PetKal wrote:
I think you allow yourself to get drawn into this sort of threads which are a forum equivalent of iPhone 6 buyer lineups, except the phone is real.
PetKal wrote:
I think you allow yourself to get drawn into this sort of threads which are a forum equivalent of iPhone 6 buyer lineups, except the phone is real.
Funny! ;-)
mitesh wrote:
I just always thought Dan got paid by the word....
gdanmitchell wrote:
I referred to "either as replacements for Canon systems or to augment Canon lenses" in the bit that you originally referred to, and I was referring to both options from my perspective.
To try to put this to rest, in my opinion potential "minuses" that I weigh against the potential "pluses" of the option of adding an A7r to my equipment include:
- Cost - The plus of the potential image quality improvement while waiting until Canon introduces something new does not outweigh the cost for that improvement from my perspective.
- Efficiency - I prefer to not carry more gear than necessary, but for my photography, there are very, very few situations in which I could shoot with only the A7r, so the fact that I would have to carry both it and my existing body is a minus for me.
- Duplications - I would need to invest in and carry an additional system of batteries and a charger for the Sony system.
- Value - While there are real improvements in some aspect of image quality with the A7r, the increment of improvement (based on my viewing of high quality prints made from images shot with this sensor on the Sony and Nikon systems) is not large enough, all things considered, to convince me to go there.
- Long term value - I'm betting that the window during which the A7r will produce better image quality than available Canon cameras will be small. If I bought an A7r today, I would be surprised if it were more than 6 months before a Canon product that negates the advantages becomes available.
Reasonable people will come to different conclusions, but that is mine.
Bye. ...Show more →
Dan, you don’t need to keep rehashing the “why I don’t buy an A7r” thing. Honestly. And I think I’ve already said that.
I’m speaking more broadly than that. You bought a mirrorless system to fit a different purpose than the one already being filled by your Canon gear. You didn’t wait for Canon to come out with something that fit your mirrorless needs as well as the Fuji did. It didn’t matter that you now have two systems with different batteries and chargers. Or that there are certain situations you can’t use it in as well as a DSLR. You use one or the other depending on what’s appropriate. And that’s great. That’s the way it should be. Buy something that gives you the options you want, when that piece of gear is available.
And that’s it. That’s my main point. If whatever someone is using has a limitation that a different piece of gear can get around, why not just add that gear? There’s no need for anyone to feel trepidation or remorse for giving into “temptation” or worrying that something else better will come along. Something else better always comes along. Just learn to recognize when you're at the point that it actually matters to you, and if you realize it does, go for it.
artd wrote:
Just learn to recognize when you're at the point that it actually matters to you, and if you realize it does, go for it.
I wish more people would "go for it" and then stop whining about Canon's low ISO DR in the forums and predicting their downfall. Unfortunately, even when they go for it they still DRone on.
digitalbug30d wrote:
didn't get an answer before aboutDR issues isn't 11-13 stops enough? as long as you expose right in the camera and not rely on post to fix.
Not if your scene has more DR than your sensor can handle. It really has little to do with exposing right. Solutions such as using GND filters or merging multiple exposures are used but these have their own issues. More DR is always better than less.
PetKal wrote:
I think you allow yourself to get drawn into this sort of threads which are a forum equivalent of iPhone 6 buyer lineups, except the phone is real.
I think he loves it as he quite often get entangled in it. Might even go a bit further and say Dan might be one of the culprits in making threads head this way.
Jglaser757 wrote:
Because "TROLLING" allows me to stay informed about what is going on AND because every time I DO, I SEE ANOTHER reason that re-in forces that I made the correct move. I don't want to regret the switch.
Why do you require other people to validate your personal choice?? Your satisfaction with the images you create or the happiness you experience taking photographs should be enough to justify your switch...
whumber wrote:
I've noticed that the edges and corners on my 16-35 f/4 IS are noticeably softer on my A7 than they are on the 5D3 or 1Ds3. At first I thought it was a problem with my adapter, but all of my other lenses seem alright and it seems pretty even around the frame. I wonder if it has something to with the sensor glass thickness.
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the A7R, if you have a slightly misaligned adapter, corner sharpness issues will be more noticeably with ultra wides than normal lenses.
When testing my TS-E 17mm, I went through a few adapters before finding one that gave me great corner sharpness.
SLR lenses are quite telecentric in any case as they have to clear the mirror and therefore do not produce the smearing/softness issues many photographers experience when using the A7R with rangefinder lenses. (Leica, etc..)
So, when adapting Canon lenses to the A7 or A7R, if your lens is free of issues, the main culprit is always the adapter....Show more →
Hi whumber & Fred,
With apologies to the OP for continuing to go OT as this discussion truly belongs in the Alt forum...
As a general point of interest, the term "telecentric" refers to a specific class of lens design where only incoming parallel light rays are transmitted to the focal plane parallel. Such lenses find their use in machine vision devices. And I was a bit curious as to Fred's usage of the term here and decided to do some homework to find out what he might know that I didn't.
The usage of telecentric, as in telecentricity, seems to have originated (or, at least, found some usage) with the folks over at Carl Zeiss with a rather liberal (IMHO) technical interpretation when trying to describe the "more parallel" (read: "less oblique") light paths traveling from the lens to the focal plane in longer-flange-distance lenses, like those found in (D)SLR's...
<<
The exit pupil is the area from which all rays of light headed for an image point appear to come. If it is far removed from the image, then rays toward the edge or corner of the image have a lower angle of inclination with respect to the image plane. Lenses in which this angle is made as small as possible are referred to as “telecentric”, because the exit pupil is very far removed from the image.
However, telecentric lenses require very large bayonet diameters, so the mechanical dimensions of the camera set limits.
It is also not at all the case that all rays of light strike the image plane perpendicularly in telecentric lenses. In all lenses, the aperture angle of the ray cone depends only on the f-stop and is identical at the same aperture – regardless of where the exit pupil lies. With telecentric lenses, the angles change less in the image field only....Show more →
@ whumber...the issue of edge and corner softness is partially, as you suspect, from the a7 sensor glass thickness but it is mostly caused by the fact that ...
<< Digital sensors do not respond very well to very oblique incident rays of light.
>>
...from P. 12/15 of the above PDF.
It is the problem that Sony has to solve with its short-flange-distance E-mount system, especially when dealing with wide angle lenses...and it is very much likely (I'd guess 100%) why they are developing curved sensors.
Anyhoo, thanks for letting me play. We pedants cannot help ourselves. Ha! Back to your fantasy camera talk, everyone!
Jimmy G
chez wrote:
With comments like this I suggest you take your own advice. Totally uncalled for.
---------------------------------------------
jctriguy wrote:
Why do you require other people to validate your personal choice?? Your satisfaction with the images you create or the happiness you experience taking photographs should be enough to justify your switch...
I'm actually annoyed with myself as well as canonrumors for believing there hype for two years or so. They have become my nemesis.
This may be a worth while investment over the Pentax 645z... If for nothing more than having excellent Canon glass. If it has a fast crop mode and a really durable shutter, it'll be a winner.
This may be a worth while investment over the Pentax 645z... If for nothing more than having excellent Canon glass. If it has a fast crop mode and a really durable shutter, it'll be a winner.
All depends on its DR. If it had old decade Canon DR then it has no chance to even compete its IQ with D810 or A7R.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Just this particular line of discussion. Not much more to be said about it that hasn't been said too many times already. ;-)
PetKal wrote:
I think you allow yourself to get drawn into this sort of threads which are a forum equivalent of iPhone 6 buyer lineups, except the phone is real.
mitesh wrote:
I just always thought Dan got paid by the word....
I'd rather read some well chosen words than see numerous images that are not 100% crops and therefore mostly a useless waste of bandwidth.
digitalbug30d wrote:
didn't get an answer before aboutDR issues isn't 11-13 stops enough? as long as you expose right in the camera and not rely on post to fix.
chez wrote:
....More DR is always better than less.
+1, the more the better. A camera with higher dynamic range always has better images quality than the one with lower dynamic range. Here some IQ comparison samples using IR and DXO comparometers.
In this illustration, I am using the lowly Sony A6000 against all Canon latest crop and full frame 7D, 70D, 5D3, 6D, 1DX to prove DR is a critical element for IQ in all photographic application not just for landscape like some indicated in this forum. Just use your eyes to judge the quality of the crop samples for yourself
Are the photos from the new canon body or not and why would anyone buy a 1Ds X or similar body to take photos of models in crappy light? It makes no sense. The money would be better spent on lighting equipment.
Has anyone else but the OP had any info on the camera, or is this a joke?
Archive 2014 · OMG - 1DsX in NYC...
Leaving ?