August 22, 2014, 04:34:03 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 - c.d.embrey

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 28
346
EOS Bodies / Re: From the Land of Crazy! [CR0]
« on: January 23, 2011, 08:58:34 PM »

Where do I have to sign for that one? sounds like "THE CAMERA"

I would not mind going for a loan in this one if canon goes all digital in their sensors. (Sony like)

Actually it sounds like the Nikon D800. 8-D

347
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* More 5D Mark III / 1D Mark V & Lenses [CR2]
« on: January 14, 2011, 12:38:55 PM »
For professional users the question isn't "Is the camera what I want?" but rather "Will it increase my income". An there are a lot of sujets  where the 5D performs just fine, making that a moot point. It will sell.

That's why I haven't bought a new Canon body since 2007. No new features that I WANT/NEED have been introduced by Canon. And from what CR has been posting, it doesn't look like Canon will introduce a new camera that will make me more money.

348
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* More 5D Mark III / 1D Mark V & Lenses [CR2]
« on: January 13, 2011, 02:23:19 PM »
Why do Canon owners want prosumer (hate the word) 7D focus, while Nikon owners get the same Pro focus/metering as the D3s with the D700.

Time to vote with your money. If the 5D III isn't what you want, DON"T BUY IT! And be very vocal about why you don't buy it!

I'm not advocating switching to Nikon. Just keep using your present camera, and write letters to Canon explaining why you aren't wasting your money on their new model. BTW Snail-Mail is much more effective than E-Mail.

349
EOS Bodies / Re: No 1Ds Mark IV in 2011? [CR2]
« on: December 22, 2010, 01:46:55 PM »
Megapixels?

The Nikon D3x is 24 megapixel, Canon 1Ds lll is 21 megapixel.

Quote
A naming/numbering scheme that makes sense?

What's so hard to understand?

D3s = 1D lV Pro Body sports camera

D3x = 1DS lV Pro Body studio camera

D700 = 5D ll Full frame Small Body

D300 = 7D Crop Frame Small Body

D7000 = 60D Consumer Camera

Most contributors to Canon Forums keep asking for better low light capability, not more megapixels. Which is why I said that Nikon is paying attention to Canon users, and is delivering what they want!



350
EOS Bodies / Re: No 1Ds Mark IV in 2011? [CR2]
« on: December 21, 2010, 10:33:46 AM »
On the Nikon side, people like Thom Hogan are expecting a complete replacement of their Pro Cameras - D400. D800 and D4. If these new Nikons are as good as the D7000, Canon is in trouble - it's that simple.

A 16 megapixel D800 will be awesome, Seems like Nikon has been listening to Canon owners.


351
Canon General / Re: Camera Body Breakdown [CR1]
« on: December 09, 2010, 10:38:58 AM »
I know you guys will hate me saying this, but for the 7th job in a row I'm renting the Nikon D3s because it is just so much nicer on skin, especially at low light, than my old 1Ds Mklll.  I also am blown away by how much crisper their 24-70 zoom is. I thought they'd never equal Canon again, but right now they really have stolen a march on Canon.

If Canon don't get their act together soon, and at least let us know when the 1Ds MklV is coming I'm jumping ship, and going back to Nikon altogether, (after exactly 20 years!) because a year of renting just isn't worth doing waiting and hoping Canon will introduce a camera that may never appear!

mac, I don't think anyone can fault you with wanting to go back to nikon, especially given that you're actually making a living off of your equipment.  I'm intrigued that you see such a huge difference between the canon and nikon systems in how they render skin tone, but I've heard it from others ... guess something I'm not seeing in the files.

really great work!  the shot of mila kunis you have on your page really is, as you said, stunning (although I know you were talking about the actress rather than the photo)

If I use it regularly I own it. If I use it occasionally I rent it. That just makes good economic sense.

It sounds like you should have bought that Nikon D3s a long time ago.

BTW this isn't Canon bashing ... it's just admitting that, for some people, Nikon has regained the lead in Pro Cameras and Lenses.

352
Lenses / Re: 70-300L & More
« on: December 06, 2010, 08:49:28 PM »
Very dissapointing re:50mm.


i see myself buying a 24mm f.14 Nikkor, 35mm F1.4 Nikkor and a 50mm f1.4 Nikkor in the near future. There are a lot of pros who don't shoot sports, and Canon is neglecting them.

353
Lenses / Re: Lenses [CR2]
« on: November 28, 2010, 12:43:00 PM »
All the TS-E 90mm needs is the ability to rotate tilt/shift like Nikon PC-Es or the Canon 17mm TS-E and 24 TS-E.

The only reason to make this an "L" lens is to jack-up the price $600.00-$700.00! Putting a red stripe on this lens won't make it any sharper than it is now.

354
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless Far Off?
« on: November 09, 2010, 11:14:38 PM »
There are two types of Non-DSLR interchangeable lens cameras.
1) Sony Nex, Olympus Pen and Panasonic GF1/GF2 are interchangeable lens P&S cameras.

2) Panasonic G/GH cameras with EVF. This is the only true mirror-less cameras.

If you need a zoom lens, no m4/3 or APS-C camera will be pocketable. Want a pocketable camera use a pancake prime like the Panasonic 20mm f1.7.


355
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless Far Off?
« on: November 06, 2010, 12:41:47 AM »
Canon has not filed a single patent for a mirrorless camera.
At the same time, Nikon has been filing patent after patent for mirrorless. 

Based on this, I'd say that Canon has no plans whatsoever for a mirrorless camera at this time.


Thom Hogan has just posted his predictions for 2011 http://www.bythom.com/2011predictions.htm He has prediction for ALL camera manufactuers.

"Canon missed a memo somewhere. The camera market is changing, but they seem stuck on executing on the old memo. Basically: more pixels, more video, same camera."

and: "Both Panasonic and Sony now have dedicated video cameras derived from their mirrorless camera systems. ...Of the video companies, Canon is conspicuously absent from this trend."

Looking a what Canon has done (or not done) this year makes me think that Mr Hogan and x-vision may be right.

356
Software & Accessories / Re: DPP 3.9.2 en EOS Utility 2.9.0
« on: October 29, 2010, 08:58:28 PM »
I found that DPP 3.9.2 had been released on Rob Galbraith's page. Why doesn't CR have this on the front page?

Here's the Canon Europe URL http://software.canon-europe.com/products/0010911.asp

Canon USA does not have upgrade available yet.

357
Lenses / Re: New Lens Availability & More
« on: October 29, 2010, 12:27:30 AM »
It's true to say that Pentax's prime lenses are quite good, but then they only produce APS-C cameras.

But I (and many others) use APS-C cameras.

Quote
Nikon has a 10.5mm Fisheye, but it's a DX one and can't be used on FF (Unless you set the camera to DX), ...

Once again, many people don't use FF cameras. If I shot Nikon, I'd use a D300s not a D700.

Quote
Nikon produced the 35mm prime, and it really hit the fan when they launched it, on the Nikon forums where most people wanted a FF lens.


Yeah, but the owners of DX bodies bought them. BTW have you seen the new Nikon 35mm f1.4 for the FX user? Nikon looks after both DX and FX user, why can't Canon?

Quote
As for a 22mm lens, I don't think anyone produces that non standard focal length, 20mm & 24mm maybe?

For Canon APS-C users 22mm x 1.6 equals 35.2mm, a standard size for all 35mm film/FF digital cameras. Most of the time I use my 10-22mm zoom it's at 22mm, that why I'd like a faster 22mm prime.

Quote
You're not likely to see a 30mm prime, because 35mm gives the same FOV as a 50mm on FF which is the reason why Nikon launched their version, ...

For Canon users 30mm x 1.6 equals 48mm, 35mm x 1.6 equals 56mm. I'd prefer 48mm to 56mm for a standard lens. BTW A 50mm lens' focal length is closest to the 43.2 mm diagonal of the 35 mm camera's 24 x 36 mm frame. So 43.2 mm, not 50mm, is what standard really should be. Maybe that's why Pentax made the smc PENTAX FA 43mm F1.9 Limited for their 35mm film cameras.

For Nikon 35mm x 1.5 equals 52.5mm. In the past Nikon made 55mm f1.2 and 58mm f1.2 standard lenses as well as 50mm f1.4/f1.8 ... so 52.5mm fits in the middle of their standard grouping.

Quote
you say you want f/1.8 but the current version is f/2.0 just a half a stop from what you are asking for, is that such a deal breaker?

Most of my work is done using Profoto studio strobes and I set the lens at f5.6 up, often f16 when using the TS-C 90mm f2.8 for table top. But I'm sure many Canon APS-C shooter would fell short changed at f2.0, 'cause Nikon cares enough to make a 35mm 1.8.

358
Lenses / Re: New Lens Availability & More
« on: October 28, 2010, 11:20:03 PM »
c.d., I am assuming you're talking about high quality, affordable wide primes, correct?

canon has high quality wide primes but they're all L-series glass and priced according.

canon has affordable wide primes but they're all decades old and underperformers optically and AF-wise.

looking at the lineup you feel like you're staring at a football side where half the team plays for Premiership and the other half are 4-year-olds

That's right, high quality like the EF-S 10-22mm and the EF-S 60mm macro. I'll never use heavy L lenses. Doesn't make any sense to me, the reason i use an APS-C camera is weight, not price. Some L lenses like the 85mm f1.2 weigh 36.2 oz (lens only), that's more than a 7D 28.9 oz (body only). Also an APS-C is enough quality for the work I do. if it wasn't I'd use a FF camera.

359
Lenses / Re: New Lens Availability & More
« on: October 28, 2010, 11:59:42 AM »

Canon already has the best lineup - in this case, the grass isn't greener on the other side!
If/When new lenses get announced and released, it's only making the lineup stronger and deeper...

Do they?

i like short primes, and there lots of good short primes not made by Canon. BTW I use  an APS-C camera, so I'm always interested in small and light EF-S primes (22mm f1.8, 30mm f1.8 should already exist)).

Pentax has these (APS-C): 15mm f4, 21mm f3.2, 31mm f1.8 (FF), 40mm f2.8, 43mm f1.9 (FF).

Nikon has (APS-C): 10.5 full frame fisheye and 35mm f1.8.

BTW Pentax makes a 17-70mm f4 that is mentioned as being on some peoples wish list and a lightweight 300mm f4 as well.

Pigs will be flying over snow banks in Hell before Canon makes the above lenses.

360
Lenses / Re: New Lens Availability & More
« on: October 26, 2010, 08:16:30 PM »

... I'm surprised you were happy with the results from the 75-300, my wife has it as well and is probably the worst performing lens we have between the two of us, ...



There is more to photography than pixel peeping. Neither of us ever shot pictures of brick walls, just action sports. I've had a few landscape half pages in magazines with this lens. Whats not to like?

Last time I used the 75-300mm was on a 40D at a Western Surfing Association contest in January 2008. I shot off the pier for about an hour, and got several shots that made good 8x10 and 12x18 prints. Normally I use either a 300mm f2.8 or 400mm f2.8, mounted on a Wimberley II gimbal head, for my long lens work.

Remember good photos have nothing to do with ultimate sharpness, barrel or pincushion. It's all about the response that the photo evokes.

BTW I bought the Wimberley gimbal head in 2006, and it was one of the best investments I've made in photo gear. Check-it-out http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 28