Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]

[Steve]

Due to the rate at which I generate photo's, I'm trying to streamline my workflow - trying to frame the shot right first time is part of that, and accepting that parts of the subject may be cut off is a part of that too. Yes sometimes that leads to 'imperfect framing' but sometimes it also leads to interesting shots that I would not have framed that way if I weren't limited to a specific FOV.

Ok you do realize that I'm not arguing against framing properly in camera, right? When its possible, I certainly try to frame correctly in camera. Its just that an arbitrary, blanket ban on cropping doesn't make any sense except in cases where you don't know how to frame and are trying to learn. If a picture would look better with a crop, it should be cropped and going 'nope, not gonna' because *vague reasons* is weird and doesn't improve the picture. There is nothing interesting about a poorly framed picture just because you chose not to crop it. Whenever I see someone online talking about how they don't crop, its like they all assume everyone else is just firing away randomly and somehow using the magic of cropping to make nice photos.

ahsanford: do you have a blanket ban on using photoshop or flash? I don't normally carry a flash for the stuff I do but I made an effort to learn how to use it and it comes in very handy sometimes. When I'm shooting with my Fuji XE1 (for which I have only one lens - the 35 1.4) I usually shoot jpeg because I don't generally feel I need to process the shots much but I certainly shoot RAW 100% with my 1D4 for birds and RAW+jpeg for sports. The point is, putting arbitrary limits on the tools available doesn't make sense if the goal is good photos. Shooting with my XE1 is limiting because of the single prime lens and because I usually only shoot jpeg but I'm not married to those limitations. I'll crop shots if it makes them look better and I'll process them if it makes them look better. I just cannot fathom why anyone would look at a shot and say "I know this would be better if I did this and that but I'm not going to abandon ~*my principles*~"

Also, I suppose the wording makes it seem that way, but I did not mean to refer to mrsfotografie as mediocre. I was referring to the trend I have been seeing and its normal adherents. I apologize for coming across that way.

 

[Don Haines]

There's this weird trend in online photography discussion groups where mediocre photographers embrace some sort of artificial limitation regime like "no cropping" or "primes only" because of the belief that it's purer photography or something.

Ouch, I missed the word in red above. Your point is well made (and I welcome the discussion that follows your comment re: purists vs. pragmatists), but there's no need for that kind of tone or implication. This is a respectful place. People who don't have the same sensibilities as you are not sub-par human beings -- they are just people with different sensibilities.

Further, I think if you went to that person's website (www.mrsfotografie.nl), you'd see far from mediocre work on display.

- A

Panning the camera is a simple skill. All you have to do is move the camera for side to side.... Yet in the real world it is really hard to get right and takes lots and lots of practice to get right. My first impression of the Motorsport photos was that they are far more colorful than I thought, and my second impression was "this guy knows how to pan".

Personally, I am not into motor sports.... But having viewed those pictures I realize that it would be a great subject for photography, both from a technical and from an artistic viewpoint. Good job! You are looking at mediocre in the rear view mirror!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Panning the camera is a simple skill. All you have to do is move the camera for side to side.... Yet in the real world it is really hard to get right and takes lots and lots of practice to get right. My first impression of the Motorsport photos was that they are far more colorful than I thought, and my second impression was "this guy knows how to pan".

Personally, I am not into motor sports.... But having viewed those pictures I realize that it would be a great subject for photography, both from a technical and from an artistic viewpoint. Good job! You are looking at mediocre in the rear view mirror!

Thank you Don, actually the trick for good panning is to anticipate and start following the subject even before looking through the viewfinder. It helps to know in which part of the arc you want to press the shutter release. Take the photo then follow through. I don't play golf but I assume there are similarities in technique.

If a picture would look better with a crop, it should be cropped and going 'nope, not gonna' because *vague reasons* is weird and doesn't improve the picture.

Cropping is not forbidden ;D For you and for the sake of this discussion, I've now clipped the car on the left too (by cropping), giving even tighter framing and possibly a more 'balanced' shot. However now I'm missing the tension generated by the original framing, a little imperfection may be just a little more interesting.

FWIW this is a Formula One car, passing by at roughly 15 meters distance at some kind of ludicrous speed.

 

[Don Haines]

e rear view mirror!
Cropping is not forbidden ;D For you and for the sake of this discussion, I've now clipped the car on the left too (by cropping), giving even tighter framing and possibly a more 'balanced' shot. However now I'm missing the tension generated by the original framing, a little imperfection may be just a little more interesting.

FWIW this is a Formula One car, passing by at roughly 15 meters distance at some kind of ludicrous speed.

When you look at the full picture and the cropped picture, the car in the full picture looks like it going faster

 

[mrsfotografie]

e rear view mirror!
Cropping is not forbidden ;D For you and for the sake of this discussion, I've now clipped the car on the left too (by cropping), giving even tighter framing and possibly a more 'balanced' shot. However now I'm missing the tension generated by the original framing, a little imperfection may be just a little more interesting.

FWIW this is a Formula One car, passing by at roughly 15 meters distance at some kind of ludicrous speed.

When you look at the full picture and the cropped picture, the car in the full picture looks like it going faster

Thanks, I think you're right about that - I couldn't quite put my finger on why I prefer the non-cropped picture but that's a pretty good explanation.

By the way, I just published the entire album, here: http://www.mrsfotografie.nl/auto-motorsport/racing-day-city-demo-assen/ You can start a slideshow by clicking the link below the thumbnails. Edit: The Red Bull Formula One car is driven by Jean-Éric Vergne.

And thank you everyone, I think it's fun how far we've strayed off-topic in this thread ;D

 

[ahsanford]

ahsanford: do you have a blanket ban on using photoshop or flash? I don't normally carry a flash for the stuff I do but I made an effort to learn how to use it and it comes in very handy sometimes. When I'm shooting with my Fuji XE1 (for which I have only one lens - the 35 1.4) I usually shoot jpeg because I don't generally feel I need to process the shots much but I certainly shoot RAW 100% with my 1D4 for birds and RAW+jpeg for sports. The point is, putting arbitrary limits on the tools available doesn't make sense if the goal is good photos. Shooting with my XE1 is limiting because of the single prime lens and because I usually only shoot jpeg but I'm not married to those limitations. I'll crop shots if it makes them look better and I'll process them if it makes them look better. I just cannot fathom why anyone would look at a shot and say "I know this would be better if I did this and that but I'm not going to abandon ~*my principles*~"

No hard ban on either.

I'm not a huge fan of hard rules either, but I do like natural light for my aforementioned list of reasons. That said, I finally picked up a flash last year because friends were more and more asking me to take portraits or mill about at large family events, and I lost my pop-up flash when I migrated to FF. I'm also fooling around with touristy 'landscape portraiture' and backlit subjects are a mess without some help from a flash.

I use Photoshop principally to bring in my RAW shots through ACR and save them as JPEGs. I only do this for my 3-5% of best/keeper shots, and I do not spend more than 3 minutes editing a shot. I almost never perform surgery with masks and curves in PS. I recognize getting better at PS help me make a good shot great, but I rarely have the patience for it and I almost never print my work. (Note: I am not a professional photographer.)

Agree with your comment against dogmatic 'I would never...' rules on photography. I am hard-pressed to think of my personal 'I would never' photography rules, but if you twisted my arm, they would be...

• I would never shoot street photography of homeless/indigent folks, nor will I capture scenes of outright suffering. I'd sooner put the camera down and help those folks. (Goodness knows, there are enough photojournalists cataloging the world's difficulties these days, anyway.)
• I would never use a flash for concert photography, because I'd like to shoot another concert someday.
• I would never shoot macro of arachnids. (In fairness, that's not dogma -- that's phobia.)

- A

 

[ahsanford]

And thank you everyone, I think it's fun how far we've strayed off-topic in this thread ;D

Given that Canon India's 'Big Splash' turned out to be a photo contest, can you blame us for going off-topic?

Link: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=10196

- A

 

[slclick]

11 pages of comments, now that's funny.

 

[Don Haines]

I think we are off topic because in reality, nobody knows what is going to happen at photokina, so why not have some fun on the trip....

 

[mrsfotografie]

Given that Canon India's 'Big Splash' turned out to be a photo contest, can you blame us for going off-topic?

Link: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=10196

- A

That's funny, I missed that announcement! ;D

I think we are off topic because in reality, nobody knows what is going to happen at photokina, so why not have some fun on the trip....

For sure, I like this forum because it's fun, and I learn lots from my fellow photographers as we go along

.. I did not mean to refer to mrsfotografie as mediocre. I was referring to the trend I have been seeing and its normal adherents. I apologize for coming across that way.

It's all right, I like that you triggered a really good discussion

For me, natural light vs. flash is about (a) how much effort and how many variables do I want to control, (b) how much gear I want to carry, and (c) how deliberate vs. spontaneous I want the shot to be. My answers to those three questions are (a) little effort / keep it simple, (b) less gear, and (c) usually spontaneous. So natural light shooting is what I strongly prefer.

+1

For getting it right in-camera vs. cropping, that's a question of whether you enjoy working within the limitations of your gear (the guy who brings one lens and moves his feet) or if you see limitations as unacceptable constraints that will be eliminated with more lenses, more post-processing, etc. Crudely, and likely unfairly, I think the first group wants to puff up their chest and show how competent they are at thinking on their feet and netting difficult shots under tough constraints, and the second group giggles at that and either changes lenses or just crops the shot. One viewpoint is proud and determined and the other is pragmatic and efficient. Neither are right and neither are wrong.

Both viewpoints apply depending on the occasion or venue:

Netting those difficult shots under tough constraints is a personal challenge for me and can be lots of fun if it's ok that I might miss some shots, the quality is not quite up to par, or I may even come home empty handed. If the results are good despite the limitations, that makes me feel great because usually I'll have learnt something from the exercise.

But when every shot counts I'm definitely going for the reliability and flexibility of my Canon DSLR system. It's sensible to be pragmatic and efficient when required

 

[tkgeoff]

Long time lurker, first time post!

To go back on topic a bit to Photokina... no one thinks a new 6d is going to come out right? I'm thinking about forking out for it but I have a tendency to buy things before new versions are just released.

I know it was only released 2 years ago and most of the talk is about the 7d MKII, but has Canon ever been able to pull off a complete upset/surprise, aka no one saw it coming?

Just for the record, I don't want to wait for Photokina because I'm going on a backpacking trip in two weeks so I was hoping to have it for that if I can manage!

Thanks!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Long time lurker, first time post!

Welcome!!!

Just for the record, I don't want to wait for Photokina because I'm going on a backpacking trip in two weeks so I was hoping to have it for that if I can manage!

Thanks!

Rule of thumb: if you need it now, get it now. FWIW I don't see a new 6D coming out for quite some time yet.

 

[ahsanford]

Long time lurker, first time post!

To go back on topic a bit to Photokina... no one thinks a new 6d is going to come out right? I'm thinking about forking out for it but I have a tendency to buy things before new versions are just released.

I know it was only released 2 years ago and most of the talk is about the 7d MKII, but has Canon ever been able to pull off a complete upset/surprise, aka no one saw it coming?

Just for the record, I don't want to wait for Photokina because I'm going on a backpacking trip in two weeks so I was hoping to have it for that if I can manage!

Thanks!

Welcome, and fair question. I'd say the odds for a new 6D / 'entry'-level FF rig are very, very low:

• Though never a certainty, Canon's full frame life-cycle/refresh timing has been running about 4 years or so based on 5D and 1Ds/1DX timing (see handy timeline from Northlight), so the 6D is only about halfway to a refresh. That's for staying 'in-family' with a refresh. Canon, could, conceivably launch a new brand/trim-level of FF camera out of the blue, but the odds of that are astronomically low based on zero chatter whatsoever about that and high stock levels of their current FF bodies.
• The 6D has been well-received (despite some features being somewhat nerfed compared to the 5D3), so there isn't a need to pull a 'Nikon D610' quick update to solve a major issue.
• If only one non-Rebel body is released at Photokina, everything points to the 7D2 being the one -- see the timeline again (hint: ancient), read about limited stock levels, see all the clearance deals, etc.

So my guess of a new FF body of ANY kind (a 6D, a 5D4, a mythical 0D Mark 12, etc.) is not happening at Photokina.

- A

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

According to Thom Hogan, the sensor is unlikely to all that revolutionary, but merely a reworking of dual pixel technology with improvements mainly in autofocus. Not so much in IQ. :
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-photokina-prognosis.html
"I think that’s likely more dual-pixel focus ability, only better integrated into the calculation engines this time. In other words, I expect the sensor change is mostly about focus performance, especially with video and Live View".

That would be SOOOO disappointing.

Agreed. Sadly a totally different source was also claiming that the big sensor news for the 7D2 is some sort of revolutionary ultra crazy fast no hunt PDAF AF. Certainly nice, but man it's been years since they bothered to improve low ISO quality. I'd be more excited about 4k top quality and 1080p RAW for video and much improved low ISO DR for stills (and further tweaking at high ISO).

The 7D is a sports/wildlife body, not a maximum IQ body. I'd love a big IQ boost in the 7D2, and might buy one if it had it in addition to the expected performance improvements. At this point I'm contemplating a refurb 6D.

True, but these specs give it slightly worse performance and the same IQ for a higher price ;D with just GPS and WiFi added in to spice it up after five years of development (OK and the video AF from the 70D).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If the composition isn't right without cropping, the whole photo gets binned.

Wow really? A lot of scenes don't look best at 3:2 or 2:3 though and what if it does look best at those ratios but you just didn't or were not able to frame tight enough, even the most amazing shot is junked?

It's one of the limitations I've set myself, and it's a risk I'm willing to live with. On the subject of limitations, I think it's good to have some - it improves my photography (one reason why I'm increasingly preferring prime lenses).

I must note that I almost never crop, and if I do that on occasion it will be only minor edge crops to remove a disturbing feature on the edge. If the composition isn't right without cropping, the whole photo gets binned.

You must shoot a lot of very slow or stationary subjects. It's simply impossible to reliably and accurately frame many of the subjects I shoot, which are often moving as fast as 60 degrees per second relative to me. Shooting those with a 3 degree total field of view, it's hard enough just to keep them in the frame much less to make sure they are perfectly framed.

Essentially, I crop every image I shoot, at least a little.

I do a lot of motorsports. Almost none of these are cropped:

http://www.mrsfotografie.nl/auto-motorsport/

A case in point. I took this shot yesterday. Equipment used: Sony NEX-6, Metabones NEX-FD Speed booster, Sigma FDn 70-210mm 3.5-4.5 APO. Manual everything (save the white balance). And no cropping.

Note that I had to go to this event straight from work and had no room for my DSLR + 70-200L so for portability sake I decided to take the NEX and a couple vintage lenses instead.

Oh you cropped it all right. Cropped of the front wing . Shooting a trace looser and cropping if need be makes it easier to not crop off the front wing ;D.

 

[Orangutan]

The 7D is a sports/wildlife body, not a maximum IQ body. I'd love a big IQ boost in the 7D2, and might buy one if it had it in addition to the expected performance improvements. At this point I'm contemplating a refurb 6D.

True, but these specs give it slightly worse performance and the same IQ for a higher price ;D with just GPS and WiFi added in to spice it up after five years of development (OK and the video AF from the 70D).

I don't believe these specs: as noted earlier, they're worse than the original 7D firmware series. The 7D2 will have equal or better performance, but I don't expect a huge IQ boost. I'd sure like to be wrong; if so I might even buy one in the $2k range.

 

[Don Haines]

Long time lurker, first time post!

To go back on topic a bit to Photokina... no one thinks a new 6d is going to come out right? I'm thinking about forking out for it but I have a tendency to buy things before new versions are just released.

I know it was only released 2 years ago and most of the talk is about the 7d MKII, but has Canon ever been able to pull off a complete upset/surprise, aka no one saw it coming?

Just for the record, I don't want to wait for Photokina because I'm going on a backpacking trip in two weeks so I was hoping to have it for that if I can manage!

Thanks!

The most optimistic and unrealistic scenario is that at photokina, Canon announces some new magic technology that makes the sensor on the 7D2 have another half stop of sensitivity and they can drop the noise by 2 stops.. If they were able to pull that off, then they would be updating their FF lineup as soon as possible.... but keep in mind "as soon as possible" will involve at least a few months of watching the public reaction to the 7D2, and by the time that's done, if they proceed at a rush, a half year to a year to wait for a new FF body.... and the odds are 5D4 or 1DX2 before a 6D2...

I would be incredibly surprised to see a 6D2 in a year's time. If you want one, get it now. You can miss an awful lot of pictures in a year....

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Due to the rate at which I generate photo's, I'm trying to streamline my workflow - trying to frame the shot right first time is part of that, and accepting that parts of the subject may be cut off is a part of that too. Yes sometimes that leads to 'imperfect framing' but sometimes it also leads to interesting shots that I would not have framed that way if I weren't limited to a specific FOV.

Ok you do realize that I'm not arguing against framing properly in camera, right? When its possible, I certainly try to frame correctly in camera. Its just that an arbitrary, blanket ban on cropping doesn't make any sense except in cases where you don't know how to frame and are trying to learn. If a picture would look better with a crop, it should be cropped and going 'nope, not gonna' because *vague reasons* is weird and doesn't improve the picture. There is nothing interesting about a poorly framed picture just because you chose not to crop it. Whenever I see someone online talking about how they don't crop, its like they all assume everyone else is just firing away randomly and somehow using the magic of cropping to make nice photos.

ahsanford: do you have a blanket ban on using photoshop or flash? I don't normally carry a flash for the stuff I do but I made an effort to learn how to use it and it comes in very handy sometimes. When I'm shooting with my Fuji XE1 (for which I have only one lens - the 35 1.4) I usually shoot jpeg because I don't generally feel I need to process the shots much but I certainly shoot RAW 100% with my 1D4 for birds and RAW+jpeg for sports. The point is, putting arbitrary limits on the tools available doesn't make sense if the goal is good photos. Shooting with my XE1 is limiting because of the single prime lens and because I usually only shoot jpeg but I'm not married to those limitations. I'll crop shots if it makes them look better and I'll process them if it makes them look better. I just cannot fathom why anyone would look at a shot and say "I know this would be better if I did this and that but I'm not going to abandon ~*my principles*~"

Also, I suppose the wording makes it seem that way, but I did not mean to refer to mrsfotografie as mediocre. I was referring to the trend I have been seeing and its normal adherents. I apologize for coming across that way.

I could agree with a no cropping rule at times when you are practicing and trying to polish up tracking skills, as an exercise. But yeah I don't see the point in just a blanket I do not crop, especially when some treat it like some bragging right and that it means they are practicing some higher form of art than the mere pions (not saying that is the case here, but I've seen talk like that), it may have been on DPR were someone was really slamming everyone for cropping and basically calling them all silly posers while he was clearly a real pro since he performed the art all in camera (except surely for all the 10x more shots he had to toss into trashcan ;D secretly on the side).

I could see sticking to 3:2 or 2:3 ratio at times as some challenge to see what you can come up with stuck with that, but I don't get the idea of everything always must be 3:2 or 2:3, I mean so many scenes clearly look better at some other ratio and why give all those shots up or force yourself into a compromise. Again, as an exercise at times I can see trying to stick to some ratio and training yourself to really concentrate and think, but that is something else.

 

[fragilesi]

Agree with your comment against dogmatic 'I would never...' rules on photography. I am hard-pressed to think of my personal 'I would never' photography rules, but if you twisted my arm, they would be...

• I would never shoot street photography of homeless/indigent folks, nor will I capture scenes of outright suffering. I'd sooner put the camera down and help those folks. (Goodness knows, there are enough photojournalists cataloging the world's difficulties these days, anyway.)
• I would never use a flash for concert photography, because I'd like to shoot another concert someday.
• I would never shoot macro of arachnids. (In fairness, that's not dogma -- that's phobia.)

- A

Another good subject in itself. By the way though I don't feel I am even getting close to the point where banning myself from any particular technique in photography might help me improve, I need all the help I can get.

Your first rule is interesting and sometimes I have wondered about similar issues. If you saw a crime being committed, is it better to help or take photographs that could help in evidence? If there was an accident of some kind a photo of the scene could be of significant use before things get re-arranged by people helping? How much are you personally able to help realistically anyway in those kind of scenarios?

I'm sure that many people would be naturally averse to someone standing there taking pictures in such situations and I'm sure "ghoul" would soon be uttered but maybe sometimes it could actually be the best thing that you could do?

 

[Don Haines]

If you saw a crime being committed, is it better to help or take photographs that could help in evidence? If there was an accident of some kind a photo of the scene could be of significant use before things get re-arranged by people helping? How much are you personally able to help realistically anyway in those kind of scenarios?

I'm sure that many people would be naturally averse to someone standing there taking pictures in such situations and I'm sure "ghoul" would soon be uttered but maybe sometimes it could actually be the best thing that you could do?

As a first responder, I can assure you that there is a time when it is best to pick up the camera.
Obviously, people come first in any considerations, but in many cases, once the properly trained/equipped people are on scene throwing additional people into the mix, even though they mean well, can be detrimental. There is a time to stand back and let the team work without you.

For example, I was first on the scene of a car accident. One car rolled and had two occupants, one with superficial cuts and the other with more serious bleeding. The driver of the other car appeared to be unhurt. I took control of the scene, had one person call 911 and wait for the ambulance, sent another back to the truck for the first aid kit, and got the bleeding under control while we waited for the ambulance. Fortunately, it looked a lot worse than it was and the police arrived in minutes and the ambulance a minute after that. At which point I was not needed anymore, surrendered the kid to the paramedics and started talking to the police.

While all this was going on, one of the onlookers came over and said that the guy from the other car got into another car and drove away and that she took pictures.... It seems he was driving without a licence and was drunk. Because of her picture they were picked up a few minutes later by another police car on the way to the scene... It went to court... her cell phone pictures convicted him.