October 21, 2014, 01:43:19 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 - moreorless

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 45
1
Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: Today at 03:04:05 AM »

2
Landscape / Re: Within Forests
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:14:56 AM »
Hawkscombe Valley, Exmoor, UK




3
Black & White / Re: Black and White Landscapes!
« on: October 06, 2014, 04:14:15 AM »

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 04, 2014, 01:33:33 PM »
Canon released a new EF-s lens this year - the 10-18IS STM.  They released two new EF-s lenses in 2013, the 18-55IS STM and the 55-250IS STM.

So, from March 21st, 2013 to now, they've released three lenses that cover a 16mm to 400mm equivalent zoom range for the EF-s mount.

You forgot the EF-S 24 / 2.8 pancake.
On the other hand i would not count iterations of the kit zoom or the 55-250 as "new lenses".

If were talking about keeping the EF-S mount for entry level bodies then I would say the 18-55mm especially is actually a very important lens, no advance in specs but in terms of performance and build its a clear upgrade.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Next Rebel Going EVF? [CR1]
« on: October 03, 2014, 06:49:08 AM »
Right and because of color gamut issues (amongst others), you'll never see on your monitor at home or on paper what it is that you saw through the viewfinder that was glass and mirrors. In which case, what value does the optical view finder have if the colors that you see will not be the colors that are captured and displayed later?

To be fair though a monitor or a printer at home do have the potential to be much better calibrated than an EVF in a camera. The biggie for me though would be getting maximum dynamic range so I can compose for areas of a picture I intend to lift in post.

I can definitely see an EOS mount camera with some form of EVF(either replacing the OVF or a hybrid viewfinder) in the not too distant future if only to cater to the video market, not sure I see a Rebel next year though.

For one thing the Rebel line will likely be getting the 70D/7D2 sensor, I don't think theres a problem with that as the 7D2 is being sold on AF, FPS and handling not the sensor plus even the 70D now has the old 7D AF unit. You add in wifi as well and that's already a bigger shift in the Rebel likeup than we've had since the T2i/550D years ago.

My opinion would be as well that the EOS mount isn't really that well suited for very small mirrorless bodies. Of course any DSLR mount will have a long flange distance BUT the EOS mount is also pretty large compared to say the F-mount meaning more empty space. I spose you could argue that space could be used for recessed lens designs but I'm not sure Canon or Nikon want to get into the position of producing lenses that can't just not be used on certain other bodies but will damage them.

The EF-M lens lineup might not be very deep but honestly I think it covers a lot of the needs of the average entry level users anyway, maybe add in a normal macro lens(say a 50mm F/2.8 2:1) and I think you've covered 95% of the market. Canon have a real advantage in terms of lens performance/value at the moment I would say plus I suspect a lot of the reason for the EF-M project is simply to devalue the market as a whole. If theres an EF-M body with EVF and decent controls with that lens lineup I think some of the current high end mirrorless prices will not be sustainable.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?
« on: September 27, 2014, 04:52:34 PM »
The interesting question for me would be if Canon came up with a new camera line for high resolution should it be priced above or below the 5D line? most of what I'v heard tends to suggest people think it would be above but really I would argue that high resolution may actually be more price sensitive. I think your talking a lot of amateur landscape shooters there and even when your talking pro its often people without massive incomes.

My shot in the dark quess would be that the 5D4 will have a lot of video functionality stuff like 4K,  dual pixel AF, tilt/flip screen, hybrid OVF/EVF, etc.

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC Gets First Test
« on: September 25, 2014, 01:17:38 AM »
Am I the only person who was not impressed by the foreground bokeh on that page of text image? The back bokeh looked better.

Probably not a big issue on many shots for a lens like this though as the subject will need to be pretty close to push parts of the image out of focus.

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC Gets First Test
« on: September 24, 2014, 11:29:25 AM »
Certainly an interesting lens, I ended up going with the 16-35mm VR for my D800 rather than the 14-24mm due to the stabilisation, range and easier filter systems with the former. If this Tamron really does perform well it would certainly be tempting although the filter issue would still be there, a bit less range but the 16-35mm isn't great above 30mm anyway and for me its the 28mmish range that's more important.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 23, 2014, 07:21:50 AM »
Maybe FF mirrorless size saving would be greater with a larger mount that can allow such big rear elements to avoid issues with light dropoff and boarder softness?

no MAYBE there. The BIGGER the freakin' hole in the body compared to sensor inside is, the EASIER it is to design
  • optically better and/or
  • smaller and lighter and/or
  • less pricey
lenses.

Sony/Zeiss FE lenses are so ridiculously expensive and huge, because that mount hole is simply too small relative to the FF sensor inside.  Sony made a huge mistake using the APS-C sized E-mount hole as basis for their new FF mirrorless line. It is a totally unnecessary weak spot built-in from the very start and this achilles heel will hurt them ever more year after year, as competitors will come to market with better, cheaper and more compact lens ranges for FF sensored MILCs.

Canon EF-M lenses are so damn small, damn good and downright cheap, because the EF-M mount - like all current Canon mounts EF7EF-S/EF-M - has a really generous clearance and is very well-sized relative to the sensor inside [and to the chosen flange distance]. And no, EF-M cannot possibly handle an FF sensor in an uncompromised, meaningful and quality fashion. Luckily Canon has repeatedly also stated this and will not compromise on that one. 8)

I wouldn't be surprised, to me the whole FE system looked like it was thrown together in a bit of a mad rush to be first to market and could potentially highlight why that isn't always a good idea. You look back to the AF revolution and the EF mount was actually quite late to the party but ended up dominating by providing better performance.

On other difference I could see with a Canon FF mirrorless system would be that unlike Sony it likely wouldn't be trying to replace FF DSLR's but rather aiming for specifically at the small camera market. Sony are IMHO clearly trying to use this system to makeup for their failure to build more market share with the FF A-mount, Canon aren't in that situation. I could see the end result being rather similar to the EOS M system, for the kind of market who buys a camera like that(generally in Japan) the lenses are very well targeted, especially in terms of not crippling kit options the way Sony tend to, I could see a similar kind of lineup for a FF system, half a dozen or so lenses would probably give most users what there after(normal/UWA zooms, f/2 primes plus maybe a short  f/2.8 macro) anything else could be adapted from EF.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 23, 2014, 02:14:26 AM »
<p>According to an interview with Mr Makoto Sakaeta Masaya, the managing director of Canon Image Communication Business Division. Canon is exploring the possibility of a new lens mount. I suspect its application would be for a full frame mirrorless system of some kind.</p>

in no place in this interview was full frame mentioned - just the reverse - the intent of the interview was that things should be made smaller - such as 1" sensor / m43's as the quality of those sensors improve.

not to mention the current EF-M throat dimension once you remove the baffling can already support a full frame sensor.

full frame doesn't do anything for the miniturization of the "system" which is what Masaya was talking about.

everyone's running amok on this thread - and there's no indication whatsoever that canon's making a bigger than APS-C MILC.

(the only thing that would make sense for bigger than APS-C would be medium format)

One possibility would be as I mentioned that Sony by shoehorning FF lenses into a mount ment for ASPC lenses has actually compromised its FE system.

Again look at the RX1 one lens design with the massive rear element...



Maybe FF mirrorless size saving would be greater with a larger mount that can allow such big rear elements to avoid issues with light dropoff and boarder softness?

I'd agree people have run riot with any idea of FF mirrorless but I wouldn't say its impossible, beyond the above point remember of course that the EF-M system is quite limited anyway so linking it to a FF mirrorless one wouldn't really matter that much. Personally I see relatively little benefit of linking even the larger E-mount system, all the FE lenses are large an expensive and don't see like something an ASPC user would buy unlike the EF mount that offers quite a few lenses attractive to ASPC users,

Besides that and MF another possibility I spose is a system more like the Nikon 1 and targeting it with lenses like the new 70-300mm Nikon have just released as a small action/wildlife camera.

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Opens Up About Their Roadmap
« on: September 22, 2014, 03:56:35 PM »
Sigma's 24-70 & 70-200 are mediocre at best and need an update and  that'll come in 2.8 i believe. Although I'd be all over a 24-70/2 it doesnt make market sense and it'll probably be a niche piece. I think a 24-50/2 or 28-50/2 seems more plausible.

That would be my guess, a 24-70mm F/2 would likely be too large/expensive to get a significant market, as you say I think any F/2 zoom would likely be shorter range.

As far as DSLR's go I think Sigma should try and get there sensors into something more the size of a rebel at a much lower price than the SD1. Right now it just seems a waste of a sensor that punches above its size at base ISO IQ to have it in a FF size and price body.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 22, 2014, 10:16:03 AM »
The M-mount, with a 58mm throat diameter, is unfortunately not that much smaller than the EF mount. The MFT mount, on the other hand, has a 38mm throat diameter and the NX system a 42mm throat diameter. If Canon wants to imitate these systems then, yes, they might introduce a smaller lens mount.

I wonder actually whether the reverse might be true for a FF mirrorless system. Look at this shot of the internals of the RX1 lens...



That's one heck of a big rear element(looks too large to fit in a regular E-mount), I'm no optics expert but I wonder whether its there to help deal with the issue of extreme light angles hitting the sensor? certainly the RX1 lens seems to be more compact for its specs than any of the FE lenses(the 35mm f/2.8 is about the same size but a stop slower with worse macro ability, the new 35mm 1.4 far larger).

So perhaps whilst it may technically be possible to fit FF coverage into an EF-M lens its actually a better option to go with something that has a larger mount diameter to allow for a big correcting rear element and so smaller lenses?

m43 might have a smaller mount size but relative to the sensor size its actually a lot larger than the the Sony FE system.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 22, 2014, 08:10:37 AM »
Good step forward. The M system is a total flop.

2nd best selling mirrorless camera in Japan last year if I remember correctly, significant seller in the west at its lower price.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Looking Into a New Mount System
« on: September 22, 2014, 07:06:38 AM »
Hopefully it's going to be a -Medium format / Full frame mount.

That was the first thing that came to mind for me, that Sony CMOS MF sensor does seem to make it more likely that another big player(Sony, Nikon, Fuji, etc) might give MF a try which could well have Canon looking to respond.

If it were a FF mirrorless mount(can the EF-M mount take FF? I remember seeing some analysis that it could) my guess would be that Canon would come up with something similar to the EF-M setup at the moment. Maybe a body that offers a bit more control but generally a system aimed a keeping things small with a handful of compact lenses rather than a full system which would be kept for DSLR's.

One thing I'm starting to wonder as well is whether the cheap EOS M stock in the west isn't just as was first suspected a case of Canon selling unwanted product but rather a direct plan to devalue the mirrorless market? how long has it been since the big EOS M price drops? almost a year? I can see the logic to doing this as it avoids pushing DSLR prices too low whilst Canon don't have to recoup a relatively small investement(by the standard of other companies) in mirrorless. Could they try something similar with FF? introduce a basic beyond below the 6D.

15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Most exciting thing at Photokina?
« on: September 21, 2014, 12:07:36 PM »
Without a doubt, the Panasonic CM1 phone, with a one inch sensor. This is the ice-breaker, there will be many more high-end camera phones soon.

This kind of phone/camera will kill-off what's left of the P&S market. And it should convert a lot of photo-phone h8ters ;)

I've been saying, for several years, that sometime soon, a Vogue cover would be shot with a smart phone. The time may finally have arrived :)

Whilst that might well be possible lets be realistic it would still be a gimmick rather than using the best tool for the job. What this does show I'd say though is that the 1 inch sensor is likely going to become the minimum standard for any decent compact besides very long superzooms.

In that respect though I do think it makes high end compacts a bit safer since whilst phones with 1 inch sensors and wide primes may still be possible to keep the size manageble your not likely to do so for anything with a significant zoom.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 45