gwilliams6 wrote:
It is not about any hype to look good. You miss the real point that there is a real shift in buyers preferences and uses of gear. It doesn't mean you cant make stunning shots with any camera format or system. What it means is that the photo world is shifting from dominance by DSLRs to a future where the dominant camera format will be mirrorless at all levels, micro 4/3; APS-C, Full-frame and Medium format. This signals a seismic shift . Not everyone will want or even need to change out of their comfort zone and systems. That is fine, be happy shoot what you like. But for others they will choose to try something new in tech and innovation.
It is not about any hype to look good. You miss th... (
show quote)
I have already experienced three transitions - from manual aperture control to auto aperture control, from manual focus to auto focus, and from film to digital. When I started the process of selecting a new camera four years ago, I expected 'mirrorless' to dominate by now. In some sense it does - if you include smart phones - but this time is different from the previous times. In the previous times, different levels of camera could completely share technology, but this time ILCs and P&S are being provided by different companies, so profits from P&S can't fuel development in ILC, and they don't share a lot of technology.
At one time, Apple was advertising, "More pictures are taken with Apple than with any other camera"; I don't know what the stats would look like if we included Apple and Samsung, but the fact is that having 'mirrorless' growth scattered, mostly, between Sony, Fujifilm, Olympus, Panasonic, Apple, Samsung {I'm sure I omitted someone} means scattered influence. No one lens system can benefit from the money coming in. Canon may be 'behind' here, but their lens catalog is deep, and they now benefit from the decision they made thirty years ago to jump to an all-electronic lens system, which translates nicely to this new world. Canon has the resources - even if one counts just customers and lens catalog - to get to good solid MILC if they really want to. Suppose Apple decided they wanted to create an ILC; does anyone doubt that they have the resources - financial, technical, and market presence - to become a player 'overnight'?
I think it is really premature to announce any winners here.
gwilliams6 wrote:
Sony is not worrying about impressing you. It all depends where you are going if you are not seeing Sony cameras. Maybe you need to frequent some different places and events. lol Cheers
As a Pentax user, I'm amused by all the posturing by users of Nikon, Sony, and Canon, and how each group tries to find something to brag about. None of this affects me, because I already have the best system for me.
gwilliams6 wrote:
This just caught my eye on Amazon,in questions and answers about the new Sony A7III:
"This is THE camera enthusiasts like myself have been waiting for, for a long time. It represents a combination of features that are non-existent in other camera's, besides the more expensive siblings, the A7 RIII and A9 (both overkill for my needs). If you have been on the fence trying to decide between this or a Canon/Nikon DSLR, this is most definitely the way to go. I will be selling off my Canon 5Diii and lenses to get this. Price point is stellar, feature set is unmatched by other brands, and now the rest will be scrambling to play catch up. Good luck Canon and Nikon, who are both rumored to be working on their own full frame mirrorless systems. They will be years behind, especially when it comes to glass. Bravo Sony!
By Amazon Customer on March 20, 2018"
This just caught my eye on Amazon,in questions and... (
show quote)
So why are Nikon users the only ones talking recently? Between the "Street Party" when the D850 was introduced {for the perfect camera}, and the almost daily inventory counts, I almost stopped reading here.
clickety wrote:
What is the reason to open up the aperture in order to focus in live view, more light?
Want minimum Depth of Field, so something 'looks in focus' only when it really is in focus.
elliott937 wrote:
To begin, I'd like to endorse Schiller's Camera store here in St. Louis, here for more than 100 years, and outstanding staff. I've purchased my Canon 5DII from them, and along with that 3 L series lenses. They are always my "go to" store, not only for the equipment, but also for opinions and advice. I know all of you would agree with me in saying that we NEED to support our local camera stores. So I'm beginning that here with:
www.schillers.com.
There was a Schillers here in South Bend at one time. I didn't realize they weren't local. Thirty-some years ago, my mother purchased her first - and only - SLR there, a Canon AE-1 Program, and they taught her to use it.
Sometime when I wasn't looking, Schillers closed, but we still have a store named Gene's here. They seem to be good and helpful people, but they're a Nikon dealer, not Pentax or even Canon, so when I purchase my Pentax KP, I'll have to go Internet, but I do purchase bags, monopods, film, and developing there.
planepics wrote:
I just checked my system in the settings area...I have 16GB of installed RAM
Often problems with Windows are fixed by rebooting - or {in 'extreme cases'} by powering down then up.
LWW wrote:
Is it really necessary to troll a thread about batteries with politics?
Doesn't matter much - this is one of those subjects guaranteed to generate more heat than light.
Newsbob wrote:
Just check the website sonyalpharumors.com
They list a published article almost every day from a pro who has made the switch to mirrorless, obviously always Sony.
I’ve always been a Canon guy, and still occasionally shoot with my 5D3 because I need a compatible lens. But most of the time I use the Sony A7r3 which I now love and is my first choice.
I'll be impressed when I see them more often than Nikon. Right now I see Sony about as often as I see a Pentax other than my own.
billyc46 wrote:
what is everyone's feelings on canon t6
My understanding is that it gets the job done - nothing special, but at that price range you don't need special. My understanding is also that the T6i is a better camera, as is the T7i. You would need to ask more specific questions to get more specific answers.
gwilliams6 wrote:
What you don't read behind the numbers is that the low-end interchangeable camera sales are fine, but the high-end interchangeable numbers are down, as Sony and others with full-frame and APS-C mirrorless are gaining ground and their sales are up while DSLR sales are dropping across the board. Canon knows how to promote and advertise any half-baked model they release and sell tons of them. Look at their M50, which Canon is touting as "mirrorless magic". Most reviewers (if they aren't on Canon payroll) have called this a joke in comparison with performance of mirrorless cameras from Fuji, Panasonic, Sony. But Canon has launched a great ad campaign for the M50 and they will sell tons.
On the pro level, many longtime Canon pros are jumping ship and moving to Sony mirrorless for better features and performance and price. BTW in case you think i am just some Canon hater, I was a high-end pro Canon SLR and DSLR user for 40 years ,yes 40, and switched to Sony full-frame mirrorless in January 2017, and have never looked back. I got tired of being disrespected by Canon with its half-baked, small incremental improvements that we had to wait years to get, while Nikon and Sony were giving us great top features in more of their line. I would never go back.Lots of other pros and amateurs alike are switching from Canon, especially after the price/performance of the new Sony A7III, a real game-changer and the biggest selling camera now at B&H, Adorama and Amazon.
Yes Canon and Nikon both are planning full-frame mirrorless cameras to be announced later this year or early in 2019. We will see if they can compete with other mirrorless brands in performance and price. The Canon M50 really does not. Canon will not lose their overall sales lead as many folks are so ingrained they will buy any release that Canon makes and advertises. But the reality is that Canon no longer leads in technology and innovation ,and that is starting to catch up with them globally. All their glorious pronouncements about market share won't stop the swell of change if they don't wake up. Canon has all the resources to be the best, but not the corporate will to change. Why would you change if you still outsell in overall numbers. Sony has just as much or more in resources, and they have the corporate will to lead in tech and innovation. And they don't make us wait years to put the latest tech into our hands. Nikon as a smaller camera maker knows it has to raise its tech and get it out to consumers to survive going forward. Look for great innovation and competition to increase from Fuji, Panasonic, Sony and more . Canon may be the emperor now, but the emperor has no clothes and could be dethroned if it doesn't open it eyes and see. Cheers
What you don't read behind the numbers is that the... (
show quote)
Can you document any of these statements about people fleeing Canon???
Distribution of a phone not currently in use in the US is a poor choice of detour for this thread - there is no reason to drive this thread into the Attic.
More important is the progress all smart phone manufacturers are making. Smart phone cameras still have issues - they don't handle motion well, and they're still more wide angle than "long", for example - but they still do an excellent job in the area once dominated by P&S cameras.
I typed this post on my smart phone, incidentally.
Ozzie2154 wrote:
I'm interested in purchasing the Tamrom 18-300 or 18-400 all in 1 zoom lens. Can anyone give me feedback on these as I want to lighten my load when I travel and just use 1 of these lenses and/or my wide angle lens. This is for a Nikon D5300 camera. I welcome any and all suggestions.
Thanks,
David
I guess 'lighten my load' is a valid goal .... but I got a Tamron 18-270mm back when I was a Canon user, and had retired it before that camera died and I switched to Pentax a year later. Making such a long zoom range stresses the designers, and they either make too many compromises, or have to charge too much - or both.
gvarner wrote:
The emphasis on which lens to use seems to be weighted towards the telephoto end, to reach out for that tiny slice of reality off in the distance. If those were the important parts of reality, our vision would be more like a 400mm than a 55. 99.9% of the important stuff is close. It's likely that photographing the distant bison or eagle brings out our hunter instincts and once engaged we get lost among the trees.
Most cameras are kitted with something like a 18-55mm {APS-C} or 28-80mm {FF}, and I'm guessing that range is what most of us use most - I know I do. More telephoto is an obvious step ahead from that.
aflundi wrote:
So you are saying that even though sensors since the 2012-2013 time frame had already achieved near-theoretical-max performance, and that despite the fact that today's sensors are virtually identical with at best increases that are so small they can't be seen by the eye, that ...? What's your logic? (BTW, I have newer camera bodies than the one I bought back in 2013 so I'm able quite able to compare.)
I do have a Physics minor, so I can follow theoretical arguments if I want to, but I don't know the details of what Pentax and Sony are doing to get better results .... and I don't care .... what I do care about is the results. I do know that Pentax has an 'accelerator' unit between the sensor and the processor which may 'clean up' the signal, and I suspect Sony may have integrated something similar into their sensor itself. Whenever there has been a theoretical limit, clever people have often found a way around it to improve.
What I am seeing with my own eyes is that people who want shallow DOF can have that, but people who don't want to be limited by that won't.
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-487131-1.htmlBut this thread is about those who do want shallow DOF, so back to our regular programming.
aflundi wrote:
I don't find those picture particularly interesting as I've had camera's with more-or-less the same ISO8000 performance since 2013.
Even though the resolution was only 760x550 in that case, the small amount of light due to the small aperture left it still quite soft.
Every additional ISO stop, lowers the number of 'effective' pixels by 1/2. Rest assured there are many that would not find them acceptable. I think it is pretty certain that those pictures would have looked much better at f/1.4, 1/1000, ISO 400.
I don't find those picture particularly interestin... (
show quote)
In the case I'm talking about, I wouldn't have wanted an f/1.4 picture, because thin DOF would have made it impossible to tell the same story - putting fan and court action in the same image, everything in focus. I used this example, not because of the expensive camera used, but because it shows professionals finding new ways to use these new tools as they emerge. 2013 was five years ago. Don't judge today's cameras by what you get with technology five years old.