Canon Sends Invitation to Dealers for Major Mirrorless Presentation Next Month

[Orangutan]

Would you rather that he said "if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them?"

There are some people on these forums who do, in fact, extrapolate, and deserve little charity for word choices; I do not believe this is one of those cases.

Sorry to come down hard on grammar but I can't resist it in a discussion of precision in use of words: "if one were" = an impossible or unreal event ("were" used as a subjunctive in a conditional clause). It should be "If one was" as one is describing a real event.
Apologies.

Thank you, I'm always willing to accept constructive commentary. In this case I beg to differ:

Subunctive forms of verbs are typically used to express various states of unreality such as wish, emotion, possibility, judgment, opinion, obligation, or action that have not yet occurred (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive)

 

[AlanF]

Would you rather that he said "if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them?"

There are some people on these forums who do, in fact, extrapolate, and deserve little charity for word choices; I do not believe this is one of those cases.

Sorry to come down hard on grammar but I can't resist it in a discussion of precision in use of words: "if one were" = an impossible or unreal event ("were" used as a subjunctive in a conditional clause). It should be "If one was" as one is describing a real event.
Apologies.

Thank you, I'm always willing to accept constructive commentary. In this case I beg to differ:

Subunctive forms of verbs are typically used to express various states of unreality such as wish, emotion, possibility, judgment, opinion, obligation, or action that have not yet occurred (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive)

Here are some simple descriptions of when to use if were vs if was:
https://commonenglisherrors.com/if-i-was-vs-if-i-were/
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/101485/If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct
https://writingexplained.org/was-vs-were-difference

 

[Orangutan]

Would you rather that he said "if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them?"

There are some people on these forums who do, in fact, extrapolate, and deserve little charity for word choices; I do not believe this is one of those cases.

Sorry to come down hard on grammar but I can't resist it in a discussion of precision in use of words: "if one were" = an impossible or unreal event ("were" used as a subjunctive in a conditional clause). It should be "If one was" as one is describing a real event.
Apologies.

Thank you, I'm always willing to accept constructive commentary. In this case I beg to differ:

Subunctive forms of verbs are typically used to express various states of unreality such as wish, emotion, possibility, judgment, opinion, obligation, or action that have not yet occurred (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive)

Here are some simple descriptions of when to you if were vs if was:
https://commonenglisherrors.com/if-i-was-vs-if-i-were/
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/101485/If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct
https://writingexplained.org/was-vs-were-difference

These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:

The subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements

I believe my use was the hypothetical, though I'd appreciate a reference to a rule that contradicts this.

 

[AlanF]

Would you rather that he said "if one were to wear them for a while, I believe one might well get used to them?"

There are some people on these forums who do, in fact, extrapolate, and deserve little charity for word choices; I do not believe this is one of those cases.

Sorry to come down hard on grammar but I can't resist it in a discussion of precision in use of words: "if one were" = an impossible or unreal event ("were" used as a subjunctive in a conditional clause). It should be "If one was" as one is describing a real event.
Apologies.

Thank you, I'm always willing to accept constructive commentary. In this case I beg to differ:

Subunctive forms of verbs are typically used to express various states of unreality such as wish, emotion, possibility, judgment, opinion, obligation, or action that have not yet occurred (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive)

Here are some simple descriptions of when to you if were vs if was:
https://commonenglisherrors.com/if-i-was-vs-if-i-were/
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/101485/If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct
https://writingexplained.org/was-vs-were-difference

These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:

The subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements

I believe my use was the hypothetical, though I'd appreciate a reference to a rule that contradicts this.

The nuance of the use of the subjunctive "were" in a conditional clause is that the proposed situation is hypothetical to the extent that it would not happen in practice. Just read the examples of correct and incorrect examples and you will see that.

 

[Orangutan]

These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:

The subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements

I believe my use was the hypothetical, though I'd appreciate a reference to a rule that contradicts this.

The nuance of the use of the subjunctive "were" in a conditional clause is that the proposed situation is hypothetical to the extent that it would not happen in practice. Just read the examples of correct and incorrect examples and you will see that.

Again, I'm afraid I disagree. See this example:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/when-to-use-the-subjunctive

Were I to get drunk, it would help me drown my anguish.

There is nothing in this example to indicate or suggest that it would not happen in practice.


Also, see:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/moods

The subjunctive mood is used to express a wish or possibility

These, presumably authoritative, pages give no suggestion at all that the subjunctive mood requires an unreal, impossible, implausible or unlikely situation. Those are certainly valid uses of the subjunctive; however, purely hypothetical, wishful or possible uses are also entirely valid.

One more example, a translation of Dante: (https://scientificgems.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/science-in-dantes-paradiso/)

“Yet an experiment, were you to try it,
could free you from your cavil – and the source
of your arts’ course springs from experiment
Taking three mirrors, place a pair of them
at equal distance from you; set the third
midway between those two, but farther back.
Then, turning toward them, at your back have placed
a light that kindles those three mirrors and
returns to you, reflected by them all.
Although the image in the farthest glass
will be of lesser size, there you will see
that it must match the brightness of the rest.” — Paradiso, II, 94–105, tr. Mandelbaum

Assuming the translator and editor were doing their jobs, this is a case where the subjunctive is used not merely to express a wish or hypothetical, but to propose an actual experiment.

 

[ahsanford]

On the grip side of things, I'll just share my personal experience: a 24-70 f/2.8L I on my old T1i was a chore to use for extended periods of shooting.

My EF-S glass was both for a smaller sensor (smaller outer barrel) and generally was made of plastic. So my 18-55 and even the nicer EF-S 10-22 were simple carry propositions. But my first two EF lenses were the 24-70 f/2.8L (I) and then a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II -- the former was a chore to a use in comparison to the EF-S glass, and the 70-200 was so downright uncomfortable I'd actually monopod it for extended shooting applications.

And then I got my 5D3 in 2012 and it changed everything. I've posted about it before.

So I look at an A7R3, compare it to a T2i here (no T1i here, but it can't be that far off):

http://camerasize.com/compact/#219.289,724.515,ha,t

...and since I've been down that road before, I say no thank you. No chunky grip in an FF ILC is no sale for me as it means I have to leave most of my best lenses on the shelf. And the proposition of owning one with only new pricey small primes or adapted smaller EF lenses is too limited a use-case for me.

- A

 

[cpsico]

Why cut the sensor out of the picture unless there's a surprise awaiting...

Maybe an M6-sized body with the 6D full-frame sensor?

Now *that* I'd buy in an instant (well, assuming there were lenses to go along with it too!)

That would be very tempting!

 

[AlanF]

These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:

The subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements

I believe my use was the hypothetical, though I'd appreciate a reference to a rule that contradicts this.

The nuance of the use of the subjunctive "were" in a conditional clause is that the proposed situation is hypothetical to the extent that it would not happen in practice. Just read the examples of correct and incorrect examples and you will see that.

Again, I'm afraid I disagree. See this example:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/when-to-use-the-subjunctive

Were I to get drunk, it would help me drown my anguish.

There is nothing in this example to indicate or suggest that it would not happen in practice.


Also, see:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/moods

The subjunctive mood is used to express a wish or possibility

These, presumably authoritative, pages give no suggestion at all that the subjunctive mood requires an unreal, impossible, implausible or unlikely situation. Those are certainly valid uses of the subjunctive; however, purely hypothetical, wishful or possible uses are also entirely valid.

One more example, a translation of Dante: (https://scientificgems.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/science-in-dantes-paradiso/)

“Yet an experiment, were you to try it,
could free you from your cavil – and the source
of your arts’ course springs from experiment
Taking three mirrors, place a pair of them
at equal distance from you; set the third
midway between those two, but farther back.
Then, turning toward them, at your back have placed
a light that kindles those three mirrors and
returns to you, reflected by them all.
Although the image in the farthest glass
will be of lesser size, there you will see
that it must match the brightness of the rest.” — Paradiso, II, 94–105, tr. Mandelbaum

Assuming the translator and editor were doing their jobs, this is a case where the subjunctive is used not merely to express a wish or hypothetical, but to propose an actual experiment.

You are confusing different types of clauses. Your sentence highlighted in red used "were" after "If" in a conditional clause. The example you quoted from Oxford Dictionary is their No. 5, "Were at the head of a clause".

I am not writing any further but will just give one final pointer towards another link:

"If I Were or If I Was: Which is Correct? - ProofreadNOW.com
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/.../If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct

15 Oct 2013 - Guideline: Use were (instead of was) in statements that are contrary to fact. ... If this were [not was] a real Florida tourist attraction, that waterskier would have made it over the jump! (The subjunctive ... (The verb here is not in the subjunctive mood because the idea following "if" is not contrary to fact. The job ..."

Your original sentence starts with the explicit meaning that one would never wear them for a while.

No more from me.

 

[IglooEater]

Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :

 

[neuroanatomist]

Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :

If you look carefully, you will find that you have made an error in punctuation. In case it is not jumping out at you, you have ended your sentence with neither a period nor an ellipsis, but with something in between.

;D

 

[slclick]

Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :

If you look carefully, you will find that you have made an error in punctuation. In case it is not jumping out at you, you have ended your sentence with neither a period nor an ellipsis, but with something in between.

;D

That's it, I'm jumping ship to Esperanto!

 

[Orangutan]

No more from me.

Thanks for the pleasant disagreement, though we still disagree.

 

[Orangutan]

Yet an experiment, were you to try it,
could free you from your cavil – and the source
of your arts’ course springs from experiment
Taking three mirrors, place a pair of them
at equal distance from you; set the third
midway between those two, but farther back.
Then, turning toward them, at your back have placed
a light that kindles those three mirrors and
returns to you, reflected by them all.
Although the image in the farthest glass
will be of lesser size, there you will see
that it must match the brightness of the rest.

I prefer it in the original Klingon

'ach ghaH ngong, nID
laH SoH tlhab cavil – 'ej Hal
SoH'a' He wepDaj vo' ngong
wej neSlo' tlhap, chopmeH ghIHDI' bIH lan
DeSDu' vo' SoH equal chuq; wejDIch HIjmeH
Qo'noS midway SabtaHbogh cha', 'ach farther Dub.
vaj tlhe' toward chaH, DeSDu' DublIj lan
wej neSlo' kindles 'e' wov qar 'ej
chegh SoH, wIj bItqu' Hoch.
naH jajmeymaj farthest HIvje' ghItlhvam
ghaH lesser size, pa' DaqaSmoHbej
Hoch brightness ghob'e' qul naQmey ghu'.

I'm afraid the Klingons took it from the ancient Tholian, but I don't have a link to the original.

 

[BillB]

These pages seem to support my use of the subjunctive. In particular, the page at the last link says:

The subjunctive mood is a verb form that is used for unreal or hypothetical statements

I believe my use was the hypothetical, though I'd appreciate a reference to a rule that contradicts this.

We don't seem to run into the subjunctive much these days. Rather refreshing, whether used properly or not.
The nuance of the use of the subjunctive "were" in a conditional clause is that the proposed situation is hypothetical to the extent that it would not happen in practice. Just read the examples of correct and incorrect examples and you will see that.

Again, I'm afraid I disagree. See this example:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/when-to-use-the-subjunctive

Were I to get drunk, it would help me drown my anguish.

There is nothing in this example to indicate or suggest that it would not happen in practice.


Also, see:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/moods

The subjunctive mood is used to express a wish or possibility

These, presumably authoritative, pages give no suggestion at all that the subjunctive mood requires an unreal, impossible, implausible or unlikely situation. Those are certainly valid uses of the subjunctive; however, purely hypothetical, wishful or possible uses are also entirely valid.

One more example, a translation of Dante: (https://scientificgems.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/science-in-dantes-paradiso/)

“Yet an experiment, were you to try it,
could free you from your cavil – and the source
of your arts’ course springs from experiment
Taking three mirrors, place a pair of them
at equal distance from you; set the third
midway between those two, but farther back.
Then, turning toward them, at your back have placed
a light that kindles those three mirrors and
returns to you, reflected by them all.
Although the image in the farthest glass
will be of lesser size, there you will see
that it must match the brightness of the rest.” — Paradiso, II, 94–105, tr. Mandelbaum

Assuming the translator and editor were doing their jobs, this is a case where the subjunctive is used not merely to express a wish or hypothetical, but to propose an actual experiment.

You are confusing different types of clauses. Your sentence highlighted in red used "were" after "If" in a conditional clause. The example you quoted from Oxford Dictionary is their No. 5, "Were at the head of a clause".

I am not writing any further but will just give one final pointer towards another link:

"If I Were or If I Was: Which is Correct? - ProofreadNOW.com
https://www.proofreadnow.com/blog/bid/.../If-I-Were-or-If-I-Was-Which-is-Correct

15 Oct 2013 - Guideline: Use were (instead of was) in statements that are contrary to fact. ... If this were [not was] a real Florida tourist attraction, that waterskier would have made it over the jump! (The subjunctive ... (The verb here is not in the subjunctive mood because the idea following "if" is not contrary to fact. The job ..."

Your original sentence starts with the explicit meaning that one would never wear them for a while.

No more from me.

 

[justawriter]

So eight pages in and we still don't know if this is a real invitation?

 

[IglooEater]

Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :

If you look carefully, you will find that you have made an error in punctuation. In case it is not jumping out at you, you have ended your sentence with neither a period nor an ellipsis, but with something in between.

;D

You’re right of course, and thank you. Also, I’d like to thank the gentlemen discussing grammar for remaining well, gentlemen. I dare say that if one w**(*) to scrutinize my own writing in as much detail, it would be found far more wanting than that of either of them. ;D

 

[slclick]

Those crazy Tholians, they knew how to party.

 

[Talys]

It's all down to what you're used to. Yes, the M5 feels different and balances differently and it's off putting initially but you get used to it really quickly and the size is NO drawback.

Sure, once you start using a small camera that's uncomfortable to hold with a heavy lens, your hand shrinks and suddenly it's all better.

It's what you're used to. I tried to use a 1DX once, huge brick that wasn't at all comfortable to use. But I'm sure I'd get used to it if I did, as you would if you used the M5 for long enough.

I do agree the original M/M2/M3 had ergonomic issues and were perhaps too small, but the M5 is an entirely different beast.

Exactly. Buy gloves that are a couple of sizes too small. Wear them for a while, you'll get used to them. Makes sense.

To be clear, any of the M bodies are fine with EF-M lenses. But not with a larger lens, e.g. 24-70/2.8 or 70-200/2.8.

M bodies are great with lenses that are designed for a 17mm flange focal distance and a 47mm throat diameter -- dimensions that are virtually identical to Sony E mount.

And just like Sony, Canon won't be able to defy the laws of physics, so as you get to pro-type lenses for full frame cameras that are large aperture and/or telephoto every single lens ends up getting longer by an inch to increase that flange focal range back to where it was. And worse, every lens will need to have larger glass elements, so just like Sony, you have pro lenses that are much wider diameter than the sleek and svelte consumer lenses, and that's what unbalances the camera.

You'll never get out of the wide diameter glass that tapers to a small diameter mount and there will always be challenges building ultrawides. The body/grip size will never be balanced with mount/lens diameter for full frame lenses. And all for what? So that a total carry weight of 2-3kg+ can be reduced by less than 5-10%, and virtually no savings in length?

In terms of the total package, the only thing that's really smaller is the width of the body and the depth of the grip. Sure, I wouldn't mind a little smaller than a 5D, but I'd never buy something anywhere near the size of an A7RIII to attach to lenses the size of 70-200/2.8 or 100-400LII, and as Sony has proven, those lenses don't get any smaller or narrower in diameter just because you don't need a mirror anymore.

When Canon makes a 100-400LIII for a full frame sensor that takes a uses a 58mm filter and that's 60% the length of the LII, then the 17mm flange focal distance and the 47mm throat diameter suddenly become pretty awesome. Until then, the small mirrorless has essentially the same role as my S110... a little extra camera with small-but-inferior optics that fills in some focal length that I don't want to lug a pro grade lens around for.

 

[AlanF]

Well now, this thread has been a very interesting read.. :

If you look carefully, you will find that you have made an error in punctuation. In case it is not jumping out at you, you have ended your sentence with neither a period nor an ellipsis, but with something in between.

;D

You’re right of course, and thank you. Also, I’d like to thank the gentlemen discussing grammar for remaining well, gentlemen. I dare say that if one w**(*) to scrutinize my own writing in as much detail, it would be found far more wanting than that of either of them. ;D

A define "was" since one Neuro has scrutinised your writing.........

 

[dak723]

• ...has to draw the camera from a bag and put it away when you are done (or need to move to the next location)
• ...hold the camera near/around the chest in those in between moments between resting (perhaps on a BR or neck strap) and actually framing and shooting
• ...reviews / chimps / pixel-peeps their shots

And all three of those circumstances heavily rely on the primary (right) hand to do the heavy lifting.

Again, one can use Keith's setup above with an M5 no sweat -- it's a question of how long you want to shoot with that combo that concerns me. A chunkier grip will absolutely be a more comfortable shooting experience over time.

- A

It's all down to what you're used to. Yes, the M5 feels different and balances differently and it's off putting initially but you get used to it really quickly and the size is NO drawback.

I am glad you feel that the size of the M5 is no drawback, but that is not a statement of fact as you seem to make it. When I bought my M5, I certainly expected to use my EF-S 55-250mm and an older 28-105mm EF lens on it, but found the ergonomics pretty much unusable. Ultimately sold the adapter and the EF-S lens. For me - and apparently others on this forum - the M5 is only comfortable to use with M series lenses and perhaps really small EF lenses. So, apparently - for some of us - the size is a DEFINITE drawback unless using M lenses.