I've posted some samples of RX100:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22571.15

Rienzphotoz said:

Like others have mentioned, every system has its strengths and limitations ... the trickiest part is to know how to get around the weaknesses and use the strengths to their full potential ...

Click to expand...

Figuring out how to get around those weaknesses is the part that starts to get the most troublesome after a while. This is especially true when you have multiple systems to choose from which offer very different shooting experiences.

Taken by themselves, I could imagine that my Fuji or Sony rig would be just fine. But when used in conjunction with my Canon rig and my sometimes borrowed Nikon rig, I realize how much having to "get around" weaknesses truly bothers me.

This was a key point to bring to light regarding work arounds. While I do not mind thinking about and planning for getting around obstacles with shooting a certain rig, using the Canon rig after all is said and done reminds me of how it feels to shoot (for all intents and purposes) in a hassle free fashion. I am not preplanning for how I am going to get something done and how to deal with the compromises of the rig I'm holding. I am simply just......shooting.

It all goes back to what it is I can accomplish with any given system. When you latch onto specific strengths and ignore weaknesses is when you get into the trap of seeing the greener grass on the other side. GAS, unfortunately grabs ahold of you during this period. I have now gone through the a7r, xe-2, xt-1, and a slew of adapters, work-arounds, etc.

If I have a rig out with me, I don't want to have to think to myself "oh sh*t, wish I had the other rig." And that is where the Canon (for me) comes in. It is the only kit I have currently that allows me to feel confident in that I can shoot absolutely any scenario that I come across. I may not have the most dynamic range/resolution, it may not be the smallest/lightest, but I never have to worry about solving the problem of how to get a shot because my rig makes it difficult to do so.

The other issue I have with this is that often times, I will go ahead and work around the issues of the rig I'm using. But then upon review of the images, I realize that the end product isn't really much, if any improvement at all over my Canon kit which then makes me feel as though it was all done in vain.

There will always be the guys that only shoot this, or that, and don't concern themselves with other things. For me, I chase my kids around, landscape/travel, events on occasion, portraiture, macro - food and product, and possibly some other things I have forgotten at the moment. The Sony and the Fuji can get a lot of that done. But neither one handles all of it very easily. The rig that has consistently allowed me to get the most usable/keeper shots in general? Still the Canon.

I have two 5DMkIIIs and I am keeping them. I am not interested in 7DMKII ... a lot!

By a lot I mean that for some specific (non-action) shots I am FL limited. But even for that shots I need best possible IQ. So it is a draw!

For now I'll stick to these since it is much easier to have exactly the same bodies.

For that price it would have been really be a shame for Canon !
Can't wait to see the MTFs and sample images as well !!

Lloyd said:

I use the EdMika adaptor on a FD 800mm lens with my 5Diii and my 60D and I am very happy with the results. I have had better luck on the full frame 5Diii, but this may be due to having more experience with the lens by the time I bought the 5Diii

Click to expand...

Your shots are great

LetTheRightLensIn said:

Then again, having just looked at the rumor starter's personal website for the first time....
suddenly I now rank this a CR -10000000000.

Click to expand...

Yeah, saw that as well. :-\

privatebydesign said:

Viggo said:

Are you sure the pre-flash is disabled in M mode? When I have used speedlites with for example the Quadra, there's an option to ignore a certain number of pre flashes to make the speedlite and the Quadra sync properly. I had loads of tries where the flash would trigger the Quadra too soon, and had to find the number of preflashes so they wouldn't trigger the quadra, and the speedlite was never in ETTL, nor was it triggered by the ST-E3, but the Elinchrom Skyports.

Correct me if I'm wrong

Click to expand...

I am 100% certain that one on camera, or ETTL cord mounted, flash not set as a Master via flash menu or body menu does not emit a pre-flash. Any Canon flash used remotely set to M, not as a Master or Slave, just in M and triggered via third party triggers will not emit a pre-flash.

If your flash or body is set to have the on camera (or cord) flash act as a controller then it will emit a series of pre-flashes even in M.

I use PCB Einsteins with a 600EX-RT setup, I often use the 90EX as a dumb optical trigger for the Einsteins with it set to M and lowest power, there is no pre-flash, this is easily demonstrated by putting it in second curtain sync and a long exposure.

If I set the 600's to optical triggering, or even ETTL with the Radio, then I will get pre-flashes, if they are all set to M mode in Radio there are no pre-flashes.

In a mixed manufacturer flash setup RT and M still has no pre-flash.
On camera as a regular flash in M has no pre-flash.

In optical triggering mode Canon triggering always has a pre-flash, even in flash M mode, if your on camera or ETTL corded flash or body is set to controller mode it will pre-flash.

Lots of combinations but you can work with remote Canon flashes and not have pre-flashes.

Click to expand...

Okay, thanks Have no idea what was up with my Quadra/speedlite system if it wasn't preflash. But they're both long gone so who cares ;D

So with the telephoto the kids looked larger but so did the Elk so it gives the illusion that they are closer together. I guess I wasn't paying attention to the distance to the kids...just the buck

jhpeterson said:

The only drawback with this older lens is that Canon stopped servicing this one some years back. Should you need parts and repairs, you're probably out of luck unless you can find some independent shop willing to take on the task. But, if that's a risk you're willing to take (in the past ten years, I had to replace the mount, as I had used the lens so much), if you can get one of these at a (relatively) bargain rate, don't hesitate.

Click to expand...

I have a 300 2.8 non-IS and had to have it repaired (malfunctioning diaphragm). There are shops that can do it, if parts are available. The biggest concern would be if the AF motor goes, since that part is difficult to find but most other parts seem to be fairly available.

For what you want to do, OP, the IS may be important though. I use my 300 for birds/wildlife so I use high shutter speeds generally and its great. But if you are doing motorsports or something similar with low shutter speeds like you mentioned, the IS will be missed for handheld shots. The original EF 300 2.8 is something like 6lbs and can be tough to keep steady. I handhold it all the time, but again, high shutter speeds make that a lot easier. Monopod or gimbal head tripod setup might be necessary if you go for the non IS.

dilbert said:

neuroanatomist said:

dilbert said:

neuroanatomist said:

Assuming that analogy is not too complex for you, are you suggesting that there's no difference in file size or data content between a 12-bit and a 14-bit RAW file?

Click to expand...

Given that file size is generally proportional to megapixels, I don't see how that helps.

Click to expand...

So you are suggesting that there's no difference in file size between a 12-bit and a 14-bit RAW file.

I haven't seen Samsung specs, but Nikon allows a choice between 12- and 14-bit, and the lower bit depth allows a deeper buffer in terms of number of shots.

Nikon D810 uncompressed RAW, 12-bit: 55.9 MB
Nikon D810 uncompressed RAW, 14-bit: 73.2 MB

That's a file size increase of ~30% going from 12- to 14-bit.

You really should stop trying to argue technical details, you succeed only in making yourself appear inept.

Click to expand...

The size of the file will be largely dependent on how the data is stored. It is entirely possible that a 12bit file from Samsung's NX-1 will be the same size as a 14bit file - it all comes down to how the data is stored internally within the raw file. For Nikon's NEF files, obviously they store the data differently in the two situations (and if you look at the documentation for NEF on the 'net then it is at least obvious that there are markers for this.) Until there's documentation on what Samsung does, all that you can do is speculate and create FUD about 3rd parties, nothing more as just because Nikon does something doesn't mean there's any guarantee that Samsung does too.

Click to expand...

It's not impossible that Samsung is doing higher bit depth processing in their post-ADC pipeline, or saving the data to memory as 14-bit data. Sony BionzX does that...the sensor readout is 14-bit, the processing pipeline is 16-bit, however then, sadly, they save the data to their memory card with lossy compression. They still gain from the higher bit depth processing, but it still would be better if they stored full raw pixels, instead of compressed information.

Given that Samsung explicitly calls out 12-bit data for high speed shooting, I think it's safe to say they are storing the information in 12-bit in the data file. Otherwise, they could very well ADC at 12-bit, then use a 16-bit processing pipeline to perform dithering of the information, and save it back out as 14-bit information that was better than 12-bit, but maybe still not quite as good as an original 14-bit read. If they were doing that, I think they would have specified as much.

Yes! but somewhat different than before.

Thank you for your reply!

I would not automatically count Pentax out of the equation.

they just can't match the Japanese efficiency when it comes to fuel injectors

Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=1EBfxjSFAxQ#t=68

Funny complainments from UK... I guess they're still angry 'bout germany. No hard feelings

a functioning panning mode IS alone makes it worth double the tamron price but we need to see how it performs overall, I find the AF accuracy and tracking on the tamron pretty amazing to be honest so the sigma is really gonna have to step up if they want to ask the premium price.

PureClassA said:

http://sigma-rumors.com/2014/09/sigma-150-600mm-f5-6-3-contemporary-sports-differences/

Sigma Rumors is calling $1099 and $1999 respectively. Find out for sure next week I suppose

Click to expand...

gotta see how the AF and panning mode IS perform vs the tamron but If its good i can see myself swapping the tamron for the sport version.

I just covered my 2nd event in my life. This was a big learning opportunity. And my first time to use a zoom lens on such a scale. I use my 6D and rented EF 24-70 F2.8L II.

On my first event, I learned that I must not be afraid to set higher ISO to prioritize shutter speed. And slowing down is better.

I made a checklist before pressing the shutter. (Camera in Manual mode and Speedlite in ETTL 0 to +2/3)

1. Is subject stationary or moving or approaching
a) if stationary - use back button, shutter speed = > fl
b) if moving - use back button, shutter speed = 160
c) if approaching - use shutter button and switch to AI, and shutter speed = 160, use center point AF
2. Set the composition (choosing focal length) and selecting focus point
3. Check shutter speed > fl
4. Setting Apperture
a) Subject is near - Av > 5.6
b) Subject is medium far - Av > 4
c) Subject is far - Av < 2.8
5. Set IS0 such that metering is between -1 .. 0
6. Focus and take the shot

moreorless said:

c.d.embrey said:

I've been saying, for several years, that sometime soon, a Vogue cover would be shot with a smart phone. The time may finally have arrived

Click to expand...

Whilst that might well be possible lets be realistic it would still be a gimmick rather than using the best tool for the job.

Click to expand...

Would it be a gimmick to a young professional, who grew up using a camera phone. I don't think so, YMMV.

Different generations look at things differently. I think that in a few years the camera-phone generation will look at DSLR users and shake their heads ??? Sorta like a present day DSLR user who sees a Large Format photographer and his back-pack full of film holders.

Whatever you can get. Keep in mind that a new one, from major players like B&H or Adorama, will cost about
$3500, and going down monthly. It also depends upon where you are and what the local market is like. Best
way to check is a local Craigslist or even EBay. Assuming mint condition, most buyers would pay$2200 to $2600
for the body and another $600-$650 for the lens. If you have high shutter count or "dings" or scratches it's worth less. If you're lucky, a retailer might consider a close to "even-up" trade for your camera and lens for the 810 body.

Aglet said:

Some allusion to MFT size sensor there, as well, it seems.
When I consider just how good the IQ is from my Oly EM10's tiny sensor, with just enough ability for OOF areas and DoF control, it seems like the 4/3 system was well conceived for all around compromises.
I can landscape at low ISO with some shadow push ability, use iso25600 and get usable images for small prints, put on a long lens for shallow DoF shooting, all in a tiny light package.
Yup, that sensor size is a good compromise.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, when Canon finally decides to put both feet in the mirrorless race, the M mount system will yield better IQ than a 4/3 system can. Though Canon seems to have stumbled out of the gate, mirrorless wise, I think we all know that when Canon gets serious, they have the tools and knowledge to produce at least a very competitive camera. Maybe by then they will have improved their sensor/readout components and that, combined with maturing DPAF tech, may allow them to be class-leading in the segment. It's good to dream...

Hjalmarg1 said:

MagnumJoe said:

I’m interested in a second body to compliment my 5D MK III. I mostly shoot candids, portraits, my grandson in the park and his T-ball and soccer games. The 5D MK III has done really well and I rented a canon 1.4 III extender and will try out this weekend.

The reason I’m interested in the 70D or 7D MK II for my second body are.
The extra reach and video auto focus.

70D advantages
Touch Screen
Articulated Screen
Price

7D MK II advantages
Ergonomics (similar to 5D MK III)
65 Focus Points
10 FPS
Weather Proof
Headphone Port
Viewfinder coverage, 100%

I’m leaning towards the 7D MK II, but I’d like to hear your feedback and suggestions.

Which one would/will you buy or would you buy?

Click to expand...

Hi Magnun,

You said you need a second body? You also have the 6D in your bag.
I would wait and see how different is the performance (particularly noise and ISO) of the new 7D2 over the 70D.
Particularly I'll wait to see real reviews of the 7D2 to see if the premiun over the 70D is worth it.

Click to expand...

Hi Hjalmarg1,

I sold my 6D when I bought the 5D MK III, I had plans to buy the GH4, but when I realized the investments i have in canon lens, that just wasn't an option. For example a f/2.8 on the GH4 isn't really 2.8, it's more like a 5.6, so I lost interest.

8) I'm blessed with bewildering perfection. My jpegs are worshiped near & far by primitives of our species.

Yea, I am a northern hemisphere dweller, so most of what I know of the southern skies, I learned long time ago when taking classes in school. My few trips south of the equator I have seen the megellanic clouds, but I have never had access to good optics to see anything else.

It doesn't exist yet, but if someone really could get the camera to do its own AFMA using DPAF (or whatever) that would be truly great.

I also think they would be smart to put it in every body (or every one that has DPAF ) not just the higher end ones. That would just go to the basic functionality of the camera and the basic image quality, and it would be concealing their own minor manufacturing inconsistency to make every Canon body work perfectly with every lens. Cheaper than trying to accomplish the same thing with massive quality control improvement efforts. And it wouldn't upset the separation of price points between models. The simple one would focus simply but accurately.