March 03, 2015, 06:36:56 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 - Woody

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 45
With sensors doing ISO12800 easily and still increasing, why do we need IS in sub-100mm lenses? Just chase up the sensitivity. Huh?

Just because you see no value in adding IS to sub-100 mm lenses does not mean others have no use for it.

As for Sony and "in-body stabilisation" ... well, maybe they didn't include it to keep the cost down.
Or maybe they do not know how to do it for a 36 MP FF sensor? Also the point of making 70-200 f/4 OSS is... ???

The insistence by Canon to slap IS into basically any new lens is proof of this assumption. This also means that they have been spending a lot of dinero on perfecting this technology, instead of simply binning it in favour of new ideas.

Does the latest and best mirrorless from Sony, the 36 MP A7R, come with in-body stabilisation? NO

Does the upcoming Sony 70-200 f/4 lens feature OSS? YES

So much for new ideas from Sony...

The bottom line in all camera companies is this: profit. Which companies have the biggest market shares worldwide? I'm afraid it's still Canon and Nikon. Sony has been trying very hard, releasing one product after another... but their market shares have not changed an iota over the years. I agree the RX100 and A7 series are fantastic.... but just check out how well these cameras are selling on Amazon (USA) and BCNRanking (Japan)... Clearly, the market isn't embracing these cameras.

So, are Nikon and Canon past their prime? Don't think so. Sure, they have misfires like the Df and EOS M/M2... but who cares about these products when their target market is very small in the first place? Remember, the ratio of DSLR:EVIL camera sold is 9:1 in both N. America and Europe... it's been like that for years.

Reviews / Re: Canon 6D Review: 1+ Year Hands-On [video review]
« on: January 22, 2014, 10:00:07 PM »
There's several highlight blow outs in some of the sky images and why is the sky darker than the land / foreground...looks like to strong grad filters too me. Nice colours, but some of the scenes look like there's false colours added from the ND grads colour casts. The scenes are nice and dramatic, but many of these would fail RPS judging (or degree level photography portfolio judging) due to the exposure issues I've just mentioned. There's bad flare in one shot and another has split boulders in the fore ground, it's important not to split any in half at the edges of the frame. These are very nice and colourfull images, i'm sure they sell well to punters. Especially to the framed print crowds, but really wouldn't impress anyone with a qualification in photography.

I almost forgot to ask, what's your website URL?

GMC has some wonderful images here:

Actually, I understand what GMC is saying. Your ND and grad filters are causing color shifts. You may want to consider changing to more expensive filters, if you so desire. ;D Now, having said that, photography is an art... so there is no rule why color shifts are bad... that is why some deliberately choose to use the 'wrong' white balance and others are able to produce colored IR images (just saw a whole article devoted to that in Landscape Photographer)...

Much simpler than that: For reasons unknown, Canon is simply throwing away 1/3-1/2 stops of dynamic range, you can recover that by changing some setting in the camera. Plus the "trick" from Canon to compensate the light loss inherent to faster lenses is not beneficial if you shoot raw, so ML is working on a way to give you the "real" raw data.

And on the 6D, one may be able to recover as much as 2/3 stop of dynamic range? Wow.

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 20, 2014, 10:32:01 AM »
This is shocking because Scott Kelby has always been a very strong proponent of the Nikon system. Now, why will someone who has touted the wide dynamic range in Nikon cameras suddenly switch to a system with inferior sensors?  ;D  ;D  ;D

Reviews / Re: Canon 6D Review: 1+ Year Hands-On [video review]
« on: January 20, 2014, 03:39:04 AM »
... more accurate sensor based CDAF, which does not require AF micro adjustment...

Dual pixel AF on 70D does not require AF micro adjustment either.

the D800E can never touch the Sony in terms of sheer resolution...

Either something is wrong with your D800E or you are not using equivalent lenses on the D800E and A7R for comparison.

with the dated OVF , we cannnot see anything in real darkness , but with the EVF we can actually see through what we are actually shooting even in complete darkness...

Nonsense. When it's TOTAL darkness, the EVF won't show anything either.

I think once they try it they will love it or at lest accept it...

I used to own the OMD EM5 for a year. Gave me some great images. But I sold the camera after 1 year. Why? Because I totally hated the EVF and ergonomics.

So, I have tried the EM5 and could never accept the EVF.

Very happy I replaced the EM5 with 6D. A FAR superior user experience.

I also want tocuh screen AF of the EM1 in my next Canon FF...

The 70D has superb touch screen AF too.

I believe in 3 years the D-SLRs will die out.

Try to convince the American and European markets where DSLRs outsell EVIL cameras by a factor of 9:1.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 18-40 Pancake
« on: January 20, 2014, 12:23:21 AM »
I don't understand why they didn't release any new M bodies in 2013

In US and Europe, the ratio of cameraless body to DSLR sold is about 9:1.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 18-40 Pancake
« on: January 19, 2014, 11:03:51 PM »
Er, the 24-105 f4, probably the most ubiquitous ff kit lens ever made, oh, and it's "replacement" the 24-70 f4. And, of course, in a few markets the 24-70 f2.8 was/is a kit lens.

Actually, when I mentioned kit lenses, I was only thinking of something small,lightweight and cheap. Sorry, I did not make myself clear.

The 24-105 f/4 and 24-70 f/4 lenses are both L lenses and relatively big. In this respect, only the Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 for FF which weighs ~450g qualifies. The EF-S 15-85 IS lens is big and expensive for APS-C. For m43, the Panasonic 14-42 pancake zoom somewhat qualifies although it's not too cheap.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 18-40 Pancake
« on: January 19, 2014, 07:32:23 PM »
Another stupid lens that starts at 28mm instead of 24mm (equivalent).

How many kit lens (FF, APS-C or m43) starts at 24 mm? Maybe you can design and fabricate one to show the world how it's done?

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 18-40 Pancake
« on: January 19, 2014, 07:31:17 PM »
What makes this a pancake rather than just another zoom?

The image shown is for the old EF-M kit lens.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:01:47 AM »
Below the 100D? You mean the market segment that doesn't exist because it's IQ is indistinguishable from iPhones?  Get a clue Canon.

You mean the iPhone produces the same image quality as the T3/1100D 12 MP APS-C sensor? Get a clue HurtinMinorKey.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 17, 2014, 03:25:02 AM »
Its not an Irrefutable Law of Markets, its a generality.  Things do shift but it's pretty tough to overcome the inertia of an overwhelming marketshare unless the big company fails big (like Nokia) or another company comes up with something that changes the market significantly (like Apple).

So, following your logic above, Canon has not failed big and the competition has not put up SIGNIFICANTLY game-changing products. Ya? ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 17, 2014, 12:47:29 AM »
It was also confirmed that “a lot” of lenses were coming this year.

I hope they release the EF 16-50 mm f/4 IS and EF 50 mm f/1.8 IS lenses soon. Will like to take them for my upcoming (July) trip to Japan.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next DSLR Will Be Entry Level [CR3]
« on: January 17, 2014, 12:45:21 AM »
The SL1 is based on the xxxD line. Maybe a smaller version of the T3/1100D?

Sounds logical. Squeeze the T3/1100D specs (12 MP, smaller viewfinder, poorer LCD, slower fps) into SL1 body and keep the price the same as current T3/1100D. Sounds like a great idea.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 45