September 17, 2014, 06:01:07 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 ... 44
Reviews / Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« on: August 08, 2014, 03:28:26 PM »

Of course, Canon isn't Hasselblad or Phase One, so like Leica, Canon's market research can't possibly be accurate.  ::)
Wow neuro this makes you look even dumber. It's a rumor at best, canon hasn't said anything, and why would they enter a market where Leica said there is no sales beyond 6000 units? Oh that's right because they know Leica is full of it and will research it anyway.

Canon didn't take Leicas word for it, because they aren't as dumb as you to keep quoting them. They also aren't saying pretentiously about a number because phase1 and Hasselblad aren't just going to give them exact sales figures.

I'm guessing its probably less "mistrusting Leica" and more looking into what kind of market could be created with a system that potentially offers improved functionality and/or a lower price than existing MF.

At present you sacrifice quite a lot of functionality going MF relative to Canon and Nikons best 35mm DSLR's, I remember talking to my second cousin who shoots a lot of pro travel photography and he ultimately sold his Hassleblad system and went with a 1DX for that reason.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doing Market Research on Medium Format?
« on: August 08, 2014, 01:53:27 PM »
MF only has reduced DOF if the lenses are built proportionally. Currently, no MF system is capable of producing shallower DOF than a Canon system. It was true in the film days, and it's even more true now.

With the same level of technology (for example, putting a roll of Tri-X in a Nikon and another roll into a Bronica), you have to double the diagonal for there to be a noticeable difference in the image quality.

My wall is full of very large prints made from cameras from the 30D to the 5D, Mk II. I'd challenge anybody to tell which ones were made with the FF camera vs the APS cameras. There just isn't that big of a difference between APS-C and FF. I only switched because of the lenses.

In this respect I actually see more reason for Nikon to go MF than Canon, at present there at a disadvantage with DOF control as there seemingly unable to create F/1.2 lenses with AF due to the smaller size of the F mount where as Canon have shown they can create F/1 lenses if needed. Going MF would give them the chance to come up with something with similar of better DOF control.

I disagree with your point about needing to double the diagonal to see an improvement in image quality but I suspect a big factor will be whether 35mm lenses can be designed easily to make the best of 50 MP+ sensors or whether MF might actually make designs easier.

Is there not a flange distance issue w/ EF TS lenses?

There is actually a Russian company that's designed a camera specifically for the Canon T/S lenses if I remember correctly although its not an SLR. When you look at the focal lengths I can understand why, the 17mm is wider than any native medium format lens I know of.

The talk about the Leica S does I'd say show you the problem Pentax have with there digital 44x33mm system, its still using a 645 flange distance that's I'd guess about 20mm longer than it needs to be resulting in a massive(I'd guess partly empty) box infront of the camera. They would IMHO have been smarter to go with a smaller flange distance like Leica and just make an adapter for the older lenses.

I liked the 645Z but the its the lens lineup that kept me from buying one.

They have just released a 28-45mm wideangle zoom with IS but its priced at the same kind of level as the 25mm.

If there looking to really exploit the low light/shallow DOF potential of the camera I'd say they need to put out a lens with at least F/2.
They needed some LS primes.

There is an older 75mm F/2.8 with a leaf shutter I believe but they do clearly lag behind something like the S2.

At present the Pentax 645 system seems to be aimed much more at Landscape/Macro users.

I liked the 645Z but the its the lens lineup that kept me from buying one.

They have just released a 28-45mm wideangle zoom with IS but its priced at the same kind of level as the 25mm.

If there looking to really exploit the low light/shallow DOF potential of the camera I'd say they need to put out a lens with at least F/2.

EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII - where are the leaks ??
« on: August 05, 2014, 01:03:00 PM »
I'm guessing a big issue here is that Canon and Nikon seem likely to be in very direct competision with the 7D2 and the D400 so both are keeping an extra tight lid on any specs.

EOS-M / Re: The firesale begins... EOS M in UK £199
« on: July 30, 2014, 10:51:13 AM »
Seriously tempting as a street shooting body, whats the AF performance like now with the updates?

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 18, 2014, 08:05:01 AM »
I imagine similar conversations took place in Britain in the 1960's when the first Japanese motorbikes arrived in the UK. At first they just weren't good enough, compared to Nortons and Triumphs. Early adopters were sneered at, the proud riders of Brit iron rumbled and roared into the distance (usually stopping around the corner to fix oiled plugs).

But the Japanese persisted and they got better, bit by bit. More Hondas and Kawasakis appeared and people started to actually enjoy them, their ease of use and their reliability gained supporters. The Brit manufacturers secure in the vocal support of their customers dismissed the upstarts.

As the product developed their handling improved, their performance improved - they were of course always more reliable.

Then another new generation of products arrived and suddenly they were faster, better handling and of course still more reliable and cheaper - much cheaper. Almost overnight the British bike industry disappeared, the manufacturers just couldn't grasp that people are ultimately pragmatic, often conservative but ultimately pragmatic.

Why buy a bike that is slower, doesn't handle or brake as well and is a hassle to own and use when compared to the new stuff and much more expensive? Answer only an idiot or sentimentalist would and there just weren't enough of those about to support an industry.

I own a Canon 60d, I'm pretty happy with it, but I'm thinking of upgrading, so I await the new 7D mk2 with interest. But I wonder how good will it be? How much better for example will it be compared to a Panasonic GH4?

It will definitely be a lot more expensive, the body will likely be 20% heavier and (assuming the 7D is an APSC) all of the lenses will be much larger.
So will the new Canon's feature set and image quality be a sufficient step above the GH4 to justify the cost and weight?

 Will  I go from my old Triumph to a flash Norton or jump for the Kawasaki?

You could of course just as easily point to many products that were talked up as likely to upset and existing market that roundly failed to do so, indeed Sony themselves have been behind two of the most famous ones in recent decades with Betamax and Minidiscs.

Where this question becomes relevant of course is whether it should inform your buying decisions today. In that reguard I have a lot more confidence that the EOS and F mounts will be well supported in 5 years than I do any current mirror less mount.

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 17, 2014, 01:21:15 PM »

Pretty good point but of course it all comes down to numbers.   Economics of scale and all of that.  Im a DSLR guy myself.  DSLR for Video and stills and have a BMCC as well for video only.  How large a market will FF have in 3-5 years and will it be large enough to merit continued investment?  I like your point and Im thinking that we might see a much smaller product line down the road if the demand shrinks more.

I worked for Apple for 15 years and I'm well aware of what technology can do and how focused companies like Apple are. Apple with a market cap 10x that of Canon and Nikon put together has no intention to pull back on developing what small mobile products can do.  Of course a smart phone is not a FF camera "Duh" ... but its all about market economics pure and simple.

Personally my view is that Canon have probably taken the right decision in trying to target video more with there very high end professional releases. For the amateur market I suspect that phones are "good enough" for more people than they are with stills simply because your looking at lower resolution output.

To me its looked like Canons tactics in recent years have generally been to target the high end markets with quality and the low end markets with price whilst tending to focus less attension on the middle. Honestly I cans ee the logic behind that too I think the "gadget" market is a very tough one to go after, you have consumers with limited amounts of money to spend who also demand constant advances.

Maybe the delays in getting large amounts of the 70D sensor made? maybe a decision to leave putting that sensor into a rebel for another year?

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 15, 2014, 02:35:22 AM »
“2013 was the worst year for the photography industry in a long long time (maybe even decades). After the official numbers have been published by CIPA (the Camera & Imaging Products Association)”

I truly believe that VIDEO has kept DSLR sales more robust then they might otherwise have been up till now.

Of course a smart phone is not an equal replacement for a DSLR.  Not sure who would think that.  But thats not the point.  The point is that enough customers feel that smart phones are good enough. That has clearly effected digital cameras sales across the board.   Oh and Apple and Samsung will keep improving their technology which will result in even more erosion of dedicated camera sales.

I'd argue this is probably the reason why Canon and Nikon have been investing more in their FF DSLR products over the last 2-3 years as there the area least likely to feel the pitch from improved phone cameras. Indeed I'd say mirrorless along with compacts is the area most likely to feel the pitch.

EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR ? - thinking out loud ....
« on: July 14, 2014, 03:31:34 AM »
I doubt if any of this comes as a surprise to Canon and Nikon – both long time leaders in the marketplace and no doubt well-positioned for the long haul. This is one reason why I personally would never consider any of their competitors for a primary system investment. (I would consider Fuji for a secondary system, but would not be buying into the system to the extent I have Canon or would do with Nikon).

I suspect theres a lot of truth in this, what many view as resting on their laurels is infact a decision not to over invest in a market that's inevitably going to contract.

Personally I still feel that a lot of mirrorless systems sales are exploiting a gap in the market that other products could target. Most obviously I think that fixed lens compacts have a lot of room to grow, for years they stayed with 1/1.7' sensors but now are rapidly advancing and provide real benefits over systems cameras when it comes to size saving. Equally I think both Canon and Nikon could look to market smaller but high quality DSLR bodies, something the size of the SL1 but with controls and build aimed at a higher end market.

Black & White / Re: Black and White Landscapes!
« on: June 30, 2014, 02:46:40 AM »

EOS Bodies / Re: Ye Olde Film Photography
« on: June 16, 2014, 02:21:21 AM »
The one I'm aware of is that as film was an expensive medium, that offered limited shots, the photographers took their time composing a shot, thinking through all aspects before pulling the trigger.

So that leaves us digital era photographers with a more reckless reputation with a less than meticulous approach towards composition.

If your talking a static scene I'd say the issue here is that a lot of film photographers incorrectly carry forward the idea that all time spent considering composition should be before a shot is taken. The reality is that digital has shifted the goal posts here, the ability to review images in the field can be used as a tool to devolp composition.

There are potential cost advantages with shooting larger format film and advantages in carrying a low value camera when shooting 35mm but I'm not sure I view film as the "learning tool" its often hyped as. To me alot of this seems more like gear lust in disguise combined with believe that just using a less popular medium/equipment will give added credibility to your work rather than actually improving that work.

EOS Bodies / Re: Debating on selling my 5D II and 35L/135L for a...
« on: May 29, 2014, 01:29:48 PM »
you may want to try the 6D first, and if you dislike it , then you might also want to try the A7.
I have the 6D , the A7R, the A7 and A7s on order, and  I am selling the A7R due to the terrible shutter shock and extremely slow AF.   but if you shoot msotly landscape or on tripod based apps, then there is nothing better than the Sony A7R.
I compared many times my D800E vs my A7R before I sold my last copy of D800E last month, and I know as opposed to some die-hard Nikon guys say, the A7R will always win over the D800E. That said , I do not shoot landscape but  mostly lowlight events, so I just prefer the A7 and 6D. if I use the A7R or D800E for lowlight handheld event use, then I almost always have to resample most of my 36mp imges at 18 or 16mp to reduce the purple noise in the shadow.  So for now I still use Canon sometimes Nikon too , but as  the next gen Sony A7 series camera gets similar quality AF system to the AF in the A6000, I will go all Son or the Sony A7 series + Panasonic GH4.  YMMV.

I'm say rambling advice from someone who guys and sells cameras like crazy is probably best avoided.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 44