August 28, 2014, 07:34:52 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 - ahsanford

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 57
106
We need to start calling you survey man!  I'm all for a tough version of the articulated LCD - I had one on the 60D and loved it for macro and overhead shots.  I hate touchscreens of all varieties, phones included (not that we have a choice), but will concede that the one on the EOS M works well and is faster than the Q button for those random settings.

I'm just trying to segment the market using the CR Forum dwellers (who are the only people who buy cameras of course).

See this posting from that 7D2 thread:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21693.msg415241#msg415241

It's possible we have enough of a split on opinion that Canon should consider something like a relatively thin (1 cm?) removable module for the LCD, so people could slap in one of 3-4 different LCD types based on their preference.  Think of it like a MF digital back with just an LCD.  Then people could have whatever they want.  We can tweak our focus screens in some cases, so why not get the LCD we want?

I think of body selection as a sensor size first, IQ/AF/DR vs. price second, features are third sort of approach (and everyone's order is different!), etc. but possibly folks desperately need the LCD to be a specific variety or they just won't buy that body. 

So I'm wondering if the market is sufficiently spread out enough to warrant (a) two standalone SKUs -- identical cameras with different LCDs or (b) a modular snap-it-together setup that users can tailor to their needs.

The respondents so far -- even from this forum, a Gear Acquisition Syndrome opium den of mad enthusisasts and pros -- shows a fairly even split in LCD preference.  It's far less polarized of a preference than I would have guessed.  But let's see, I'd like to get a good 50-100 responses.

- A


107
I started a survey on a 7D2 rumor thread, but thought I'd increase my hits by having a standalone posting.

Head here for my simple and fast survey re: displays on the back of DSLR bodies.  I'm trying to segment everyone's take on touch vs. no touch, rigid vs. tilty-swively, etc.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y
(I did this offsite to get more than one question asked with a multiple checkbox response, that's all)

Everyone can participate once, and then repeating the link should show the results.  It's interesting so far, but I'd like more responses if you have 90-120 seconds to give.  It's fast.

Thanks,
A


108
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 17, 2014, 03:50:02 AM »
In general:

This may be a bit above your price range, but this Gura Gear bag is designed expressly for mixed cargo:
http://www.guragear.com/uinta/

The F-stop Mountain series is similar in its configurability and chambering of different types of items:
http://shop.fstopgear.com/us/products/mountain.html

It seems a small distinction to have separate compartments, but it lets the nasty dirty campy stuff stay in a separate chamber. 

But in specifics, the type of camping you are doing defines your answer.  Car camping is not backcountry camping...

- A

109
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 17, 2014, 02:00:17 AM »

IS data re-run with Neuro's advice in mind.  A solid 2s run-up with the IS was used for each shot.

New IS data below.  Same non-IS data as before.

1) IS OFF at 16mm, I netted:

  • 3 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure

2) IS ON at 16mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure
  • 4 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/2s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1s exposure (two borderline ones were called 0.5 each)

3) IS OFF at 35mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/60s exposure
  • 4 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/30s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure

4) IS ON at 35mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/60s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/30s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 4.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)
  • 3.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/2s exposure
  • 0.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)

I'll be damned.  Neuro's trick shows 16mm IS is more like a 2 stop benefit, but the 35mm data only slightly improved (still around 3 stops).

Neuro, is this true with all IS lenses?  That might imply sports guys with long glass never net as sharp a shot with the first frame in a long burst that they might get with the rest...

- A

110
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 17, 2014, 01:41:32 AM »

Neuro.  Wow.  Had no idea.  My 5 shots were discrete shutter depressions, but they were in rapid succession.

Will check this out now. 

- A

111
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 16, 2014, 09:12:32 PM »
Just ran a crude IS test on my 5D3.

1) IS OFF at 16mm, I netted:

  • 3 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure

2) IS ON at 16mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure
  • 4 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure
  • 1.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/2s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)
  • 0 out of 5 sharp shots at 1s exposure

3) IS OFF at 35mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/60s exposure
  • 4 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/30s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure

4) IS ON at 35mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/60s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/30s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 4.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/2s exposure
  • 0.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)


Granted, n of 5 is weak statistical power for a variable like my grip/shooting technique and the method of selecting sharp shots is decidedly subjective, but the numbers above suggest I'm seeing a sliver over 1 stop IS at 16mm and about 3 stops IS at 35mm.

Perhaps infrared has found something here.  I don't want to go on a witch hunt, but can I ask others with this new lens to attempt a similar evaluation?  Your grip / breathing very well may be better than mine, but the approach should work -- use non-IS to find where your ability fails you, and then see how much further IS lets you slow the shutter.

- A

112
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 16, 2014, 06:43:53 PM »
Ahsanford,
Yeah..everything I have read is super positive about the IS.  I am an extremely experienced  photographer. 

...

Like I said, I am very experienced and truly know and understand ALL the variables...except the IS ..LOL!

Super helpful, thanks.  I'd agree your test should absolutely net sharp shots.  Something seems amiss.

Potential culprits:

  • How good is your grip / mechanics of holding the camera steady?  I presume this is not your problem, but it's worth ruling out:  pick a 'tough to handhold without IS' shutter speed (say 1/4s for a 16mm shot or a 1/15s for a 35mm shot) and take 10 shots with and without the IS on.  If the IS shots have a higher hit rate and the than the non-IS shots, that implies the IS is working and it may be your grip / holding technique.

  • Do you know the IS is on and working?  One simple test is with your ears.  Verify the IS switch is 'on' and switch the lens to MF (so you don't hear focusing adjustments) and then you press the shutter halfway with your ear next to the lens.  You'll initially hear a little noise at half-shutter-press, but after you let go, the IS motor/mechanism/whatever should be whirring in the background for an additional moment or two.  It's really, really faint with IS in the year 2014, but the sound is there if you listen for it.  If you don't hear that noise, I'd wonder if there was a glitch with the IS internals or possibly you have a faulty connection with the IS switch.  I defer to the nerdy folks and professionals on this forum, but if you can't hear the IS going when the switch for IS is 'on', something is off and I'd consider returning the lens.

  • It could be a poor AF, potentially.  Take AF out of the possible root causes and repeat your test:  switch to MF, go LiveView and 10x manually focus and repeat your 'tough to handhold without IS' test.  And yes, you need to handhold during LiveView for this -- it shouldn't be too hard with these wide FLs (I'm reaching / speculating at this point.)

- A

113
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 16, 2014, 05:45:52 PM »

Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y

I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts.  It's a classic example of an engineer channeling his inner marketing guy, but please, indulge me.  I am truly curious.

Sorry to take the question outside of CR, but I wanted follow up questions that the CR Forum poll doodad will not allow.

- A


My answers didn't appear in the results, a well that's marketing for you  ::)

Homer:  Bad helper monkey!  Bad Mojo!

Sorry.  This link works for me (even when I am logged out), but you may have to have filled out the survey to see it:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s_thankyou.aspx?sm=Ws7JK%252bcabzvEcxXxJcXkq45j8D7iDKRGz0nakT9q9A0%253d

If that doesn't work, I'll post a summary of the results in 24 hours.

- A

114
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 16, 2014, 04:38:06 PM »

Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y

I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts.  It's a classic example of an engineer channeling his inner marketing guy, but please, indulge me.  I am truly curious.

Sorry to take the question outside of CR, but I wanted follow up questions that the CR Forum poll doodad will not allow.

- A

115
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 16, 2014, 03:57:02 PM »
Regarding touch and tilty-swively screens...

(this is long, but perhaps has merit re: screen preferences)


I design things for a living -- medical devices, not cameras.  In my line of work, when we run into preference proliferation where you have intractable 'camps' of users that must be satisfied all the time.  We size it up pretty simply.

Scenario 1: The value proposition of the product we have in mind is good enough (on aggregate) to overcome the loss of that the one critical feature, i.e. the product is so slick, powerful, intuitive, effective that someone will willingly go against their core / gut beliefs to get their hands on the product.  In this case, we just offer that one great product and tell folks to take it or leave it.

Scenario 2: The product isn't so compelling that people will go against a 'must' desire of theirs, but that camp of users is large enough to warrant a sister product / alternate version / new SKU that has the feature they want.  i.e. Despite the time / cost / difficulty to satisfy this camp, it's worth it to do so, and we spin up the people to get it done.

Scenario 3:  Scenario 2 with a smaller group that doesn't warrant standalone products to scratch their itch.  Wiser companies drive around these battles and chase more lucrative targets.  Smaller / more desperate companies to swoop in and fill the needs of these under-served customers.

Scenario 4:  There are enough Scenario 3 groups that we entertain a modular solution to the problem.  One core product is designed with 2, 3, 4, etc. versions of a single critical subsystem.  Either you offer all of them to the market and the user assembles them, we kit them into different standalone SKUs, or we only offer one but design in this modularity as future proofing for a future Scenario 2 situation (i.e. if the market changes).  Once that group gets large enough, we're glad we have a flexible enough platform to bolt on what they need as a new SKU.

I'm just wondering what the market segmentation is on touchscreens and/or tilty-flippy screens.   I assume that the former is simple like/dislike preference, but the latter is a potential win for ergonomics at the cost of robustness (drops, hinge mechanism reliability, etc.) and weather sealing.  (I'll post a poll on this to mine where this group stands, just for fun.)

Question for this thread is:  would Canon ever go all 'mirrorless external viewfinder/grip/etc.' on this problem and make the LCD a kit-like selection of standard / touch / touch+swivel or (gasp) something users could interchange themselves?

- A

116
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 16, 2014, 03:13:28 PM »
I have to say, "never felt a need to take out the Zeiss 21" says a lot about the quality of the zoom. I can't imagine not wanting to take photos with the Zeiss if you have it available at the time. 16-35mm f/4L would have great application as a hking lens to replace a heavier primes kit for landscape. Dragging both the Zeiss and the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 (current landscape and astro-landscape kit, with 6D, tripod, filters, etc - 12 pounds?) up the side of a mountain made me aware that I need to do more conditioning.

Yeah....I have a Zeiss 21mm and the Sigma 35mm Art that I did personal, informal testing against my new Canon 16-35mm  IS.    So...I used to never use my 16-35mm f/2.8 II because the Zeiss and the Sigma blew it away....but damn...these are all very close in sharpness now....hmmmmmmm...the others do offer the faster f/stops though.

I have noticed some funky motion blur in some of my shots caused by the I S though, when I am shooting at reasonable  shutter speeds like 1/30... Anyone else seeing this issue?
I haven't personally, but I haven't shot longer than perhaps 1/8s exposures handheld with this lens yet.   Just curious: have you verified it's a legit lens event and not wind, moving subject, etc.?

I just assumed the IS worked like other Canon lenses.  Reviewers like Bryan Carnathan certainly raved about it:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

"Under ideal conditions (standing indoors on a solid floor) and shooting completely freehand, at 16mm, I obtained a decent sharp image percentage down to about .6 seconds for just over 3 stops of assistance. A very slow trail-off in keeper rate ensued and with an occasional sharp image at exposures as long as an unreal 2.5 seconds (as shared above and a new record for me). At 35mm, I had a decent sharp image percentage down to about .4 seconds (just under 4 stops) with a few sharp images remaining at exposures as long as 1 second."

- A

117
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 16, 2014, 11:19:53 AM »
Better add f8 autofocus. A 24mp 7D coupled with a new 100-400 f5.6 zoom and a 1.4III converter would be very tempting.

Good call.  That would be a great add.  I'm surprised in a thread about the 'future king of crop', the length-mad 7D user base didn't flag this need sooner. 

I'm also surprised no one offered their dream of creating a 4000mm setup with T/Cs, duct tape and love.   :P

- A

118
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 16, 2014, 11:15:41 AM »
4. Video features. Hate it or love it video is here to stay on DSLRs. Canon has to protect their cinema line now so we can't expect 4k raw obviously on the 7D ii. However, I have a belief Canon will decide not to cripple the video on the 7D II as they have on the 70D and other cameras. The C300 and C500 are due for updates so I suspect those cameras will introduce much higher specs that will significantly widen the gap between cinema line and DSLR, which allows Canon to give their DSLRs better video functionality.

I think Canon has a delicate line to walk here.  I think they will push more 'pro' / top end video options down the line to non-Cinema bodies because they have to to some extent -- competitors without the high-end Cinema rigs in their portfolio will simply take that business from Canon if they don't.  Consider:

https://www.slrlounge.com/gh4-sales-roof-panasonic-doubles-production/

So I won't prognosticate the specifics (I keep seeing thousands of wrinkles on formats / speeds / clean output, etc.), but Canon can't leave high-end video out of their non-high-end bodies for too long.

- A

Disclaimer on this opinion:  I don't shoot video unless I lost a bet or owe someone a really big favor. 

119
Lenses / Re: 16-35 F/4L IS -- Canon registration, ACR profiles, etc.
« on: July 15, 2014, 12:27:14 PM »

That did it, thanks.  I was drilling down under professional imaging products instead of EOS systems.

Done.  I am so fired up to have 15% off full list price accessories in the Canon store.   :P

- A

120
Lenses / Re: 16-35 F/4L IS -- Canon registration, ACR profiles, etc.
« on: July 15, 2014, 11:50:58 AM »
Update - the 16-35 f/4 IS can now be registered on Canon USA's site.  CPS still doesn't have it, though.

I'm striking out on my end.  I can't link you the URL as it will be for my account (you have to login to open up product registration).  But here's a screen shot.  No new lenses yet.

Can you link where you found it?

- A

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 57