September 22, 2014, 06:34:12 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 - Jackson_Bill

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
1
I feel as if (and this only my opinion which is worthless) the ones doing the crying are not the people who the 7DII is aimed for.

....
Meanwhile sports / wildlife photographers are quietly pre-ordering. If I was a sports photographer I'd be pretty excited to have the 7D II either as a back up or main camera. I have a feeling once some solid reviews come around and people get to feel how easy the camera is to work with (loved my 7D ergonomics) things will calm down.

I thought the 7D was an amazing camera but on paper when it was compared to say a 60D there didn't seem to be all that much different. Once you actually use the 7D you start to realize that it's a beast and is built to last. The IQ was it's Achilles heel but hopefully that issue will be addressed to a satisfactory level and what we'll get is a highly refined machine!

Not all the wildlife photographers are pre-ordering.
I've been using a 7D since October of 2009 for wildlife and I've been hoping for a sensor update from Canon for literally years. At the moment there are many opinions being expressed about the high ISO performance - some say its great, others that its not much better than the 70D, so I'll wait. The high ISO performance is the most important thing that was lacking with the 7D (followed closely by AF performance).
If its true that the ISO performance isn't much better than the 70D, I won't be buying a 7Dii at all. It really doesn't matter how well focused your photos are if they're still so noisy at 1600 ISO that you have to apply NR to the point you lose that sharpness.

2
Lenses / Re: Wildlife lens setup
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:01:24 PM »
My wildlife photography varies from pink-sided juncos (a small bird in the western US) to grizzly bears and my opinion is go long and go prime. While the versaility of the zooms can be a real advantage (to be honest, there have been situations that I had too much lens), you simply can't beat the sharpness of the 500 f4 or 600 f4. I own the old 500 f4 and while it was pricey (at the time, now a deal compared to the II versions) I've never regretted buying it.


3
EOS Bodies / Re: Sample Images From the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 19, 2014, 06:41:45 PM »
So, the 7Dii is a failure because:
1. It's noisier than the 5Diii
2. It can't do 4K video
3. It doesn't have a brand new sensor
4. It's screen doesn't tilt
5. No wifi

65AF points. ITR. 10fps. Intervelometer. Increased buffer. Autofocus at f/8.0. Spot metering on AF point. All these things doesn't stop the 7Dii from being a useless, no good, piece of crap camera. Apparently...

IMO there are only two things the 7Dii needed to do, improved AF (not so much the 61 points, just more accurate AF, period) and, more importantly, much better performance at ISO 1600 (ideally, similar to the Exmor). If the high ISO isn't appreciably better than the 70D as some are saying, the rest of it doesn't matter and I see no reason to buy a 7Dii, unfortunately.

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: What's more important, gps or wifi?
« on: September 19, 2014, 02:28:13 PM »
Having GPS allows government snooping :( If you have GPS, NSA will always know where you and your camera are located :( I know, I know privacy is a thing from the past and will never be seen again :(

Using WiFi to communicate with a client's iPad, etc is a money maker :)
Not that I worry about govt snooping on my GPS but that reminds me of a question - how hard would the Canon wifi systems be to hack? Could some malicious hacker format your card?

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: What's more important, gps or wifi?
« on: September 19, 2014, 09:26:00 AM »
Absolutely don't need wifi.
I shoot RAW exclusively so I don't need to upload anything and I'm generally out in the weeds so I have no need for remote operation.

GPS - I wouldn't complain if I had it (and could turn it off)
Useful for location tagging and, as someone mentioned in another thread, returning to a location for landscape photo year after year. But as far as using my camera as a compass? Hadn't occurred to me. And, I'd rather use the battery life for photos.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Chuck Westfall Talks Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 18, 2014, 09:21:26 AM »
The silence regarding the high iso performance was deafening. One remark in passing about Digic 6 noise reduction but I'm not sure what that means for ISO above 800.
Sadly, it sounds like moving the 7Dii to video is more important to Canon.
Very disappointed.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 16, 2014, 01:55:42 PM »

And just like Neuro, this was one of my most frequently used mode :D


Zone AF was your most frequently used mode? What types of photography are you doing? For my wildlife stuff, I use spot AF / AI servo with my 7D almost exclusively. I have trouble enough getting the focus I want with that and can't see how zone AF would work.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: How excited are you about the new 7D II?
« on: September 16, 2014, 10:43:26 AM »
Not at all, yet, even though I've been waiting for years.
I need to see some RAW files at 1600 ISO before I can decide. If its like the 70D, I'm very disappointed.

9
Software & Accessories / Re: How do you carry your tripod around?
« on: September 16, 2014, 10:39:50 AM »
Quote
How do you carry your tripod around?

with my right hand. simple. least inexpensive. most efficient.
   but sometimes when i am hiking or the like, then i attach them to any of my lowepro backpacks.

Actually, I have to agree with this ^
I have a Gitzo carbon fiber tripod and Wimberly head. If I'm planning to walk a long distance (say, more than a mile) without using it I'll put it in the pouch on my LowePro Pro Trekker 400. However, especially with the head, its a quite top-heavy so I'll just carry the tripod in my hand for shorter distances.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO Samples from the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 16, 2014, 09:28:54 AM »
Wow. This is 12800 ISO. This is 5D3 league of noise performance not APS-C.

*Impressive noise reduction, at any rate.*  If recommend waiting for RAW files before passing judgement on noise performance.

+1

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 07:46:43 PM »
I'm not so sure about that. A friend of mine with a 70D took some test shots and I don't think the 70D performance at 1600 is all that much better than my 7D. If so, Canon needs some magic in that "low light sensitivity" improvement to the 20.2 Mpixel sensor to make the 7Dii worthwhile, IMO. Without a usable 1600 (or higher) ISO, I'm thinking I wasted all this time waiting for the 7Dii and maybe the 5Diii is the answer.
I'm definitely NOT pre-ordering.

That's only the answer if you can either get closer, or use a bigger lens (500/4 versus 300/4, 300/2.8 versus 200/2.8, etc.).  If neither is the case, most likely the camera with the smaller pixels will win.

Exactly, only I'm looking at the 800/4 vs my 5004 and that's an EXPENSIVE proposition.
I was hoping that Canon would come up with something that matched the EXMOR process, which would give me a usable 1600.


12
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 07:35:49 PM »


If wildlife stills were the only goal I'd definitely rather have the 7D2 over the 5D3.


I'm not so sure about that. A friend of mine with a 70D took some test shots and I don't think the 70D performance at 1600 is all that much better than my 7D. If so, Canon needs some magic in that "low light sensitivity" improvement to the 20.2 Mpixel sensor to make the 7Dii worthwhile, IMO. Without a usable 1600 (or higher) ISO, I'm thinking I wasted all this time waiting for the 7Dii and maybe the 5Diii is the answer.
I'm definitely NOT pre-ordering.

13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 11, 2014, 06:46:09 PM »
I've gotten a real lesson in high ISO needs.  I just received the Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 lens and have been testing it on my 7D and 6D.  f/5 and 6.3 are really slow!  I can add 3 stops of light on the 6D (ISO 6400 vs, 800 on the 7D) which makes the lens a lot more usable.  That won't help on BIF, so I'll be stuck shooting in good light on the 7D (really would like to have a 5D!!

Yep, I totally agree with the need for higer ISOs when using long tele's. The problem with the going FF is I'd need to replace my 500mm with an 800mm to get the same image size and that's a huge cost difference.

14
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 11, 2014, 06:42:34 PM »
Q: Do you need a really high ISO?
A: Day to day? Hardly ever.
...

Depends on what you mean by "really high ISO". I've owned a 7D since they came out and my two complaints are 1) poor high ISO performance and 2) poor AF.
By high ISO, in this context, I mean 1600 or higher. The 7D is OK at 400, so-so at 800 and useless at 1600.

And day-to-day? I need it every day.
Out at dawn and/or shooting in the evening until the light is gone - those are the times the animals are moving.
Middle of a bright sunny day? - they're asleep in the shade.

15
Canon General / Re: Those D'oh moments!
« on: September 09, 2014, 05:42:26 PM »
I had my camera bag in the trunk of a car.  I had been in it to get something and didn't bother zipping it; imagine getting it out of the car and upright watching it split open...
...
Been there, done that. My 15-85 EFS got a trip to Canon.
An unintended plus for the UV filter - hammered the filter and broke the glass, the threads and glass on the lens were still OK.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17