September 16, 2014, 11:39:33 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 - dstppy

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 60
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 09, 2012, 07:52:18 PM »
I agree; there's so many GOOD cameras out there that, as long as you're trying, you can take great pictures.

Yes, but good pictures had been captured since the beginning of photography.
Yet basic novices have not.  Thanks for taking it out of context :)

"Yes, but" implies that you disagree with my post . . . so you think a new camera will make new, better pictures emerge, no?

Disclaimer: English is my first language.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 09, 2012, 11:36:18 AM »
The POS 60D stopped me from buying addional Canon cameras/lenses :(  I'm impressed with the ergonomics of my Nikon body, and the IQ of Nikon lenses :)

I'm interested in seeing how the Canon 6D and Nikon D600 compare. I have a feeling that I'll be adding a D600 and the 135mm f/2.0D DC to my inventory.

Mine burst into flames after it came out of the box.   :o

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D in October? [CR1]
« on: August 09, 2012, 08:35:18 AM »
No DSLR for Photokina? It’s possible. The last time I was there, Canon was only showing off the 60D. A solid camera, but hardly a show stopper.
Canon has five cameras for Photokina: 1D X, 1D C, 5D III, 650D and the EOS M. Should be enough as show stopper.

I agree; there's so many GOOD cameras out there that, as long as you're trying, you can take great pictures.

My only personal complaint is that all of their "current" DSLRs should have been 'refreshed' with minor software tweaks and newer DigicV processors.

Look at apple: they replaced the iPhone4 with the 4s in about 15 months, addressing almost every complaint (that they intended to) and people were freaking out that it wasn't a totally new device.  People are expecting way too much of companies that are really delivering in a meaningful way.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II [CR2]
« on: August 08, 2012, 02:35:13 PM »
We've gotten this far without this? Fine, I'll do it if no one else is gonna:

What? No IS? How could they release it without IS?  If they do that, I'm moving to Nikon.


Pricewatch Deals / Re: 5D Mark III Bundle Deal at Adorama
« on: August 08, 2012, 09:01:34 AM »
I can't take the pressure!!!!

The wife is on vacation . . . technically that means I only have ONE camera and a backup is perfectly reasonable, no?   :o

I wonder how that'll fly when she gets back with my other body :D

Canon General / Re: Taking DSLRs into olympic venues
« on: August 07, 2012, 09:24:59 AM »
I don't know what the tickets say, but my sister took her 550D and 70-300 nonL to the canoe/kayaking (the flat one, not the white-water) yesterday without a problem. But then, i'd say you're more likely to get stopped with a 70-200L than the 70-300 non-L...

200mm 2.8 ftw :D

Canon General / Re: Announcements in August [CR1]
« on: August 03, 2012, 08:42:26 AM »
Nobody should be beating themselves up over a 16-35mm L purchase; dollars to donuts it's going to be like the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM and be both overly expensive and drive the price of the older model up briefly after announcement.

Is the "small camera with an f/1.9 lens." the S100 replacement?

I hope not, I just bought one :D 

Small is relative as well.  A g12 is small by some people's standards.

What I want to know is, why no new calculators Canon?  ;D

Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 135 f/1.8L IS
« on: August 02, 2012, 09:12:07 AM »
It is 100% fake.

The photoshopper never focused on the current font printed on the front ring of the lens. It is Frutiger series, not Arial-like.

Font-Nerds.  There's a geek-type for everyone.

I love the internet.   ;D

This was my morning chuckle. Thanks.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Coverage of the Canon EOS M
« on: July 23, 2012, 02:55:40 PM »
So, how long before you get bored with your newest toy and feel the need for one of these in the bag neuro?

Not long at all, in a geologic time frame.  At least for now, I still don't get this whole mirrorless thing, any more than the G1 X.  Neither the G1 X nor the EOS M are 'pocketable' for me (I don't think fitting into a cargo pocket in my oversized winter coat counts).  If it can't fit in a regular pocket, I might as well bring my 1D X...

So, with global warming speeding all of that stuff up, it's any day now then :D

Wow, the G-series is bigger than I originally thought; the eos-m size would be great for a G . . . but with lens I guess people would be wondering about what is in your pocket.

EOS Bodies / Re: More Coverage of the Canon EOS M
« on: July 23, 2012, 01:13:46 PM »
...I think you'd agree that submersible $1K APS-C is such an extreme niche market that it doesn't even vaguely register on Canon's marketing's consciousness....

Absolutely.  But as I pointed out elsewhere, the G1 X is outselling the Nikon 1 offerings on Amazon, which I expect points to a solid market for a high-end fixed-lens camera, and that rings a loud bell in Canon's marketing's consciousness...

So, how long before you get bored with your newest toy and feel the need for one of these in the bag neuro? :D

EOS Bodies / Re: More Coverage of the Canon EOS M
« on: July 23, 2012, 11:55:52 AM »
Yup. It's a Rebel in a PowerShot body, and it won't be all that much longer before all the Rebels have been merged into the EOS-M line, as well as the G-series PowerShots.

Look at all the specs, and the only meaningful thing any of the Rebels have that this doesn't is the viewfinder. And the only Rebel buyers who actually prefer the viewfinder are starving students and penny pinchers. Anybody who actually uses a viewfinder knows that the Rebel viewfinders are dollhouse coke bottles and would only use a Rebel if there wasn't any other option.

Well, I suppose there's another thing you can get in some Rebels that this first EOS-M doesn't have: an articulating screen. But that'll come soon, I guarantee you....



An articulating screen on a compact? I suspect, mirrorless or not, that will have to be as big as a G-series . . . I doubt canon will ever get rid of all of the current-sized rebels; they'd be turning away at least some people that either want a camera that's easier to hold or people that want the look/feel of a 'pro' camera.

Well played, though, Canon.  If the IQ truly ends up as good as a T3i/T4i, then your price point is right.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Preorder the Canon EOS M
« on: July 23, 2012, 09:06:54 AM »
Am I the only one thinking that when Beach/Adorama/B&H start the 'super packages' it's going to be really nice?

The price really isn't that bad considering it's size.

Portrait / Re: My BEAUTIFUL GF (feedback please)
« on: July 18, 2012, 08:56:37 AM »
Bah; the brokeh here is fine -- the f1.4 is a much better lens, but at $100 what do you want?  I love 50mm on a crop body, it feels "right".

As alex mentioned, shoot raw and use something that has a lens profile to remove distortion and chromatic aberration.

Are the colors intentional?  Seems like the white balance is off on at least two . . . unless you did that on purpose to get a particular effect.

Lenses / Re: New Canon 50mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: July 17, 2012, 11:46:20 AM »
I came in at the 15-85 days, so I don't know if the 'the lens would be better at $" thing started then, or is just something from pricing experts.

Am I the only person that won't pay retail? Bundle? Used? Think about it, at nearly $900, we're talking improved (just sub-L) build quality, most likely a faster USM ( think the 85mm f1.8) and probably improved IQ.

IS, well, Yeah, that'd be nice, but if it's the same system from the 70-300mm non-L, I think we're all better off without it. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]
« on: July 13, 2012, 06:57:49 AM »

See, that's where I  don't get it; my wife's 4s is the *only* half way 'keepable' phone camera but it is nothing compared to any of canon's entry-level IS cameras.

Most people don't care about quality!!! All they ever do with their photos is post them on FaceSpace. They don't even make 4x6 prints. For these Non-Photo-Enthusiasts a camera phone makes more sense than a Real Camera, 'cause they can post to Social Sites directly from their Smart Phone (no computer needed).

The SX40IS type cameras are super light and get great IQ for the price ...

But you can't make a phone call on them or post to directly to SpaceFace ;)

We're pretty sure this camera's price isn't going to be cheap and nothing is going to be revolutionary on it . . .

I'm not looking for a cheap price! I'm looking for a small/light camera and I'm willing to pay a reasonable amount of money to get it. The M4/3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 sells for $999.00 and there is a waiting list to get them, so it's not just me wanting this type of small/light camera.

Okay, this seems like the first lucid response :)  So you're expecting the mirror less to surpass even the G-series, while still being compact (which isn't going to be necessarily cheap).  That makes sense.

Re: SmartPhones
I think once people have kids, their perceptions about image quality change though . . . and $100 P&S take fabulous photos these days. 

Don't get me wrong, I've had 2 iPhones, and plan to replace the one I have, but I'm ready to go back to a dedicated phone and just have a PDA (as soon as I can get one with wifi) and with privacy concerns (some places don't like cameras on their visitors) I think we'll see some non-camera choices soon.

Eventually, (some) people will realize that 1 camera, phone and 'computer' means when your phone breaks, your camera does too . . . but that's another topic entirely :)

Thanks for the explanation about your thoughts on the mirror less; makes more sense (for some people).

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 60