December 21, 2014, 01:57:31 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
Lenses / Re: $600 burning a hole in your pocket?
« Last post by Act444 on December 20, 2014, 07:50:20 PM »
If one doesn't mind going 3rd party, a Tamron 17-50 2.8 is probably the best "bang for your buck" for $600 (it could even replace the 18-55 you're currently using and you'd get constant 2.8 and slightly wider angle). I had the VC version (slightly more if buying retail new) and it's a great lens for the money.

If sticking with Canon, I would agree with the suggestions for the 35 f2 IS. If willing to buy used off eBay, the 24-105 f4 also sells for sub-$600 white-box.
52
Lenses / Re: How satisfied are you with the 100-400 II?
« Last post by LovePhotography on December 20, 2014, 07:48:54 PM »
Voted 1 - Initial satisfaction is same level as when I first used my 70-200 mark 2.  Both lenses exceeded my personal expectations.  Well worth the wait and pre-order "premium price" for me.  YMMV

I wish someone would take some identical comparison shots with the new 100-400 and the great 70-200 2.8 ii at the same focal length. Such as 100mm and 200mm. I'm thinking a lot of peeps with the 70-200 would enjoy seeing that. (Or not, if the 100-400 blows it away!)  :)
53
EOS Bodies / Re: Built in adapter?
« Last post by Mt Spokane Photography on December 20, 2014, 07:42:04 PM »
If/when canon brings out a FF mirrorless, would it be possible to have a built in adapter for EF lenses? Compact cameras have "telescope" lenses that collapse into the camera when turned off, would this technology be possible to implement in a mirrorless camera? Would be great if we could mount an EF lens, and the camera would automatically adjust to the correct flange distance.

I'd not want a EF 600mm lens hanging from some sort of telescoping mechanism, it might last for 1 shot.  I'm sure someone could design something, but I believe that any new lens mount would have to be larger than the EF mount.  If smaller, it would block the image circle. 
 
It does not sound practical on the surface, but it might be a way for Canon to design something that would not work with 3rd party lenses.
54
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« Last post by Mt Spokane Photography on December 20, 2014, 07:35:40 PM »
http://www.naturescapes.net/articles/techniques/the-economics-of-digital-photo-sensors/

i read the article. it is outdated (2006). i don't know if the same percentages apply now? the article concluded that you got 5 ff sensors vs 13 crop sensors from a "silicon wafer". that translated to a cost of $385 vs $38. this conclusion was based on knowledge of semiconductor production and conjecture. not known costs. i don't suppose there is any published information about what the actual manufacturing costs of various sensors are?

The old article was based on a Canon white paper, and things have changed.  They now use 12 in wafers instead of 8 inch wafers, and the process of tooling for 18 inch wafers is under way.  There is less waster when using larger wafers, the issue is making one that has few defects.
 
The cost of wafers has dropped a lot as well. 
 
If a wafer has just a few defects evenly spread around the sensor, it can ruin most of the sensors on that wafer.
 
This is a old article, but it gives a good explanation of the issues faced in making camera sensors.   There are some very sophisticated processes involved in trying to eliminate or reduce defects.
55
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII AF Point Issue
« Last post by neuroanatomist on December 20, 2014, 07:25:02 PM »
I just did a test and mine appears off a bit as well.  However, I did a test where I focused on the extreme top-left corner of a square and fired 3 times.  Each time it locked focus properly on the corner of the square and NOT on the wall behind it.   When I looked at the playback, the highlighted area was on the wall, not on the square.   So I think this may be a playback issue, NOT a focus issue.

It's a misalignment issue.  But...misalignment of what?  Ideally, the transmissive LCD, the AF sensor, and the image sensor should all be aligned.  If the transmissive LCD and AF sensor are in sync but the image sensor isn't, focus point placement for the shot will be correct but the AF point playback display will be off.  If the AF sensor and image sensor are in sync but the transmissive LCD isn't, both focus point placement for the shot and the playback display will be off. 

I expect careful testing could determine which was off.  It's worth noting that the actual area of the AF point on the AF sensor is larger than the little box in the viewfinder.  Spot AF uses a smaller area of the AF point, but even that is slightly larger than the box in the VF (the main box, not the smaller inset box that indicates Spot AF).
56
EOS Bodies / Re: Built in adapter?
« Last post by Don Haines on December 20, 2014, 07:24:42 PM »
who says they would change the mount distance for a FF mirrorless?

57
EOS Bodies / Re: Built in adapter?
« Last post by Don Haines on December 20, 2014, 07:23:05 PM »
If/when canon brings out a FF mirrorless, would it be possible to have a built in adapter for EF lenses?

Surely they'll over some means of transition, or people are bound to take the opportunity and switch to another brand. However, with the film-lens distance ef is designed for, the adapter will be quite awkward esp. for smaller ef lenses and counteract the "small camera body" opportunity of mirrorless.

That's probably the reason why there isn't a ff mirrorless from Canon (yet) and their ef-m lens lineup isn't very large: They're still unsure which way to jump and if to produce a new ff mirrorless lens line.

As they did when transitioning from FD to EF?  Just sayin'.
FD was mechanical. EF was electronic. it was not practical to produce an adaptor.
58
Canon General / Re: How does one close/delete one's account ?
« Last post by Don Haines on December 20, 2014, 07:19:14 PM »
Hi all.
I am trying to find a way to end/close/delete my account here on cr Could anyone tell me how to go about it.

Many Thanks

At the bottom of every post there is a box for "report to moderator". Just tell the moderator you want out.... I am sure that they will help you.

59
EOS Bodies / Re: Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review
« Last post by neuroanatomist on December 20, 2014, 07:10:57 PM »
http://www.naturescapes.net/articles/techniques/the-economics-of-digital-photo-sensors/

i read the article. it is outdated (2006). i don't know if the same percentages apply now? the article concluded that you got 5 ff sensors vs 13 crop sensors from a "silicon wafer". that translated to a cost of $385 vs $38. this conclusion was based on knowledge of semiconductor production and conjecture. not known costs. i don't suppose there is any published information about what the actual manufacturing costs of various sensors are?

Yes, it's outdated.  But even though Canon is now using 300mm wafers, two things haven't changed since then.  One, the number of rectangles of a given size that can fit within a circle of a given size (actually, that hasn't changed since Euclid described the basic principles of geometry), and two, given a fixed defect rate and random distribution over the wafer, larger sensors will fail QC with a higher frequency than smaller ones.  Since the cost to image a wafer isn't affected by the size of the pieces into which it will be cut, those two facts above mean a FF sensor will cost >10x the cost of an APS-C sensor.   Then factor in the cost of everything else that has to be bigger because of the bigger sensor. 


Try looking over the financial reports for Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic, Samsung.  Then tell them how they can cut the price of products by 50% and still make the 5% profit they now make.

How dare you let facts and reality stand in the way of 'but I don't wanna pay that much *whine–pout–stamp-my-foot*'.   ;)
60
Canon General / Re: How does one close/delete one's account ?
« Last post by Mt Spokane Photography on December 20, 2014, 07:04:36 PM »
Just stop posting.  Your posts will soon be so old that no one reads them.  CR can close your account, but your posts remain.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10