August 22, 2014, 08:11:15 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 - c.d.embrey

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 28
Canon General / Re: Canon Destroys Nikon in DSLR Marketshare for 2010
« on: April 24, 2011, 02:58:05 PM »
totally agree on the big-sensor compacts blindness

That's photo enthusiast think. Average people don't care about sensor size. What they want is something to post on the web easily (cell phones with cameras) and something that will make good 8x10/12x18 prints. A Canon 20D was good enough to do this. A Olympus/Panasonic m4/3 is good enough to do this.

Nikon and Sony APS-C cameras are 1.5x, Canon APS-C are 1.6x, m4/3 are 2x and the new Nikon should be 2.5x (rumors based on patents). Compare the lens size between Sony's E-mount lenses, m4/3 lenses and what should be the even smaller Nikon 2.5x lenses. For many people smaller is better based on ease of carry.  :D 

You can't put a 1Ds III with a 70-200 f2.8 into even a very large pocket.  :D  But why would you want to, if it is in your pocket no-one would see your awesome camera   :D  :D 

Canon General / Re: Canon Destroys Nikon in DSLR Marketshare for 2010
« on: April 22, 2011, 01:20:57 PM »
Canon made a big leap over Nikon (in the pro market) with the EOS system. Nikon was slow to respond, but recently they have taken the lead in pro cameras.

I bought a 40D and as soon as the D300 came along I knew I had made a mistake staying with Canon. The D300 was better, but not enough better to make me switch ... then. When Canon came out with the EOS 7D and the POS 60D that clinched it. 

Now I have both Canon and Nikon bodies and lenses (no kit lenses for either). My next lens purchase will be another Nikon prime. Will I buy more Canon in the future ? Hard to say, but I see nothing that has been announced/rumored that I'm interested in buying. But Nikon has several things coming I'm waiting to buy.

Nikon's Professional Mirrorless system sounds interesting (and innovative). If it is as good as I hope, I'll order a body and some lenses the day it is announced.

Try to remember that cameras are just tools. Way too many people base their self worth on the kind of camera they have, the make of car they own and the brand of beer they drink.

BTW P&S cameras are quickly being replaced by camera phones. What will be the camera makes response ?

I use both Canon and Nikon, do you have a problem with that ???

EOS Bodies / 7D with PL Mount
« on: April 09, 2011, 02:50:22 PM »
Several companies make PL conversions for Canon cameras. This one is for a 7D.

Canon General / Re: APS-C 11mm f/2 Patent
« on: April 04, 2011, 08:13:57 PM »
I bought a full frame Nikon body, plus 1 Nikon prime last week. If Canon continues to make EF-S primes like this I'll keep at least one 40D body around to be able to use them. Now when is the 22mm f2.0 (36mm FF equiv.) coming-out?

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]
« on: March 12, 2011, 02:55:21 PM »
Canon has been pretty watertight recently, with few leaks of any substance until days before the official announcement.  I'm guessing that when the 1Ds Mk4 is annouced it wil all start to happen very quickly. 

It's a shame that EF-S has been relagated as there are still so many holes in the lineup.  Apart from the 17-55mm f/2.8, the 60mm f/2.8 Macro and the recent 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6, there are no other lenses for serious users.  I'd have to agree that what Thom Hogan says about the Nikon DX lineup ( applies equally (if not more so) to Canon.  Yes, there are FF lenses that fill some gaps, but many of these are old and a bit sub-par (e.g. the non-L primes in the 28-35mm range) and using others leaves you with a camera bag that is heavy, expensive and a bit long for many people (e.g. the 70-200mm Ls).  I guess that there are third party options, but a company with Canon's market share shouldn't need to rely on Sigma and Tamron to prop up its lens lineup. 

So, lets give Canon a break and write EF-S off for a year (as it's a full frame camera refresh year); may I suggeat that in 2012-3, Canon fill out some of my wishlist:

Budget - Sub $250:
EF-S 30mm f/1.8 USM (priced at under $250 -Nikon can do it, why can't Canon?!)

Mid-range - $250-$499
EF-S 15mm f/2.8 USM (wide angle was what EF-S was designed for)
EF-S 22mm f/2 USM (nice compact lens/body combo for street photographers)
EF-S 50-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS replacement for those who can't afford the L).   

High-end - over $500
EF-S 50-135mm f/2.8 IS USM WS (weathersealed ala Pentax -to complement the 7D Mk2)
EF-S 15-50mm f/2.8 IS USM WS (weathersealed to complement the 7D Mk2)
EF-S 8-15mm f/? (not sure for f/4 size/weight, or f/2.8 for available light?)

In addition, I think that Canon should re-focus its crop sensor lineup to offer smaller cameras to go with these smaller lenses; the 7D is great, but (IMHO) it would be even better if it were the size of the Pentax K5. 

Would this mean that some people might stay APS-C rather than go full frame? Possibly, but I think that this would be more than offset by the people who would choose the Canon system and those that are currently forced to buy third party lenses.

Sign-me-up for the 15mm, 22mm and 30mm primes. That and the EF 85mm f1.8 is all I need.

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]
« on: March 12, 2011, 02:51:50 PM »
The EF-S line of lenses are not high on the list of priorities at Canon.
“L” lenses and the development of them are whats needed to get the most out of the 18mp crop sensors.

Hehehe...  Sounds like a line from a full-frame enthusiast and L-snob  Someone who obviously doesn't understand business.  Canon makes good money on their crop gear.  Furthermore, if you want to get the most out of your 18 mpix crop sensor then EF-S lenses like 17-55 and 15-85 are the way to go.  Why struggle with full-frame ultrawides thast have limited focal length range and/or aperture.

This is CR -10, folks.

The EF-S 10-22mm f3.5/4.5 is also a great lens. That and a EF 85mm f1.8 is all I use.

EOS Bodies / Re: What next?
« on: February 10, 2011, 10:24:45 PM »
The only thing on the list I'd be interested in buying is the 90 f2.8 TS-E II. BUT NOT if it is an OVERPRICED "L" LENS.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless [CR1]
« on: February 06, 2011, 05:10:02 PM »
As enthusiasts we often lose sight of the fact that the market for cameras is far larger and more diverse than our little corner.

Exactly ! Someone who gets it.

Many enthusiasts aways seem to think that if they don't like it, no-one will like it. Get a clue, everything isn't about you, you, you.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless [CR1]
« on: February 06, 2011, 12:16:07 AM »
After reading the posts, I have the following thought:
1. In order to complete with the DSLR, the auto focusing speed of the EVIL must be as fast as  the DSLR.

Why do you think that a Mirrorless needs to compete with a DSLR ??? There are an awful lot of people who are not interested with carrying a large, heavy DSLR when going on a family outing. But want something better than a P&S.

2. Overall size is important ... needs to have its own set of lens to make the size to be small to lure people from their DSLR.

No need to lure away from a DSLR ... many people will own both. And some P&S owners with buy them who aren't interested in Big & Heavy DSLRs. Two different groups to sell to.

3. ... FF in EVIL is almost a dream ...

Sounds more like a nightmare. If people wanted oversized cameras Olympus, Panasonic and Ricoh wouldn't be selling all the cameras that they do.

3. Marketing pressure/ user perference. Due to the lower demand, the sales volume of EVIL will be quite a bit smaller than the DSLR. So in order to get the R & D and tooling expense back, the EVIL (body and lenses)will be selling a lot higher than the DSLR at the same performance level.  So how many people will buy an EVIL instead of  a DSLR???

P&S cameras out sell DSLRs because there are many people who don't want or need a DSLR. Mirrorless cameras will sell to people moving-up from a P&S you don't want the size and weight of a DSLR and don't need image quality of a DSLR. How many of your acquaintance s print their snapshots at 20x30 ???
4. What is the advantange of EVIL over the DSLR beside size???

For many people that is enough. Mico 4/3 cameras sell well because of their size and good enough quality. BTW why don't you own a 60 MP + MFD, much better quality than a DSLR :D  :D
5. my personal choice of mirrorless is down to two. 1. Leica M9. It combined the best of classic interchangeable lens range finder and the digital. Too bad at $8000 body only is too steep for me, even I have some Leica lenses from my M4.  2. FujiFilm X100, I look at it as a high tech  M9  with  a fixed lens.

I think I'll go with a Panasonic GF2 with a 20mm f1.7 lens. YMMV

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless [CR1]
« on: February 05, 2011, 01:47:18 PM »
they are not going to risk cannibalizing sales of any of their SLRs...
They won't any more than the current situation, if someone wants a mirror-less camera they will get one,
if they were not going to buy my(if I were Canon) dslr I'd want the customer to buy my mirror-less vs. the other guys.

There are many non-fanboys in the world who will buy what best meets their needs. Ricoh GRIII s are carried by many pros, so are Panasonic GF1 s.

Fuji's X100 will also be bought by many Canon shooters.

If Canon doesn't fill the perceived need, others will. Fuji, Ricoh, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica, etc stay in business buy building things that CaNikon won't.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless [CR1]
« on: February 04, 2011, 02:06:22 PM »
This would be a great camera, but Canon would never build it.

Something like a Leica M9, with simple film style controls, and short primes (NO ZOOMS) would be a good seller at a reasonable price.

EOS Bodies / Re: “1Dsq” & 3D [CR1]
« on: January 30, 2011, 11:33:11 AM »

Canon made the right choice when they switched lens mounts in '87. They knew, and understood from the outset, that AF worked best when the AF motor is in each lens.

That's beside the point. Doesn't make any difference why they did it, or that it was what allowed Canon to over-take Nikon with Pro shooters.

The point is that Canon did it ... and will probably do it again at some point, when they see an advantage to doing it, i.e. a square sensor or a mirror-less camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: “1Dsq” & 3D [CR1]
« on: January 29, 2011, 11:03:00 PM »

Back to the arguement about "Standard  height to width ration".  There is no standard. However, human vision do have more width than height, it is about 3:2, individual milage may vary. That is why the movie industry set this standard at the beginning and Leica adopted it since day one and evey body follows. TV has been using 4:3 for a long time. Movies has been using wide screen for a long time also. DH TV has moved away from 4:3. So what is the right ratio???

In the conventional motion picture format, frames are four perforations tall, with an aspect ratio of about 1.37:1, 22 mm by 16 mm (0.866 in × 0.630 in). This is a derivation of the aspect ratio and frame size designated by Thomas Edison (24.89 mm by 18.67 mm or 0.980 in by 0.735 in) at the dawn of motion pictures, which was an aspect ratio of 1.33:1

VistaVision (used for a few years by Paramount Studios) was an 8 perf wide (film running sideways in the camera) format that was changed from sideways (using an optical printer) to conventional 4 perf for projection at aspect ratios between 1.66:1 and 2.00:1 By making a reduction print from the larger they got finer grain prints. When film improved VistaVision died.

So no motion pictures were ever shown at 1.5:1. Low budget wide screen was done by shooting 1.37:1 and cropping the picture to 1.85:1 with a projector mask.

Leica just took vertical 4 perf and changed it to horizontal 8 perf for their cameras.

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Dsq & 3D [CR1]
« on: January 29, 2011, 10:31:11 PM »

 ... the most important thing I don't like is the cost of lenses that are large enough to cover a square image sensor.  and the need to buy a totally new set of them.  for that reason, I think all the square sensor rumors are very unrealistic, unless canon is looking to seriously alienate a large portion of its professional and serious amateur customer base.

Canon has done that before when they switched from the FD mount to the EF mount in 1987. The FD mount was introduced when Canon built their first Pro Camera, the F1. And lots of Pros were really unhappy when Canon made all their FD lenses obsolete. No reason that history can't be repeated.

EOS Bodies / Re: From the Land of Crazy! [CR0]
« on: January 24, 2011, 11:36:25 AM »
a quick google search tells me that the only reason is that nikon wants to sell grips harder than canon does, and cripples their cameras on purpose, then uncrippling them for the price of a grip

Different cameras for different jobs. Why should I pay a higher price for a camera with a built-in grip and higher frames per second, if I don't need high frames per second?

High frames per second may be important to sports photographers/PJs or fanboys, but I've never heard a portrait photographer complain about not enough FPS. A commercial shooter, shooting catalog pix, doesn't spray-and-pray.

I like Nikon's idea of only paying for what you need. Too bad that Canon doesn't have the same philosophy.

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 28