Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11   Go Down

Author Topic: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros  (Read 33219 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #100 on: September 22, 2014, 08:43:37 pm »

It's obvious you have never had a pole-vaulter drop his pole right on your Leicaflex and 250mm Telyt-R, separating them at a significant angle.

U are right that I haven't but am not sure what U are disagreeing with.

Cheers,
Bernard

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #101 on: September 22, 2014, 08:51:09 pm »

I really don't understand what the difference is in terms of actual impact between 2 and 4 days TAT on bodies repair for working pros. Especially if you use Canon or Nikon whose bodies are so cheap that owning 2 back up bodies should be a no brainer for any profitable business.
It is a different story for lenses, in particular the big guns because most people cannot afford to own back ups due to their much higher prices.
These statements seem a bit contradictory as Canon1Dx costs about the same in the UK as a 16-35mm f2.8, a 35mm f1.4, a 24-70 f2.8, an 85mm f1.2 and a 70-200mm f2.8 all L glass which would cover most photographer's needs.
A 5DIII costs the same as a 16-35mm f2.8 + a 24-70mm f2.8 which will do most of my shooting.

Not saying you shouldn't have a back-up body, but you're a bit off with your justification re prices of bodies Vs lenses. Particularly as you say two back up bodies, i.e. a total of 3 bodies, but I guess you mean two in total. :)
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #102 on: September 22, 2014, 08:54:27 pm »

U are right that I haven't but am not sure what U are disagreeing with.

Cheers,
Bernard

Uhmmmm...how many 250mm Telyts do you think I need to have on hand in case of wayward vaulting poles?

I was positioned under the crossbar pit with a wide-angle, and had set the SL and 250mm Telyt down away from me to the side. It was a track meet. I was using the 250mm for the runners. So, the pole vaulter starts down the little path they have for this, and somehow he was unhappy with his approach, so he threw the pole to the side in disgust. It hit square on to the lens right where it mounts to the body. I just about died. The repairs were substantial, but I did have insurance.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2014, 09:01:00 pm by melchiorpavone »
Logged

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #103 on: September 22, 2014, 08:55:31 pm »

These statements seem a bit contradictory as Canon1Dx costs about the same in the UK as a 16-35mm f2.8, a 35mm f1.4, a 24-70 f2.8, an 85mm f1.2 and a 70-200mm f2.8 all L glass which would cover most photographer's needs.
A 5DIII costs the same as a 16-35mm f2.8 + a 24-70mm f2.8 which will do most of my shooting.

Not saying you shouldn't have a back-up body, but you're a bit off with your justification re prices of bodies Vs lenses. Particularly as you say two back up bodies, i.e. a total of 3 bodies, but I guess you mean two in total. :)

Having two or three of everything is a bit of overkill, don't you think? Who can afford that? 400mm 2.8 lenses can cost $10K or more...
« Last Edit: September 22, 2014, 08:57:09 pm by melchiorpavone »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #104 on: September 22, 2014, 08:57:53 pm »

Uhmmmm...how many 250mm Telyts do you think I need to have on hand in case of wayward vaulting poles?

I agree with you, never said the opposite.

If you are a pro sport shooter at the Olympics either you belong to a pool of photographers who can share spare pieces of critical equipment or you bring 2x1Dx and a 5DIII as second back up if you shoot alone.

This seems like the most basic common sense to me, is it not?

Lenswise nobody can carry 2 400f2.8 so you probably bring a 400f2.8 and a 200f2.0 + converter as back up, right?

Shorter lenses also, have one short prime 35mm as back up of the 24-70mm f2.8 sounds like a good idea to me, but what do I know?

In short, we need to distinguish the need in terms of support. Is this about hot spare during an event or about the repair time needed during "regular business" times?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: September 22, 2014, 09:04:07 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #105 on: September 22, 2014, 09:20:10 pm »

I agree with you, never said the opposite.

If you are a pro sport shooter at the Olympics either you belong to a pool of photographers who can share spare pieces of critical equipment or you bring 2x1Dx and a 5DIII as second back up if you shoot alone.

This seems like the most basic common sense to me, is it not?

Lenswise nobody can carry 2 400f2.8 so you probably bring a 400f2.8 and a 200f2.0 + converter as back up, right?

Shorter lenses also, have one short prime 35mm as back up of the 24-70mm f2.8 sounds like a good idea to me, but what do I know?

In short, we need to distinguish the need in terms of support. Is this about hot spare during an event or about the repair time needed during "regular business" times?

Cheers,
Bernard


The point I was making was that the quicker you can get your gear back the better off you will be in the event something happens to a key piece of kit. You cannot anticipate every eventuality.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #106 on: September 22, 2014, 09:31:05 pm »

The point I was making was that the quicker you can get your gear back the better off you will be in the event something happens to a key piece of kit. You cannot anticipate every eventuality.

Faster is always better, but the point I was trying to make is that the impact of TAT is probably less for some types of equipment such as DSLRs that are the more complex, therefore likely to fail and for which we will always have back ups.

Anyway, I think that we understand each others. :)

Cheers,
Bernard

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #107 on: September 22, 2014, 09:44:51 pm »

Faster is always better, but the point I was trying to make is that the impact of TAT is probably less for some types of equipment such as DSLRs that are the more complex, therefore likely to fail and for which we will always have back ups.

Anyway, I think that we understand each others. :)

Cheers,
Bernard

Fine, I agree.
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #108 on: September 24, 2014, 04:50:11 pm »

These statements seem a bit contradictory as Canon1Dx costs about the same in the UK as a 16-35mm f2.8, a 35mm f1.4, a 24-70 f2.8, an 85mm f1.2 and a 70-200mm f2.8 all L glass which would cover most photographer's needs.
A 5DIII costs the same as a 16-35mm f2.8 + a 24-70mm f2.8 which will do most of my shooting.

Not saying you shouldn't have a back-up body, but you're a bit off with your justification re prices of bodies Vs lenses. Particularly as you say two back up bodies, i.e. a total of 3 bodies, but I guess you mean two in total. :)
Having two or three of everything is a bit of overkill, don't you think? Who can afford that? 400mm 2.8 lenses can cost $10K or more...
I didn't say that, read what I actually wrote.
I'm pointing out that Bernard's justification for 3 back up bodies, because they are so cheap compared to lenses makes no sense. A pro body can cost as much as the entire lens kit that many pros need.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #109 on: September 24, 2014, 04:51:48 pm »

Having two or three of everything is a bit of overkill, don't you think? Who can afford that? 400mm 2.8 lenses can cost $10K or more...
I didn't say that, read what I actually wrote.
I'm pointing out that Bernard's justification for 3 back up bodies, because they are so cheap compared to lenses makes no sense. A pro body can cost as much as the entire lens kit that many pros need.


Huh? It depends on which lenses you own, but regardless, quick turnaround is better than slow turnaround.

You never know when those pole-vaulters will drop their equipment on you!

http://youtu.be/TbESRGnFe5Y
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 04:55:09 pm by melchiorpavone »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #110 on: September 24, 2014, 05:02:18 pm »

Having two or three of everything is a bit of overkill, don't you think? Who can afford that? 400mm 2.8 lenses can cost $10K or more...
I didn't say that, read what I actually wrote.
I'm pointing out that Bernard's justification for 3 back up bodies, because they are so cheap compared to lenses makes no sense. A pro body can cost as much as the entire lens kit that many pros need.

The only pros needing also a 1Dx as second body (1st back up) are IMHO the sports shooters. Even for them a 5DIII is ok as 3rd body.

Two 5DIII as back up is fine for all the others that must represent 90+% of pros.

But the main point is that we DO own several back ups for bodies, whatever their price.

So I am not really sure what part of what I wrote doesn't make sense.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 05:54:42 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

David Anderson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 715
    • http://www.twigwater.com
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #111 on: September 24, 2014, 06:48:37 pm »

The only pros needing also a 1Dx as second body (1st back up) are IMHO the sports shooters. Even for them a 5DIII is ok as 3rd body.


I always found it easier to use a matching pair of bodies when I shot Canons, but I only shot prime lenses.
Now, with Nikon I use a main body (800e) and a back-up (D7100) with a mix of prime and zoom lenses.
This is a cheaper set-up compared to 1DsIII's, but I've found it's not as quick to work with.
The problem is the different controls and menu set-ups slow me down.
(aged eye sight enemy #1 ::) ;D)
I think I'll be adding another 800 (or 810?) to get back up to speed.  ;)

All that said, I don't now see any big advantages is using 'pro' series bodies (Nikon D's or Canons) over second tier stuff like the 800's or 5d's.
In fact, I really like the weight reductions and the fact they cost much less than the heavy hitters.
Yes, I miss out on the toughness and amazing battery life, but not much else.
(I don't shoot any sports)

Also, in fairness to Canon dragging the chain on a high resolution camera, I do well remember complaining to the CPS guys that they were brining out new stuff to quickly and it was expensive to change over cameras to keep current.  ;)
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #112 on: September 25, 2014, 06:20:38 am »

The only pros needing also a 1Dx as second body (1st back up) are IMHO the sports shooters. Even for them a 5DIII is ok as 3rd body.

Two 5DIII as back up is fine for all the others that must represent 90+% of pros.

But the main point is that we DO own several back ups for bodies, whatever their price.

So I am not really sure what part of what I wrote doesn't make sense.
The bit where you say bodies are really cheap compared to lenses. Nothing in this area is cheap to start with, less eye wateringly expensive would be a more accurate description. As the prices I listed above show, you can get a lot of L glass for the price of the pro camera bodies. So by your logic, as these are far less expensive than the camera bodies, you probably should get backups of them too.  :P
So for the 90+% of pros that would only need one 1DX and two 5DIII, that's still more money that the lenses they would buy would cost. I'm certainly not against having back up bodies, but saying they are cheap is the part that is a bit daft. If I spent that much money on say a bicycle or camera, most people would think it was crazy money.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #113 on: September 25, 2014, 07:03:13 am »

The bit where you say bodies are really cheap compared to lenses. Nothing in this area is cheap to start with, less eye wateringly expensive would be a more accurate description. As the prices I listed above show, you can get a lot of L glass for the price of the pro camera bodies. So by your logic, as these are far less expensive than the camera bodies, you probably should get backups of them too.  :P
So for the 90+% of pros that would only need one 1DX and two 5DIII, that's still more money that the lenses they would buy would cost. I'm certainly not against having back up bodies, but saying they are cheap is the part that is a bit daft. If I spent that much money on say a bicycle or camera, most people would think it was crazy money.

Fine, some bodies are expensive relative to some lenses but lenses overall break less often (unless they are dropped of course) and using another lens is often a realistic workaround in the case a breakdown does occur. That's my understanding of the reason why people don't own back up of lenses. Would you not agree?

So, if your point is that people own back up of bodies because they are indispensable instead of because they are affordable, that works for me too.

Anyway, that was a side argument to the main point that pros needing support do own back up bodies and that turn around time is therefore less critical.

Btw, nobody would think you are crazy if you spent that much on bikes as a pro. In fact most people would think you'd be crazy to be a pro cyclist not owning 2 back ups of your 6-10 KUS$ carbon wonder bike because those DO break.

And in the end, a 3KUS$ back up body that will remain mostly un-used and will therefore last years is really nothing compared to the cost of running even a small business. Not to mention the fact that many pros keep their former generation bodies as back up. That is simply a totally negligible expenditure for a pro considering the huge risk of not owning sufficient back up.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: September 25, 2014, 07:14:35 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #114 on: September 25, 2014, 09:25:17 am »

In my days shooting film, I always traveled with four camera bodies. If you think about it, film bodies were comparatively cheap. (An EOS1n cost about $1400, compared to my 1Dx which was $6700. The original 1Ds cost me close to $9000!) Other than primes overlapping with zooms, I only travel with two digital bodies -- my 1Dx and 1ds Mark III. Since all my glass are "L" lenses, I can't afford backups to those. I've often thought of going with a 2nd 1Dx, because the camera is so sweet to shoot with and I like the ergonomics. As it is, 95% of my shots are made on that body -- hence why I keep holding out for Canon to do something significant. Maybe I'll bite the bullet and go with a 2nd 1Dx, because, if I do, you KNOW Canon will finally release something. One thing Canon use to do is release equipment in the amateur market to try out new technology, which after refined, they'd put in the pro bodies. (Almost the opposite of Nikon.)

I still assert that Canon, for their lip service, has ignored the pro market for a long time, choosing amateur and cinema over the still pro photographer. Where Canon does shine (at least until recently) is the CPS program. From all I've heard, much better and faster service than their Nikon counterpart. No such program exists for any other brand (that I know of) -- Sony, Leica, you name it. But, again, where I disparage Canon is even the CPS program is gradually turning it's back on pros. Originally, to join CPS, you have to show published work, show you were in fact a working photographer. Now, it's pony up the money and have a certain level of equipment (so in theory, any well equipped dentist could join). But what's worse is, even paying for the service now, if you say to them when sending in your 50/1.2 and a 1Dx, "Hey, it's not sharp. It's also back focusing", you end up with an $800 bill! (True story from six months ago.) If I'd sent those in for cleaning, they may or may not have caught the problem, but IF they had, it wouldn't have cost me anything since it was a "clean and check" service. Oh, and the 50 still sucks big time. (I'm getting rid of it and buying a Sigma 50 -- rented for my last shoot and a truly sharp lens.)

Unless things change dramatically, after using Canon since 1980, I believe I can say, they've abandoned the pro still shooter.
Logged

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #115 on: September 25, 2014, 09:47:58 am »

In my days shooting film, I always traveled with four camera bodies. If you think about it, film bodies were comparatively cheap. (An EOS1n cost about $1400, compared to my 1Dx which was $6700. The original 1Ds cost me close to $9000!) Other than primes overlapping with zooms, I only travel with two digital bodies -- my 1Dx and 1ds Mark III. Since all my glass are "L" lenses, I can't afford backups to those. I've often thought of going with a 2nd 1Dx, because the camera is so sweet to shoot with and I like the ergonomics. As it is, 95% of my shots are made on that body -- hence why I keep holding out for Canon to do something significant. Maybe I'll bite the bullet and go with a 2nd 1Dx, because, if I do, you KNOW Canon will finally release something. One thing Canon use to do is release equipment in the amateur market to try out new technology, which after refined, they'd put in the pro bodies. (Almost the opposite of Nikon.)

I still assert that Canon, for their lip service, has ignored the pro market for a long time, choosing amateur and cinema over the still pro photographer. Where Canon does shine (at least until recently) is the CPS program. From all I've heard, much better and faster service than their Nikon counterpart. No such program exists for any other brand (that I know of) -- Sony, Leica, you name it. But, again, where I disparage Canon is even the CPS program is gradually turning it's back on pros. Originally, to join CPS, you have to show published work, show you were in fact a working photographer. Now, it's pony up the money and have a certain level of equipment (so in theory, any well equipped dentist could join). But what's worse is, even paying for the service now, if you say to them when sending in your 50/1.2 and a 1Dx, "Hey, it's not sharp. It's also back focusing", you end up with an $800 bill! (True story from six months ago.) If I'd sent those in for cleaning, they may or may not have caught the problem, but IF they had, it wouldn't have cost me anything since it was a "clean and check" service. Oh, and the 50 still sucks big time. (I'm getting rid of it and buying a Sigma 50 -- rented for my last shoot and a truly sharp lens.)

Unless things change dramatically, after using Canon since 1980, I believe I can say, they've abandoned the pro still shooter.

Uhmmmm...the 50mm 1.2 is not a 'sharp' lens. It's a high-speed lens, and like many fast lenses suffers from focus shift as you stop down.
Logged

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #116 on: September 25, 2014, 10:04:30 am »

Uhmmmm...the 50mm 1.2 is not a 'sharp' lens. It's a high-speed lens, and like many fast lenses suffers from focus shift as you stop down.

Obviously it's not super sharp wide open. I still swear by the adage that ANY lens' sharpest aperture is generally 1-1/2 to 2 stops down from max. (There are also obviously exceptions -- my 300/2.8, and to a degree, even the 70-200/2.8 II, are very sharp wide open.) On a shoot a couple months ago, even at 4 and 4.5 it sucked on the edges -- and I'm not saying extreme, just not center. Even 5.6 was just not that great. My 24-70/2.8 is sharper at 5.6, and that is not always the greatest of lenses. By comparison, the Sigma 50 was very sharp across the field from about 3.5 on, and certainly at 4. By comparision, my 85/1.2 is a much better lens than the 50 at any given aperture, from about f2 and on. Trust me, after 35-years shooting, I think I can spot a dog among cats.
Logged

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #117 on: September 25, 2014, 10:52:43 am »

Obviously it's not super sharp wide open. I still swear by the adage that ANY lens' sharpest aperture is generally 1-1/2 to 2 stops down from max. (There are also obviously exceptions -- my 300/2.8, and to a degree, even the 70-200/2.8 II, are very sharp wide open.) On a shoot a couple months ago, even at 4 and 4.5 it sucked on the edges -- and I'm not saying extreme, just not center. Even 5.6 was just not that great. My 24-70/2.8 is sharper at 5.6, and that is not always the greatest of lenses. By comparison, the Sigma 50 was very sharp across the field from about 3.5 on, and certainly at 4. By comparision, my 85/1.2 is a much better lens than the 50 at any given aperture, from about f2 and on. Trust me, after 35-years shooting, I think I can spot a dog among cats.

Super-high speed lenses (other than Leica's) are generally not intended as general-purpose optics. Nor is it universally true that all lenses are sharpest 1-1/2 to 2 stops down from max. Some of Leica's lenses are diffraction-limited (meaning that they are best wide open and become less sharp as you stop down because of diffraction effects).

Try reading here:
http://collectiblend.com/Library/Leica_Lens_Compendium_Content.php
« Last Edit: September 25, 2014, 11:00:19 am by melchiorpavone »
Logged

Jim Pascoe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1131
    • http://www.jimpascoe.co.uk
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #118 on: September 25, 2014, 11:20:34 am »

Super-high speed lenses (other than Leica's) are generally not intended as general-purpose optics. Nor is it universally true that all lenses are sharpest 1-1/2 to 2 stops down from max. Some of Leica's lenses are diffraction-limited (meaning that they are best wide open and become less sharp as you stop down because of diffraction effects).

Try reading here:
http://collectiblend.com/Library/Leica_Lens_Compendium_Content.php

I think you ought to look at the guys work on his website before teaching him about lenses - he seems to know about photography alright.  I don't think a Leica lens will improve the pictures....

Jim
Logged

melchiorpavone

  • Guest
Re: Photokina - Canon abandons the pros
« Reply #119 on: September 25, 2014, 11:23:52 am »

I think you ought to look at the guys work on his website before teaching him about lenses - he seems to know about photography alright.  I don't think a Leica lens will improve the pictures....

Jim

Not the point. He expects a super-speed lens to be as good as a moderate-aperture lens. It's not gonna happen. High speed lenses have improved, but super-speed lenses still lag behind them. The latest effort from Leica, the new 50mm Noctilux-M f/0.95 (2009), is much improved over its predecessor (an f/1.0 lens from 1975), which was in turn an improvement over its predecessor from 1966 at f/1.2. But the new Noctilux costs more than $10K!

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/05/19/revisiting-the-leica-noctilux-f0-95-by-ashwin-rao/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ashwinrao1/sets/72157624075806922/

You cannot expect Canon's 1.2L lens to match it, as it is a much less costly lens. They cannot ask such a price. Not enough customers would buy an even more expensive lens from Canon. Also, the need for super-speed lenses has diminished considerably with digital cameras with super sensitivity compared to films.

Leica's is just about the only super-speed lens that could equal more moderate-aperture lenses.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2014, 11:41:27 am by melchiorpavone »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11   Go Up