October 22, 2014, 01:31:46 AM

Author Topic: I hate to say you told me so, but...  (Read 4950 times)

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2013, 01:12:09 PM »
You are currently running a Macbook Pro with Retina display, don't you?

No, PC's.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2013, 01:12:09 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #16 on: November 02, 2013, 01:29:53 PM »

On the other hand, I am not a big fan of the 4:3 format. I was, when I owned 1600x1200 screens but not anymore.

I preferred the 4x3 format, particularly for printing... but as time marches on, more and more work gets displayed electronically, and the 3x2 format is better, particularly when it gets cropped down to 16x9.
The best camera is the one in your hands

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #17 on: November 02, 2013, 01:35:25 PM »

Canon is missing IBIS. Not only in the M series...


IBIS would be much appreciated by bird photographers... (picture from Wikipedia)
The best camera is the one in your hands

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #18 on: November 02, 2013, 01:44:40 PM »

I know canon have tried to design a system that doesn't alienate existing EF users, ...

I think canon may have been better ripping it up and starting from scratch, it does seem a bit mental that the 70D got the tech the M should have had.

I don't know what bit I got wrong though, might you elucidate?

I totally agreee with you, that the 70D should have been served up as a mirrorless cam.

Wrong? Your statement "I know Canon have tried to design a system that does not alienate EF users" ... is plain wrong. Canon does not care whom they alienate or not. Truth is: Canon was and still IS simply NOT ABLE  to deliver a better MILC than the sub-par EOS-M.

* Canon has no clue.
* Canon  is NOT ABLE  to bring an APS-C sensor matching the Nikon D7100 - 2 years later!
* Canon is NOT ABLE to bring a FF sensor matching the D800. 2 years later.
* Canon is NOT ABLE to produce a mirrorless FF system camera like the Sony A7/R.
* Canon is NOT ABLE to produce PD_AF that performs as good as an Oly OMD1 or a Panasonix GX7.

All Canon is able to do ... is to charge outrageous prices for their last century DSLR technology and "video-optimize" it. Canon has become a real bunch of losers.

Nope, no clearer.

What bit did I get wrong again?  My argument is that the M was hamstrung by backwards compatability.  Systems that were not had a clean sheet to design without compromises.

You seem to disagree that canon made the M backwards compatable (they did) as a selling point (no doubt) and that instead they should have started from scratch (you say they would do that if they wanted anyway, but ahem, they didn't appear to want to, so we can only surmise what they wanted)

So I'll ask again, because at the moment you are making as much logical sense as a chocolate teapot... how am I wrong?

Oh and you are back to video.  Yawn.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2013, 02:01:46 PM by paul13walnut5 »

AmbientLight

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #19 on: November 02, 2013, 02:01:36 PM »
I know canon have tried to design a system that doesn't alienate existing EF users, ...

I think canon may have been better ripping it up and starting from scratch, it does seem a bit mental that the 70D got the tech the M should have had.

I don't know what bit I got wrong though, might you elucidate?

I totally agree with you, that the 70D should have been served up as a mirrorless cam.

Wrong? Your statement "I know Canon have tried to design a system that does not alienate EF users" ... is plain wrong. Canon does not care whom they alienate or not. Truth is: Canon was and still IS simply NOT ABLE  to deliver a better MILC than the sub-par EOS-M.

* Canon has no clue.
* Canon  is NOT ABLE  to bring an APS-C sensor matching the Nikon D7100 - 2 years later!
* Canon is NOT ABLE to bring a FF sensor matching the D800. 2 years later.
* Canon is NOT ABLE to produce a mirrorless FF system camera like the Sony A7/R.
* Canon is NOT ABLE to produce PD_AF that performs as good as an Oly OMD1 or a Panasonix GX7.

All Canon is able to do ... is to charge outrageous prices for their last century DSLR technology and "video-optimize" it. Canon has become a real bunch of losers.

Nope, no clearer.

What bit did I get wrong again?  My argument is that the M was hamstrung by backwards compatability.  Systems that were not had a clean sheet to design without compromises.

You seem to disagree that canon made the M backwards compatable (they did) as a selling point (no doubt) and that instead they should have started from scratch (you say they would do that if they wanted anyway, but ahem, they didn't appear to want to, so we can only surmise what they wanted)

So I'll ask again, because at the moment you are making as much logical sense as a chocolate teapot... how am I wrong?

Oh and you are back to video.  Yawn.

Did you actually try a chocolate teapot? I wonder what that might taste like. I am not much of a tea drinker, more somewhat of a Swiss chocolate eater, so please forgive me for asking.

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2013, 02:02:52 PM »
A chocloate teapot may make some sense in your scenario, although chocolate bars may be cheaper in the long run.

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2013, 02:26:02 PM »
I know canon have tried to design a system that doesn't alienate existing EF users, ...

I think canon may have been better ripping it up and starting from scratch, it does seem a bit mental that the 70D got the tech the M should have had.

I don't know what bit I got wrong though, might you elucidate?

I totally agreee with you, that the 70D should have been served up as a mirrorless cam.

Wrong? Your statement "I know Canon have tried to design a system that does not alienate EF users" ... is plain wrong. Canon does not care whom they alienate or not. Truth is: Canon was and still IS simply NOT ABLE  to deliver a better MILC than the sub-par EOS-M.

* Canon has no clue.
* Canon  is NOT ABLE  to bring an APS-C sensor matching the Nikon D7100 - 2 years later!
* Canon is NOT ABLE to bring a FF sensor matching the D800. 2 years later.
* Canon is NOT ABLE to produce a mirrorless FF system camera like the Sony A7/R.
* Canon is NOT ABLE to produce PD_AF that performs as good as an Oly OMD1 or a Panasonix GX7.

All Canon is able to do ... is to charge outrageous prices for their last century DSLR technology and "video-optimize" it. Canon has become a real bunch of losers.

Nope, no clearer.

What bit did I get wrong again?  My argument is that the M was hamstrung by backwards compatability.  Systems that were not had a clean sheet to design without compromises.

You seem to disagree that canon made the M backwards compatable (they did) as a selling point (no doubt) and that instead they should have started from scratch (you say they would do that if they wanted anyway, but ahem, they didn't appear to want to, so we can only surmise what they wanted)

So I'll ask again, because at the moment you are making as much logical sense as a chocolate teapot... how am I wrong?

Oh and you are back to video.  Yawn.


I'm not sure if backwards compatibility was such a problem with the EOS-M.... They changed the lens mount... but making an adaptor to EOS was a simple task.... and pretty well whatever route they took with lenses an adaptor would have been easy. I think that with sensors it was a choice between going FF or APS-C, and Canon being conservative would have gone with APS-C.

To me, what didn't make sense was how poor the AF is on the EOS-M, other than that, people seem to like it.

(This is all guesswork, I have no inside knowledge) I really think that the EOS-M was designed for dual-pixel and was given the standard APS-C sensor when development was taking too long. You can bet that the dual-pixel project is at least 5 years old. Probably, in the infancy of the project, Canon realized that this would make a kick-ass compact mirrorless camera that nobody else could touch.... and so began the EOS-M project. When the planned time for release came, dual-pixel was not ready so it went without it, probably in the hope of getting some lenses out there in the buying public to make the eventual release of a dual-pixel EOS-M an easier system to buy into.

I don't understand how people can rant about "lack of innovation" from the company that has just introduced what may well be the best balanced sensor for use in mirrorless cameras... The 70D sensor is merely the first iteration of this technology, more and better will come. How long before you see a dual-pixel sensor where you can set the two halves to different ISO's and take pictures with 16 stops of dynamic range? If we have thought of it you can bet that Canon has thought of it.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2013, 02:29:22 PM by Don Haines »
The best camera is the one in your hands

canon rumors FORUM

Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2013, 02:26:02 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #22 on: November 02, 2013, 02:27:44 PM »
A chocloate teapot may make some sense in your scenario, although chocolate bars may be cheaper in the long run.
There are liquor filled chocolates, so the technology does exist.... Tea filled would be a down-grade :)
The best camera is the one in your hands

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 685
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #23 on: November 02, 2013, 06:03:45 PM »
I'm glad you like the new OM-D EM1 - except that its viewfinder isn't as good, and aside from photographing things that move, the EM5's performance is much the same, and very impressive it is, too; using the Canon M after owning the OM-D for several months, despite the potentially excellent image quality, was frustrating.  If Canon could somehow acquire/develop similar mirrorless performance for a body (preferably FF - I don't care if it's big, and preferably with IBIS) that could take its pre-existing lenses, I would be all over it.  Meanwhile, don't mind owning both systems.  On top of everything else, it's remarkable how good the images taken with Olympus 4/3 sensors can be: like Pentax and Nikon, they seem to get better performance out of Sony's sensors than Sony does, which seems a tad counter-intuitive (if they can conjure up such quality from those smallish sensors, imagine what they could do with a FF sensor...).

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2436
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #24 on: November 02, 2013, 06:44:43 PM »
 when I saw this, I  thought it might be thgmuffin  finally ageing that f5.6  is useless for shooting night sports... I  guess I  will just continue to wait for that  acknowledgement.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #25 on: November 02, 2013, 07:23:53 PM »
@sdsr

Viewfinder wasn't great, jaggies etc.

BUT i barely used it.  The rear screen was so fast to use I didn't ever once think 'viewfinder'

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1266
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #26 on: November 02, 2013, 08:05:21 PM »
when I saw this, I  thought it might be thgmuffin  finally ageing that f5.6  is useless for shooting night sports... I  guess I  will just continue to wait for that  acknowledgement.

 ;D ;D ;D
5D II | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

Woody

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 622
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #27 on: November 02, 2013, 08:19:53 PM »
Two things to keep in mind:

a) Canon talked about MILCs as early as 2006, way before the first Olympus MILC appeared in the market. This is what Chuck Westfall told PC Photomagzine in a 2006 interview:

"If you substituted an optical viewfinder with an EVF, the size, weight and cost of the camera would come down quite a bit. You’d be eliminating the need for a prism and a mirror, which currently limits how small of an SLR you can make."

b) But Canon chose not to do anything about it. Why? Because they know current MILC technology is not good enough to replace DSLR. I know that because I used the OMD for a year. The masses have already spoken with their wallets, interest in MILCs is dropping rapidly. Currently, in Europe and USA, for every MILC sold, 9 to 10 more DSLRs are sold.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #27 on: November 02, 2013, 08:19:53 PM »

dickgrafixstop

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #28 on: November 02, 2013, 08:21:50 PM »
I would rather imagine that Canon could do whatever it wants to, assuming some marketing geek can make a
financial case for it and some insider is willing to champion it.  If I were running Canon I'd be much more concerned about the bottom falling out of the point and shoot market as cell phones get better and better
photo functions.  The Rebel SL1 isn't that much bigger than the Olympus or Panasonic top end m43 offerings,
with access to a much fuller line of lenses - some of which anyone who looked to buy the SL1 would probably
already have.  I'd be much more concerned about the rumored new full frame, basic photography oriented
Nikon DF as having the potential to impact my high end product lines than any smaller format ILC offering.
It's reasonable to assume that within five years only Canon, Sony, Panasonic and Fuji will be making serious
cameras anyway.

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #29 on: November 02, 2013, 08:42:56 PM »
Most folk at the seminar today brought their own cameras. 
Most of those folk had canons.
Most of those folks had 1100d's.

True story.

I went to listen and play.

Quite a revelation.  I think canon have became quite complaicent.

I was straight with the olympus guys, I said I'm thinking bmd or panny gh.
So would they for video.  The oly lenses are nice however.

And the om-d was a revelation.




canon rumors FORUM

Re: I hate to say you told me so, but...
« Reply #29 on: November 02, 2013, 08:42:56 PM »