October 22, 2014, 03:22:03 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 [2] 3 4 ... 62
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 12:56:11 PM »
If someone buys the L lens for the M, the cost of adapter is a small change. Why not?? On the other hand, the M mount lenses has already cover from 11mm to 200mm. That is more than enough for most people. One of the idea od M is to keep it small. Put a big L lens on it goes the opposite way. I have a 17-40 L, I have never consider mounting it on the M.

That's the problem.  The purpose of mirrorless is to take stellar pictures in a much thinner body, hopefully with smaller lenses as well (but the sensor size does have something to say about that). 

But Canon knew that the first people in line to buy an EOS-M would be mirrorless devotees -- it would be existing Canon guys with lots of glass who want a very small 2nd or 3rd body.  That (plus the lack of native EF-M lenses) is why the adapter was available on day one.

So -- at least with Canon -- you have two camps of EOS-M owners.  They don't see eye to eye too often re: what should be mounted on it.

- A


17
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 02, 2014, 12:50:28 PM »
    2) Now this battery of questions is interpreting this rumor to mean the new Rebels will get an EVF which replaces the traditional mirror setup.  In this case, it would be EVF only / mirrorless.  Questions if this is the direction:

    • Why?  They'd either keep their EF-S mount to sensor distance (to protect their stable of EF-S glass) and have a far thicker body than any mirrorless competitor or they'd adopt something smaller (like EF-M) that would require a lot of new lenses to be developed.

    There is no absolute law that states mirrorless cameras must be small and have a short flange to focal plane distance. It is just something that somebody started to do and now everyone else does it. So maybe Canon has cottoned that these super-small SLR-like cameras - e.g. E-M5 & E-M10 - are just plain too small and that consumers will possibly want something a tad larger ... i.e. maybe their ergonomics experts have determined that their current line-up of DSLR cameras are just the right size?

    • Why convert Rebel's identity -- i.e. the most used SLR -- to mirrorless?  Fantastic brand recognition, sure, but why redefine it so?

    Why not? The "Rebel" line started as a film SLR camera, then became a DSLR camera. So why not progress it to a mirrorless camera? Especially since the target audience for the "Rebel" line are more prone to adopt "new" technology than the more "settled" bunch for the top lines.[/list]

    On your first bit, sure, but let's say they keep the EF-S mount setup and switch to an EVF.  That EVF will gobble up battery and have a very small lag, which are downgrades from an OVF.  I'd need to know why they'd shoe-horn in an (almost) must for mirrorless in a body that has room for a mirror.  What is the upside to doing that?  Cost?  More compositional feedback a la LiveView (for the entry level?!).  I must be missing something here.

    On your second bit, you make a fair point -- Rebel can evolve.  I just don't think Rebel will evolve overnight.  If this rumor is true -- and that's a big if -- one might imagine there would not be a hard exodus from mirrors.  So you'd have Rebel SLRs alongside Rebel mirrorless -- they'd have to call them something very clearly different (like Rebel Mirrorless), and that seems a bit of a fragmentation of the brand rather than an evolution.  I'm not opposed to it so much as curious why they would do this here instead of grow the EOS-M brand with an EVF, smaller native lenses, etc.

    - A

    18
    EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
    « on: October 02, 2014, 12:38:38 PM »
    If Canon retired the EF-S mount, wouldn't that harm the upgrade path to EF lenses (particularly L series)? Would someone using an entry level body with EF-M mount really be as likely to buy an L lens if they have to buy an adapter, too?

    I just don't see Canon dumping EF-S any time soon...

    1)  Agree with EF-S sticking around for a long time.  There are currently (according to TDP) 14 first-party EF-S lenses available today to only (off the top of my head) 4 first-party EF-M lenses.  So obsoleting the EF-S mount would put a large burden on EF-M glass development.  I don't think they would do that in a leadership position in crop cameras unless crop sales were being devoured by mirrorless sales -- many folks have said that this is happening, but it has been in stops and starts.  Crop camera sales aren't eroding from mirrorless like compacts are from cell phone camera use, so abandoning a mount that Canon can build lenses for cheaply in their sleep seems very premature.

    2) Mirrorless enthusiasts absolutely buy adapters to try all kinds of nutty lenses on their rigs -- full frame glass, ancient old lenses with manual focus, other companies' lenses, etc.  But soccer moms and family archivist dads who buy a camera that happens to be mirrorless will want native glass for that mount.  So today, they can go sort-of-small with a crop camera that retains the ability to use EF glass natively, or you can crazy small with mirrorless at the cost of native lens connectivity without an adapter.

    In many cases, going small and using native mirrorless lenses means waiting for the nicer FF lens you really want to be made for your mount.  This is the mirrorless quandary, and it should be no surprise that companies that lack as comprehensive lens offerings as Canon/Nikon (i.e. everyone) would rather throw the house at native mirrorless lens development rather than try to build an on-ramp for people to use larger existing lenses.  As much as Canon owners with a dozen lenses love the value of an adapter for EOS-M (making it an easy 2nd/3rd body addition to our gear), we are very much in the minority.  A mirrorless devotee who only uses one body wants great native glass for it, plain and simple.

    - A


    19
    EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
    « on: October 02, 2014, 11:56:44 AM »
    • Why isn't Canon's second-ever EVF (remember the GI X Mark II has one) ...

    So do the S1IS, S2IS, S3IS, S5IS, SX1, SX10, SX20, SX40, SX50, SX60, Pro 90 and Pro 1.

    Well, that's embarrassing.    :D

    - A

    20
    EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
    « on: October 02, 2014, 11:30:22 AM »

    EVF/OVF knowledge is lacking on my end.  Someone please help me understand a few things / dispel a few misconceptions on my part:

    (I'll cluster questions together to help you see where I am stuck / lack the knowledge to answer things.  I don't think you need to answer each question so much as have one of them give you an a-ha! moment which flags what I fundamentally don't get.)

    1) If this rumor is true and this means it will be an EVF camera with the mirror/SLR setup remaining intact:
     
    • Why go EVF on an SLR line?  Why have an EVF if there is a mirror in the way?
    • Presuming Canon isn't digging into partially transparent mirrors, doesn't the mirror need to go up for the sensor (and therefore the EVF) to see anything?
    • Are they just trying to get a LiveView working through the viewfinder?  If that's the case, why have a mirror at all?
    • Hybrid OVF / EVF function requires an optical viewfinder pathway that isn't in line with the sensor, doesn't it?  Hybrid is only possible on something rangefinder-y like Fuji's bodies, right?
     

    2) Now this battery of questions is interpreting this rumor to mean the new Rebels will get an EVF which replaces the traditional mirror setup.  In this case, it would be EVF only / mirrorless.  Questions if this is the direction:

    • Why?  They'd either keep their EF-S mount to sensor distance (to protect their stable of EF-S glass) and have a far thicker body than any mirrorless competitor or they'd adopt something smaller (like EF-M) that would require a lot of new lenses to be developed.
    • Why convert Rebel's identity -- i.e. the most used SLR -- to mirrorless?  Fantastic brand recognition, sure, but why redefine it so?
    • Why isn't Canon's second-ever EVF (remember the GI X Mark II has one) being made for EOS-M first, where it is so desperately needed?

    Finally, if you buy this rumor, surely it will be the first scenario and not the second, right?

    - A

    21
    Lenses / Re: Headed to Hawaii -- let's talk gear / locations
    « on: September 29, 2014, 01:37:07 PM »

    All -- I thought I'd resuscitate this thread as I just got a question on how the trip went.

    In short, it was a blast.

    Pics attached.  Oahu is gorgeous.  Thanks for all the help in nailing down what to bring and where to go!

    - A

    22
    EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
    « on: September 14, 2014, 01:15:16 PM »
    The one spec that no one seems to be mentioning much is the dual Digic 6 processors. Now I'm no technical guru so maybe extra processing power doesn't make much of a difference to anything but if the 7D Mk2 is such a small step forward as some are suggesting why does it need/have more processing power than any other camera in the Canon range (with the possible exception of the 1DX with it's 3rd processor)?

    Ten frames a second means you need to hustle with all that data.  The new AF system will need additional CPU horsepower as well, but the 5D3 AF system seems to be of similar power and that camera only has one DIGIC chip.  And keep in mind that no 5D model (I, II or III) has ever had two chips, yet the original 7D had two chips.  So my money is on framerate. 

    The 1DX is a slightly different animal in that the third chip (I thought) was dedicated to make the 1D-series level metering functions work -- like spot metering at any AF point, which is a feature I sadly don't have on my 5D3.   :(

    - A

    23
    EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
    « on: September 12, 2014, 08:10:58 PM »
    The lack of DR for this one isn't killer...

    Which Canon cameras have been 'killed' by a lack of DR??

    Didn't you hear, Neuro?  Every Canon landscape photographer on the planet -- utterly moved by the kind, impartial souls at DXO -- sold their gear to buy a D800, a 14-24 F/2.8, and a comfortable pair of shoes to walk the earth and capture things at ISO 100.   :P

    - A


    24
    EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
    « on: September 12, 2014, 03:47:43 PM »
    Is it? We don't know what marketing Canon will attach to the 7d2, all-around premium crop or specialized machine gun.

    First, to the comment above: I think the needle is leaning ever-so-slightly towards the specialized machine gun, but it's not slammed all the way over.  If it had an integral grip, solid top without seams for a flash, published specs of a massive buffer, F/8 AF points scattered all over the viewfinder for the reach-obsessed folks on teleconverters, etc., then I'd say the the needle would be all the way over and they'd ask for $2,500 for it.  But the specs shown are probably going to be marketed similar to a 1D4 with a different product: an action camera with great reach.

    But the 6D and 7D2 user bases are completely different animals to me.  Both may be priced about the same, but that doesn't mean they'll attract the same users:

    • 7D2 folks are one of two groups to me.  The first group -- the first-in-line early pre-orderers on day one -- will largely be sports/wildlife/birding folks who either can't afford superteles, or pros who can afford them but would rather not have to lug the biggest ones in the field all the time.  The second group are the 'stuck in crop for a host of reasons' shooters -- the 7D2 will be the top-of-the-line call as the big upgrade for Rebel or XXD owners looking for a new body, or for folks fully bought in to EF-S glass and stubbornly refuse to sell off those lenses to move to FF.

    • 6D folks run a much wider gamut of users -- pros just getting started, art/photgraphy students who prefer more potential for IQ without the bells and whistles, concert photogs for that -3 EV AF point, old manual settings/film shooters who are just now making the move to digital and hiss like reptiles when their brain first tries to process crop factors, wealthy folks buying their first SLR but wanting to have a nicer camera than the masses, etc.  It's a real mixed bag here.

    I don't think one camp is better or worse than the other, it's just different strokes for different folks. 

    I have, on many occasions in this forum, predicted the 7D2 could cost more than the 6D because for 'reach'-obsessed/necessitated realms of photography, the 7D2 isn't an option for them -- it is the next camera they must buy, and that's that.  Canon can take whatever they want from these folks.

    - A



    25

    I can't help but think some megapretentious industrial design fan of an executive at Sigma has protected X% of Sigma's money on "Project: The Future", and he/she just knows that this project, by the 35th or 36th version, will change photography forever.

    I design things for a living, so I LOVE out of the box ideas.  So please understand that I am -- at the same time -- mocking the madness and tipping my cap for Sigma's bravery with fielding these cameras.

    - A
    That sounds like a pretty cool job - do you mind if I what kind of things you design?  Also, Sigma's courage sometimes produces pretty cool things like their f/1.8 zoom!

    As a lens company, I love what they do:  high quality, disruptive tech that shakes the bigger players at times.

    As a camera company...  Yikes.

    I design medical implants and instruments, so its a different animal completely.  But I do know a few things about grip, something both photography and instruments have in common.  But I do not ride a Segway to work or live in a Bizzaro orthogonal world like the Sigma dudes do.

    - A

    26
    EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
    « on: September 12, 2014, 02:15:18 PM »

    [Marsu said lots of good stuff.]


    That's why a 'flagship-level crop body' is such an odd, odd duck.  It's meant to be your last crop body before you make the plunge to FF, but the cost of the big white superteles gives the 7D a small slice of pros who say "Hell, I'll pay $3k, $4k for this if it saves me from having to get a 600mm L lens."

    And that's why Canon should offer this for $5000 for the first three months and then drop it down to the $1800-ish we're expecting.  Some folks have to buy this based on the glass they own and the reach they must have.  Canon really owns them.

    - A

    27

    I can't help but think some megapretentious industrial design fan of an executive at Sigma has protected X% of Sigma's money on "Project: The Future", and he/she just knows that this project, by the 35th or 36th version, will change photography forever.

    I design things for a living, so I LOVE out of the box ideas.  So please understand that I am -- at the same time -- mocking the madness and tipping my cap for Sigma's bravery with fielding these cameras.

    - A

    28

    Only Sigma has the stones to find a way to turn a fixed lens point and shoot into a medium format ergonomic footprint...

    http://photorumors.com/2014/09/12/new-sigma-dp1-quattro-camera-three-lenses-and-two-teleconverters/

    Quattros have always been an odd, odd duck.  They have amazing detail in the sensor, yet such poor low light performance that a review I saw of this little thing was largely done on a tripod (!).  The science fiction ergonomics, the fixed lens, all of it -- is wacky and "why?"-inducing. 

    But that viewfinder, good gravy that viewfinder...  [Does the bon appetit hand to mouth kiss of perfection.]

    Stick with lenses, guys.  Stick with lenses. 

    - A

    29
    2 years behind? who behind who?

    This seems much more a 5D3 variant to me, 2 years after the 5D3 is released on the market, then only this spec? The Nikon reactions are not that positive. This is not a worthy successor of the marvelous D700. Think about water sealant, fps, 1/4000 max shutterspeed, missing AF-On, max 1/200 x-sync.

    As mentioned by the OP, a lot of this camera is a mix of pro but also of entry level. Thought this Nikon would really push Canon to look at further development. However, it only seems a spec that's close to the 5D3. Never the less a nice specification, but not a D700 version 2.

    Features-wise, I understand your point, but I price would imply pros will value this camera less.  5D3 is a D8-something competitor (regardless of the MP count).    The 5D3 is a $3399 camera vs. the D750 at $2300. 

    So I'm assuming the build quality, pop-up flash, etc. imply the D750 is for enthusiasts more than pros.  It may not be built for dyed-in-the-wool pros with tougher needs and higher expectations.

    - A

    30
    EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
    « on: September 12, 2014, 01:35:28 PM »
    I think the fact not one person has ticked the "I'm over-the-moon with the spec list.  This is beyond my expectations."

    Speaks volumes

    But how and why?  Are they looking for too much?  Are they being pragmatic and waiting for testing?  Have their expectations been mostly met?

    Partly it's high expectations, but partly it's the reality that Canon cannot hit every variable out of the park.  'Over the moon' would imply that the camera -- top to bottom -- checks off all of your boxes. 

    Zooming in on this a bit, of maybe 10-12 things that frame up the kind of camera we want, each of us really gives a damn / prioritizes about (I'd guess) 3-5 of those.  I'm going to go out on a very sturdy limb and state that if there is one thing that is keeping the 16% of us currently pegged as 'Excited' from saying 'Over the moon' would be the sensor.  I'm not necessarily a high MP fan, and I'm not saying that it's a 70D sensor in there, but 20.2 MP hints that it may not be a breakthrough new piece of tech. 

    (That is wild speculation of course, but I'm guessing that many more readers of this post bobbed their head at the notion I've presented rather than those who scorn the lack of logic and facts behind it.  Not my best moment, I admit.  Honest, I'm not a troll, 20 year old fanboy or rabble rouser.  I'm just sayin.)

    As everyone cares about the sensor as a very high (if not highest) priority, hearing/inferring/believing it will be good but not great will limit how fired up people are for this.

    A not very brave hypothesis:  if the confirmed spec list included, say, a 24-28 MP sensor or even the current 20.2 with a clear addendum of "two to three stops better low light performance than the 7D", the percentage of over-the-mooners would skyrocket.  Because everything else on this spec list is pretty solid, save for a meager 2.9% of us who are pining for 4K, Wifi, tilty-screen, touch-screen, etc. 

    - A

    Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 62