May 03, 2016, 02:32:05 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10
41
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by unfocused on Today at 01:02:29 PM »
Hey you! Get off of my lawn!

Isn't that an updated version of the Rolling Stones song to reflect the changing attitudes of us baby boomers?
42
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by Mr. Low Notes on Today at 12:57:31 PM »
A quick note about my writing style.  When I capitalize a word or series of words, I'm not "yelling", I'm emphasizing.  It's like using voice inflection.  I'm from the south, and where I was raised, and who I was raised around, emphasis on your words was EASILY as important as the words themselves.

A little moderation wouldn't hurt but I guess, sadly, the mud slinging keeps the traffic high.
Indeed.

As for me I do not disagree that more DR is better but it's not the only thing that makes for good image quality.
Agree wholeheartedly!

That starts with the photographer
PUMP THE BRAKES!  We've entered into a COMPLETELY irrelevant arena when it comes to a website dedicated to REVIEWING AND COMPARING CAMERAS!  If the website were dedicated to reviewing and comparing photographers, or techniques, THEN you would have a great point.  But seeing as how a photographer will be choosing which CAMERA (and lens) to take a specific picture with, the photographer is the "constant" and the camera/lens is the "variable" which needs reviewing/comparing.  If that doesn't make sense to someone, they should probably excuse themselves from commenting on or about ANY camera or lens review.

Buying a high end Fender Stratocaster won't make you suddenly play like Eric Clapton anymore than buying a high end camera, regardless of brand, will suddenly make you a better photographer. 
There's so much floating around in my head right now in response to this, but I'll do my best to keep it short.  I make no guarantees about "sweet" :-)
If Eric Clapton were deciding between 3 guitars, do you think it would be helpful to have Stevie Ray Vaughn, BB King, and Jimi Hendrix review the same guitar and tell him all about it?  I mean, besides the fact that it would be AWESOME to have all 3 of those guys back and playing again, how meaningful would their analysis be to Mr Clapton if they all reviewed only one guitar, and it happened to be the same guitar?  For sure, we could say that the guitarist makes a difference in how the guitar is played and thus, what comes out of it.  But so what?  SRV, BBK, and JH aren't looking to buy the guitar, Mr Clapton is.  And the skills those 3 "reviewers" posses aren't the exact same skills Mr Clapton possesses and thus, Mr Clapton will necessarily obtain different results.  So how are their reviews relevant?  Answer: They're not.  Not without context.  And if all 3 legendary guitarists reviewed all 3 options that Mr Clapton is considering and COMPARED THEM TO ONE ANOTHER USING A CONTROLLED, REPEATABLE METHODOLOGY then THAT would be useful to Mr Clapton.  Would it not?
Regarding the whole "better equipment doesn't make you a better photographer" cliche.  That might be among the dumbest, most trite statements bandied about by those who are SO completely closed minded that they can't even BEGIN to realize how asinine they sound.  Why is it a dumb statement?  Because it's SO incredibly true.  But at the same time, ignores the fact that better cameras can do 2 things (for the sake of this discussion)... 1) they can take better QUALITY pictures which WILL improve the output of said photographer, making their WORK better (but again, not THEM) and 2) they can enable the same photographer to utilize their skillset more completely which can improve their work and can enable them to take pictures they were unable to take previously due to the limitations of their gear.  So ,no... Gear will not make the photographer BETTER.  But gear ABSOLUTELY can make the photographers RESULTS (quality, diversity) better.  If this weren't the case, everyone would still be using the very first camera and lens ever made because it wouldn't make sense to make anything else.
Ok... so that wasn't even remotely short... my apologies...

I came from film in the mid 80s.  Read a lot of photography books that I still have. Learned my camera (Chinon CP7-m, no auto focus either) and made every shot count.  Had to.  Film.  ;-) 
Congratulations.


Ya know I was kinda with you until you gave me that nasty dig.  BTW, How old were you in 1986? 6?

43
Camera Body Gallery / Anything shot with a 1DX II
« Last post by Eldar on Today at 12:56:46 PM »
Someone had to start this thread ...

Out of respect for this fantastic camera, I should have posted something spectacular as the first image. Instead I am posting a poorly composed mallard duck. However, to me this image includes a few good points.

It is shot handheld (!) at 1200mm (600mm f4L IS II w. 2xIII extender), ISO25600 and I could use all focusing points, which was very important for my purchase decision. I have not done any AFMA  (1DX II not supported by FoCal yet) and I believe I have a couple of clicks adjustment need.

This is just a 30 seconds edit, where I gave it a Luminance NR of 25 and a flat +10 in saturation.
44
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DS place on update roadmap
« Last post by Maximilian on Today at 12:52:01 PM »
Wasn't there a rumor that the 5DS / R would get a minor update in ergonomics and built to use synergies with the 5D4?
But I don't believe that there will be a new sensor in less than one year after the 5D4 release.

Why not? There's no competition between those two cameras.
I hope you're right. But I don't believe in Canon on that point.
45
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by 3kramd5 on Today at 12:51:59 PM »
...
Well, we're on the internet now, and you should respect established norms of communication. ALL CAPS is almost universally considered rude, and one should not expect others to remember or adapt to one's idiosyncracies - instead, it's one's own responsibility to make oneself understood by others. This forum, like most others, supports italics for emphasis, and for those situations where only plain text is available, *asterisks* or _underlines_ are well-established ways to represent accentuation.

Writing:

GET OFF MY LAWN

represents a different use of capital letters than:

The BLUE car had an accident, not the red one.


And, it allows all the nuance of other markups.

Get OFF my lawn
Get off MY lawn
Get off my LAWN

Three different meanings.

I mostly post from a smartphone, which makes using the [] type markups more tedious. I'll keep capitalizing; if someone mistakes it as rudeness, oh well.
46
EOS Bodies / Canon 1dx mk II Sound clip + Unboxing Video
« Last post by IsaacImage on Today at 12:48:47 PM »
Hello dear friends
Please enjoy the new sound of the Shutter and Unboxing Video from Toronto.

http://www.isaacimage.com/canon-eos-1dx-mark-ii-wedding-studio-toronto/

47
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang unveils lenses with AF
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 12:47:44 PM »
Curious to see what drove the 'We'll try Sony first' business model.  Could be any of the below, right?

  • A straight off the sensor mirrorless AF system easier to design AF for than an SLR
  • The SLR lens space is pretty crowded with comprehensive Canon / Nikon / Sigma / Tamron options, while Sony still has a fairly skinny (native mount) lens lineup
  • Sony has dirt cheap lenses and explosively pricey lenses -- the 'porridge is just right' Sigma Art sort of $799 market segment is underserved with (native mount) Sony glass presently

Which do you think drove Samyang to choose Sony first?

- A
48

B&H Photo now has stock of the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 zoom lens for APS-C sensor cameras.


PRODUCT HIGHLIGHTS



  • Canon EF Mount/APS-C Format

  • 80-160mm (35mm Equivalent)

  • Aperture Range: f/1.8 to f/16

  • One SLD and Three FLD Elements

  • One High-Refractive Index Element

  • Super Multi-Layer Coating

  • Hyper Sonic AF Motor

  • Internal Zoom and Focus; MF Override

  • Rounded 9-Blade Polycarbonate Diaphragm

  • Fixed, Rotating Tripod Collar


Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 Art $1099 at B&H Photo


49
That expresses it well.  After shooting mostly 1D4 for a few months there was a very depressed feeling going back to my 6D but certainly not due to IQ.  The FPS vs. higher resolution either/or issue is problematic for a primarily wildlife shooter.  10 FPS was enough for me.  And I don't regret not buying the 7DII relative to non-1DX features but would have bought it if it hadn't been for the early adopter's having issues with AF.

While I appreciate the fact that some photographers want a high resolution sensor in a 1D body, I am just not sure if there is a large enough market for Canon to develop that camera.

The 1DX Mark II is already $6000, and a 1DsX will have to be pushing $8000+, and bringing it awfully close to a Pentax 645Z. I don't think enough landscape, portrait or studio photographers really want the build and ruggedness of a 1D level camera, hence the 5Ds. The build quality and responsiveness is still good, but just not 1D-level.

Agree the market may be small, but the technical challenges to offer that product would also be small.

I'm not arguing for a high FPS / high MP rig or a brand new 50 MP sensor that is better than the 5DS.  Far from it.  I'm asking why Canon isn't taking the current 5DS sensor and integrating it into the 1DX II body and letting it snap away at 5 FPS like it does on a 5DS.

Sensor = 5DS
Framerate = 5DS (5 fps)
Everything else (body design / grip / controls / menus / interface) = 1DX II

And I'm not convinced it necessarily needs to climb in price.  A 5 fps rig does not need a 400K actuation rated shutter/mirror setup or as comprehensive of a tracking AF setup.

- A
50
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Dpreview of the 80D
« Last post by jebrady03 on Today at 12:27:52 PM »
I'm not asking anyone to remember anything. That's why I prefaced my post with the information

...
Well, we're on the internet now, and you should respect established norms of communication. ALL CAPS is almost universally considered rude, and one should not expect others to remember or adapt to one's idiosyncracies - instead, it's one's own responsibility to make oneself understood by others. This forum, like most others, supports italics for emphasis, and for those situations where only plain text is available, *asterisks* or _underlines_ are well-established ways to represent accentuation.

Writing:

GET OFF MY LAWN

represents a different use of capital letters than:

The BLUE car had an accident, not the red one.

Using italics correctly means not using them for emphasis.

See, this guy gets it! :-)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10