April 20, 2014, 04:00:31 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 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 34
286
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 07:11:06 PM »
Actually, a 24-70 f/4L IS with great optical quality is not a bad idea.

The only problem is: there are higher demands for other lenses... 14-24, 50 f/1.4 Mk 2 (with ring USM)...

287
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS-M in Stock at Norman Camera
« on: October 29, 2012, 11:19:42 PM »
I always thought it was 'Powershot on Steroid'.

From what I hear, the EOS-M AF speed can be even slower than a Powershot camera. So, it does not qualify as Powershot on steroid. :)

Canon needs to refresh their EOS-M camera with new AF algorithm/sensors + features (e.g. EVF) and introduce many, many more lenses (particularly compact f/2.8 zoom lenses like their Panasonic counterpart) if they want to attract new takers. Otherwise, their entire mirrorless line is a stillborn. It's a pity that Canon is a victim of their own success: their manufacturing plant can no longer be as nimble as the past 'cos they need to support their massive market share while new competitive products are introduced at the same time.

288
Pricewatch Deals / Re: The 5D Mark II & 5D Mark III Get Cheaper
« on: October 29, 2012, 02:38:34 AM »
Here is quote from Goro Yoshida, one of the founders of Canon.

When asked about his motives in disassembling a Leica to produce Japanese made high-grade 35mm cameras, Yoshida explained in later years:
"I just disassembled the camera without any specific plan, but simply to take a look at each part. I found there were no special items like diamonds inside the camera. The parts were made from brass, aluminum, iron and rubber. I was surprised that when these inexpensive materials were put together into a camera, it demanded an exorbitant price. This made me angry".

The current CEO of Canon should also get very angry, but this time the wrath should not be directed at Leica but at themselves.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/history/canon_story/1933_1936/1933_1936.html


This is funny, very funny.  ;D

Leica products are assembled by hand and QC is supposedly very high. Canon products are machine assembled and QC is....

289
Pricewatch Deals / Re: The 5D Mark II & 5D Mark III Get Cheaper
« on: October 28, 2012, 10:52:06 PM »
As expected, the price of 5D3 is now equal to D800... it may fall even further in time to come... Canon has already recovered some of their manufacturing costs from the early adopters.  ;D

290
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to start using 0.18um (180nm) process for FF?
« on: October 28, 2012, 10:58:19 AM »
Actually, Paul Pope, a highly reliable source in DPReview, has indicated on many occasions that Canon has the next level sensor technology; Canon is not as far behind as what many think. However, he believes the bean counters in Canon are not willing to move their latest technology into manufacturing phase because of low(er) yield.

291
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Patent: Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3
« on: October 25, 2012, 11:04:47 PM »
So, how heavy will this lens be? ~ 1.5 kg.

How does it compare to the Panasonic 100-300 f/4-5.6 lens that only weighs 500 g but provides the same FOV on a m43 camera?  ;D

292
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 21, 2012, 01:11:43 AM »
Has anyone looked at the results posted at Senscore:

http://www.senscore.org/

Even though I am aware their dynamic range results are averaged over the entire available ISO range, I cannot see how the 5D3 can be that much better than the 5D2 and 1Ds3. Comments?

293
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 19, 2012, 03:10:04 AM »
I am surprised it's been more than a week since DXO Lab announced their software support for 1DX and D600 but there has been no official release of their 1DX test results, unlike the D600. Is this because (i) DXOMark do not believe their results and are now re-testing everything (ii) they are blackmailing Canon to give them more monetary support (iii) they are blackmailing Nikon to grant them more support.

 ;D  ;D  ;D

294
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 13, 2012, 11:06:08 AM »
There are at least two compelling advantages of DxOMark here -- one is the simple practical one -- as we do not have access to Canon's internal processes, we can't use their internal benchmarking results to appraise the 1DX or compare it to competing products (again, assuming Canon have an internal testing regimen, one would expect that they would run all of their own, and several competing products through it).

Second, even if we could see those results, it would be misleading to compare cameras that had been tuned to those specific testing processes with those that hadn't (basically, it would be analogous to in-sample versus out-of-sample testing)

Ultimately, real world results are what counts, yes? Photographers buy cameras to capture images, not to pass specific testing processes or specific testing regimes, ya?

So, can you point out specific real world scenarios that Canon's cameras perform really well, outside of what DXOMark can ever reveal? Perhaps Canon's internal test regimes are tailored for such instances? ;)

295
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 12, 2012, 09:02:02 PM »
'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...
 
Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

Wow, you don't have a clue, do you. I write that the 1Dx is "not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations".
In what way does that contradict anything else I wrote?

I'll write it again, to make sure you get it this time: Canon did not make the 1Dx to score one way or the other in any test, Canon made it to be an incredibly good camera at what it does. And Canon succeeded.

So, according to you, (i) DXOMark results are accurate (ii) Canon 1DX produces fantastic results REGARDLESS of its DXOMark scores.

This means whatever DXOMark measures is USELESS since their results have no correlation to real world results. Correct?

296
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 11, 2012, 06:28:27 PM »
'DxO has no credibility'.... who says? You and a couple of others here who don't like the results they publish, and just don't understand that DxO CANNOT AFFORD TO BULLSHIT...
 
Anyway, the 1Dx is an absolutely unbelievably good camera. It's not made to get high scores, it's made to get fantastic results in almost impossible situations, especially low light of course.

I hope you see the obvious self-contradiction in what you wrote

297
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 11, 2012, 09:58:14 AM »
I will believe these numbers when I see them on the DXO site itself.

Come to think about it: some folks who tried to lift the shadows in 1DX images do not find the performance any better than the 5D3... Hmmm...

298
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 11, 2012, 01:09:08 AM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer


That is a link to the Canon US website. All major decisions are made in Canon Japan. Not sure if it'll have much of an impact. :)

299
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2012, 03:35:45 AM »
Maybe as you say, because they really don't have anything now that can match Nikon when it comes to sensors (or, more hopefully, they have something in the wings, but want Nikon to think they are still stuck in the past).


If you know or remember Paul Pope from DPReview, this well-informed guy has this to say:

"Not the best they could do by any means but rather the best they were permitted to do by the bean counters concerned with wafer yield in their sensor manufacturing...

But don't be too concerned the best Canon CAN do is still to come ..."
- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40792377

"I believe Canon's latest sensor technology is going to be showcased later this year. The video camera gives us a hint of what's to come I'm told."
- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40800902

"I don't believe its a 5 series camera .... more like a 1DXs type of thing.
I think it shoots video at a bit more then 1080p as well ...."
- http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/40792357

So, we can expect the high megapixel sensor to appear in a 1D body. And if the engineers manage to convince the bean counters they have the yield under control, we may very well see the latest sensor technology from Canon in it.

300
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon EOS-1S the Name? [CR1]
« on: October 07, 2012, 10:32:27 AM »
9K to compete, what a joke, Canon really are a big monopoly

IF this new sensor technology is true, and Canon needs to set up a new sensor plant just to cater for the new manufacturing process, then it does not surprise me that Canon implements this high pixel count camera in a $9000 body. Early adopters of this high pixel count camera are merely paying for the non-recurring engineering (NRE) costs.  ;D

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 34