October 21, 2014, 11:55:10 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 - Woody

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 42
271
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 18, 2013, 02:08:34 AM »
There are a lot of new products out for testing, but nothing hit the market.

I am curious too.

My guess is that the poor camera market conditions (ALL camera sales numbers are down) and rapidly changing camera landscape (invasion of camera phones + mirrorless offerings) probably caught Canon unawares.

Nikon is in a similar situation (except their sensors from Sony are much better).

We should expect some good stuff from both companies next year. This is certainly true for Nikon which is 80% dependent on sales of photography gear. If Nikon does not adapt quickly, they will be wiped off the landscape.

Armed with the new sensor PDAF technology, Canon is ready to plunge into the world of mirrorless cameras. But I think further refinement is needed... sensor PDAF needs to be 100% as good as current DSLR PDAF.

272
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 17, 2013, 09:48:50 PM »
Of course SLRs are selling better than mirrorless, that's precisely my point. They are selling much worse now

That's half the picture. While sales of DSLRs has fallen, the same thing is happening to mirrorless cameras.

From http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/and-april-makes-four.html

"The April shipment numbers are in, and the trend I've been commenting on for some time continues: mirrorless camera sales growth is still not what everyone seems to think it is. For the fourth consecutive month, mirrorless shipments from camera makers in 2013 trailed shipments in 2012...

No, this lowering of production doesn't imply the death of mirrorless cameras, it simply acknowledges what I wrote over a year ago: mirrorless cameras will not overtake DSLR sales any time in the near future. The initial high growth rate of mirrorless was a false one: the camera makers overzealously produced them when the demand wasn't really there.

I still predict that the mirrorless/DSLR world will eventually be one and the same. Once phase detect autofocus is on the imaging sensor with the same level of performance, there's little need for the cost and complexity of the mirror system in DSLRs. As Canon has shown recently, you can make much smaller DSLRs, even with the old mount depths. Long term, the difference between most mirrorless-derived cameras (m4/3, NEX, etc.) and most DSLRs (EF mount, F mount, Alpha mount) is going to really only be the depth of the camera. The smaller sensor cameras (Nikon 1, m4/3) will have an advantage of smaller lenses, at the disadvantage of lower image sensor performance."

273
Canon General / Re: What's Next for Canon?
« on: October 17, 2013, 08:32:18 PM »
Canon could take the lead in this new market, but to do so they would have to cannibalize their own products, which they won't do.

Canon has killed their product line once when they changed from FD to EOS mount. If they are certain mirrorless is the way of the future, they will have done the same for their DSLRs. But the truth is that worldwide sales of DSLRs still far outstrip that of mirrorless cameras at a ratio of about 3:1.. Even in places where sales of mirrorless cameras has picked up previously, e.g., Japan, that growth has stagnated in the past year. Just take a look at BCNRanking (Japan).

There is no need to play the role of armchair CEOs here. Canon knows what they are doing, far better than you and I.

274
SIZE is matter...in mirrorless world small body +  small lens = win

Only to some extent. Sony's upcoming E-mount 70-200 f/4 OSS and 70-200 f/2.8 zooms are not any lighter than Canon's counterpart.

275
You sure? The EVF in A7 / A7R is a new OLED-model. Diglloyd reported that it's the best EVF so far (of any camera brand).

It's the same EVF as the one in Olympus E-M1.

Current EVF technology still cannot match the dynamic range and colors as the human eye (OVF). :)

276
Sony has definitely played a nice move. I'm afraid as too often, Canon will come too late, too expensive and not daring enough.

That was what happened with the EOS M...

I am not entirely happy with the current state of the art for EVF. Will skip a few generations and see what we get then...

277
Since Sony is rumored to release the following lenses: 35 f/2.8, 55 f/1.8 and 24-70 f/4 (all without stabilization), I am curious how their weights will compare against Canon's equivalent offerings, 35 f/2 IS, 50 f/1.4 and 24-70 f/4 IS. If they are similar to Canon's offerings, then I really do NOT see any advantage to Sony's concept.

Looks like the above Sony lenses (24-70 f/4 with OSS) are pretty lightweight. But their telephoto stuff like 70-200 f/4 OSS and 70-200 f/2.8 are slightly heavier than Canon's equivalent. Hmmm...

278
A7 & A7 R Spec: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/a7-and-a7r-specs/

A7 seems to fit my needs - Faster AF, with 117 points (phase-detection AF),

I hope their PDAF in mirrorless body works well. On the Nikon V1/J1, they are next to useless when light levels fall (see DPReview write-up on V1/J1 PDAF).

279
Lenses / Re: Which Normal to Wide Angle Focal Length Matches Your Vision?
« on: October 16, 2013, 01:30:19 AM »
50mm on FF format.

280
I think IS for Sony isn't in the lens.  It's in the body.  One major advantage for mirrorless is the fact that there's no mirror and the form factor is smaller than a DSLR.

If the rumored specs are correct, Sony A7/A7r do not have in-body image stabilisation. A pity. :o

It's fairly clear the small body form factor isn't too popular, otherwise Sony would not have released the A3000 (mirrorless body that accepts NEX/E-mount lenses but with a DSLR camera form factor). ;D As Thom Hogan says, Sony is going all over the place without any clear direction, as they desperately try to grab more market shares.

281
But so do the new FF mirrorless Sonys.  The appeal isn't so much the size (it might be a nice upgrade from the Micro 4/3 equipment I have, but it's so good that I'm not sure how important that is) but the fact that they're mirrorless, with all the advantages that come with that.  New, small lenses would be nice, but I'm as interested in trying some of the highly regarded Minolta lenses, which might be a bit awkward to use on a tiny body...

Toss in the new sensor technology that Fuji and Panasonic are supposedly working on - which may render FF obsolete - and it all becomes simultaneously confusing, interesting and enticing....)

Since Sony is rumored to release the following lenses: 35 f/2.8, 55 f/1.8 and 24-70 f/4 (all without stabilization), I am curious how their weights will compare against Canon's equivalent offerings, 35 f/2 IS, 50 f/1.4 and 24-70 f/4 IS. If they are similar to Canon's offerings, then I really do NOT see any advantage to Sony's concept.

Having used the EM5 for a year, I find that I intensely dislike mirrorless cameras for 2 reasons: (i) EVF (color and brightness never the same as OVF, no matter how fast and high resolving they are) (ii) poor handling, difficult to grip. Since Canon has demonstrated what they can achieve with weight reduction in the 100D, I am hopeful they can produce low weight DSLRs bodies in future.

FF can never be made obsolete, just like medium format never really goes away. Larger sensors will always have shallower depth of field and better resolution.

I am not a die-hard DSLR fan. I am willing to try out mirrorless stuff too, but at the moment, they simply cannot match my DSLR experience. I plan to use my 6D and 70D until 2020. Hopefully, some breathtaking technological breakthroughs happen by then. :)

282
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Outed?
« on: October 15, 2013, 12:33:29 PM »
You mean that test DPReview did trying to focus on the white eye of a white marble horse?? Then they tried to use the USB dock and stated that it took several hours to configure it?

Curiously, because the new Canon 24-70/2.8 wasn't that great on the 650D, they felt the urge to specify that "As always, though, it must be noted that focus speed and accuracy is dependent upon a number of variables, including the camera body used, subject contrast, and light levels."

My experience with the Sigma 30 f/1.4 (ART) lens exhibits the same symptons of inconsistent AF even with highly contrasting subjects. All the microadjustment won't help inconsistent AF.

283
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Outed?
« on: October 15, 2013, 06:27:20 AM »
Oh my God! ... the lens isn't even out yet but people already know it has "inconsistent AF" and that too from just knowing that it is "much heavier" and that it has "82mm filter size" ::)

On Sigma website before it was taken down:
    Lens Construction: 19 elements in 14 groups
    Dimensions (Diameter x Length): 3.5in x 4.3in
    Maximum magnification ratio: 1:4.6
    Weight: 885g / 31.2oz
    Minimum focusing distance: 45cm /17.7in
    Angle of view (35mm equivalent): 84.1°-23.3°
    Filter size: 82mm
    HSM delivers high AF speed and quiet performance
    Offers F/4 brightness throughout the zoom range
    OS (Optical Stabilizer) functionality
    Super Multi-Layer Coating reduces flare and ghosting
    Rounded 9-blade diaphragm
    Mount conversion service available
    Sigma USB Dock compatible

As for inconsistent AF, well, I had the latest Sigma 30 f/1.4 DC (ART) lens. Used it for a week and got rid of it. DPReview had similar problems with the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 lens. The Sigma 24-105 f/4 won't be any better... of course its f/4 aperture may help to mask some of its AF problems.

284
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Outed?
« on: October 15, 2013, 04:33:12 AM »
Much heavier. 82 mm filter size. The same old same old Sigma inconsistent AF.

No, thanks. I'll pass.

285
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D610 yes D600 minor upgrade!
« on: October 10, 2013, 12:26:12 PM »
I never read about the "they spent a lot of time" and onwards part before. Where did that get documented?

You'll need to comb through Rob Galbraith's website: his long series of articles on 1D Mark III AF, various preludes to aforementioned articles as well as his criticism of Canon's offerings after the 1D Mark III. The info is all there.

Ultimately, like what others have pointed out, why do you think Rob Galbraith finally had to quit his job?

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 42