Posts

powershot2012 · Jul 9, 2019

FACT!

Keith_Reeder said:
Is it a fact? Or a rumour?

Hjalmarg1 · Jul 9, 2019

Keith_Reeder said:
Nobody asked your opinion. But the fact is that if you can't take superlative images with your Canon kit, it ain't the fault of the cameras.

Oh - and "Canon's response to market challenges" might disappoint you, but it's hard to argue against them, given that Canon continues to outsell the rest by a significant margin.

Maybe they know more about responding to market challenges than you do...

This is an opinion-free forum so, I can express my opinion at my discretion unless I disrespect or offend anyone here I think...and yes, I have taken and continue to take good images that can be taken event with a P&S little camera with proper technique.

Talking about sales in 2018.

So, yeah, this shows Canon is gaining overall market share, but don't be getting all excited about the current R system , because we don't even know if that's a factor in this report. The FF market sales are not longer led by Canon, adding the APS-C and other consumer-grade cameras (biggest part of Canon's sales & profit) is not relevant to the discussion to claim that canon continue to outsell others, I think. What is very valid is the fact that Canon colors are among the nest and lenses are top notch and for that reason continue to be used on other brands camera with adaptors.

Canon R autofocus, ISO and Dynamic Range are not up to the level of Sony and Nikon. What is remarkable are the newly released lenses.

Once a pro R is released and something that wildlife/sport shooters can use comes out then we'll see a real behavior of the market but, as Canon normally behaves, don't expect that these improvements in the Pro-R body will be incorporated in the lower tier FF bodies in the short term.

raptor3x · Jul 8, 2019

DaveGrice said:
No worries. Maybe you can add the link to the comparison you were asserting. You know, where the comparable Nikon lens is always better than the Canon lens.

I think you're confusing me with someone else as I never said anything like that; actually I don't think anyone has said anything like that. Someone just pointed out that DxO scores Nikon mount versions of a given lens, like the Sigma 35 1.4 as an example, higher than the Canon versions. Some examples

Sigma 35 1.4
F-mount = 43
EF-mount = 41

Sigma 50 1.4
F-mount = 46
EF-mount = 44

Sigma 85 1.4
F-mount = 51
EF-mount = 47

Sigma 20 1.4
F-mount = 41
EF-mount = 40

Sigma 12-24 2.8
F-mount = 28
EF-mount = 24

and so on.

flip314 · Jul 8, 2019

AlanF said:
How does that help?

I'm not sure that it does, but it's possible that this allows more elements to be used by providing more space. It also may be easier to design a TC that doesn't have to fit into an existing optical path (ie, by changing the distance from front element to sensor it may be easier to complete the optical path rather than fitting into a specific space). Those are just guesses though...

Apart from that, anything that has to move has extra constraints on how it can be designed. That may be the bigger issue.

Mikehit · Jul 8, 2019

miggyt said:
Canon bodies with IBIS? I'll believe it only when Canon launches it. Historically, Canon prefers to launch lenses with and without stabilization to keep customers upgrading lenses. It's all $$$ to them.

How can they release IBIS when they do not have a workable system?
Your idea of Canon's historical preferences is based on a total misunderstanding of why.

masterpix · Jul 8, 2019

TAF said:
A 400mm lens on a small drone would need some serious IBIS functionality, as the vibration from the motors is substantial. Not to mention the instability from the flight control system. Folks like DJI use wide angle lenses to 'gloss over' those limitations.

I think you gave them a serious point to think about, by the way, any small 100-400mm lens will have this probelm. A good gimble can solve part of the problem, IBIS or electronical stabilasation devive will also help. I think that most drones use wida angle lens because they aimed at "areal view" not "pin-point" things.

Ozarker · Jul 8, 2019

Click said:
Lovely portraits. Well done, CFB.

Thank you click. Still trying to learn, which isn't easy for me.

tron · Jul 8, 2019

Keith_Reeder said:
Oh, I'm not disputing the idea that Sonys can take good pictures, but so can my Canon kit, and until Sony gear lets me do things I simply can't do with Canon, all the noise about Sony's supposed wonderfulness is irrelevant (and frequently irritating and unwelcome when it's crammed down our throats on here) chatter.

I'm certainly not hitting the buffers of my gear's capabilities, and - something I mention here pretty regularly - in my opinion most photographers would get more bang-for-the-buck improvement in image quality if they simply used a different Raw converter: Lightroom for example, is not a particularly good converter (nasty democaising algorithm, by today's standards) and just getting to grips with (say) Photo Ninja (PN), which is far-and-away my favourite these days, would give them more than all of the supposed (and yet to be demonstrated, of course) "superiority" of Sony files.

For context: even with my 7D Mk II, I can get sharp, detailed, noiseless - and I do mean that literally - images at approaching 5-digit ISOs, by converting in PN: 3200 ISO is literally no different to 320 ISO in terms of the quality of the output.

And I'm north of 20,000 ISO before I even notice any noise from my 1D X files.

It's not just the noise reduction (which is edge-aware, incidentally, and beats anything else available, including the much-lauded PRIME NR in DxO/Photolab): PN's demosaicing algorithm is better than any other out there.

I was a beta-tester for DxO; I've beta tested for Phase One (Capture One Pro) and I was on the Adobe (Lightroom) Certified Professional (ACP) programme before I dropped Lightroom. NR and demosaicing algorithm testing has always been my thing, and Photo Ninja is just way better than any of them in terms of basic rendering quality.

So why would I be interested in Sony? I find myself wondering...

All of the above is very useful information. Thanks for your contribution.

Del Paso · Jul 8, 2019

YuengLinger said:
"When we start to get the pro bodies, these lenses are going to be fantastic." Yes!

Just gives some more time to save up.

Some more time?
I'd say lots more time, the offer being so mouthwatering....

LSXPhotog · Jul 7, 2019

Not sure if anyone saw the review on DPReview, but they shard some very blurry, hazy images in their review. I personally didn't like this lens, but it was certainly very sharp.

koenkooi · Jul 7, 2019

The lack of CA is really impressive, I used this lens to during my daughters swimming lessons and no issues with the reflected light on the water. And f/1.2 at that distance is great for putting other kids outside the DoF

Quirkz · Jul 7, 2019

Or an RF camera... with an EF mount.

;D

Del Paso · Jul 6, 2019

simply gorgeous picts!

Maximilian · Jul 5, 2019

bichex said:
Use live view At the time of the total eclipse, no filters are needed. minutes before use 10-step nd filter

Thanks for your reply.

Jasonmc89 · Jul 5, 2019

bgoyette said:
As Netflix is a major purchaser of independent productions and contracts out the production of a number of it's own properties, they have camera standards, similar to other networks like BBC, Discovery, natGeo, etc. Because it's become such a behemoth in the industry, it's camera specs are watched by all the manufacturers.

Netflix made some waves in the DP community a few years ago when it required 4k capture, essentially blacklisting the most popular camera in the single camera series category -- Arri's Alexa XT. While this camera is responsible for some of the best digitally-captured large screen productions and a huge percentage of TV series produced world wide, it only captures 3.2k and thus is not allowed by Netflix's standards to be used as an A camera. It's stupid, really, most experienced DP's will tell you, but Netflix has stuck to it's guns...essentially forcing Arri to create a 4k camera (the 65 and later the LF) that could be used on Netflix shows.

Now to Canon...not really a big deal, as all of it's Cinema EOS cameras except the C100mkII and C200 are Netflix certified, including the original C500. Not sure why the C200 is excluded...but it's currently not on their list.

(edit: apparently the C200 isn't officially certified by Netflix because it cannot accept timecode input, which would be important if it was being used with other camera's on a set. Thus while not officially certified the C200 can be used in RAW mode on a case by case basis).

Cameras & Image Capture: Requirements and Best Practices

Skip to translations WHY NETFLIX HAS AN APPROVED CAMERA LISTTo help creatives produce their best work and create compelling visual experiences for our audience, Netflix requires 90% of a program’s ...

partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com

Very interesting! Thank you for your reply

hamish · Jul 4, 2019

andrei1989 said:
anything new on the M front? a previous rumor said first half of 2019 which has come and gone without any info...
any chance the new M and lenses will come out with the G5X/G7X?

The later rumo(u)rs indicated late July/August for the M announcement. Patience, grasshopper

Although I really want to know what it will be too, as I'm looking to upgrade a 200D. I'll either get the M5 Mk. II and EF adapter or, if that's too expensive for my limited budget, a used 80D on ebay.

Keith_Reeder · Jul 4, 2019

st jack photography said:
It is a rule on this forum that you have to be a fanboy and suck Canon's you-know if you want to leave a comment

No - just don't be a whiny, flamebaiting troll about it.

Canon fans cant handle the truth

Your opinion isn't the "truth". Never was, never will be.

Maybe just learn to use the cameras properly?

Keith_Reeder · Jul 4, 2019

Hjalmarg1 said:
Will the Canon's APS-C mirrorless version will be another R-type format or a revamped EOS-M?

We'll know when Canon lets us know. Right now, it's anybody's guess.

Keith_Reeder · Jul 4, 2019

Ian_of_glos said:
I use Lightroom a lot so that is 3 years worth of work I would lose. Yes I have the original RAW and JPEG files but all the updates would be lost.

How's that an "Adobe" issue? It's true of migrating from any solution to any other solution.

Besides, most of the competitors to Lightroom have conversion/migration tools. So "in Adobe's clutches" remains complete nonsense.

Keith_Reeder · Jul 2, 2019

Kannon said:
This is my opinion. Others have different ones... Did I complain? I didn't want to. Only express my opinion, nothing more....

No need to take it personally - I'm just pointing out that there's no such thing as pleasing all the people, all the time.

LDS · Jul 2, 2019

The New Camera has leaked images of what should be the G5X Mk II, from Nokishita as usual.

Canon G5X Mark II « NEW CAMERA

thenewcamera.com

【噂】キヤノン「PowerShot G5 X Mark II」の特徴【画像追加】

デジタルカメラに関する情報や噂を気の向くままに紹介しています。

www.nokishita-camera.com

Very different from the Mk I

Maximilian · Jul 1, 2019

Yet another sequence from Crete
200D + 85/1.8 + CPL, 1/800, f/8, ISO 320-200
Interesting that the second wave breaks before the first in front. I haven't seen that much before.

peters · Jul 1, 2019

Must.... be..... strong....

Don Haines · Jun 30, 2019

I love the 70-200F4, and have been happily using the previous version since the day it was released.

Jun 30, 2019

Kit. said:
It should be enough for Sunny-16 fill flash in X-sync mode, but a bit short in power in HSS mode, unless you find a way to move the flash closer to the subject.

Will see how it goes. It can always end up as a slave to a 600 at a later date

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics