July 22, 2014, 10:05:46 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 - CanNotYet

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
31
##### EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 10, 2013, 03:24:16 AM »
Jrista, back off a sec. I got this one.

Let us try some elemental semantic logic instead. (this was long ago, so bear with me if I make technical mistakes)

Gear is a convenience. Ok, I accept this as true. in semantic logic this would be "X is Y", or "X=Y", where X is "Gear" and Y is "a Convenience".

But then I postulate my own assumption: "A Convenience is something that matters". This I say, as if you have the possibility to get the exact same shot (regardless of gear/skill/posistion etc.), it matters if you can do it easy, or if you can do it with great difficulty. There might be reasons to each, but it matters.

In semantic logic, this would be "Y=Z", where Y is still "a Convenience", and Z is "something that matters".

If these two are true, then you can replace Y in "Y=Z" with X, as "X=Y", and "X=Z".

Ergo, Gear is something that matters.

Back off-topic, or rather to other parts of off-topic:

On Canada calling Football Soccer and America being North and Central America too: I knew there was a reason it is called "American football" everywhere else, and not "USA football".

On the British coming up with this: Yeah, the British are notorious for meddling in sports, they have written the rules for sports they do not even practice, like "bandy", which is really weird. (I guess they DID practice it earlier?)

And on the testosterone sports: I have played Soccer/Football, Rugby, American Football, and Ice hockey regularly when I grew up. Should I be ashamed now?

32
##### EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 08, 2013, 06:26:23 PM »
The sport world is bigger than the U.S. and american football, its called soccer
Ahem. Nowhere else than in the U.S. it is called soccer. The name of the game is "football". Pretty logical, as you play it with your feet...

33
##### Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: May 08, 2013, 02:15:12 AM »
Ankorwatt: I might be missing something here, but I get the impression that your comparison pictures are made with a 35L on a Canon body, and the Sigma on a Nikon body. Is that correct?

If that is the case, then I think your comparison lacks something, color rendition etc might be affected by other things than the lens...

That said, I would get the Sigma if I would choose between them. I would do that even if it was 90% as good as the Canon, as I am one of the price sensitive ones...

But now if it is 105% of what the 35L is (better sharpness, worse AF etc.), then the choice gets even easier.

I also rarely take pictures at 35mm that requires blistering fast AF, I am usually at 70 at above when that occurs. (although I see the point with kids at home)

34
##### Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 07, 2013, 04:21:06 AM »
Joking aside, for me it's the 135L (1.8 or 2, either one, but with IS and even better optics) or the 14-24 2.8 that has little distortion and is very sharp.

Just curious, what's wrong with the current 135L?

Nothing... but modern coatings and possibly f/1.8 would be even better.  I'd like IS in concept, but I don't think I'd like the price tag.  The current one is a bargain at ~\$1000; an updated one would lose some of it's charm if it's was twice that.
+1 on this

35
##### EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 06, 2013, 09:50:47 AM »
Somewhere in my mind I have the feeling Canon might not be doing the 0.18 micron process at all, but instead going directly to the next one (0.12, 0.09 or 0.065 maybe?), and that is why they have such problems in getting it to roll.

It makes sense doing something like that when you have your own factories and do not want to upgrade them too often. Going to 0.18, just to do it all over again in 2 years? I don't think so. But, leapfrogging the competition and take them by surprise, and in the same time prolonging the active time of the process platform? Yes, I think I'll vote for that.

36
##### Lenses / Re: Which is the best?
« on: May 05, 2013, 05:51:22 PM »
Another way to go is to get the 400/2.8 and some TCs. 800/5.6 is then available to you for much less money.

37
##### Lenses / Re: How about a new 28-135mm?
« on: April 30, 2013, 06:27:47 AM »
Yes, I want this. Consumer (not budget or L) level lens 24-135 f/2.8-4 IS USM retailing for 699\$. Make it so.

38
##### Street & City / Re: Stockholm, Sweden
« on: April 30, 2013, 05:02:00 AM »
You're coming in June? Then you should not miss the late evening photo opportunities. In Stockholm, it does not get truly dark until 23.30 in June, so use the evenings! If you get off at 17.00 hours, you'll have at least 5 hours of good light left.

If you are into architecture, Stockholm is a virtual goldmine, with buildings ranging from 1100 to modern times. Old town is ofc great for the older buildings (another place is Östermalm/Vasastan), but everywhere else it is a mix between old and new.

Vantage points include Fjällgatan (which also have a nice cafe open until 23.00) on Södermalm, Västerbron (between Hornstull and Kungsholmen) and both Södermälarstrand and Norrmälarstrand (close to the water).

Everywhere you go in Stockholm, the water is not far away, so take it into account. A good way to go around is the sightseeing boats (so you can get pics from the sea).

Stockholm is also FULL of churches, so don't miss them! They might be hidden away, like on Södermalm, or very visible, like Riddarholmskyrkan. They are also almost always open.

The Royal Castle, with the changing of the guards is a given photo op, and if you want some history, you can go into the Livrustkammaren Museum to see some cool medieval clothes and armory (beware, it is dark in there).

You can also easily get to the Riksdag (house of Parliament/Congress/Government) which sits right next to the Castle, on it's own little island.

If you arrive around the 7-10/6, you might also catch the "finish school" carnival, as it is tradition for 18-year-olds to gather on the back of a lorry/truck and honk,  play loud music and get drunk for the afternoon. This is typical for the second week of June.

Well, that is some suggestions. I would also recommend Djurgården, with the living museum Skansen, and the Vasa museum.

So, bring a UWA+tripod and/or some fast glass for indoor shooting in churches/museums and you are set. Welcome to Stockholm!

39
##### EOS Bodies / Re: Back to the Future Parts 1/2/3 Canon Strategy
« on: April 29, 2013, 02:30:24 AM »
I rather like this idea of the thread. Let's just hope no one comes along and hijacks it with pointless DR/Sonikon/MFT/Fuji trolling

To totally go against my first point, I SERIOUSLY doubt that Canon is ignorant and/or does not care what the competition does. In fact I think they constantly are on the watch for what takes off in the markets. Depending on the results, they might have a hard time responding (EOS-M anyone?), but they will certainly try.

Another route I think they might take, as they are one of the few companies that manufacture imaging chips, is to cut down on models like A and Ixus, and instead sell the chips directly to Samsung and Apple to put in the phones. A phone marketed with a camera "made by Canon" in it, could sell very well.

My 0.02\$

40
##### EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]
« on: April 17, 2013, 03:41:26 AM »
Regarding differentiation. I am not sure Canon can keep the 70D at 9-points, all cross-type (as 650D/700D). (Well of course they CAN, they are Canon...)

But, although it is imbued with my wishful thinking, I really think it is time for Canon to get some ROI on the 19-pt system in 7D. Putting into 70D would seem like a no-brainer to me, ESPECIALLY if they go the cream-of-the-crop route with 7D2. That route more or less demands an even better AF system than the 7D has today. (Otherwise it would not be the upgrade people crave).

I really do not think 7D2 will keep the same AF-system as the current 7D. And if it does not, getting more ROI from that particular tech would involve putting the system into another body. 70D looks like a plausible candidate.

Besides, it gives the 70D a relation to 7D as the 6D has to 5D2, a modern version with tweaks. Not to mention it would sell like hotcakes.

41
##### EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:12:58 AM »
Add the 19 pt AF system from the 7D to this and it would fly off the shelves. (I would like digic 6, better hi-ISO, and wide-tele AFMA also). If these things come through, the 70D will be many peoples choice instead of the 7D.

42
##### EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 07:39:44 AM »
This does sound as the 70D to me... then I would be happy.

43
##### EOS Bodies / Re: Will you be disappointed if the 70d gets the same 18mp sensor?
« on: March 25, 2013, 02:07:26 PM »
that fact that I can now buy a computer that's twice as fast and half as expensive as it was in 2009 tells me everything I need to know about how much Canon has been milking their APS-C chip. sure they've added on-chip autofocus now, but a badly implemented feature does not count as improvement.

I'm really happy to see Canon diving into a whole bunch of new areas with cameras like the EOS M and the SL1, but let's get something straight: the body development team are not (hopefully not) the same guys that are the sensor development team. so there is no justification for the near-zero evolution of Canon's APS-C sensor line.

is there anything inherently wrong with the 18 MP APS-C sensor? no. we were pretty happy when the 7D got released with it, and while it never came close to matching the 5DII's sensor, I don't think anyone really expected it to. the sensor was great then, and is just as good now as it was then. the issue to me isn't really the sensor itself, it's what it signifies from Canon. it's Canon telling us that they don't feel that they need to innovate. it's Canon telling us they think we're dumb enough to think that sticking a t5i sticker on a t4i means it's "new". it's Canon lying to us that we shouldn't judge the chip's autofocus speed on the EOS M because it's pre-production, and it'll get much faster by the time of the actual release.

I don't think the folks at Canon are stupid, but I do feel they take the liberty of thinking that their consumer base is a little dim. the t5i is definitely toeing the line of "let's see how sheep-like our customer base is" and I hope the 70D and 7DII have not been treated the same way.
I agree fully with this. Well put, my friend!

44
##### EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 100D Detailed Specs Appear
« on: March 23, 2013, 04:41:20 AM »
Sorry if this sounds smug or anything, but on the new IS prime, couldn't you just turn it off if you do not want it? Cheaper for Canon to manufacture just one lens with two functions.

Aside from that, I do agree that Canon (or 3rd party) could take a part of the market with small, light, inexpensive primes. (like 40/2.8 and 50/1. They could skimp on features (micromotor AF etc.) to achieve it. I would buy them.

45
##### EOS Bodies / Re: Congratulations Canon to another great Camera release!!
« on: March 23, 2013, 04:29:36 AM »
I think AFMA should be standard in ANY camera, but I do understand why it is not. I also seriously doubt it costs zero to add. As a professional software tester I believe that adding this feature to ANY camera model would include testing of that feature. (at least some regression testing)

Although lots of testing can be automated, and one can limit oneself to spot testing (not testing every camera body), it will still cost human effort, and as a consequence, money.

So, unless you actually work at Canon, and was present at the meeting where the QA responsible took the decision to take the risk of never testing AFMA in a new camera body (and can prove that to us), I would not claim that I know how much it costs to add.

It could still be cheap, when you spread it out on the volumes for these cameras, but we do not know that, and in this end of the camera spectrum, cutting manufacturing costs is good practise.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10