July 29, 2014, 05:02:37 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 - Chosenbydestiny

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16
16
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot N100 Official
« on: January 06, 2014, 05:53:26 PM »
So it will definitely capture my expression of disappointment? I'll consider =P

17
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 03, 2014, 02:05:12 AM »
Beautiful images clartephoto. I love the first one.

...Welcome to CR :)

+1

+2 however you wanted to interpret the colors is of artistic value, something most of these pixel peepers don't have. Keep on shooting.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: A 2014 Roadmap Part 1: The 7D Mark II is Coming [CR2]
« on: December 19, 2013, 10:22:30 PM »
I'd love for them to bring APS-H back, in a smaller body with 10fps it could be like my old 1D mark III without a grip :D

19
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A 40mm f/0.85 for Your EOS-M?
« on: December 15, 2013, 09:25:47 PM »
I think they're trying to compete with the noctilux, but after seeing this sample..... Nah.

20
Lenses / Re: Canon 40mm f/2.8 Lens: Thoughts? Reviews? Is it worth getting?
« on: November 18, 2013, 02:31:38 AM »
I call it my vacation lens. I'd almost never use it for work but when I want to travel for personal enjoyment and get better shots than a camera phone or better than a point and shoot I take the pancake lens. Sometimes I even pair it with an 85mm 1.8 for a small and light travel setup with a 6D.

21
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: November 13, 2013, 11:25:41 AM »
The link is broken, I think.

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 12, 2013, 10:26:53 PM »
Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip.  That would be a deal-killer for sure.
Maybe for you. It's the complete opposite for me. I'll take the built in, fully integrated grip.
Part of the reason the ergonomics of 1-Series bodies is so brilliantly refined is that it's a totally integrated package.
Part of the reason for my post is that I find the ergonomics of the 1-Series worse than any Canon body aside from perhaps the M.  They're too large and they're unnecessarily heavy.  They're simply unusable for me.  I'll take my 5D over a 1-series every day.  In fact, if you give me a 1Dx for free, I'll put it in the basement along with my VCR.
Really? Seriously? Hmmm....OK

-pw

Or you could donate it to one of us who do prefer it. I prefer the grip, just a minor annoyance with the somewhat cumbersome traditional grips they've made so far. If they redesign it to make the grip area smaller than at least half it's size now, we could very well all have the compromise we've been waiting for. With today's technology I'm sure they could redesign the battery bay to be smaller and carry a thinner battery that equals the power of about two LP-E6s and a slightly better voltage to drive the AF better than it's driven on the 5D mark III but not as good as the 1D-X. Since it will most likely be a crop body with lower ISO performance, I don't feel that the 5D Mark III would be cannibalized in sales. That design would put the vertical shutter button closer to the thumb wheel and AF selector button as well. It would fit the 1D-X nickname that's been floating around. I'd definitely pay 2k for that.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Teaser
« on: November 08, 2013, 11:27:45 PM »
Seems to be a white version of the SL1/100D.
Yep, agreed...its the only way to explain the Canon logo being so dark.

Kind of cool, though certainly not the interesting new product people thought it might be
Is it a MILC? It is filed under Canon mirrorless...

A 7D Mark II that is a SLT?
That's because CR Guy had been running with the idea that the announcement might be the EOS-M2; seems pretty clear it isnt, unless they have radically re-styled the body from the M

Perhaps it's an EOS-M2 with an optical viewfinder, designed to look more like a DSLR and less like a point and shoot.  ;)

24
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the Df
« on: November 05, 2013, 01:41:55 PM »
Wow, they took video away and made it more expensive. I guess that takes away the useless assumption that video adds to the price =P

25
A friend and I were shooting a model's headshots side by side a couple of days ago at his home studio. He had his 5D Mark III with 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mark 1, and I was using a 6D with 70-200mm f/4L IS. I had zero trouble focusing, but there were a couple of times where the model had to wait for him because he couldn't land focus for some reason. We were both using center point in one shot mode. I am not, in any way, saying the 6D is a better camera. But in that particular situation my center point did great. In fact, I still haven't found a normal situation where I couldn't focus. Then again, I rarely use the outer points on 6D which I do feel are better on my 5D mark IIIs that I use at work. They really are two different bodies for different audiences, but the 6D can pull it's weight in almost every situation that the 5D mark III can and sometimes it actually does better.

26
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 30, 2013, 07:04:57 AM »
Despite the logic of your statement I am still hearing in this forum as well as all over the fruited plain that the 7d2 is going to be "better" than a 1DX, or have the same IQ as a 5d3. 

This is the Internet, where you can find 'evidence' that humans are descended from extraterrestrials and 'proof' of the existence of unicorns that poop rainbows.  Just sayin'.


+1 Thanks to DXO the internet, the quality of information is at an all time low =P

27
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 30, 2013, 03:03:31 AM »
The argument of that article, "The main problem for the Japanese camera makers though, is their continued lack of focus on software. The world has moved from a place where hardware was the dominant factor to where software is now more important", doesn't convince me either, at least for Canon modus operandi.

Proof One: Magic Lantern.

Proof Two: Canon (and maybe the rest as well) don't offer firmware upgrades once a model is replaced. For example, I found that STM lenses, although they worked on my (ancient) 5D and 30D's, they did not work very well. Now just how much effort would it be for Canon to offer a firmware upgrade for discontinued cameras just to keep the lens info up to date?

How many of the users of a specific camera model bought Magic Lantern? If you have 10,000 5D MkIII sales did 10% buy it? That's the criterion. For firmware backwards support I would agree but they want to boost new model sales. Even Microsoft teminates support of Windows older than 2 versions, that's pretty much the same analogy.

Of all this I make it the weak link is entry-level dSLRs. Someone in that segment could turn to other solutions. For the sake of the argument let's say that level is discontinued impact is prosumer and higher dSLRs become more expensive. And I wouldn't want to see the MkIV at USD4,000...

Bought Magic Lantern? 

Magic Lantern is free to download and use.

HTH,

cayenne

Probably if ML put a small charge, more people would use it

That would just give Canon more reason and just cause to fight against ML

28
Software & Accessories / Re: I think I may want a Monopod
« on: October 24, 2013, 02:36:04 PM »
A good alternative is a flat tripod, extremely portable, and stable enough for most travel situations. I'm looking at a Benro C1190T myself, when I was at the store it just felt so light and seems like it will pack easily. Unfortunately I was making a more important purchase at the time and came up short, I'm definitely going to buy one when I return. I already have a monopod, and it even has legs. I don't like it because it isn't versatile or stable enough for me for trips, it's also too long to fit in my backpack where the flat tripod looks like it might.

29
Portrait / Re: 'Straight' Portrait of a Young Woman
« on: October 22, 2013, 10:29:02 AM »
Contrasty* <- I know, that's not a real word either, lol

30
Portrait / Re: 'Straight' Portrait of a Young Woman
« on: October 22, 2013, 10:27:39 AM »
It seems to only be overexposed by a little bit, obviously a flattering look for the skin. Most importantly, the details that show the shape of her head, hair, and indicate she has all of the basic features of a human face are all still there. I wouldn't cry over it, it's still a good image and I'm using both calibrated and uncalibrated screens to view it. As someone said previously the contrasts look via post processing does looks intentional.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16