July 25, 2014, 05:01:04 AM

Author Topic: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]  (Read 59890 times)

RGF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1231
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #300 on: May 13, 2013, 10:33:00 AM »
A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

I absolutely agree with this statement, as I'm sure most would. The problem comes when you seem to suggest that with skill, creativity or by sheer will you can use any camera to 'get the shot', whatever that may be. But there are so many instances where this is just not the case- high resolution macro work, deep space long exposures such as the Hubble space telescope, fast moving small targets. You could make some sort of shot, but would it be any good?

+1000   Equipment only enables. The photographer creates. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #300 on: May 13, 2013, 10:33:00 AM »

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3733
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #301 on: May 13, 2013, 11:07:27 AM »
A great shot is a great shot. Weither its from an a1400 or a 1Dx. It's more convienent to get the shot with a 1Dx but If you got it with a a1400, both would be great shots. That's the principle and has nothing to do with equipment.

A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

Basic failure of logic.  A great photo can be taken with any camera, but it does not follow that every great photo can be taken with any camera.

No one is contesting the former, the latter assumption is where you're incorrect.

But just because the great photo would be different from the a1400 than the 1Dx makes it no less great.

IE: great wide angle shot of a landscape is no less great than a tele-compressed photo landscape, which could also be just as good.
Oh, sure. Look...here's this great photo of the Western Greebe's courtship ritual taken with the A1400.  The birds are those two tiny, dark specks there.  What a great photo.  ::)

The photographer chooses the shot. For some shots, 'any camera' just won't do.

It's obvious you're practicing reductio ad absurdum - and you're doing a great job of sounding absurd in the process.  Feel free to keep on baiting, I've fed you enough troll food in this thread.

More like look, a close up wide shot of the western gebes courtship and here's another of them tele compressed.

Which one is better? Neither, they're both good. That's were I disagree, one shot was easier to get and the other was extremely difficult but the end product is the same.

The end product is not the same. Simple FACT of the matter is...you could NEVER get that close to a courting Grebe couple in the first place! You would scare them off LONG before you ever got close enough to photograph them as more than two black and white specks with the A1400. That all assumes you aren't arrested first for encroaching upon the habitat of a protected bird.

Your hypothesis only works in a dream world where there are no environmental and wildlife protection laws, and in which birds are completely unafraid of idiotic human activity. You CAN NOT get that close to a Grebe, especially a courting couple. There are matters of respect that must be addressed. If I saw a photographer like you out in the wild at some protected migrating bird stopover, sloshing through the water so get a snapshot of a couple grebes, I'd happily nark on him and get his ass arrested for being a disrespectful jackass.

You can wish and hope all you want, but it's still absurd to think you can literally "get the shot", hell "get any shot" with a $100 P&S wide angle camera, in any situation. You can't.

At this point, it's obvious your just trolling. Your making absurd arguments just for the sake of making absurd arguments. That's fine...it only really hurts you. I think it's clear no one here believes a word you are spouting anymore, so I'm quite happily done with the conversation.
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

Hobby Shooter

  • Guest
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #302 on: May 13, 2013, 11:26:56 AM »
A great shot is a great shot. Weither its from an a1400 or a 1Dx. It's more convienent to get the shot with a 1Dx but If you got it with a a1400, both would be great shots. That's the principle and has nothing to do with equipment.

A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

Basic failure of logic.  A great photo can be taken with any camera, but it does not follow that every great photo can be taken with any camera.

No one is contesting the former, the latter assumption is where you're incorrect.

But just because the great photo would be different from the a1400 than the 1Dx makes it no less great.

IE: great wide angle shot of a landscape is no less great than a tele-compressed photo landscape, which could also be just as good.
Oh, sure. Look...here's this great photo of the Western Greebe's courtship ritual taken with the A1400.  The birds are those two tiny, dark specks there.  What a great photo.  ::)

The photographer chooses the shot. For some shots, 'any camera' just won't do.

It's obvious you're practicing reductio ad absurdum - and you're doing a great job of sounding absurd in the process.  Feel free to keep on baiting, I've fed you enough troll food in this thread.

More like look, a close up wide shot of the western gebes courtship and here's another of them tele compressed.

Which one is better? Neither, they're both good. That's were I disagree, one shot was easier to get and the other was extremely difficult but the end product is the same.
Ramon, you're one of the good guys here, always contributing. But the last week or so it feels like you've chewed of the sour end of something. I normally like your comments, the knowledge and insight you share. Please come back.

sanj

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1425
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #303 on: May 13, 2013, 11:55:46 AM »
A great shot is a great shot. Weither its from an a1400 or a 1Dx. It's more convienent to get the shot with a 1Dx but If you got it with a a1400, both would be great shots. That's the principle and has nothing to do with equipment.

A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

Basic failure of logic.  A great photo can be taken with any camera, but it does not follow that every great photo can be taken with any camera.

No one is contesting the former, the latter assumption is where you're incorrect.

But just because the great photo would be different from the a1400 than the 1Dx makes it no less great.

IE: great wide angle shot of a landscape is no less great than a tele-compressed photo landscape, which could also be just as good.
Oh, sure. Look...here's this great photo of the Western Greebe's courtship ritual taken with the A1400.  The birds are those two tiny, dark specks there.  What a great photo.  ::)

The photographer chooses the shot. For some shots, 'any camera' just won't do.

It's obvious you're practicing reductio ad absurdum - and you're doing a great job of sounding absurd in the process.  Feel free to keep on baiting, I've fed you enough troll food in this thread.

hahahaha. Well said!

sanj

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1425
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #304 on: May 13, 2013, 11:57:32 AM »
A great shot is a great shot. Weither its from an a1400 or a 1Dx. It's more convienent to get the shot with a 1Dx but If you got it with a a1400, both would be great shots. That's the principle and has nothing to do with equipment.

A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

Basic failure of logic.  A great photo can be taken with any camera, but it does not follow that every great photo can be taken with any camera.

No one is contesting the former, the latter assumption is where you're incorrect.

But just because the great photo would be different from the a1400 than the 1Dx makes it no less great.

IE: great wide angle shot of a landscape is no less great than a tele-compressed photo landscape, which could also be just as good.
Oh, sure. Look...here's this great photo of the Western Greebe's courtship ritual taken with the A1400.  The birds are those two tiny, dark specks there.  What a great photo.  ::)

The photographer chooses the shot. For some shots, 'any camera' just won't do.

It's obvious you're practicing reductio ad absurdum - and you're doing a great job of sounding absurd in the process.  Feel free to keep on baiting, I've fed you enough troll food in this thread.

More like look, a close up wide shot of the western gebes courtship and here's another of them tele compressed.

Which one is better? Neither, they're both good. That's were I disagree, one shot was easier to get and the other was extremely difficult but the end product is the same.

The end product is not the same. Simple FACT of the matter is...you could NEVER get that close to a courting Grebe couple in the first place! You would scare them off LONG before you ever got close enough to photograph them as more than two black and white specks with the A1400. That all assumes you aren't arrested first for encroaching upon the habitat of a protected bird.

Your hypothesis only works in a dream world where there are no environmental and wildlife protection laws, and in which birds are completely unafraid of idiotic human activity. You CAN NOT get that close to a Grebe, especially a courting couple. There are matters of respect that must be addressed. If I saw a photographer like you out in the wild at some protected migrating bird stopover, sloshing through the water so get a snapshot of a couple grebes, I'd happily nark on him and get his ass arrested for being a disrespectful jackass.

You can wish and hope all you want, but it's still absurd to think you can literally "get the shot", hell "get any shot" with a $100 P&S wide angle camera, in any situation. You can't.

At this point, it's obvious your just trolling. Your making absurd arguments just for the sake of making absurd arguments. That's fine...it only really hurts you. I think it's clear no one here believes a word you are spouting anymore, so I'm quite happily done with the conversation.

It is obvious that RLP has never tried bird photography and so is talking so ignorantly... Sad...

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1683
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #305 on: May 13, 2013, 12:55:59 PM »
All is not in vain  ;)

If nothing else this thread has made me want to come over and see a couple of Western Grebes perform their mating dance.  ;D

Trouble is I don't intend to swim one handed whilst holding the camera up above the water, and I can't afford a 600mm lens  :(

What to do ?

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2057
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #306 on: May 13, 2013, 01:13:02 PM »
All is not in vain  ;)

If nothing else this thread has made me want to come over and see a couple of Western Grebes perform their mating dance.  ;D

Trouble is I don't intend to swim one handed whilst holding the camera up above the water, and I can't afford a 600mm lens  :(

What to do ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOD1imznwRY
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #306 on: May 13, 2013, 01:13:02 PM »

dlleno

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #307 on: May 13, 2013, 01:21:24 PM »
All is not in vain  ;)

If nothing else this thread has made me want to come over and see a couple of Western Grebes perform their mating dance.  ;D

Trouble is I don't intend to swim one handed whilst holding the camera up above the water, and I can't afford a 600mm lens  :(

What to do ?

you just have to be patient. its only a matter of convenience, you see, so if you are willing to wait out the odds, until you are able to swim one-handed whilts holding the camera, and coaxing the birds to stay put,  you will get the photo and it will be great.  If you wait long enough, the odds tell you that it will happen!

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3733
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #308 on: May 13, 2013, 01:22:54 PM »
The end product is not the same. Simple FACT of the matter is...you could NEVER get that close to a courting Grebe couple in the first place! You would scare them off LONG before you ever got close enough to photograph them as more than two black and white specks with the A1400. That all assumes you aren't arrested first for encroaching upon the habitat of a protected bird.

Your hypothesis only works in a dream world where there are no environmental and wildlife protection laws, and in which birds are completely unafraid of idiotic human activity. You CAN NOT get that close to a Grebe, especially a courting couple. There are matters of respect that must be addressed. If I saw a photographer like you out in the wild at some protected migrating bird stopover, sloshing through the water so get a snapshot of a couple grebes, I'd happily nark on him and get his ass arrested for being a disrespectful jackass.

You can wish and hope all you want, but it's still absurd to think you can literally "get the shot", hell "get any shot" with a $100 P&S wide angle camera, in any situation. You can't.

At this point, it's obvious your just trolling. Your making absurd arguments just for the sake of making absurd arguments. That's fine...it only really hurts you. I think it's clear no one here believes a word you are spouting anymore, so I'm quite happily done with the conversation.

It is obvious that RLP has never tried bird photography and so is talking so ignorantly... Sad...

It's not just this, though. Same kind of debate ensued regarding a comment I made about the closing gap between FF and MF. Similar, anecdotal, non-factual comments there as well, and generally debating a point I never made. Not sure why he persists in his flawed arguments...but I've grown tired of trying.
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3733
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #309 on: May 13, 2013, 01:24:35 PM »
All is not in vain  ;)

If nothing else this thread has made me want to come over and see a couple of Western Grebes perform their mating dance.  ;D

Trouble is I don't intend to swim one handed whilst holding the camera up above the water, and I can't afford a 600mm lens  :(

What to do ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOD1imznwRY

That'll work!
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1683
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #310 on: May 13, 2013, 02:25:34 PM »
All is not in vain  ;)

If nothing else this thread has made me want to come over and see a couple of Western Grebes perform their mating dance.  ;D

Trouble is I don't intend to swim one handed whilst holding the camera up above the water, and I can't afford a 600mm lens  :(

What to do ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOD1imznwRY

That'll work!


 ;D

And I never even got my feet wet ! Like it

CanNotYet

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #311 on: May 13, 2013, 03:39:57 PM »
Sporgon. One word: SX50 :)

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2786
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #312 on: May 13, 2013, 05:16:42 PM »
A great shot is a great shot. Weither its from an a1400 or a 1Dx. It's more convienent to get the shot with a 1Dx but If you got it with a a1400, both would be great shots. That's the principle and has nothing to do with equipment.

A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.

Basic failure of logic.  A great photo can be taken with any camera, but it does not follow that every great photo can be taken with any camera.

No one is contesting the former, the latter assumption is where you're incorrect.

This is a rare opportunity to prove that Neuro is wrong....

Let us examine the red squirrel, which will run away if you get too close. Since equipment has nothing to do with how great your shot is, I chose a GoPro and a 60D with a 400mm lens. My goal is to take a picture of a red squirrel for my community newspaper... Both pictures were taken a few minutes ago from the same location.

Picture 1 is the GoPro, Picture 2 is the crop of the squirrel on the GoPro, Picture 3 is the 60D, Picture 4 is the crop  of the 60D. I think we can all agree that there is no difference in quality between the GoPro squirrel crop and the 60D squirrel crop, and I think we can all agree that even if I had a 1DX and a 600F4 lens that the image would still be comparable to the GoPro. Sorry Neuro, there is no noticeable difference between images from the two cameras...
The best camera is the one in your hands

canon rumors FORUM

Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #312 on: May 13, 2013, 05:16:42 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13539
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #313 on: May 13, 2013, 05:49:04 PM »
Nice try, Don...but I'm sure if you just put your mind to it and used your imagination, you could have gotten a great close up shot of the red squirrel with the GoPro or an A1400 or a pinhole camera.  I'm not going to go into all the reasons that's true or ways you could have accomplished it - that's up to you to figure out (hint: the Brenzier method and Harry Potter's invisibility cloak are just two of the many ways).  I'll leave it at that.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2786
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #314 on: May 13, 2013, 05:56:40 PM »
Nice try, Don...but I'm sure if you just put your mind to it and used your imagination, you could have gotten a great close up shot of the red squirrel with the GoPro or an A1400 or a pinhole camera.  I'm not going to go into all the reasons that's true or ways you could have accomplished it - that's up to you to figure out (hint: the Brenzier method and Harry Potter's invisibility cloak are just two of the many ways).  I'll leave it at that.
and sub-pixel imaging..... that could work....

I'll try again tonight with pictures of Jupiter..... I'll use the 60D with a telescope for the lens and the GoPro again... but to get closer with the GoPro I'll stand on a ladder...... that should work :)
« Last Edit: May 13, 2013, 06:00:14 PM by Don Haines »
The best camera is the one in your hands

canon rumors FORUM

Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« Reply #314 on: May 13, 2013, 05:56:40 PM »