November 24, 2014, 10:40:52 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 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 44
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 07, 2013, 12:40:10 AM »
Image details. Use the ISO 12233 Sample Crops in The Digital Pictures to see the difference.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the Df
« on: November 05, 2013, 11:21:28 AM »
Nikon DF - 5.6 x 4.3 x 2.6" :: 710g for camera body
Canon 6D - 5.7 x 4.4 x 2.8"  :: 770g for camera body


Nikon DF + battery + memory card = 765g
Canon 6D + battery + memory card = 770g

I've said it before and will say it again. The DF is too expensive, too heavy and too crippled (for its price compared to D610). A sure dud in sales.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 05, 2013, 02:09:33 AM »
Too heavy, too expensive and no video.

A sure misfire!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 04, 2013, 06:33:52 AM »
Nikon 1 has not been a misfire. Not long ago production couldn't keep up with demand. Eventually market saturation occurred and sales went drastically down. The underwater version seems to be a good way to revamp the system - it's what "weather sealing" should actually mean and I'm interested in a camera that costs less than most underwater casings alone.

Market saturation => overall market demand is low. The fact that DSLRs now outsell MILCs by 9:1 in N. America and Europe is proof of that. Misfire? Absolutely.

Underwater version is great. I love the idea too! But how many folks need underwater cameras... again a very niche market.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 04, 2013, 06:25:21 AM »
Here's my take on it: the DF will  be the most successful Nikon FF camera to date.

NO WAY that is gonna happen if it weighs > 750g and costs US$3000

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 04, 2013, 03:42:10 AM »

To me it looks like Nikon is trying to target a lot of niche markets at once...

Those after a smaller FF system...

If the rumors are correct, the DF weighs 750g. Doubt it's going to be small and light...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 03, 2013, 09:01:52 PM »
If it doesn't offer video, and it's not <$1500 because it doesn't offer video, Canon still wins


Nikon wants to appeal to their base of stawart fans. This will also test those folks who claim they don't care about video and all they want is better photographic tools. Now, let's see how big this group is... I suspect it is VERY small and the DF is going to be another misfire, like the Nikon 1.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« on: November 02, 2013, 08:19:53 PM »
Two things to keep in mind:

a) Canon talked about MILCs as early as 2006, way before the first Olympus MILC appeared in the market. This is what Chuck Westfall told PC Photomagzine in a 2006 interview:

"If you substituted an optical viewfinder with an EVF, the size, weight and cost of the camera would come down quite a bit. You’d be eliminating the need for a prism and a mirror, which currently limits how small of an SLR you can make."

b) But Canon chose not to do anything about it. Why? Because they know current MILC technology is not good enough to replace DSLR. I know that because I used the OMD for a year. The masses have already spoken with their wallets, interest in MILCs is dropping rapidly. Currently, in Europe and USA, for every MILC sold, 9 to 10 more DSLRs are sold.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 01, 2013, 09:16:57 PM »
US$3000 and 750g.

How is this going to compete against Sony A7/A7r?

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: A Pellicle Mirror by Canon
« on: November 01, 2013, 12:40:40 AM »
And to those of you saying how bad mirrorless is because sales suck compared to DSLR, just remember a few short years ago when people were saying that digital would never be replace film.....

My money is on mirrorless.....

I am not aware of anyone saying digital would never replace film. If there were, those folks definitely belonged to the 0.001% minority. In fact, the day digital cameras appeared in the market, many folks already knew film was dead.

The landscape of interchangeable lens cameras will certainly change. But no one knows what the future is going to bring. Current MILC technology is certainly not good enough. The masses have spoken with their wallets and that is louder and far more convincing than anything you and I have to say on the web.

I am wondering if we'll ever see DR and other sensor improvements in Canon DSLR sensors. In Canon's latest financial report (Oct 2013), they indicate they are continuing their crusade for cost cutting. As far as I know, the only way to improve their sensor performance is to shift to new silicon processes that require new machines. If they want to cut down on operational costs, they will probably be very reluctant to make this change.


EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: A Pellicle Mirror by Canon
« on: October 31, 2013, 10:09:25 PM »
For those of you who think that mirrorless cameras are the future and Canon does not know what it's doing, think again.

Look at CIPA worldwide camera shipment numbers from

a) In 2012, for every unit of MILC shipped, 4.1 units of DSLR are shipped.
From Jan-Aug 2013, for every unit MILC shipped, 4.9 units of DSLR are shipped.

b) When the numbers (shipment ratio of DSLR:MILC) are analyzed on a regional level:
Japan 1.25 (2012), 1.8 (till Aug 2013)
Americas 6.75 (2012), 9.9 (till Aug 2013)
Europe 5.5 (2012), 9.6 (till Aug 2013)
Asia 3.44 (2012), 3.37 (till Aug 2013)
The rest 2.3 (2012), 3.8 (till Aug 2013)

Appears that sales of MILCs are losing steam quite rapidly in America and Europe. Even within Japan, there is a loss of interest in MILCs!

Clearly, the masses are not buying into this silly EVF thing. My one year of experience with OMD taught me the same thing.

Hence, I think a pellicle mirror with electronically adjusted reflectivity/transmittivity is excellent! Combined that with on-sensor PDAF and we have a possible winner. My only concern is whether viewfinder blackout still occurs with this electronic adjustment of pellicle mirror reflectivity. In principle, it should be possible to switch this reflectivity quickly enough to minimize viewfinder blackout.

Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 28, 2013, 10:43:11 AM »
Much like the digital revolution that changed how 99% of all photographers captured and took photographs, I can see another change coming also...  Will DSLRs die in 5 years?  No, but will there be a change in how we photograph or think about photographing?  Yes.


I used the EM5 for a year and came to the conclusion that I totally hated the EVF. The camera takes fine photos and AF quickly. But the EVF and the nearly non-existent grip? Yiiikes.

I think the Canon 100D is the first step in the right direction. Hopefully, all DSLRs will be made that way in future: smaller and lighter. I'm sure it can be done.

Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 28, 2013, 10:39:36 AM »
Certainly.  It's just that people are extending that argument to dSLRs, and the data don't support that argument.  Canon dropped their forecast 7.7%, including a forecast drop of 24% for P&S sales, vs. only a 3% drop in dSLR sales.


If only there are more folks like you who take the time to analyze the data carefully... :D

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 28, 2013, 05:31:52 AM »
For not so good light and the best iq esp. above iso 1600 no current crop sensor can compete with a ff, not Sony, not Nikon, not Canon - so this is hardly something to complain about.

I think most people are looking at the low ISO dynamic range numbers very closely... :D

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 44