April 25, 2014, 01:43:36 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 - moreorless

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 38
EOS Bodies / Re: Why a high MP camera?
« on: July 06, 2013, 12:51:41 PM »
I would hope for starters that those who think they want a high mp dslr are planning on printing big.

Lets define big for a second. 16x20 no ... 60x40 upwards yes. The level of clarity at large format print size will do it justice. Just for clarification I mean inches. Upwards of 60x40 usually mean the use of larger format cameras. Bigger megapixel dslr cameras in 135 format (that's 35mm in lay terms) might mean some users may not need to spend quite large to huge sums of money on medium format digital.

However, the larger sensor in those cameras give you more than just ability to print large. Hence why they won't wipe out the likes of phase one or hasselblad. They also give more colour clarity, contrast and things hard to describe unless I write an essay here.

I'm sure some will get my point.

You'll start to see the benefit of higher resolution well before 60x40 inches, I can start to see a noticble resolution difference between my old 550D and a D800 as small as 18 x 12 inches, by A2 its become clearer and by 30 x 20 its pretty obvious.

Sure - but there are excellent m43 primes that are relatively inexpensive (the best and most expensive is probably the Olympus 75mm f/1.8, which costs c. $900 - but the marvelous 45mm 1.8 and 60mm macro are half that).

Considering the sensor size I'v always felt m43 primes were rather expensive as well, I'm guessing because as with Leica building that much smaller costs more.

I look forward to the disappearance of mirrors, for various reasons.  Whatever else one might say about the relative performance of my Canon 5DII and 6D vs my Olympus OM-D, the latter invariably nails focus precisely (and it's nice to buy a new lens and not worry about front/back focusing, let alone trying to fix it).  I don't much care whether the resulting cameras are smaller (the top of the line Panasonic m43 body isn't much smaller than a 6D); in fact, as long as I'm going to be using my Canon lenses, I would prefer the body to be bigger for the reasons given by others. 

 do want a viewfinder, though.  In some ways electronic viewfinders are already superior to optical viewfinders.  I realize it's nice to see what you're photographing as you're photographing it, and what you see through an optical viewfinder is certainly nicer (though that will doubtless change as technology improves), but optical viewfinders are misleading - it's surely more useful to see through the viewfinder roughly how the image will look as you're taking that photo that waiting until you've taken it and checking on the monitor.  One of the OM-D's dials adjusts exposure, and it's nice to be able to do that while you're taking the photo, looking through the viewfinder and seeing what happens as you turn the dial.

The ideal situation would I'd say be a system like Fuji's recent cameras were you have an OVF and EVF in one finder, just have the mirror flip up at the touch of a button.

I do think we'll see a few compact FF mirrorless cameras in the coming years going after a market similar to Leica(but with AF) but I have my doubts there going to make up as much of the market as on ASPC/43 sensor sizes.

I actually think the more obvious size advantage would be when you push up to MF if theres a long term market for sensors that size. When you get to that size I think the mirrorbox clearly starts increasing the size of the camera beyond that which could be argued to be ergonomically ideal.

I wonder how good they can make pancake primes.

Have a look, how small, light, fast and good primes can be made: http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/lenses/

And contrary to urban legend, adding Ring-USM-AF to those lesnes would not cause additional bulk, but actually make them even smaller and lighter, once the utterly unneccessary manual focusing gear and focus ring will be finally exterminated. :-)

Look at what it'll cost you. ;)

TBH, lens size isn't that big an issue. If you want F1.2 lenses then yeah, sure.

But the 85 1.8 is half the weight and size of it's L big brother. Why Canon haven't released a light series of L's is beyond me.

Same size of the 1.8 but better coatings and refined optics. I don't need 1.2L but I need the image quality.

Its maybe not such a big issue for certain people who are happy with f/2ish primes in the wide to short tele range but how much of the market does that really make up? the majority of users still IMHO preffer to use zoom lenses with a recent range and on FF to get decent quality that means a minimum of 500g and a decent size.

I'm sure a decent sized market exists for FF mirrorless but I think the lens size issue is going to limate its appeal compared to ASPC where I do think mirrorless will gradually build market share as performance increases. Added to that of course the advanatges of an OVF are multipled on FF were as an EVF can be the same size on any format.

I was talking to one of my friend last night and ask him is he is going get the Mark III.  He said "It forgoes the SLR system that is outdated which allows for a much more compact body. Imagine having the functionality and image quality of a 5D mark III but with the size and weight of a compact point n shoot. "

If he wants the same coverage of focal length and aperture then this is likely physically impossible.

As has been said the other side of the debate is that a lot of people actually like the size of current DSLR's, look at something like the GH3 and its clearly much larger than it needs to be.

I'd add as well that to me there doesn't seem to against potentially going the Fuji route with DSLR's and having a viewfinder that can switch between an OVF and an EVF to potentially get the best of both, I won't be shocked if we see this from Canon in the future given the amount of focus there putting on video.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 02, 2013, 03:47:22 AM »
great ,  this sensor based AF is the future because this really helps getting rid of the annoying mirror, the slapping mirror is not really needed for digital sensored cameras.

fast LV AF is very important , if you shoot events with DSLR over crowds, you know it, the fast sensor based phase detection AF combined with swiveling screen is really interesting.

but too bad it does not have 60p, I probably get this one for testing soon any way, though.
I love the small body  of this camera and I actually like the look of it too.
But I hope next 5D gets this sensor based AF tech and swiveling screen +4k raw video, and hopefully usable ISO6400(I do not consider ISO6400 of any current camera usable at all).

any way, it is a great move and I much prefer this over any APS-C camera out there.

It'll be interesting to see how this compares with the AF systems of Canon's mirrorless rivals, if it beats them then that likely changes that market a good deal.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M or EOS SL1 ??
« on: June 30, 2013, 08:49:20 AM »
The viewfinder issue is I think one only you can answer although I'm guessing we'll probabley see a Canon mirrorless with EVF and the new 70D sensor latter this year or early next.

To me what makes the EOS-M tempting isn't the body or the EF adapter but the native EF-M lenses themselves. Granted we've only seen three released so far but in terms of quality and/or value they seem like there a step above all of their mirrorless rivals, arguably above most DSLR options aswell.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Future of EOS M [CR1]
« on: April 26, 2013, 10:08:08 PM »
yeah...if Canon can keep the price reasonable (good luck with that, tho), make it focus uber fast, have a great viewfinder and and comes out with some small fast primes people would want it to complement their FF or CF kit...but certainly as I mention in my post (you cut and copied the above out of context just to bash!) as the M is now...I cannot see many people who come to this site considering it for anything. :-)

The ironic thing for me is that dispite only having two lenses this is the area where Canon seems already to be to have an advanatge over Sony. Obviously the lineup is smaller but in terms of lenses I'd actually want to use the 22mm is both cheaper and faster than the Sony equivilent while the kit lens seems like it outperforms the Sony to a considerable degree aswell.

Personally I'd say the M's failiure thus far seems to partly be down to Canon's very SLR like approach to the market being a mismatch for mirrorless. Its a market where "sexy" rather than "dependable" sells IMHO, the casual user probabley has no idea of lens performance while the more serious user probabley looks past cheaper lenses.

The AF is obviously an issue but the original X100 was by all accounts hardly a speed demon but we heard much less about it because the camera had more in the way of "sexy" features.

EOS Bodies / Re: Future of APS-C Given 6D Pricing
« on: March 27, 2013, 07:07:44 AM »
i think the chance that the 7D MK2 will be fullframe is way below 1%.   :)

APS-C will still be wanted and needed by some for the extra reach.
even when you have a 800mm and a TC you will still have more reach using an APS-C camera.  ;)

so a PRO 7D MK2 makes absolute sense.

Indeed, I'd expect something pretty similar to the 5D3 but with an ASPC sensor, 10-12 FP, priced around the same as the 6D at launch but maybe dropping a bit less over time.

That still leaves room for say a non sealed, 5-6 FPS, old 7D AF 70D with the same sensor priced around the same as the D7100.

Lenses / Re: small primes to go with SL1?
« on: March 23, 2013, 12:00:04 PM »
I don't see wide angle primes in pan cake format for EF/EF-S mount because the flange distance doesn't allow very small lenses with high quality. You have to use a retrofocus design which needs negative lenses in front of positive groups and therefore consumes space. A very contrasty, sharp and distortion free lens like a f/4.0 25mm seems possible with perhaps 30mm length. But nothing more.

One existing pancake like lens is the Color Skopar of Voigtlander:
  * NO AF
  * Moderate IQ
  * small size
  * great mechanics
I never used it and I am not interested because I have the old 24mm f/2.8 from
Canon which is a little bit larger but gives me the IQ I need and is made from sturdy
but light plastics. Perhaps that lens is another alternative for the 100D (and should
be cheaply available).

SL II lens collection of voigtlander (except 58mm lens available for EF mount):

A test of the 20mm:

Best  - Michael

Some of Pentax's limated primes manage to be very small dispite being retrofocal and having AF.


I'm guessing you might need to make an SLR lens slower to get it down to the same size but if your looking at a cheaper EF-S lens f2.8 is probabley fast enough.

I wouldnt be supprized if the SL1 was devolped pretty quickly, faster maybe than any more compact lenses for it could be. The new 18-55mm while actually larger than the previous lens does at least offer things like fulltime manual focusing, a focus ring and a non rotating front element, makes for a smaller alternative to the likes of the 17-85mm, 15-85mm and 18-135mm if you want those things and not the range.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-b Images Leak & a New Kit Lens
« on: March 21, 2013, 02:11:15 PM »
I'd love a small camera with EF mount, that would be awesome, but this is not it for me. I have to say that very small DSLR are very ugly, this being the ugliest of all. I'm sure that it has the build quality of a Bic pen. If it had the smooth design of a NEX for example it would totally hit the spot and I think it would sell like crazy..

I'm guessing Canon's view is that they'll target the market that cares more about "style" with the EOS M and the market that just wants a smaller body but the functions of a DSLR with the 100D.

What is I'd say really lacking at the moment is compact lens support for the 100D, add an EF-S version of the 22mm F/2 EF-M and I think your looking at a potentially very popular camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 100D Detailed Specs Appear
« on: March 18, 2013, 08:11:11 AM »
If I wanted a body this small I'd invest in a m4/3 mirrorless system instead.  When I think of wanting something more compact, I think of both the body AND the lenses.  A super small body will be really unbalanced when you add larger lenses to it, even EF-S.  Pricing is kind of out there too.  Meh.

I think it makes more sense when you consider it agenst m43, you want a body with an SLR form factor and an EVF and your paying a significant amount more than this.

It also of course offers an option to existing EF/EF-S lens users looking for a smaller second camera with the same mount.

We don't of course know what kind of lens support Canon might offer in the future, maybe a powered zoom or a wider pancake?

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 100D Coming? [CR1]
« on: March 18, 2013, 07:36:44 AM »
We don't of course know what kind of standard this camera might be built to, it maybe of a higher quality than the Rebel line. Even if its not though I'm guessing Canon are banking on its compact nature to sell at a prenium, not really that unrealistic considering the prenium you pay for m43 bodies with DSLR like form factor and an EVF.

The other side I spose is lens size, the 40mm pancake is an option I spose but a bit long, a shorter EF-S pancake or a powered zoom would IMHO help such a camera alot.

EOS Bodies / Re: A New DSLR Line from Canon? [CR1]
« on: March 12, 2013, 01:02:34 PM »
why does this have to be entry level? why cant Canon make a full frame interchangeable lens camera with a form smaller than a DSLR.
I know some of you out there cant hold tiny cameras, but for me, walking or carrying a backpack for 8 or 12 hours in a day around town, or walking to work, traveling, size and quality is everything... along with quick and accurate AF.
Canon, please make this dream of mine come true.

The 6D does seem to be looking to cater for a smaller FF body so I'm not sure we'll see something similar released in the next couple of years.

To me the most obvious gap in Canon's DSLR lineup seems to a be a high end but compact ASPC body akin to say the K-5, perhaps taken even further. Canon still seems to hold to the "bigger = better" line of marketing but I think were starting to see a change there with the likes of the NEX 7 and the XE-1. Of course bigger does equal better within those lineups but the higher end mirrorless bodies are I'd guess taking more of there market share from DSLR's than entry level mirrorless.

A Rebel sized(but nicer styled) body with say the latest sensor, 7D AF/FPS and metal/sealed build would IMHO do alot to combat this.

EOS Bodies / Re: What about a more versatile sensor dimensions?
« on: March 04, 2013, 04:15:37 PM »
I'm guessing too many lenses like the 24-105mm have plastic covering the image circle that would be needed for a square sensor, might be interesting for a new system though.

I'v always thought going the other way might be interesting, more panoramic rather than squarer. Some people preffer the wider aspect and having say a sensor the width of FF but the height of ASPC would potentially save money on the sensor/mirror/viewfinder while still allowing EF lenses. Heck if were really getting fantasy make it mirrorless and include a built in shift function so you can use as much image circle as on FF.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 38