Messages

16

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!

« on: November 07, 2012, 04:07:11 AM »

I'm waiting to see what the MTF charts look like, compared with the old ones.  The DR too...how many stops?  It could be a while though, with Canon's track record lately, they'll be $40-50 each and available "late 2013."  Twice that for the ones with a red ring.

</sarcasm>

On a more serious note, has anyone actually done a study on using "dark frames" to calibrate sensor noise?  Shoot a few frames with the lens-cap on (same exposure) and then shoot the subject... then "average" the dark frames and "subtract" them from the "real" shot in post, as in Astrophotography?

One wonders whether it may be possible to do the same "in-camera" by doing a pre-read of the sensor before the shutter actually opens...

17

Canon General / Re: Canon's MAP Pricing Goes Into Full Effect Today

« on: November 03, 2012, 08:53:04 AM »

As others have noted, this creeping phenomenon affects mainly US customers - in this latest instance anyway.

However, it has other consequences to competition in the world market, without the "price setting" of the dominant market.

There is also likely to be considerable collateral damage in the US market; not from what people are discussing now, but a result of the "banning" of easily-accessible price-comparison information.

That effect is this: a customer can no longer hit a few web pages and glean the best deal on the day.  They must now jump through multiple hoops and consume not only their own time and resources, but those of however many retailers they choose to canvas, looking for the best price.

Instead of 'doing the rounds' in a few minutes with a web browser (or a visit to a price-watch site), they will find themselves calling toll-free numbers, waiting on hold, waiting for call-backs, adding items to yet more "abandoned" shopping carts and other hugely time-wasting activities.  Instead of the retailers' websites doing all the work, they will be answering telephones and writing out quotes.  Which is clearly much less efficient.  I suppose it will create jobs though!  Expect prices to rise as a result.

The 'first resort' of some of these retaillers seems to be bundling excess stock into questionable 'deals' as 'free bonus items' at the MAP.  Deals which are very hard to compare.

Noone is stopping the retailers from selling at lower prices - only from advertising those prices.

Which brings up an interesting conundrum.  If a certain price-watching site (or any new one) decides to collect and publish the "best price of the week" off their own bat, is there anything Canon can do about it?  If that website is independent and not owned or controlled by any Canon Authorized Dealer, can it be considered "Advertising" at all?  All it takes is a link with a 'coupon code'...

There is a business opportunity right there...

18

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Natural Progression of Camera Bodies. Type Your story below.

« on: October 30, 2012, 11:14:56 PM »

<mumble!> My mother's Leica Rangefinder
<mumble> Bought my first SLR - just-released Minolta AF 7000 (aka Maxxum), 24mm f2.8, 35-70mm f4, 70-210mm f4 "beercan."  After a few too many snap-happy weekends (20+ 36-exp films) it was mothballed, to save my aching hip-pocket nerve!  The 'keeper' rate on this camera was astonishing.

1999 (Sony DCR-TRV900E - video)

2003 Canon IXUS 400 - great little camera; still have it, still use it occasionally (keep it in the car)

2008 Canon 30d / 17-85 IS USM because I needed a half-decent camera now and the 5D2 was too late; compromise camera ought 2nd-hand with the intent of replacing it with a 5d2 - which quickly turned out to be a white elephant due to AF issues and the price.

2011/2 (Sony HDR CX130E - video) To simplify my workflow - mini-DV is a hassle, SD cards mount right up   With no '5d mark 3' available at the time - again - Canon left me high and dry.  Again.

2012 Would have a 5d3, 24-70 II and 70-200 IS II if Canon Australia weren't gouging the Aussie market.   Every dollar they jack up the local price actually costs $1.16 to the Oz customer.  We do not get the "rebates" that Canon offer to their US customers either.

I've also looked into buying a Sony A33/35/37/57 body to mount the old Minolta glass on.  It seems a terrible waste to have that Leica-designed glass gathering dust - but the AF is soooo slooooooow, I suspect it'll be wasted money.  The negatives (and 8x10 prints) from the Minolta are amazingly sharp, with wonderful bokeh (especially from the beercan).  The beercan is a bit 'slow' for the dog sports though, at f4 in fading light. Even if it was great for Formula1 in very bright sunlight

I am one of those sitting right on the fence right now - the 5d3 kit is well over my budget, and I'm not about to invest in more glass for the 30d until I know what 'system' I'll end up with.  So Canon get 100% of nothing, instead of 80% of a lot!

(I know I'm not alone in that sentiment, either!)

So I might end up with just an EF 70-300 (non-L) or a 70-200 F4 USM and wait a few more years with my 30d
A friend has trouble getting enough light with a 7D/70-300L doing the same things I plan to do.
Why invest a boatload of cash in a compromise?  I vote with my wallet.

Yes, I've considered a 5d2 *and* a 7d as well... but it ends up costing the same or more than a 5d3 (no rebates here!)
Nikon prices here for the equivalent are comparable, so it's a wash vs 5d3 - so I'd choose Canon on that basis for the glass.

In about a month or less, I'll give up trying entirely and wait another year or two.

19

EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all

« on: October 12, 2012, 06:31:30 AM »

I know a couple of pro photographers who have bought the 5D MK2 recently, taking advantage of the price drop, on the basis that the Mk3 improvements don't amount to much...

I have been considering the same thing - and would give it serious thought if there WAS a price drop here in Oz.  The 5d2 is more than enough camera for my non-dogsport ambitions... but as usual, the "drops," "offers" and "rebates" never made it here.  Unless I misread something, it's not so much a $400 drop in price as a $400 rebate.

I remember well the US reaction to the intro pricing of the 5dm3.  "$3500.  SHOCK!  HORROR!"
Mine was "I'd gladly pay that, rather than $4299"  - the $US and $AUS being essentially the same in value then and now.

AFAIK, the best "offer" Canon Australia has had in some time is a "free camera bag."  in 2011.  All lenses and bodies strictly at retail, and a good 10-20% above typical US prices at that, even after tax.  I understand it's at least as bad in the Eurozone and the UK.

Rebates?  I don't remember a single one as long as I've been looking, and that predates the mark II!

US customers don't know how good life is for them.  Sony managed to price the A99 lower here than the US...

20

EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all

« on: October 11, 2012, 06:52:28 AM »

You might find that Canon thinks that $2100 is a very reasonable price for a ff camera, they seem to have lost the grip on reality a bit - or maybe not, because they know users won't switch. If they designed the 6d for the $1600 price tag they'd left out autofocus completely :-o

Arguably, they did leave it out     Actually, I would be reasonably happy paying $2100 for a FF version of a 7D, as long as I can have it tomorrow.  Just upscale the AF/metering units and the sensor/mirrorbox and it has everything I want... and they even have a sensor they could use - the one from the 1DX.  Just use the ones that are 'marginal' for the big-brother camera.  I'm frankly amazed they aren't doing that already.  Perhaps they are stockpiling them for future use in this very way?

Of course, the "$2100" 6D won't sell for anything like that here, either.  The "preorder" prices are well above that, and I'm not talking about 10% either...  There is a mysterious $400 gap between the average price for a fully imported 5d3 body (including shipping, GST and customs duty) and the very best retail prices.  That's rather more than 13%.  Add the 24-105 and it becomes $600....

It looks like noone wants my money unless I give them ALL of it.

Indeed - I've got €5000 lying around waiting to be spent on Canon equipment, but the current €3000 5d3 + €2500 24-70 (excluding equipment like cf cards yadayada) simply don't seem like a very sweet offer to me.

At least that here, but it won't be 'reserved' for long.  I'm focal-length limited right now, and the AF on the 30d is probably comparable to the 6d (what, five years later?) - so cropping half the frame or more AND struggling for focus is doing my head in.  There's practically nothing left except the 'lucky shots.'

I remember reading the 6D leaked specs here a few days before it was announced, thinking to myself, "they CAN'T be that out of touch.  Who would buy this?"  Then the boot fell.. the leak was right!

21

EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all

« on: October 11, 2012, 05:50:25 AM »

Anyone else think that maybe the propeller-heads at Canon designed the 6D down to the *rumoured* price of the D600 ($1599) instead of the actual price ($2100)?  I can just 'see' the party in the weekly Product Development meeting when Nikon released their price...  and if "They" are selling at over 2k, why not do the same?  After all, it's too late to add an autofocus system back into it, this close to market.

All I wanted was a FF DSLR with a decent AF system and reasonable IQ in variable light for dog sports.   I don't even care about >4fps.  The rest of the time, I could even do MF!  Don't care about video.   I'm not 'committed' to anyone's system yet, as I've been waiting to see what was coming out this year.  Nikon might have an edge on the bodies right now, but for the focal lengths I'm looking at, Canon has the better glass.

Yes, I could probably get away with a 7D for the sporting stuff, and a 6D for everything else... but that would mean lugging two compromise bodies around for the same price as a 5D3.  Put the 7D AF system in the 6D and I'd probably perorder it.  Hell, you could even take the "OK, but not perfect" sensors from the 1DX production line and stick them in a lower-end FF camera for all I care.  18MP is plenty.  I'd rather have another stop or two of clean ISO than 4-6MP.

It looks like noone wants my money unless I give them ALL of it.   Looks like my 30d might have a couple of years left on it... perhaps with a 70-300.   Maybe even a 70-300 L.  Case in point of elasticity of demand.  Stretch the customer too far, and they walk away.  You get 100% of nothing.  If the prices here in Oz were on parity with the US or HK, it'd be harder to walk away... but with 20-30% margin?  These shoes are walkin'.

(And yes, I'm aware that Canon have decided [or justified, retrospectively?] that the target market for the 6D is travellers/tourists, who don't need more than one AF point.)

22

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D High Resolution Photo and Video Samples

« on: September 17, 2012, 11:28:38 PM »

Anyone actually looked at the EXIF metadata and filesizes?

The D600 portrait is 10.5MB compared to the 6D's 4.6MB.  It's hardly surprising that the brunette's features are mushed up considering how much compression has been forced on the image for the web.  The DoF is also very thin and appears not to be in the vertical plane.

Is there some unwritten rule of web advertising that only poorly taken, poorly processed images of marginal subjects are allowed to be published as samples?  Virtually all Canon and Nikon "samples" are worse than the images posted by denizens of this forum with a caption "how can I fix this photo?"

It's hard to say much about the shadow noise when the image has been compressed this heavily