skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
zlatko wrote:
You wrote "still only 1DX and 7D2 have it [Auto ISO] working" which is outright false. Only when challenged with the fact that it works very well on the 5D3 and 6D did you *qualify* your statement by saying Auto ISO should have been designed differently.
It's not false.
Canon's Auto ISO on the 5D3 and 6D is similar to Leica's on the M9 & ME, except that that those cameras only allow setting the minimum shutter speed no faster than 1/125th with Auto ISO (not even 1/250th). So not "everybody" builds Auto ISO your "obvious" way. Leica actually made an even more limited version of Auto ISO with their new M240. A "crippling theorist" would assert that this was all the work of malevolent marketing people determined to "protect" some more expensive camera that had an un-crippled Auto ISO implementation — except that there was no such model. In each case, they were listening to certain photographers that gave them input at the design stage — but obviously those photographers didn't represent the entire world of photographers that might use their product.
When someone has an anti-manufacturer bias and resentment, it's easy to come up with theories of "crippling" and to blame everything that isn't built your way and at your price level on "marketing". Those theories cost about $0.02 and can be leveled against any manufacturer. They don't depend on knowing any facts about any actual input to or deliberations by the manufacturer. Moreover, they completely overlook obvious cost differences with some items, such as AF systems. According to this way of thinking, every camera model is "crippled" if it doesn't have every feature of more expensive cameras from the same manufacturer or even from other manufacturers. And every model is "crippled" if it doesn't have every "obvious" feature of every successor model that will be introduced in the next several years. Underlying this way of thinking is the presumption that manufacturers have absolutely unlimited resources to build anything at any price and in any time frame, and can (and should) produce without giving any thought to profiting from their work....Show more →
gimme a break
and i never said every camera is crippled if it doesn't have every feature of the advanced model. I've even specifically mentioned many times over the years the large cost of a super high fps shutter and mirror box mechanism, for instance.
And a guy at a Canon show, a Canon employee himself even said they pulled AMFA from the 60D so they could re-introduce it as a 'new' feature for the future 70D.
It's not very sensible to lock a max min shutter speed to 1/125th or whatnot. If Leica did that, they had some marketing agenda down the line or in some way or another or they have let MBA types take over too much decision making, ones with no clue about photography and then they just put together a very poor focus group or something. But even if the focus group, for some unfathomable reason (I mean just think about it, when is AutoISO most important, when things are changing so fast that you have no time to reset things yourself, when conditions are changing like that it tends to hint that in most cases you are talking about action photography and when are shutter speeds like 1/125th or 1/250th considered good for action? Sure for some who just use it for some static snaps for a little convenience maybe those speeds are fine, but for every other scenario, including the one where using it would be more than just a little convenience such speeds are crazy low) claimed that 1/125th is a good limit spot, there is no technical reason to have any limit at all, so why lock it in? It shows something, somewhere is going horrible wrong.
Although the limit isn't as bad with a Leica since they are not likely used to shoot wildlife and sports and such and probably mostly for street photography/landscape/art. (That said, even for street photography/people, 1/125th can be getting a bit on the dicey side in some cases, although I guess many tend to use fairly wide lenses with Leicas )
And with Canon it's pretty clear what is going since they have slowly, slowly dribbled it out over ten years, removing one tiny little cripple after another and touting the improved mode each time. And again this is a TRIVIAL, utterly trivial feature to implement without limitation, it's about the simplest thing to create on the entire camera, literally.
Anyway, it seems clear to me that it is impossible for Canon to ever make a mistake or ever have designed or carried out anything less than in an ideal fashion so I won't bother responding to you anymore. It's pointless. They could do anything under the sun and it would be 100% perfect and never anything to do with marketing ever.
And the thing is AutoISO isn't even really that big of a deal. So it's absurd for them to play games with such a minor little thing.
And as for AMFA, that is not so much a feature as something that just lets the equipment perform to spec, so playing games with that is simply wrong IMO. And yeah you can send gear in to Canon for adjustment, but then you are without gear for a week or two and things can bump around in shipping, plus what if they are busy? I got a 40D, the microfocus was way off, nobody else had another copy in stock, 1D3 mirror AF fiasco, Canon told me they were too busy fixing 1D3 to bother adjusting my 40D so I ended up going with Nat Geo to Africa with a 40D that I had to basically use in live view 10x zoom mode to focus or shoot at f/8 even when f/2.8 would;ve been nicer or stick to my older bodies.
Edited on Oct 08, 2014 at 02:19 PM · View previous versions
|
, lowering their handicaps to 7?
