production must begin.

My point was that it is a bit silly at this stage to believe any rumors about what the specific feature set the 7D Mark II might have.

1001

EOS Bodies / Re: My Prediction for the new EOS Lineup

« on: June 29, 2011, 07:09:35 PM »

Re Canon FF Strategy

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_1DS_MkIV.html

Scroll down to the 18th June IIRC from Canon Product Manager

Not interested in a big debate, but I'm not sure a six year old quote from a product manager has much relevance today.

As I said, I'm no engineer, but others on this forum who are more technically minded have said that they don't think you can easily overcome the price differential between full frame and APS-C.

Obviously, from a marketing standpoint, it's good for Canon to maintain that they want everyone buying a full frame camera. But I just don't think their actions reflect that and I can't find any evidence in the actual marketplace to support that premise either. I guess all we can do is wait it out over the next 4-5 years and see what happens.

1002

EOS Bodies / Re: My Prediction for the new EOS Lineup

« on: June 29, 2011, 05:40:09 PM »

Canon have stated that they want everyone on FF at some stage,

I'd like to see that quote. It sounds more like hyperbole than a serious business strategy.

From what I understand from others on this forum (I'm no engineer) the inherently higher cost of full frame vs. APS-C  sensors are unlikely to be overcome by improved manufacturing technologies. If the manufacturing cost is more and if the profit margin is less, I can't imagine why Canon (or any other manufacturer) would want to push full-frame sensors over compact sensors.

I would think that all manufacturers would like to be moving their customers toward smaller sensors. In fact, that does seem to be the strategy. I'm not suggesting that full frame SLRs will be going away anytime soon, but there doesn't seem to be much growth in that segment of the market.

Instead, it appears manufacturers of all brands are focused on higher-end APS-C bodies. (Sigma recently announced a new flagship APS-C body in the $5,000 range). I would not be at all surprised if within a few years we see more true professional APS-C bodies (full weathersealing, built-in grip, 15-20 fps, etc. etc.)

1003

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Large Sensor PowerShot? [CR1]

« on: June 28, 2011, 11:32:43 AM »

Well, as we all know, the best craftsmen and artists blame their tools for a poor result.  Oh wait, that's wrong, isn't it? 

Umm. You might want to take five minutes to look at Macfly's blog or website before you criticize his craftsmanship.

He's made it very clear in previous posts why he doesn't like the G12. Not trying to put words in his mouth, but as I recall, he indicated in the past that he feels the G12 was a step backwards from the G10, which he previously owned.

He's entitled to his opinion and I think he makes some valid points. I also appreciate that a photographer working at his level in the industry takes the time to participate in a forum like this and share his opinions.

I appreciate his opinion because it has helped me in considering whether or not to buy a G12. The downsides that he's mentioned in the past help me to evaluate the camera for my own needs.

1004

Animal Kingdom / Re: a few shots

« on: June 26, 2011, 03:37:35 PM »

Great shots. Knowing how quickly these subjects move, you should be very pleased to have gotten the shots you did.

1005

EOS Bodies / Re: End of the APS-H sized CMOS?

« on: June 25, 2011, 08:24:07 PM »

Just a thought, but why do we all assume that an APS-H sensor would be replaced by a body with a full-frame sensor? It occurs to me that Canon might ultimately replace the APS-H sensor with a APS-C sensor once they are comfortable that they can get the same or better image results out of the smaller sensor. If a 1.3 crop is good for sports and wildlife shooters, a 1.6 crop should be even better.

No, they wouldn't want to call the camera a 1D. Maybe a 4D or 9D? Same sensor as the next generation of 7D, but in a 1D-type body?