josh27 said:

While its disappointing that this isn't a L-series lens with a fixed f/stop, it appears to be a similar lens to the EF-S 18-135 STM geared for dual pixel video focusing on a future full frame canon camera, like a 6d mark II.

Click to expand...

Too bad the loss of the constant f-stop wasn't made up for by an increase in reach to match the 18–135....

sarangiman said:

neuroanatomist said:

[quote author=DP Review]
The D750 inherits a version of the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system that we've seen used in the D800/E and D810 but its 'II' version is actually more sensitive rated down to -3EV. We haven't been able to really get a feel for how much difference this makes in normal use but in theory, the D750 should offer superior AF reliability in poor light compared to the D810 and D4S, which is quite something (and which might prompt more than a few D800 owners to 'upgrade' to the D750).

Click to expand...

As I've stated before, people make too much of this spec. Consider an example of the difference between -2 EV and -3 EV light levels: f/2.8, 1/15 s, ISO 51200 vs ISO 102400. Neither of those is likely to result in a very good image in most situations.

Click to expand...

Whatever (likely hardware?) change that enables focus to work down to -3 EV might, just might, make the system also work better and more reliably at, say 1 or 2 EV. That would be advantageous.

I'm not saying that's the case, I'm just saying it's likely and that if it *is* true then that would be pretty worthwhile.

What'd be nice would be if someone tested this thoroughly. But before that, I think it's premature for anyone to make the comment you did - completely ignoring the potential benefits at slightly higher, yet still low, light levels. We all know very well that precision of AF points drops with lower light levels and lower contrast; anything that increases the SNR of what the AF sensor 'sees' could help performance in situations other than just -3EV.

Let us know if you think that's completely false.

All that said, I do wish Nikon put some more revolutionary changes into the AF system. Canon's been, admirably, iterating quite a bit on their AF sensors, if I understand correctly.
[/quote]

Interesting that this went unanswered. Neuro: if you don't have any solid evidence that the -3 EV rating *doesn't* help in other, less drastically low-light settings, then please don't go around spreading misinformation that its of no utility to shooting scenarios other than those extreme ISOs (51k and above) you mentioned.

I'm saying I don't know, as I haven't had a chance to test it yet, but common sense dictates that if the AF sensor can focus in lower light, then it's probably going to better in other, more reasonable, low light scenarios as well (like EV 2 or 3 or what have you).

This was certainly the case for the A7S, for example. Just b/c it was rated down to EV -4 didn't mean that's the only place it was useful. It'd focus far more quickly and reliably than the A7R in less low-light scenarios as well. And this isn't surprising - if you're not pixel-binning, then each pixel used for focus has significantly lower SNR. Thus, AF is more likely prone to failing in low light, especially with low contrast subjects. And if you're only pixel binning at the software level, you've got all the extra read noise of the extra A7R pixels (which, importantly, don't individually have lower read noise than the A7S' pixels).

Of course, the fact that the A7S' EV -4 rated AF is still only CDAF usually meant that a 5D Mark III, for example, would still outperform it when shooting actual moving subjects in low light (b/c PDAF only needs to make a few measurements to nail focus, whereas CDAF needs to continuously hunt - during which time your subject may move significantly, throwing CDAF completely off.). That said, Sony was correct in saying the A7S would focus in lower light levels than any competitor DSLR - but I found that was only true for static subjects. The sampling intervals get longer in lower light (so AF slows down) and if your subject is moving - good luck to any CDAF system. The subject usually ends up moving before CDAF is able to make enough measurements to complete focus.

pwp said:

DominoDude said:

Thanks for your thoughts and input, guys! It's much appreciated.

pwp: Metz is cheaper here than Canon SpeedLites at comparable GN's.
Canon 600EX-RT -> $710
Metz 64 AF-1 -> $535

Click to expand...

$710 for a 600EX-RT? Not any more. That sound like maximum RRP. Shop around. You should get them for under $500 now.

What about pre-owned? Good 600 EX-RT's can be picked up for under $400 if you're patient, and mint condition 580EX II's can be bought any day of the week for around $300. Canon Speedlights tend to be amazingly robust and reliable bits of kit. I absolutely hammered my pair of 580 EXII's for years until an update to 600 EX-RT's and I've been hammering my pair mercilessly for over 12 months now. They 100% pass the tough-test.

-pw

Click to expand...

It was the lowest prices of that day for both of those flashes. Looked them up on a site specifically for price comparisons. The currency was converted according to the day price, and only slightly rounded. So, sadly, that's the ballpark in which I have to play.

I have to add that I have a habit of being a pest in the shops, so I usually can shave off 15-20% on prices there and then - they want to get rid of me and agree to giving me discounts...
I promise to keep a better eye open towards used ones, that might save a buck, and the nerves of shop owners.

Shooters who are going to make $$$$ with this body seem super jazzed.

Pudknockers working up the balls to ask "Mommy" to buy it for X-mas, not so much.

Hi Guy.
It occurs to me that getting the printer to reply to a print request with something like,
"Print? Nah not today I'm hacked off!" Might have only taken a couple of weeks which would have proved the hack and prevented what seems like a waste of 3 1/2 months of his life, it loads and doesn't run and has poor colour representation!
If he had said he enjoyed it and was looking forwards to finishing the project it would not seem to be a waste but he states something like he was fed up with it, = waste!
Tuppence worth?

Cheers, Graham.

AcutancePhotography said:

Since you were there, please share some of your other experiences with the different vendors and the crowd.

Click to expand...

Well, there's not much that I can add. As usually on the first day it wasn't too crowded, I managed to walk through all halls, had a nice talk with the guys of Google (first time at photokina) about Google Maps Views, bought 2 photo books, listened to 2.5 lectures, wondered why Canon had a complicated systems with cards and registration instead of giving away brochures. Shook my head over the guys of Impossible who developed a system that reproduces photos from the screen of a smartphone on old-fashioned Polaroid-like instant film. Also shook my head over the photos of Anton Corbijn in the Leica gallery who took portraits of musicians, but made them deliberately grainy as hell and left the heads of the artists were completely out of focus and the completely irrelevant background in focus. Very creative. For that you don't need Leicas that are worth thousands of dollars. That basically was my day at the photokina.

AlanF said:

A very interesting read. Canon has made a real breakthrough in DO. I would love a short new 100-400mm for travel. A bit worrying, however, for all those who have invested in series II glass if it all suddenly becomes obsolete.

Click to expand...

Current 300, 400 and 600mm II are SOLID. I got to play with all three. I wish I have couple millions in the bank to own all.

instaimage said:

I had a shutter mechanism fail at 20k frames... they're mechanical parts, bound to have failures of some type, it's just the law of averages, they can't be perfect...

Click to expand...

Yeah, but this " law of averages" in those bodies need to be almost "Zero" for that amount of $.
Otherwise the Brand should be responsible for that and cover it even if the warranty is over.

I_Miss_Minolta said:

@Quest for Light

And putting Samsung crap on here is appropriate, hmm?

Click to expand...

yes.

in case you missed it i explain:

1) because it has something to do with PHOTOGRAPHY
2) there is a THIRD PARTY forum.

now troll on....

Oops. My bad. Helen's probably not quite ready for a change in scenery. Anyhow Mitch, I'm sure you'll love your new and improved lens. The only complaint you could have is size and weight, and you've already experienced that.

Seems like a good deal. Buy a 7D II within the presale time for $1,799 CDN and then get an EF 24-70 f/4.0 IS L for $399 CDN plus a waterproof jacket, trinket, and a Canon smartphone/tablet skin.

I only came here to ask about the G7X but then i was carried away in the 7D threads.

With all due respect for Canon and no intend of trolling i have to say the images i have seen look just like any other image from a Canon Rebel.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-7d-mark-ii/canon-7d-mark-iiGALLERY.HTM

I don´t know about ISO 12800 and above and im not interested in such HIGH ISO shoots but THIS looks just like images from my 550D.

arcanej said:

AcutancePhotography said:

"The body alone costs $16,900."

Erk!

And that's the cheap model. The other one is "$25,400" I think that is body only also

Erk Erk!

Click to expand...

It's a little costlier than that. After you write the check for $25,400, you then have to write a payout half of your remaining wealth in the ensuring divorce.

Click to expand...

Better buy some lenses with it, it substantially decreases the remaining wealth

Price is up on B&H: $1,999 for the Sport.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082150-REG/sigma_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_dg_os.html

I didn't mean to say that ISO 320 is, in absolute terms, cleaner than ISO 100. It's the combination I use most to get the exposure I need. In the old film and analogue days I mostly shot 400ASA film to get what I needed.
As an example: I shoot a lot of birds, and frequently find myself with my shoulders and everything above that shoved deep into bushes, and to get a decent exposure I need rather short shutter times and then I go for ISO 320 or ISO 800 to easier find an aperture that match subject, DOF and so on without getting too much of an underexposure.
So I use ISO 160, where others might have gone for ISO 100, or ISO 200. ISO 320, instead of ISO 250, ISO 400, or ISO 500. If available light is in abundance of course I click down to ISO 160, and adjust my aperture, and the shutter, if my hand is steady. On those occasions where other factors rule, it's ISO 320 that is preferred.

Re: Aranmula Boat Race - 2014 ( A Photo Walk)

Hi,

01)

02)

03)

04)

Will add more soon...

neuroanatomist said:

Quest for Light said:

sony was brave enough to make the step and build the RX100.
canon waited until they saw there is a market for such a camera.
then they took a sony sensor and build a better lens for their on camera variation.
i don´t call that innovating or being at the forefront of development.

Click to expand...

Canon innovates and is at the forefront of development in many areas. In other areas, they let other companies take the risk, then 'bat cleanup'.

Click to expand...

When chinese companys do that you call it cloning.

Like Benro cloning the Wimberley gimbal, or Flash triggers etc.

I bet the G7 X will outsell the RX100-III.

Click to expand...

Possible.
And i guess a great part of the success will be because of the Sony sensor in it.

ahsanford said:

neuroanatomist said:

LetTheRightLensIn said:

The lack of DR for this one isn't killer...

Click to expand...

Which Canon cameras have been 'killed' by a lack of DR??

Click to expand...

Didn't you hear, Neuro? Every Canon landscape photographer on the planet -- utterly moved by the kind, impartial souls at DXO -- sold their gear to buy a D800, a 14-24 F/2.8, and a comfortable pair of shoes to walk the earth and capture things at ISO 100.

- A

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't get your remark. We are discussing the 7D2, which is mentioned to be an action camera. Why the hell would a landscape photographer choose this body?

Just the same as buying a Ferrari and then complaining the hard suspension.

He gave it a good preview. Predicts it as the action and sports camera to buy, will be hard to beat.

Disappointed with the lack of new sensor tech tho… like the rest of us. Otherwise awesome camera.

What I loved about the video:

The fact that-

• the only advantage Canon cameras have is a larger buffer
• portrait photogs should use Canon because of the longer reach of Canon's 70-200 II (how about the 99% photogs who don't shoot portraits at 200mm?)
• sports shooters <10k should use Canon because of the 70-200 II and the 400 5.6 (how about the <10k great whites? or blacks, if you think Nikon)
• and of course, as someone mentioned- >10k wildlife and sports are recommended to get the D810. As is he hasn't heard of the 1D X or D4s.

I used to like his reviews and technical discussions, but now it has become too ridiculous and lost all objectivity.

You can also use integration software's for those panoramic images to view it in a flash or html 5 format to be more suitable.You can use easypano or krpano to create a virtual tour.

Quest for Light said:

can we be sure now there will be no new 100-400mm? ???

no new speedlites, no medium format system, no 14-14mm f2.8, no 800mm f5.6.

two years waiting and beside the G7X nothing that interests me..

Click to expand...

yep! I suppose that's it.
Canon marketing wants to keep us humble and modest.
And they want to keep something for 2015, 2016, ...

Tanispyre said:

Newton ring interference is dependent on both the reflective surfaces, and the frequency of the light passing through. Light from the Auroras is fairly monochromatic, and may have been just the right frequency to show as light and dark Newton rings, rather than the rainbows seen by white light. It is just a guess but it could be an explanation on why you were unable to reproduce the effect the following nights with and without the filter.

Click to expand...

That makes a lot of sense. Thank you!

123Photog said:

it is said to look very sexy... well we will see in 40 minutes.

Click to expand...

Take a look here:
http://www.panasonic.com/de/consumer/foto-video/lumix-kompaktkameras/dmc-lx100.html

(sorry, just German page)

The Canon walkthrough video of the G7X is quite interesting. I noticed they mention manual focus peaking as a feature, not seen that mentioned anywhere thought it might interest some.

http://youtu.be/0-8-WV1Zqi4