March 28, 2015, 07:17:22 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Reviews / Canon Disappointment
« Last post by Magnardo on Today at 05:18:44 AM »
Hi everyone,..
I need some opinions.

When Canon came up with the 5D Mark III, I made the switch from Nikon to Canon and bought a bunch of Canon gear.
Canon 5d MArk III, CAnon 7D, Canon 580 Ex flash, Canon 430ex Flash, Canon 85 1.2, Canon 135 F2, Canon 100 2.8, Canon 40 2.8, Canon 35 f 1.2, Canon 17-55 F2.8IS.

The Canon 7D was bought in March 2013.
Was mainly intended for back up.
I did not use it much. Maybe less then 500 shutter actuations.
Mainly it sat in weather sealed bag.
In November 2014 we went to Hawaii for vacation and I decided to bring the 7D with the 17-55 for the vacation photos.
When we got there the camera had developed a depression and would not turn on.
I checked it at home , before departure, and only thought the batteries were dead and that was the reason.
Had two batteries, fully charged them both, none would turn the camera on.
I called Canon and they told me to send it in.

They told me that the circuit board is bad and needs to be replaced for $569.
I complained that the camera has barely been used , never dropped, and mainly kept in a sealed bag.
Only left the house twice.
They could check the shutter actuations which should prove that.
The only way this camera could break is if there was something faulty to begin with, and that, in turn, makes it their responsibility.
They said that they checked with their repair people and told me that the camera's circuit board can also stop functioning, if submerged under water.
I told them that it is very easy for them to check if there is water damage and I will guarantee there is none.
That's the first thing they do at an Apple store if you return an Apple phone and it takes them 5 minutes.
I am sure Canon has the same technology.

Then the operator got back on the line and said they will take the $219 off for labor from the repair price but that's the best they can do. Also claimed that cameras break due to condensation. Ended up paying for it because otherwise it would be a paperweight.

Now,.. A camera sold for $1500 by Canon.
A camera that is professional weather sealed.
A camera that was barely used. Around 500 shutter actuations.
A camera that was stored in a professional weather sealed Tamarac bag.
How could it break?


You have to pay for repair costs of $350 reduced as a courtesy from $569.
....For a camera that right now gets sold by BH for $750.
How is that fair?

Forget about the lost memories that were lost by trusting on Canon reliability and the quality of their products.

HOW CAN ANYONE BUY OR RECOMMEND CANON PRODUCTS TO ANYONE THEY DO NOT HATE?
12
Re. Automatic AF calibration I am sure Canon is unable to, not unwilling.

They could easily write the software to only work with Canon lenses, leaving Sigma, tamron and all other third party lens makers in the dust - one more time. It is a game that canon just Loves to play normally. Especially when the competitors deliver really great lenses, that beat older design canon lenses that were not updated in a long time (eg 50mm/1.2, 1.4, 1.8, 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2 etc.). Canon not offering auto-afma exclusive for their own lenses is fairly clear evidence they are not able to do it (yet).
13
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First Full Frame...on a budget.
« Last post by Philshoz on Today at 04:58:14 AM »
Great input guys, thanks a lot.

To answer a couple of questions: I live in France and regularly use a site called Leboncoin.fr so lots of bargains to be had on there e.g.: 5d II 900€. Just checked out the 6D and they are on there for about 200€ more, so that could be the way to go.

As for my kit: 24-105 f4, 50 f1.4, 100-400 mk1, 100 macro 2.8 mk1 and a Tamron 11-18.

I shoot mainly landscapes and surfing.

14
Lenses / Canon vs. others at 200mm
« Last post by Perio on Today at 04:40:46 AM »
Lensrental.com posted an interesting comparison of Canon 200 2.0, 70-200 2.8ii and 200 2.8 vs. similar lenses from other manufacturers and among each other.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/03/just-the-lenses-the-great-200mm-shoot-out

Enjoy!  :)
15

so, in your eyes Warhol is fine art....and worth millions???
i would be interested what people said 40years ago.... ::)

art has become business for collectors and artist and millionaires....




I don't know who was fool enough to pay 6 million for a photo.

This was previously discussed.  My personal opinion is that his left hand bought it from his right hand.  Or perhaps his cat bought it from him and gave it to the dog as a birthday present.

It's certainly possible.

It's almost hilarious that his record sale comes from an extraordinarily generic (if technically competent) image of one of the most-photographed landmarks in generic landscape photography. Which is then... made black and white to make it more "artistic." This is a little harsh, though:

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2014/dec/10/most-expensive-photograph-ever-hackneyed-tasteless

I do think the NYT has an elitist bent toward the art world in that they'll call out the sale of Lik's tacky photos, but they call Hirst's sale of a $100 million skull (which is also pretty, and also somewhat tacky) "Warhol-like" and his business model brilliant for incorporating commerce into it... Hirst pretty clearly bought that skull himself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/13/arts/design/13skul.html?_r=0

There's this elitist idea that artists and art critics are "in on the joke" when it comes to high art, but Kincade and Lik sell to the "dumb masses" who aren't and are swindling them.

I'm not so sure Koons and Hirst aren't swindling everyone, too.

Warhol prints of a soup can sell for big $$$. THAT is fine art! Ask any N.Y. critic. http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/251732848740?gclid=CLnh_aeZyMQCFY-Vfgod4EYA8g

Not at all. You missed my sarcasm.
16
How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...  ;)

Something tells me your sarcasm will go over the heads of many on this forum.

I think so, too. Guys, this is not that serious... :)
17
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Backup body for an enthusiast 6D user
« Last post by McSpike on Today at 04:05:50 AM »
+2 on a 60D.
I have both, bought the 60D, then got a 6D later. I think they compliment each other very well, and it is easy to switch from one to the other because of control layout and menus.
18

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6798841724/lee-filters-introduces-updates-to-super-wide-sw-system-to-fit-more-lenses-and-to-cut-down-on-flare

Bulbous ultra-widers rejoice! 

The 'more lenses coming' comment surely must include the 11-24L, though even the huge SW150 filters won't cover an 11mm FL that far off the front element.

But hey, it's progress.

- A
19
Lenses / Re: Review: Samyang 135mm f/2 ED UMC
« Last post by Perio on Today at 02:28:54 AM »
I agree with @VirtualRain on the Canon 135 f/2: it's my best lens, edging out the 70-200 f/2.8 L (Mk I) and obliterating everything else.  Hard to believe that any lens could be that much better optically.

Then you don't want to look at my review of the APO Sonnar 2/135mm.  It embarasses the 135L optically in every way.

Please don't tempt me to get Zeiss 135... I still need money for my school  :D
20
I had a 1Ds MK II loaner that had a similar problem. It seemed to be in the processing components. It will have to be sent in for adjustment.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10