https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g9-x-mark-ii-review/5

Valvebounce said:

Hi Tron, Frodo.
The trick is not to close the card door (or take the battery out for charging) then this setting doesn’t get reset, at least these are what I have found works on my cameras. The second you close the card door with a battery in the camera (even with the camera off) the camera reads the cards and changes the default. I usually see a message something like “separate recording not available with no card in slot 1”

Cheers, Graham.

tron said:

At yellow/setup menu tab1 select card 1 (It's the CF card) in Record/Play field.

NOW: If you remove it for some reason (for example to put it in a card reader to copy photos) and then reinsert it you have to check this number again (camera will not be able to use card 1 so it will use card 2 and I have seen this number not being set back to 1 afterwards).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Nice trick! Thanks! Although I am more or less used to it and set it back I do remember missing it a few times.

The photo I posted from my 18-55 was shot with the IS II version. A recent copy, but it was not the STM version. That would be an interesting comparison.

I did take my new 15-85 out for a little urban photo safari today mounted on my 77D. I'm pretty pleased with the IQ and the handling as well. I sort of wish it were lighter, but the weight balances very nicely when you are shooting and made me feel like I had solid shooting position. That portends well for use as a walking around lens without a tripod.

Here is a shot I took today: F/8, 1/200, ISO 100, 50 mm, with a big bump in contrast via Lightroom for effect. This was a vertical shot, I cropped the top and bottom quite a bit to get the squarish format.



There was a tiny bit of CA in the corners, but I could only find it by toggling the CA correction in Lightroom.

okaro said:

i have solved the problem by checking the error in each camera and then I use a a combination of a script and a program to adjust the file timestamps. With this I can achieve an accuracy of 1-2 seconds a month.

Click to expand...

Okaro, this sounds very useful. Can you provide more detail?
Thanks

Frodo said:

kaihp said:

Curious: why are you only moderately happy with the SW2700?

Click to expand...

First one had serious lack of colour consistency with the left side being visibly warmer than the right. The replacement screen is much better but still outside BenQ specs. I've been waiting for a fortnight with no reply from BenQ. In hindsight, I should have bought a lower res Eizo for 50% more money.
If you get a good SW2700, you will be happy. Perhaps the third one will be good and I will be happy!

Click to expand...

Eww, not good. I have been eyeing the SW320 for some time, but this cools my interest in BenQ as a brand.

interesting and rather mean/condescending replies to this topic. While there is some interesting insights and differences of view, the delivery could use some work.

I'm also of the camp that I've more or less stopped investing in Canon, but haven't yet jumped ship due to investments. I normally agree that they take turns leapfrogging aspects of technology, but this cycle seems excessively long and Canon isn't innovating/giving ME what I want for the price point.

Its pretty telling their latest release the 6d mkii was on sale for $509 off and with a bonus of about $300 in accessories in less than half a year after release. I still didn't buy as it felt like a lukewarm release, it gives the impression of being behind the others and missing on a few key areas for me (such as the autofocus spread being so narrow).

I still continue to hope for something exciting given how much it costs to change, but I'm voting with my wallet and I've stopped investing in them for now.

Let's hope Sigma will bring their best techniques to the lenses. In my opinion, both the 2.8 and 4.0, need to be as "good" as the competitors offerings. Of course, the 70-200 2.8 L IS II is hard to beat, but Tamron's new one seems to be nearly as good, so Sigma has a new benchmark. Also, both new Sigma offerings should provide a kind of weather-sealing. Tamron has coupled good lenses with good mechanics. Sigma's Art lenses has lack of weathersealing. For me a no-go.

I do think that Sigma's Global Vision line brought back the company to serious competition, but I also think that their best lenses should have best optics plus best mechanics ("A+S combined").
I would never compare Eos 5DmkII with 7DmkII (FF vs. APSC; 2008 vs. 2014). Apples and oranges. But I think that all newer Eos 5D should have same build-quality as 7DmkII.

Hi Larsskv.
Ok, I find that interesting, so it is basically only the ‘key’ to the display that changes via the instructions, I didn’t realise, (obviously)!

Cheers, Graham.

Larsskv said:

Viggo, Valvebounce and DJL329, thank you very much for your helpful suggestion.

Valvebounce - I am Norwegian, but when it comes to the icons displayed in the viewfinder, the various symbols are displayed the same, regardless of language settings.

Click to expand...

IMHO, I love the camera's DX Crop mode wherein the perimeter of the viewfinder is masked to provide a view equivalent to that of an APS-C-format DSLR. Currently priced at $3K+, I'm satisfied with its performance. Flawless image quality. Images look fantastic in any light.

it very smart

Don Haines said:

I have also asked for and gotten discounts ... even from a grocery store.....

Click to expand...

Careful. You might get in trouble if they catch you on the security camera denting the cans and bruising the fruit.

I would absolutely love to see a 400/2,8 with a built in 1,4 TC.
Considering the 200-400 with a built in TC.
It would be a logical update to the 400/2,8L IS II.
To me it would be perfect for soccer/football.

With both the Olympic games and the Fifa world cup i´m pretty sure that we will something interesting coming in the coming months.

Dylan777 said:

bwud said:

Some bad news, I can’t feel any difference between the grips of the a7r II and A7r III.

And the good news:

It’s more customizable than I expected. If there is a function you can’t map somewhere I haven’t found it and probably wouldn’t want to map it. The controls feel good, not gimmicky.

It’s responsive. It doesn’t turn on right quick, but once it’s on it goes.

The EVF is beautiful.

I initially intended to have AF-ON stay default and AEL be for EyeAF. However I discovered that you can map the center press of the joystick (what resets the AF point to center on canons), so I instead put the AF-ON function there (meaning I need not move my thumb after selecting an AF point), and put the EyeAF function on the AF-ON button as well as lens button.

That freed up AEL, which I have toggling between exposure preview and not, a function I had to tediously find in the A7R II menus. Combined with the custom menu, I can’t think of any reason I’d have to navigate the main menu with any regularity.

Click to expand...

Congrats!!!

Compared to mrk II, how is 6400ISO & 12800ISO? Thanks in advance.

A9 is the only body I have as FF. I'm kinda want 2nd FF body, too lazy swapping 2470 &70200 ;D , but want to see what a7s III has to offer. The a7r III looks very good.

Click to expand...

So I shot a couple hundred family photos today, and lo and behold CameraRAW doesn’t support the files yet. There were a few at 6400 which look good in the EVF, but I’ll be in a holding pattern (not a fan of captureone, which does support it).

I'd like the Prime trinity completed. 22 is a good start.

For raw picture quality the 5DS/R cannot be beat by any other Canon DSLR.

To me the 5DS/R and a Dx camera is the perfect match. With the 5DIV being a good compromise between the two if you want a little more fps and the live view/video options it delivers over the 5DS/R and can live with the relatively paltry 7 fps compared to a fast shooting Dx.

Since I prefer maximum IQ and very often need the ability to crop the 5DS/R gets almost all my time.

I bought the sl2 over the M6 simply because it uses native EF lenses, and cost $500. I have been very pleased. the flip out ans rotate lcd screen with touch works so well that I seldom use the optical finder. My battery life exceeds my expectations, and unlike the M series, the user interface and features is tha same as other EOS APS-C bodies, which means it can be tethered by wire to a PC for remote control. A AC adapter is available to power it continuously from AC, it is a very good value.

I can fold out the lcd and hold the camera against my body for extra stability if needed for long exposures.

Dual Pixel AF is a big improvement. I'd look for special deals at Christmas time and get a new one rather than waiting for $50 off on a refurb deal next year. The $449 deal for SL2 plus lens may appear again for Christmas, its expired now. Watch for it, they sold out in short order.

The new printers were unfortunately the PIXMA TS205 and PIXMA TS305. I was hoping A3... Can someone here check on A3 printer updates?

So I have one of these on my desk right now for testing and review right now and I can't seem to open the RAW files in anything. The Adobe DNG converter won't convert them and I can't open them in the latest version of photoshop or view them.

What do you guys use to process these RAW files?

Re: Sigma Trade Up Program Gives $350.00 USD Back on Used EF, E, or PL System Mount Lenses Towards S

midluk said:

Anybody has any idea what they optimized the pricing for? Maximum profit?

Click to expand...

In business parlance an optimum price is the best balance of volume and price to yield the max total profit. It is important to note this is not the max profit per marginal unit. The company may sell less units for a higher per-unit profit but this is NOT the optimum price. As customers in a market selling at the optimum price means, for the group as a whole, the most people are able to buy one for a reasonable price.
All of this is very theoretical and usually only commodity goods are sold at close to true optimum prices. To say this about camera lenses is marketing hype.

I was casually looking around to see if there was any news about a new 50 with IS since the 85 came out, and found this thread. It's been interesting to read because, as someone noted, the participants seem to mostly be enthusiasts and not professionals, and the analyses regarding why Canon would or wouldn't want to bother updating a 50 are from that perspective - and you can't argue with (most of) the arguments here, which basically sum up to "I can do everything I could possibly need to do with what's currently available so I don't see why Canon would bother".

So I thought I'd chime in with the perspective of someone who uses this focal length professionally. The main thing my partner and I do is weddings, family and baby/child portraits, and things like that (we do also do corporate type stuff, where our equipment needs are a bit different). I do video - and we both shoot with 5d4s (we can share equipment and there's a more-or-less consistent look between the photos and the video for a wedding, for example, though our approach and style is different).

Now, you may be thinking, 50mm is not really a great portrait focal length on a FF body, and isn't wide enough for events. Well, my partner carries two cameras on a harness, the second with a 24 1.4 L - and I use the 35 f/2 IS for wider shots; anything wider than that I typically do with the 24 TS-E II on a tripod. 50mm is certainly a compromise, but a very good one - the problem with shooting with an 85 is that in a wedding, that actually gets you too close most of the time. During the ceremony and speeches etc. she uses a 70-200 2.8 IS - an 85 doesn't get you close enough in that case. The rest of the time, the best moments often happen in very tight quarters with the bride and groom and 85 just doesn't work. So the 50 1.2 saves the day - you get the shallow depth of field that clients love (and you don't actually have to shoot at 1.2 on a FF body to get it) and you can zoom with your feet even in tight quarters to get the framing you want. Likewise for family and kid portraits, it's great because it can be very difficult to track fidgety kids with an 85 or longer length, and with younger kids you need to be close to them to get their attention and to get them to engage with the camera (though she does use the 70-200 for these too occasionally depending on the situation).

So, it's actually the perfect focal length for that stuff. But, I also actually prefer it for a lot of other kinds of photography too, and plan to get the 50 TS-E for my other stuff including architecture and landscapes. I have the 24 II and the original 90 TS-E lenses; I find myself stitching together 90mm TS-E shots to get essentially a 50mm perspective - the increased resolution from stitching is not really worth it for what I do (I will probably sell the 90 because it's an awkward length for me, and eventually get the new 50 and 135 TS-Es). For me, the 50mm perspective is how I see things most of the time and is just ideal for my style of photography.

So that said, for video I primarily use the 35 f/2 IS - and I don't like it (though it's actually perfect for corporate type stuff I do as well where shallow DOF style is less important). I mean the lens is great, honestly, I just don't like how it looks for video You can get shallow depth of field with close-ups on a FF body, but for the most part the way it renders on video is just not my favorite - though it is not actually soft, for my purposes it appears "not crisp" in 1080p video compared to shooting with a shallower DOF (sharpness at this resolution being more about perception than technical specs). I vastly prefer using 50mm. I use the 1.4 for video because it's much lighter than the 1.2, and because we have two copies of it that weren't getting used since she got the 1.2 - and because I'm waiting for an IS version.

Here's what's key here - IS is a godsend for Canon video (even with a tripod, truthfully) since we don't get in-body stabilization (the stabilization in the 6D II is not good for professional results, at least for my style - it's digital processing, which I can do better in post if that's what I wanted, which I do do although as little as possible because it usually looks weird). If you haven't tried it, try a short clip with any recent-model IS lens you have - even a telephoto. It's amazing. I use a shoulder rig because the 35 is not the only lens I use but with modern IS, hand-held is legitimately just as good as a shoulder rig - and that's why I want a 50 with IS. I want to ditch the shoulder rig and instead have two bodies on a harness, one with a 50 IS and one with the 35 IS (with the 85 IS in a belt pouch for certain shots that I currently use the 85 1.8 for).

A 50 IS would be a game-changer for video. I shoot at or near wide-open most of the time (using ND filters outside) to get a "cinematic" shallow-depth-of-field look because that's what I like, and what clients like.

I would gladly pay $1600 for a 50 1.4 with IS, just like the 85. I would also gladly pay *significantly* more for an updated 50 1.2 with IS, no hesitation. I am far from the only one, too, although I will concede that most people doing this kind of low-level professional video are more than happy with their zoom lenses with IS (or their Sony or Panasonic cameras with in-body IS). I aim for something aesthetically far better than that - people like me buy these lenses to shoot wide-open with, and I care more about that (and IS) than the "versatility" of a zoom, or even of absolute technical sharpness (same thinking as e.g. Leica users - and e.g. I also shoot medium-format film wide-open with large-aperture lenses). Canon is *so* close to letting me realize that in really an amazingly easy way compared to what would have been required just a few years ago, and a 50 with IS would take me almost all the way there.

This is not the mini 80D you are looking for.

Actually this cr news is half of the whole story. For anyone intersted here’s the whole 20 min. presentation.

https://youtu.be/SOpKwy_S7YA


EDIT: wasn’t there a vidoe tag for embeded video?

There are two ways this part can fail:

1. Rubber outer loosens and slips over the plastic disc. No clicks felt when turning the dial. Apply tiny dabs of glue to the join with something like a toothpick.

2. Dial clicks when turned but nothing changes. Replace the top plate.

neuroanatomist said:

With the 2x TC, the max aperture is reduced by two stops, regardless of what is recorded in the EXIF or how it appears. The behavior you describe is normal, and it will make sense if you count the pins/contacts. On the camera mount, there is a set of five pins and another set of three, with a slight space between them. The front end of the extension tube duplicates this 5+3 arrangement. Most lenses (with specific exceptions mentioned below) have a set of five contacts for the five pins, and a set of two contacts for the three pins (one of the two is double-wide). So, cameras, extension tubes, and most lenses have that 5+3 setup.

However, look at the front of the 2x TC (extender), and notice the arrangement is 8+3 – those extra three pins are specific for communication of the lens with the TC (the rear mount of the TC is 5+3, and the TC 'converts' the information to the same 5+3 on the camera). On the mount of your 200/2.8, and on all Canon lenses that are compatible with TCs (70-200 zooms and L primes 135mm and longer). there's a corresponding 8+2 set of contacts.

So, the only way the TC information is communicated to the camera is if the TC is mounted directly behind a compatible lens.

Click to expand...

Interesting..... good to know!