September 19, 2014, 01:51:20 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 - docsmith

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 19
Canon General / Re: Another Northrup - Canon vs. Nikon
« on: September 03, 2014, 06:11:52 AM »
...cough....5DIII is a 24 MP camera body???.... :o :o ;) ???

First half empty people have been around...forever.  They always see what they don't have rather than what they do have. 
The real test for Canon, though, will be the 5DIII successor.

Yep. a very large extent, the "competition" for the 5DIV isn't Nikon, but Canon's real challenge is to try to get people to upgrade from the very capable 5DIII.  I can easily see myself skipping a generation if they do not come out with something remarkable.  Granted, upgrades is only part of the market of potential buyers, but I have to think it is a significant part of the market.

Couple of quick things:
  • The timeframe of the graph is limited and by happy coincidence, starts in 2012 that coincides with the release of the 5DIII, 1DX, D800, D800E and followed shortly by the 6D, 600D, etc.  2012 was a good year for DSLR body releases.
  • DSLRs is likely a maturing market whereas mirrorless is a relatively new market.  I am not sure the two are related.  For example, mirrorless could be growing but taking sales away from what used to be the P&S market

But, thanks for the link.  I love data.  I do wish it went back further.  That would be more telling.  If a bunch of new DSLRs are released in 2015 or 2016, I'd expect the numbers to increase again.

Lenses / Re: New Lens Information for Photokina
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:12:58 AM »
400 4.0 DO IS II might be interesting, but I guess I won't like the price.

+1 I would love to have such a lens and it would be absolutely fantastic if it works well with a 1.4 TC. It would very likely be beyond my reach though, cost wise. Especially if it quickly earns a good reputation and it doesn't devalue as much as the current model.

Agreed.  If this lens is sharp (w/ w/o 1.4 TC), light and compact for ~$7k it will find itself into many kits as it would be a great lens, especially for travel. I may even find its way into my kit.

Lenses / Re: 200 f/2.0 vs 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: August 24, 2014, 10:41:08 PM »
wow....I've compared sharpness between the two before, but the difference in bokeh is amazing.

Unfortunately, I don't have a spare $6,000 lying around....

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: What does Sigma do next?
« on: August 16, 2014, 06:32:01 AM »
I think Tamron has already tried to answer that question, 150-600 mm.  Either with a top end zoom or a serious of primes.  Take Canon on at 400 f/5.6 OS or, even better, 500 f/5.6 OS.  Or, have Sigma update their zooms that go out to 500 mm.  They would have to beat Canon on price in the 85-135  mm range. 

Granted, I've always wanted to see a "portrait" zoom, 50-150 f/2.8.

Another 7D to 5DIII convert here.  I don't dispute that the 7D could out resolve the 5DIII in certain circumstances.  Your second comparison with the moon is more inline with my tests than the first.  But as I was evaluating the two bodies, for me, it became more than just about resolving power.  The color, transition from the highlights and blacks, noise, etc, were what stood out to me as the primary differences.

The 7D is an amazing camera.  I shot with it for years.  I would not hesitate to recommend it.

And I make this post knowing this thread is titled "The Reach War," but I was a little surprised that no one else had yet brought up that the differences between the 5DIII and 7D (or 70D) is about more than reach and noise.

That said, I will watch reviews and comments on the 7DII.  It would be nice to have the extra reach if everything else is up to speed.  The 7DII with a 100-400L would be easier to travel with and cheaper than a 600 II.  But, I haven't shot my 7D since the early tests with the 5DIII.  Even for birds.  I prefer the shots taken from the 5DIII.  Sometimes I miss the reach, but, overall, I prefer the images.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doing Market Research on Medium Format?
« on: August 06, 2014, 03:14:05 PM »
I actually like this trend.  I'll probably never own a MF camera, but the cost is coming down.  Right now, I suspect they are aimed at pros that need them and those that are not phased by the price of an Otus lens.   That market seems small, but it does exist. 

So, buy an Otus lens or a MF camera?  When you are in that price neighborhood, I can see a few people going for the MF camera.

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: July 31, 2014, 11:27:12 AM »
Of gear that I intend to be part of my active kit....EF 40 mm f/2.8 pancake. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: July 31, 2014, 06:17:21 AM »
Maybe in the context of what he is shooting the difference is negligible. Maybe he is at bright lights, always less than ISO 400 and bokeh/noise do not matter.  Maybe his clients do not perceive or require a difference.

Those contexts exist, sure. But I use 1 camera for all the different contexts in which I shoot. The 5DIII. And I like the images I get from it better than my excellent 7D.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]
« on: July 30, 2014, 05:57:41 PM »
I know all the speculation is for the 100-400L, but, if I am going to think BIG.... EF 800 mm f/5.6

Just sayin'

I doubt it since they made it sound somewhat more like a lens for everyone.

Good point....but maybe Canon is just hoping that everyone will shell out $14k for a lens  ;D ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]
« on: July 30, 2014, 05:00:17 PM »
I know all the speculation is for the 100-400L, but, if I am going to think BIG.... EF 800 mm f/5.6

Just sayin'

I've been thinking about it, and my kit has been updated to the point where I think I'll only be interested in the 100-400 II if it works very well with the 1.4 tc or if the IQ/AF/IS are just outstanding.  But the 2x tc with the 70-200 ii has become my travel combination and the 70-200 II has become my short telephoto lens.  As a result, I only use the 100-400L for local birding trips (@ 400 mm).  A new lens would have to be good enough to expand that niche to justify the expected cost differential.

Software & Accessories / Re: RRS or Markins?
« on: July 28, 2014, 05:03:37 PM »

Markins generally is thought of as not playing well with other gear. 

I have the Markins Q3 on Gitzo monopod and the Q10 on Gitzo tripod. 7D with RRS L-Plate and 2 lens with collars and RRS lens plates, 2 RRS rails and Wimberley Arca Sidekick Ball to Gimbal Head Adapter and never had an issue with compatibility.

Very similarly, I have a Markins Q3T mounted on a Gitzo tripod and connect with RRS L- and lens plates.  No compatibility issues.  If anything, the Markins plays better with others as it has an adjustment screw that lets me adjust the quick release to other manufacturer's plates.

Software & Accessories / Re: Lee Big Stpper with UV filters
« on: July 17, 2014, 05:42:47 PM »
I don't have the Lee Big Stopper, but I use grad ND filters a lot.  I have found that I sometimes get mechanical vignetting at wider angles if I leave the protective filter on.  Something to look for. 

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 12, 2014, 09:47:25 PM »
It's weird. I've wanted this lens badly for years but this, if true, is coming at a time when things have changed to the point I may not get it. The 70-200 II with 2x tc has replaced my currant 100-400L in my travel kit.   That leaves local birding, and I have to wonder if the Tamron 150-600 may be better suited. To my needs plus I am saving up for a big white. We'll see. I've wanted this lens for so long I'll definitely look at it. But it is no longer a no brainer. 

Oh, and I like the push-pull.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 19