Messages

1321

EOS Bodies / Re: Eye control

« on: June 19, 2011, 09:01:29 AM »

I've read elsewhere on this forum in another thread, people really complaining about the eye-control, couldn't get used to it, didn't want to spend a while training it, hated it, etc blah blah.
I've never used it (although i think my sis had it on her eos 50), but the one thing i do know is _if you don't like it, turn it off_.

the only arguement i can see against it is the 'i don't want to pay for something i'm not going to use'. yeah well, get used to it. how many people regularly change between all their different focus modes? us af microadjustment on every lens? use white-balance and ev bracketing?  high iso and long exposure noise reduction, lighting optimiser, illumination correction in every shot? (probably not the people who shoot raw-only). record cards-full of HD movie at 3x zoom?

half your camera is stuff you're never going to use all the time. you want a simple camera? buy a film or a leica M9.

I say bring it back, i'd be interested in trying it out on my next body. at the least i'd certainly use it for zone-selection on my 7d...

1322

EOS Bodies / Re: 60D + EFS17-55 f/2.8 - £1000 at Tesco

« on: June 19, 2011, 04:42:14 AM »

this one?
both of those are €870 each at my shop, that's gotta be a typo.
but then again, look at the standard £1,588.97 Save £589.00.
so maybe they do know what they're doing.
also, the 60d + 18-55 IS is £914.97
if you've got the cash, buy a few and sell them on ebay...

1323

EOS Bodies / Re: 3D (Again) & 5D Mark III (CR1)

« on: June 19, 2011, 04:33:49 AM »

when even TDP is talking about the 1ds3 being out of stock, it's worth noticing (maybe he's got some info about the replacement and is being a bit cryptic about it, without breaking an NDA?)

my local shop doesn't even list the 1ds3 on the page any more.
the 1d4, 60d, and 1100d are in stock in 1 shop+web, 5d2 and 7d both out of stock everywhere, 600d only 1 shop, 550d both shops, 500d both shops+web.

(aside: every dutch employee gets a summer holiday bonus (8% of yearly income) paid in may. mine paid for my 70-300L (and i got the last one in the shop). maybe they're out of stock because people went on a spending spree?)

my guess at canon's manufacturing process is that they tool-up a line for one model at a time, build as many as they think they'll sell before the next run, then switch to another model.
If they sell more than they think, say, because of a recovery from recession, or if the time between runs is longer, say, due to an earthquake and power shortages, then they'll just run out before the next run, whether it's being replaced or not. (but yeah, if a replacement's coming, they just might not bother with a new run)

1324

Lenses / Re: EF 20 mm f.2,8

« on: June 19, 2011, 04:18:16 AM »

personally i wouldn't bother in any f2.8 prime (except >200mm), you can get just as good images from recently-released zooms these days. (compare the photozone.de reviews of the 70-300L and the 300 f4L, they even say the prime isn't any better than the zoom (except for the wider aperture)).

there's only one reason i think anyone would consider it nowadays, and that's size+weight (or maybe cost).

I'm definitely hopeful that one day the wide-prime-nonL lenses will get an upgrade, but i'm not holding my breath.

Canon have this mentality of "if you can afford a 5d2 or 1ds3, you can afford a 17-40L or 16-35L or a 24/35 f1.4L, and if you can only afford an aps-c then you'll only want the 17-55 f2.8 and if you want a faster prime then you won't be able to see how crap our 20-year old lenses are on your low-quality aps-c sensor because if you cared about quality you'd buy a 5d2 with a Xmm 1.4L"

rubbish, and i'm still hopeful that since the release of the 7D canon might realise that even professionals care about image quality and are using aps-c. we still don't even have a 'normal' length affordable decent quality fast prime
- 35f2 is a bit squishy at f2, not worth the savings from 17-55 f2.8 for the extra speed.
- sigma 30 f1.4 is very soft on the borders.
- 35 1.4L is just too expensive (and huge).
- personally i'm scouring ebay for old manual focus primes in this range, they still beat the 35f2.

so back to original point: i see very very little chance of this ever being updated, f2.8 primes just won't sell well, unless it has the quality of an L in the same size/weight/cost bracket. If anything we might get a 28 f1.8 replacement, (i'd be happy with efs 28f2), or maybe a 35f2 replacement (efs 35 f1.4-1.8 would be better)

1325

EOS Bodies / Re: 3D (Again) & 5D Mark III (CR1)

« on: June 16, 2011, 06:32:17 PM »

a) i've just shared a bottle of wine.
b) i'm not the best at reading patents.
c) i didn't read the text anyway

but d) that diagram, using 3-level-sensors only sensitive to one colour each, looks suspiciously like a Sigma DP1 sensor. It would certainly make a good marketing spin: "The 3D, with 3-Layer sensor!"

<edit> and e), now that i read the text it says foveon-type anyway... but more power to the company that tries something new. will it give up more dynamic range? i'm sure most people are tired of megapixel wars and would rather more dr than mp in the next round...</edit>

Cool if Canon can pull one off, from what i hear they give better res than a regular sensor for the same MP, i just hope Sigma don't give them a bad name with their $10k joke...

1326

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D mrk. II

« on: June 16, 2011, 06:22:57 PM »

If it is capable of 12 fps then nobody will buy the 1D Mark IV anymore.
Personally I'm hoping for an NTFS-like file system that supports files over 4 GB, and I expect more megapixels.

1) possibly true. but some people still buy 1ds3 years after 5d2 came out. (some people > nobody)
2) ReiserFS! it's free and it's open source! (sorry, my inner linux nerd wrote that)

1327

EOS Bodies / Re: 3D (Again) & 5D Mark III (CR1)

« on: June 16, 2011, 06:19:22 PM »

some where saying that canons glass cant bring out the best of the 21MP sensor nevermind a higher MP

Some lenses can get the best of a 40-50mp+ sensor, but some start to show their squidgyness at above 8mp.

The last year canon have anounced a lot of updates of their long primes and zoom, 300&400 f2.8, 500&600 f4, the 70-200 f2.8is, and the 200-400 f4 1.4x whatever it's called.
The image quality of those, according to canon's MTF charts at least, will be stunning (i hope in real life too).
I reckon they will keep up with sensor resolutions to be released in the future until the next lens update, which could be up to 10 years from now...

(ok, now we need an update on the wide-angle side of things in 2011, only 7 months left...)

1328

EOS Bodies / Re: ISO 50

« on: June 16, 2011, 07:29:42 AM »

You can set custom functions to use 1/3 or 1-stop values for ISO, does that also count for when in auto-mode? (i use manual Av/Tv with auto ISO a lot for animals going in and out of shadows quickly)

I heard (another poster on this forum) say the "native iso" of a 7d is 160. does anyone have any (ie, concrete) proof of this? (can't google, at work).

i read on a review of the IQ180 Medium Format back that its native ISO was something like 35 (ok, so that's an MF back).
Likewise, I would have thought that every camera sensor had its own "native ISO", different to every other sensor, dependant on manufacturing process, sensitivity of silicon and circuits used, etc.
"ISO" is just the native unmultiplied number that comes out of the pixel, timesed by 'something' so that every time we set any camera to the same settings, we get the same exposed picture. in that case, the "native iso" is just what comes out when the 'something' = 1.
Going down to 100 or down to 50 or whatever, doesn't mean that either is the 'native', it's just where the engineers/marketing department think they can get away with it...

1329

EOS Bodies / Re: 3D (Again) & 5D Mark III (CR1)

« on: June 15, 2011, 03:46:48 PM »

1. Canon will not release a camera called 3D, unless it shoots 3d pics. It would be insane to do so. Many have pointed this out, and they are right.

yes, yes they are right. It's a bit far fetched, but can't we dream of a DSLR 3D(imensional) camera?

Nothing like those old Soviet 3d cameras on 120 film, that would be nice but way too bulky. Maybe if we buy two, we can join them together, get 2 exactly the same prime lenses and take 3D photos? (even using zooms would be possible, get them both 'about right' and let software line up the details and crop to the right area)

ok, so the market for this would be tiny, or would it? i would definitely file it under one of those expensive advertising stunts of top-end products that inspire lower-end sales. Sigh, dreams...

1330

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Autofocus

« on: June 15, 2011, 03:33:58 PM »

I've got a 7d, and frankly, i'd put up with less AF points if they were better spread out.

For anyone who doesn't know, they're in a diamond shaped around the centra, of course, but only take up maybe half the height and 2/3 to 3/4 of the width. there's a whole big border that has nothing.
I was taking some photos of birds diving at sea on the weekend. There's a good proportion that were out of focus (more to the point, focussed on the waves in the background) and the bird is still fuzzily in frame, but on the edge.
Give me less AF points, give me more, don't care, but put them closer to the borders.

Nikon has 51 AF points on the top 6 models i just clicked through on wikipedia (D3/s/x, D700, D300/s), and the D7000 has 39 points. I've never used one, so i can't comment on quality vs quantity, but if number is all we're talking about then they have little to no differentiation in their model numbers.


My 2c: The only way that the 7D2 is getting a new AF system is:
a) if the 1d5 and/or 1ds4 come out first, with >46-point system. Then the 45-point is 'old-tech' and can trickle down to the 'lesser' 7d2. (same way as the sensors trickled from 1ds3->5d2 and 7d->60d->600d->550d)
b) canon actually change their 'trickle-down' strategy they seem to have used all along, and more interestingly, they make something new 19<x<45-point for the 7d2 and give the 5d2 the 19-point from the 7d. (more fun, but less likely, trickle-down does have advantages for R&D costs and volume-savings...)

1331

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II

« on: June 14, 2011, 06:55:42 PM »

So i was bored and thought i'd do some comparisons of MTF charts from www.photozone.de all in one go.

efs 55-250, currently €220
ef 100-300, €320 (nearly a 55-250 plus a niftyfifty) (nb this one reviewed on the 350d)
ef 70-300 nonL, €470 (2x the 55-250)
ef 70-300L, €1350 (6x efs55-250 and a few crates of beer)

<well yeah, i did have a chart here, was just a screenshot comparing the MTF charts of the above 4 lenses side-by-side>

ok, so the focal lengths aren't all exactly the same, but here's my conclusions:

widest end, all fairly similar, maybe the 70-300 non-L is the loser. the 55-250 @ 250/5.6 is almost touching the L @70/5.6 in centre resolution. (100-300 is probably out-resolving the 350d it was tested on).

at 135mm the 55-250 is down a bit on resolution (but barrel/pin is almost nothing)

200mm, you get what you pay for, although the 2 cheapest lenses are roughly the same if you average centre/corner.

longest end gets interesting, the 100-300 falls apart, but it is the oldest. 55-250 beats the 70-300nonL. The L wins of course, but not by much at the longest end.

So coming from someone who doesn't own the 55-250 (i did own the 70-300 nonL and just upgraded to the L), i'm going to say i'm impressed for what it can do, for the price. But then, i'm also impressed with the newest 18-55IS kit lenses (given that they're the same price of a niftyfifty, which i also own and love).


<i also thought i had a comment about how canon did get a lot of flack for their first kit lenses, check the MTF of the first 18-55 non-IS models. but they've definitely made up for lost ground with the latest 18-55 IS, as well as the res of the 55-250>

and back to the USM vs non arguements, i think if you gave joe average who'd only ever used a point and shoot the option, faster focussing, sharper pictures, or both for a higher price, i'd say there's a fairly good chance he'd go for the sharper pictures (hey, i would too, normally).
my old point and shoot took about 2 seconds to focus every time. both the 50/1.8 and 70-300 non-L were blazing fast compared. between those two stepping up to the efs15-85 and 70-300L ringusm lenses, the difference is noticable (definitely quieter, and the speed is just noticably faster).

1332

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II

« on: June 14, 2011, 03:38:44 AM »

And what is this constant worry about lens/camera weight these days?  What is up with these people who review their lens as "a bit heavy"? Isn't heavy usually more durable?

To us, who know what we're talking about, who love our photography, who in general own at least a 7d/5d or more, who bother to read these forums, yes, yes it does.

But we're not talking about the 'prosumer' or professional who only make up what, 10-20%, maybe 30% of the new-body market sales?

We're talking about joe average who's spent his whole life so far with a P&S, maybe he's even got one of those 35x 'superzoom' half compact thingies, who might have saved up a few hundred $ and 'splurged' on a 550/600d.

Either way, he's going to be impressed with IQ moving up from them. Of course, he'd be more impressed moving up to an L zoom, but he can't see the point now in lugging all that extra weight an expense for that little bit better shot, from where he's coming from an efs 55-250 is crystal clear already.
And these kinds of people are only going to pull them out on family vacations anyway, smiling happy kids, maybe a bird in a tree in a campsite, the dog running on the beach. It's going to be durable enough for that. They won't be wading through swamps to get a good photo of the last endangered whatever.
And, coming from spending $200 on a P&S to maybe $700 on a dslr kit, that's big money to them, they're going to baby it anyway,  it's gonna be a lot more expensive than the last few P&S cameras they bought put together.

1333

Lenses / Re: Odds of patents models seeing actual day light and time frame ?

« on: June 13, 2011, 02:24:11 PM »

just looking through this...

50 f1.4, definitely needs replacing
28 f2.8, i want faster but i'd still consider it if the price was right
28 1.8DO, 24 1.4DO, i'd buy them if the price was right, even if too expensive i want them released.
70-300L and efs55-250 - released already
efs 11f2. i'll be first in line if it's cheap enough (ie, cheaper than a 5d+14 f2.
evil patent, damn i want one of them too. make a tilt/shift adapter from evil-mount to ef-mount and i'm sold...
600 f5.6DO, interesting...
24-70 f2.8 ii, it's coming, more of 'when' than 'if'...
17-55 f2 is, it's coming, f2 or 2.8, maybe not for a few years (i'd rather 15-60 f2.8 though)
14-24 fisheye? weird...
60 f2.8 macro, not yet.
70-200 2.8L ii, and we're back at the beginning of the list, dec6 2009, only the third listed here to be released yet.

3 of all them seeing the light of day isn't a good hitrate, is it?

1334

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon 50mm Æ’1.8

« on: June 13, 2011, 11:43:55 AM »

I love this lens, not least because it only cost me €90. Compare it to the 50 1.4, or the 35f2, 28f2.8 etc, but i wouldn't have bought them anyway, i only got my niftyfifty because it was so cheap.

Here's a nice bunch of flowers, 7D, iso100, 1/200s, f2, on the carpet with the sun coming through the glass doors open behind me (hence the shadow on the left). I don't think it's soft even at f2, nor lacking contrast. this is the camera jpg, no raw or enhancements at all (except 4:3 cropping and shrinkage for web)
And a 100% crop. It's sharp enough for me, and definitely sharp enough for €90...

1335

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II

« on: June 13, 2011, 10:04:18 AM »

Must be a cost-effectiveness decision.
The only reason they'd do this is
a) to compete with the 3rd party superzooms with better IQ (i'm looking at you, tamron 18-270 etc).
b) for the people who were going to buy the 55-250 v1 anyway, maybe the v2 is cheaper to make?


I know they've just updated a lot on the very high end (big white primes and the 2-400) and the very low end (18-55 IS ii and now this).

time from 55-250 to 55-250 ii = 4 years.
time from 28 f1.8 = 16+ years
time from 35 f2 = 21+ years and counting.
time until efs 25-35ish f1.4-f2ish = not holding my breath

So how about something for the aps-c prosumer? we can't all afford L-primes, but the IQ of your cheaper and slightly slower versions is just plain squidgy sometimes...