Ishootcanon wrote:
Does any one know about Canons new 50.6mp camera. The new Canon 5Ds! And the Canon 5Ds R. They also introduced a new lens! The Canon 11-24mm 1:4L USM!
Finally! Canon has the highest mp camera!
Yes I've seen a few advertisements on them. But do I really need 50.6mp? And for what? A bigger SD cards may be? Will I need newer lens? Will my computer be able to download all that information at the same speed? WOW! 50.6 mega pixels.
bcheary wrote:
http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/gear/more-gear/gadget-bag/winter-weather-camera-bags.html?
Just starting to get into our coldest time of the year and just had our first snowfall. A very timely posting...Thank you
:)
Fullframe wrote:
This is a great site, so glad I joined! I've been shooting DSLR for about 5 years now. I just upgraded to full frame, hence my user name ;) I got a black friday deal on a 5DM3 that I just couldn't pass up. A big upgrade from my 7D!
Welcome Fullframe (nice name). I'm from the state of DE.
birdpix wrote:
Those pictures are of terns that are shaking the water off their feathers after diving for fish. They were not taken with the Mk II.
Ok, thank. Not taken with the MkII, still some very nice pictures. This just proves that its not just the camera taking the great shots, its also the one holding the camera.
Just read the review on KenRockwell.com (thanks for sharing), it was outstanding and well detailed.
As soon as I take care of Christmas gifts (bills), I am getting this camera. Made that decision when the camera first came out. I really had to control my G.A.S. until after Christmas. Now, I can let err rip.
birdpix wrote:
So far, I am well pleased with the high ISO performance of my Mk II. 3200 is a bit better than 800 on the Mk I. 800 was as far as I wanted to go on the older model. 6400 is a bit noisy but still better than the Mk I at 1200. Even 16000 is useable in certain circumstances.
I am not in a place where I can upload pictures but if you will click on my Flickr site, you will see some very recent ISO 3200 shots.
I haven't yet really taxed the AF system yet but it seems to work quite well. It will take a bit of leaning to understand all the additional controls.
So far, I am well pleased with the high ISO perfor... (
show quote)
Great photos on Flickr of the birds. You have a couple of birds in flight where it looks like their heads are upside down compared to their bodies. Explanation please.
Couldn't be a better time to share this message. I know I have been looking for deals during the holiday and these gray market products, usually at a lower price, may just be the deals I need to stay away from.
Thank you for sharing this and here's wishing you a joyous and Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays.
MT Shooter wrote:
F2.8 lenses are going to be heavy, no matter the brand. It takes a lot of glass to make a lens that fast, and glass is heavy. F4 versions of both lenses mentioned are much lighter and only 1 stop slower.
Sorry, I am lost to that comment. Can you explain how a F4 lens can be one stop slower than a F2.8? Can F4 lens be used in some low light situations?
:?:
Good information. Hopefully when I get my 7D MarkII, I won't subject it to getting wet (been very good at keeping all my equipment dry, so far), but if I do...it's good to know I'll have a chance.
Thank you for sharing. :thumbup: :thumbup:
bcheary wrote:
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2013/03/15/crop-photos-the-right-way-classic-mistakes-and-how-to-avoid-them/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=10467&utm_term=6583952&utm_content=13407
I always have room for improvement. Thanks for sharing
:thumbup:
[quote=Mikro]I am considering the purchase of editing software.
Does anyone have an opinion of Corel AfterShot Pro (linux) or Adobe Photoshop
Elements 13 (windows)? Corel is about $25 cheaper for the linux version(from Corel site). I did have a problem (so far) locating a book/manual for the Corel. Also Amazon doesn't carry a linux version of Corel.
I have both as a 30 day trial. I did have a few lockups with Adobe.
So far so good with Corel.
Both programs are handling raw well.
Hello Mikro, I have used CorelAfterShotPro for sometime now and I am extremely satisfied with it. I recently upgraded to AfterShotPro2. I love the batch mode.
Now, granted, I am just a serious hobbyist (amateur) who has done a few wedding, parties and special occasions with much success. And those who are using Adobe, LR and Element are probably doing a lot better than me, but I am satisfied, my clients have been very satisfied. Continue to use your trial periods. Try as many trial period products you can find. Continue to ask questions on this site and than make your decision base on your experience and questions answered. I am sure everyone has a favorite program. You will find your' and than constantly improve on your skills.
CHG_CANON wrote:
Having sold some EF-S lenses, I can say from experience: they do not hold their value. Assuming the specimen is in good condition, the best way to buy lenses is at the used price rather than new.
Thanks 👍. It's just hard finding the lens I want used for sale. And Canon's refurbished ones, the ones I want, are ALWAYS sold out 😔
MT Shooter wrote:
Actually the 7D has been at $999 for almost a month now. The price dropped ahead of the 7D2 announcement prior to Photokina.
Just a curious thought. With the newer Canon cameras coming out (DSLR), with the suggestion of using the newer lenses (STM), what do you think the chances are of the prices of the regular/normal EF & EFS lenses (without STM) dropping. Wouldn't that be nice??
Or are those lenses (STM) only required when you use your camera to take videos?
pecohen wrote:
As I noted before, it is not at all a certainty that without video capability the Canon 7D would cost less. The production cost would probably be slightly less as would be the design costs but perhaps the cost of inventory, marketing and sales would increase. The overall costs to Canon would quite possibly increase and the market price might well go up instead of down.
I have a calculator on my desk that can do a lot of things that I never use. I can say the same about my computer, my printer and my scanner, not to mention my modem and telephone. Would any of these items be substantially cheaper if they were designed to do only the things that I use? I would guess not.
As I noted before, it is not at all a certainty th... (
show quote)
I am not sure if any of those items would be cheaper but some of those items could be cheaper. Because you have options. Examples: a computer with or without a monitor, the CPU speed or the options you want on your scanner. The size of the hard drive (which YOU choose). Modems or phones, once again you have options to choose from. And even the lowly calculator plain or a multi complicated business calculator. Once again, you choose your options and pay accordingly.
If I bought a calculator with options that I never use, it would still be my choice and not because I had no other options. Heck, if it adds, subtracts and multiplies but I only needed it to add, that still my choice. But if I brought a business calculator for the same purpose, than that is my decision, stupid, smart or just because I can. But is still a choice, an option, my decision. And that is all I want.
And as far as cost, like most items, if the demand goes up, production may increase and with added competition, the price may just go down.