Messages

31

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]

« on: December 20, 2012, 12:51:10 AM »

There are plans to release an EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS sometime in the next 18 months. I have confirmed from two sources that the end of 2013 or early 2014 is the earliest we’d see a production model announced.</p><p>There are no plans for a non-IS 24-70 f/4L.

It's not a surprise that Canon has been researching this.  However, a fact that has been flogged repeatedly on these forums is that Canon is out to make money, not just produce great gear.  Is it really cost-effective for Canon to support both of these lenses?  Either this is targeted to the video crowd (supposing strong sales of the non-IS Mk II to the stills-only crowd) or the Mk II isn't selling well enough.  If the problem is lack of Mk II sales, then maybe the IS model would replace the Mk II.  That would be weird, though...

This just doesn't make sense unless they had delays with the IS version, and felt compelled to release the non-IS Mk II as an interim solution.

It's all just idyll speculation (pun intended) on my part since I can only dream about lenses too expensive for my hobby budget.

32

Lenses / Re: 650-1300 T-mount lens

« on: November 28, 2012, 07:23:22 PM »

Dunno, might work great if you've got a Mr. Fusion(tm)-powered flash to get good exposure with a fast shutter. 

33

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Free and Inexpensive Video Editors

« on: November 05, 2012, 05:28:47 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_editing_software

34

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]

« on: October 30, 2012, 04:02:42 PM »

Pure speculation here, but this could be a video-oriented lens.  It will likely be parfocal, possibly with an internal zoom mechanism.  To do this out to 105mm would make it a lot more expensive, heavy, and not necessarily more marketable to the video crowd.

Again, this is just a guess.

35

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx simple DR stress test

« on: October 19, 2012, 03:18:43 PM »

It appears that Mikael Risedal is seeking recognition or approval.  Perhaps he believes he can be the great leader who will organize the oppressed serfs of Canonia as they present their sad laments to the royalty in the Big White Palace.  Moved by their plight, the Royals will soften their hearts, and bestow upon the poor peasants an abundance of Dynamic Range.

Mr. Risedal, please read Neuro's previous comments: it's widely discussed that the D800 sensor has a little more DR than Canon sensors.  You aren't presenting anything new, and this incessant arguing does not show you in a good light. The reason you haven't gained acclaim here is that you haven't presented anything new/useful.

I would like to be able to read useful discussion of DR, and I usually try not to be snarky, but this is a tedious waste of time.  A camera is more than just a sensor.

36

Canon General / Re: when/how to start a photography business?

« on: October 12, 2012, 08:44:03 PM »

I'm hoping to make some money with this beloved hobby.
Any tips on starting out?

Find a local pro who runs a solid business and offer to be a second shooter/assistant.  You might try the older photographers since that may have several benefits: if they've been doing it a while they know how to run a business; they may appreciate help with physical and/or technical challenges; they will know the "tricks" of dealing with adverse conditions;  they may feel a desire/obligation to mentor younger folks to "pass on the trade."  Be willing to start as a volunteer or for low pay.  At this point it only costs you time.

If you decide to go solo you should start in the "low rent" district.  Do inexpensive jobs under favorable ambient lighting so you don't have invest time and money in gear.   Be willing to turn down jobs in unfavorable circumstances.  DO NOT take every job you're offered.  Find a good boilerplate contract form that limits your liability.  There are books on the legal aspects of running a photo business: borrow or buy a couple

Before you spend money on gear make sure you know how to run your business, and are willing and able to handle it (e.g. clients).   There is a difference between being an avid photographer and a successful business owner.

37

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 200 f/2L IS

« on: October 11, 2012, 04:15:46 PM »

Well, I appreciated the joke. And I still want one of those mugs! It's a shame Canon only made them as a one-off for that one show.

http://photojojo.com/store/awesomeness/camera-lens-mug/

38

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 200 f/2L IS

« on: October 09, 2012, 06:52:57 PM »

This one is on my list of 'wants', along with the 300/2.8 II.  Owning one supertele makes me want more!

And I would like to thank you for your personal efforts to stimulate the global consumer economy in these distressed times.   

39

Lenses / Re: Wide or ultra-wide angle with excellent corner performance

« on: October 05, 2012, 04:05:35 PM »

Good evening to all,

(have) 20-35mm L f2.8: Much better than all the previous ones in the corners and at any focal length, but with two probems: the minimum focusing distance is too long, only 50cm; and the lens is very prone to flare.

Is there any chance a short extension tube would help with minimum focus distance problem?  That doesn't help with flare, but might help for many shots.  I'm just assuming that if you're focusing inside 50cm you're willing to give up infinity-focus.

40

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 19, 2012, 11:05:33 PM »

I don't believe it's correct to say that 4 are combined into 1.  The de-mosaicing is an interpolation algorithm that uses the values from adjacent pixels to estimate the intensity and color of each pixel.  The demosaicing algorithm doesn't do any binning in the way you suggest. 

I didn't mean to suggest binning at all; demosaicing is (presumably) a complex algorithm.  I was making a simple point: if you take data from 4 photosites, each having 14EV of DR, you can demosaic in a way that gets you more than 14EV DR in the resultant pixel.  It's not guaranteed that you would, but it's possible. 

41

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 19, 2012, 06:26:57 PM »

that does not work very well sometimes.... have a look at sony (tv biz) or nokia for example.

I assume Canon's management and finance people are aware of this.  They're making calculated plans to maximize profit.  Their calculations may be right...or not.  Still, though, it's not personal.  Complaints don't matter, only sales numbers.  Reviews from major photo news outlets have some effect since they probably affect sales numbers.  Complaining on blogs probably does not have a measurable effect.

Besides, I'll bet there are many event/wedding photographers on Nikon sites complaining about the weak AF system in the D800 compared to the 5D3.

Everybody plays with the same laws of physics: I'd be very surprised if Canon does not have high-DR tech in their back pocket.

42

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 19, 2012, 05:53:32 PM »

only because they have build a big userbase in the past.  but if they go on like this... i would not be suprised if sony and nikon have gained market share over the last year.

That's how "the Market" works.  If they lose market share Canon will take their profits from the last few years and build a more competitive product.  Then Nikon and Sony users will complain about their brand lagging.

It's business, it's not personal. It's not an attempt to insult you.  It's merely an attempt to make profit.

43

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 19, 2012, 05:05:10 PM »

Put another way...Canon is milking their loyal customer's wallets rather than focusing on producing the best product they're capable of producing.

Of course, that's how all for-profit companies work; why would Canon be any different?  And why get emotional over it?   If Nikon were financially stronger they'd do it too.  My interpretation is that Nikon is "betting the farm" on a series of "wow" products, desperately hoping to claw back market share.  Have you ever seen the movie "Big Night?"  Fabulous meal, but bad for financial solvency.  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115678/

Why would I not choose to align my $$ with a company that pushes the edge of tech, etc in imaginative ways instead?  Aren't those qualities appealing? As in the D800, D800E removing aliasing filter option, HDMI video out, D600.  Sony is coming on strong too. 

That's your choice, it's how "the market" works.  There is no personal relationship between you and Canon; and if you start buying Nikon there will be no personal relationship there either.  Both companies want your money, and are trying different tactics to get it. That's all.

And look at Canon's pricing.  I just have no idea what Canon is thinking any more.  None.

It seems to work for them.

44

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 19, 2012, 04:24:23 PM »

which explains how a camera with 14 bits per pixel can, according to DxOMark, actually deliver a dynamic range greater than 14 bits of EV. 

Question for you: my understanding of Bayer pattern sensors is that a group of 4 monochrome {R|G|B} are de-mosaiced to form one color RGB pixel.  If I combine two 14-bit wells I get (roughly) one 15-bit well.  If I combine four 14-bit wells I should get (roughly) one 16-bit well.  Certainly they wouldn't do a crude addition of wells, but it seems very plausible that you can get >14EV DR, even without re-normalizing.  What's wrong with this interpretation?

I think the problem is that Canon simply can't improve their DR, not even if their life depended on it. They just don't know how to do it.

You keep repeating this, and it remains unsubstantiated, and likely wrong.  Canon doesn't improve DR because there's no business need to do so, and it would cut into their profits to do so.  They're making very nice money as things are.  They will hold onto their high-DR tech until the market requires them to use it.  Even Pentax has pro-sumer sensors with higher DR than Canon; you can't expect me to believe that a tech giant like Canon can't keep pace (in the lab) with Pentax.   No, Canon DR will improve when it must.  Right now they're trying to keep manufacturing costs down to increase profits, just like any for-profit entity would do.

45

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Magic Lantern Firmware - Good or Bad?

« on: September 13, 2012, 09:19:52 AM »

Wow, I just had an innocent enough question followed by some website research ... but had no idea some folks out there would be so spiteful in return for no apparent reason. Sheeesh.

Personally, I'd like to thank you: I was thinking about installing ML, and the flood of positives + lack of negatives has sealed it for me.  If you were trolling you failed. 

On the serious side, be aware that your posts had the hallmarks of a troll, even though you may very well not have intended that.  For example: it was your first post with a new account (you have no history of legitimate participation).  Second, you asked an "innocent" question but in a leading way.  Third, you answered your own question in the negative, rather than leaving it open for replies.

If you weren't trolling, you might want to be a bit more careful with your posts.