April 24, 2014, 11:46:48 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 - Helevitia

Pages: 1 [2]
17
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: September 20, 2012, 04:26:41 PM »
Fist shot I was happy with after buying my 7D back in May:



http://www.flickr.com/photos/s3r3n1ty/7194124194/#

18
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Smart Phone control
« on: September 17, 2012, 08:03:44 PM »
A wonder how big of a battery waster this would be?

19
EOS Bodies / Re: Enough Full Frame Talk: Where are the 7D II Rumors?
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:59:53 PM »
Better AF, usable ISO above 400 up to 6400 would be nice, real autofocus for movies.  1080p @ 60fps, USB 3.0(or thunderbolt), 8-way multicontroller within its rear dial just like 60D and 6D, and dual CF/SD slots. 

That's pretty much my dream camera.

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Official Specs
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:02:45 PM »
If the 6D turns out to have IQ closer(meaning more than 50% from the MK2) to the MK3 with good ISO up to 6400 and the AF system turns out to be fast and accurate with low AF, do you think it would be worth upgrading over the 7D?

I ask because I bought the 7D in May anticipating an entry-level FF camera by year's end.  Unfortunately, like everyone else, I was a bit disappointed.  After soaking in all the info over the past two days, my thoughts are:

- wifi and gps seems to be a gimmick and will be mostly useless after a few months
- If the IQ is great(KR seems to think it's almost as good as the MK3), this would make it much more worthy
- Hopefully the AF system is new and improved.
- My one big complaint about the 7D is the poor ISO, even at 400.  Too much noise.  If the 6D can perform good with 6400 ISO that would beat out the MK2, this would be a very strong selling point for me.  I literally use NR on almost every image, even down to ISO 200.

Anyhoo, just wanted to see if people think I'm off my rocker or something else?

21
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 03:41:19 PM »
Can someone tell me what this means:  63-zone Dual-Level Metering Sensor?

I'm assuming it's to read the amount of light that the camera sees, correct?  Also, how does that play a role with AF since they are bunched together in the specs?  Thanks!

It's the same metering sensor in the 7D, 5DIII, 60D, etc.  the metering sensor determines the amount of light in various portions of the scene, and uses that for the camera to make its exposure decision on what is "correct". Dual layer means it is somewhat sensitive to color information as well. That helps out with the AF in some situations, for example under fluorescent lights, which can alter the accuracy of the AF.

Thanks!

22
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Announces the Canon EOS 6D DSLR
« on: September 17, 2012, 01:32:02 PM »
Can someone tell me what this means:  63-zone Dual-Level Metering Sensor?

I'm assuming it's to read the amount of light that the camera sees, correct?  Also, how does that play a role with AF since they are bunched together in the specs?  Thanks!

Also, I think wifi and gps are a gimmick.  After 3 months, nobody will use wifi and gps will be used by the minority, IMHO.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Official Specs
« on: September 16, 2012, 09:39:25 PM »
I'll wait for reviews before fully judging, though I have to admit I'm a little disappointed.  The AF really needs to be some kind of new badass system to justify 11 AF points IMHO.  Are the mentioned AF features normal or new?  I'm still learning so I don't know.

I noticed it has 1/8000 instead of 1/4000.  If the AF system is really good and the ISO noise is better than an MK2, I might still buy it.  FYI, I'm coming from a 7D.

24
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?
« on: September 14, 2012, 05:10:05 PM »
Although I don't want to believe these rumored specs, I'm starting to think more and more they are real for the simple fact that The 7D firmware was bumped to 2.0.  Also, the specs are slightly better than the 5DMK2 except for the FF sensor which is why they are calling it a 6D instead of a replacement for the 5DMK2.

Of course, this is just speculation.  Time will tell :)

I'll keep my 7D for now unless the reviews show otherwise or the specs are wrong.

25
At the end of the day, Canon will Milk their customers because they have good glass... people are bought into a system. The 5d3 was overpriced for this reason, and they got away with it... but many people are peed off that a similar costing body, costs 500-700 less. Had the 5d3 have similar DR and low ISO noise performance as the D800, it would have been a different story.
You're quite mistaken. The 5D3 is a nearly perfect blend of pro camera (1DX, 1DsIII, 1DIV) and small camera (5D2, 7D) in performance, features and size.  There are a number of ways in which the 5D3 is perfectly suited to my work and the D800 isn't (quiet shutter mode, variable file sizes, high ISO performance, autofocus performance, radio-controlled flash system, etc.).  The D800 doesn't meet my needs as well.  I've heard the same sentiments from other pros — they felt that Canon had really listened to their needs with the 5D3 and Nikon really hadn't with the D800.  (Of course, a landscape photographer has different needs and may be happier with the D800).

Rather than "getting away with it [higher pricing]" or "milking" their customers, Canon have delivered exactly what some photographers need at the 5D3's price level.  This idea of deviously "milking" customers with "overpriced" gear is unfounded in an age when customers have very good alternatives and can switch brands without a big financial loss.

Looks like you are carrying a peeve from our disagreement on the 24-70 thread.  ;)

No one said that the 5D3 was not a good blend/ all round camera, I own one myself. But I still think they Milked me and you.   :P

It's true. The 5D3 is amazing and priced too high. We should probably be more upset about it than we are.

I would have expected Nikon to to better than $2100. I think Canon could actually undercut Nikon here. Basically release a 5D2 with an expanded 7D AF system for $1,999, alone that would be enough.

I would buy that if the sensor and ISO noise were on par with the MK2 or better.  I love my 7D minus the ISO noise.    Basically I want the D600 with a Canon label on it.  The 1/4000 is kind of a bummer, but not a deal breaker.  I would also like to see usb 3.  So my perfect Canon Camera would be FF sensor,   6-7fps, built-in flash, 1/8000, usb 3, better ISO noise than the 7D, great AF system.  If Canon can do that, I will be a first day buyer. 

The current rumored specs have me concerned.  I really want a built-in flash.  I bought the 7D in May, assuming Canon would come out with an entry level FF DSLR by the end of the year.  I planned on selling my 7D and upgrading to the new camera, so I hope I made the right decision.  I guess we will know more next week?  On the bright side(for me), I got my 7D for $1250, so I think I could get most of my money back.  The only lens I have is the 70-200 IS USM II.  If Canon doesn't come out with a competitor to the D600, I might consider selling all equipment and switching.  I'll wait for reviews before making that choice. 

26
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D and 5D II that different?
« on: August 08, 2012, 12:39:52 PM »
I've owned a 7D since April/May.  It's a great camera, you won't be disappointed.  The one huge difference that I noticed right away is the ISO noise.  The 5DM2 blows away the 7D in this area.  If noise is a big concern, you should really rent both cameras and look for yourself.  I really believe that anything past ISO 400 on the 7D has too much noise.  The 5DM2 can easily go up to 3200 and still have an usable image.  Of course, noise is subjective and what bothers me may not bother you :) 

And last, might as well wait 1-2 months and see what new Cameras Canon will announce.  It looks like they might release an entry level Full Frame DSLR.  It'll probably be about $2K.

Pages: 1 [2]