Jonathan Brady

Lives in United States Sarasota, FL, United States
Joined on Dec 31, 2010

Comments

Total: 287, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM gallery (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: I had this lens for a while and just couldn't produce what I wanted out if it in terms of sharpness wide open. It was great at f/2.8 but I wanted to shoot at f/2. I picked up the 35L II and WOW! THAT is what I was looking for. It was sharper (and more consistently focused) at f/1.4 than the 35IS was at f/2.
My experience was inconsistent with what others report so I fully acknowledge that it could have been a bad copy. I'm currently using the 35L II on an A7rii and I'm hoping Zeiss makes a 35/2 lens in the Batis lineup.

Crazy, right!?
To me, it's more about delivering on what's unique. And the 35mm f/2 IS didn't deliver sharpness at its unique wide-open aperture.
Also, at launch, it was an $850 lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 01:33 UTC
On article Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM gallery (124 comments in total)

I had this lens for a while and just couldn't produce what I wanted out if it in terms of sharpness wide open. It was great at f/2.8 but I wanted to shoot at f/2. I picked up the 35L II and WOW! THAT is what I was looking for. It was sharper (and more consistently focused) at f/1.4 than the 35IS was at f/2.
My experience was inconsistent with what others report so I fully acknowledge that it could have been a bad copy. I'm currently using the 35L II on an A7rii and I'm hoping Zeiss makes a 35/2 lens in the Batis lineup.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 17:23 UTC as 28th comment | 7 replies
On article Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM gallery (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

cybersimba: I agree! This is an underrated Gem in Canon lens collection. Canon should have actually marked this lens "L"! Here are some shots I have taken with this lens
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sachinsawe/27361900324/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sachinsawe/22017487002/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sachinsawe/16109682773/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/sachinsawe/15598631222/

This lens was priced much higher at launch and sold like hotcakes... Which were being crapped on by rodents. Once they lowered the price, sales took off.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 17:13 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: I realize it's the end of summer but really, this is just filler. Both cameras have been tested and anyone considering spending $2000 on a 6D2 already knows the pros and cons of full frame. If you didn't know this, why would you even consider a 6D2?

But this doesn't get some of the usual benefits of full frame. That's the irony (and disappointment).

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Between this reticle and the review, it's pretty clear where DPR stands on the 6D Mark II... Unless you're IN LOVE with Canon or are looking for a backup body, then pass on the 6D Mark II. Better choices are the 80D (better value = invest in lenses) or another brand's entry or even mid level FF (because the price is the same or lower for better tech/results).
I have to agree. In terms of benefits for consumers, the 6D Mark II is a rather narrowly targeted camera. Very few people are better off choosing it over something else. Unfortunately, most people won't bother to educate themselves regarding the options and/or they're so married to the brand that they can't wrap their heads around the fact that they're paying more for less.

I see the term "crippled" as a way to say "the software was changed to lessen the functionality of the hardware AND the feature(s) should be present at that price point".
To me if those TWO conditions are not met then "crippled" is the wrong word to use.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 18:06 UTC
In reply to:

Shiranai: If I'd ever get a 6D Mark II, I'll wait till next summer cash back. By then, it'll probably be down to a more reasonable 1400.
But currently I'm leaning towards Sony, cause Canon seems to be stuck regarding their innovations. Dual pixel seems to be the holy grail for them. They'd better take a sneak peek to Magic Lantern's Dual ISO and implement that technology (among other stuff that this software offers).

Marty, in regards to switching, for me, it's not about the total $ outlay, it's about value. So although it may cost more to go with Sony, it's a better value. For someone who's limited by a specific budget, maybe Canon's decades old lenses are a better choice. For me, Zeiss' 85mm f/1.8 Batis lens was a steal for $850 vs Canon's purple fringing, no character 85/1.8 at any price or vs the 85L II I sold which couldn't nail focus on my subjects eye as consistently as the 85 Batis plus A7r2. Yeah, I'm losing more than a stop of DOF with the Sony, but because the AF is deadly accurate, my keepers are better and I get more of them. Value.
That's just one example. The small/light Zeiss 55/1.8 is another example of better value. I bought it for $615 and in my side by side comparisons, it's as sharp at f/1.8 as the Sigma Art is at f/1.4 (which is to say, REALLY sharp). But it's smaller/lighter.
Conversely, the 35L II is a superior lens to the Sony 35/1.4. So I just adapt it.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 14:55 UTC
In reply to:

Shiranai: If I'd ever get a 6D Mark II, I'll wait till next summer cash back. By then, it'll probably be down to a more reasonable 1400.
But currently I'm leaning towards Sony, cause Canon seems to be stuck regarding their innovations. Dual pixel seems to be the holy grail for them. They'd better take a sneak peek to Magic Lantern's Dual ISO and implement that technology (among other stuff that this software offers).

I agree that Canon seems to be hanging their hat on DPAF. And the irony is that it's a better video technology than it is a stills technology. Sony's on-sensor AF substantially outperforms Canon's DPAF when it comes to stills. It's not even close. It's like a watching a race between an Olympic hurdler and a soccer mom. It's truly pathetic.
Again, for video, Canon wins (not by such an extreme margin though). But for through the viewfinder AF or live view stills, Sony wins. Simple as that.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 14:34 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Between this reticle and the review, it's pretty clear where DPR stands on the 6D Mark II... Unless you're IN LOVE with Canon or are looking for a backup body, then pass on the 6D Mark II. Better choices are the 80D (better value = invest in lenses) or another brand's entry or even mid level FF (because the price is the same or lower for better tech/results).
I have to agree. In terms of benefits for consumers, the 6D Mark II is a rather narrowly targeted camera. Very few people are better off choosing it over something else. Unfortunately, most people won't bother to educate themselves regarding the options and/or they're so married to the brand that they can't wrap their heads around the fact that they're paying more for less.

It hasn't, Marty. In the 6D Mark II review, DPR literally said the only consumer who should consider the 6D Mark II is one in search of a backup FF body (and realistically, even that consumer should probably get a 6D - that's my take, anyway). Everyone else should consider a different brand as they offer better value via better image quality and a lower price.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 14:13 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: Between this reticle and the review, it's pretty clear where DPR stands on the 6D Mark II... Unless you're IN LOVE with Canon or are looking for a backup body, then pass on the 6D Mark II. Better choices are the 80D (better value = invest in lenses) or another brand's entry or even mid level FF (because the price is the same or lower for better tech/results).
I have to agree. In terms of benefits for consumers, the 6D Mark II is a rather narrowly targeted camera. Very few people are better off choosing it over something else. Unfortunately, most people won't bother to educate themselves regarding the options and/or they're so married to the brand that they can't wrap their heads around the fact that they're paying more for less.

Reticle? What the heck is autocorrect doing to me?

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 13:18 UTC

Between this reticle and the review, it's pretty clear where DPR stands on the 6D Mark II... Unless you're IN LOVE with Canon or are looking for a backup body, then pass on the 6D Mark II. Better choices are the 80D (better value = invest in lenses) or another brand's entry or even mid level FF (because the price is the same or lower for better tech/results).
I have to agree. In terms of benefits for consumers, the 6D Mark II is a rather narrowly targeted camera. Very few people are better off choosing it over something else. Unfortunately, most people won't bother to educate themselves regarding the options and/or they're so married to the brand that they can't wrap their heads around the fact that they're paying more for less.

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 13:17 UTC as 79th comment | 14 replies
In reply to:

kodakrome: Using DPR's studio scene image comparison tool, the 6D2 images look better than the 80D images even at low ISO's.

It's important to differentiate between detail and noise. The 6D Mark II will give more detail courtesy of its larger surface area and total pixel count. It's the noise in the shadows, at base ISO, that will favor the 80D

Link | Posted on Aug 13, 2017 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

AKH: Best super small laptops ever. Very realiable.

Have you had 90,000 of them?

N = 1 means literally nothing.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2017 at 00:30 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1052 comments in total)
In reply to:

tim_b: this might be the camera that makes the toughest fanboy falter

Ehhh... There's still a few clinging to their false sense of reality. But most Canon fans are calling this a pile of garbage compared to all the other offerings available.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 15:20 UTC
On article Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review (1052 comments in total)

Very fair review, as I expected.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2017 at 19:04 UTC as 157th comment
In reply to:

lawny13: As an engineer I get a lot of what is said here. And I even agree with a lot of it.

However, on the canon section. Yes I believe they probably have issues with tech with regards to certain features. I believe that they rather not include something if it causes problems because it may damage their image. Example being 4k without the crop for the 5DIV line. Sony did 4k and ran into many issues and it took them a while to get it mostly fixed. But they were the underdog. Can you image canon with overheating 4k for example? We would be throwing rotten tomatoes at them.

However... the cramped AF, the lower DR compared to the 5DIV, single card slot, no joystick, and other already existing tech frankinsteined into a body. For 2k that is just cheap. Let me put it this way...

I actually liken it to a scaled up version of the 70D sensor with the 80D AF module (not scaled)

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 23:14 UTC
In reply to:

CanonKen: I think the biggest frustration is a NEW model coming out with WORSE features/specs than what it replaces.

If the 6D Mark II had better DR (between the old 6D and 5D4) but the specs were otherwise the same as the 6D2 we have today, I think most of the detractors (myself included) would have given it two thumbs up.

I went from being 100% ready to buy the new 6D2 (to complement my current 6D) to just stopping and reevaluating my next steps. This means not spending any money.

What is most worrying on the 6D2 is the refresh cycles are so long (4, 5 years), we can't just way for a 6D3 in late 2018 or 2019 that will 'fix' these concerns. We might have the 6D2 until 2022.

I agree ozturert. It is a problem.
The interesting thing is that reviewers frequently compliment DPAF too broadly, IMO. It's a fantastic technology for AF video (clearly unmatched) and a fairly good tech for stills (easily over-matched). The speed and precision (Eye AF specifically) of Sony's system makes DPAF look incredibly deficient. Should Sony get their touchscreen and UI up to par with Canon... Yikes! (at least for photographers)

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

Jonathan Brady: I hope Canon gets forcibly removed from its dominant position, especially if it's due to complacency and/or timidity. 1) I think it's good to have shakeup at the top, it keeps things fresh and very competitive, and 2) if the dominant position is lost due to complacency or timidity it'll be a stark reminder to whomever takes the spot that aggressiveness and advancement are valued by consumers.
Signed,
A long-time Canon user.

Agreed. Since the launch of the A9, I've been interested in am A9r (should it be released). With the 6D Mark II Canon just CLEARLY signaled to me where the company is headed (profit through doing as little as possible). So, I bought an A7rii, 55/1.8 and Batis 85 along with a metabones IV adapter and I'm testing this out NOW.
So, I went from considering an A9r to knee deep in the Sony system because of the signals Canon is giving to its consumers. And I was never a potential 6D Mark II consumer as I own a 5D Mark IV and 5Ds. THAT'S how poorly Canon's marketing message with the 6D Mark II was received by me.
You know what I've found? The Eye AF, IBIS, and ENORMOUS spread of AF points (and the number of them) are absolutely ideal for pictures of people (posed and candids). I'm getting better pictures, easier, with the A7r2. And it's made the process even more enjoyable for me.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 14:51 UTC
In reply to:

CanonKen: I think the biggest frustration is a NEW model coming out with WORSE features/specs than what it replaces.

If the 6D Mark II had better DR (between the old 6D and 5D4) but the specs were otherwise the same as the 6D2 we have today, I think most of the detractors (myself included) would have given it two thumbs up.

I went from being 100% ready to buy the new 6D2 (to complement my current 6D) to just stopping and reevaluating my next steps. This means not spending any money.

What is most worrying on the 6D2 is the refresh cycles are so long (4, 5 years), we can't just way for a 6D3 in late 2018 or 2019 that will 'fix' these concerns. We might have the 6D2 until 2022.

Heck, there won't even be a 5D replacement (other than the s/sr series) for 4 more years! That's a LONG time for people who are unimpressed with what the 6D Mark II offers. In that time, Sony will have released at least 3 FF bodies (probably more) and Nikon will have released at least 2, and maybe 4.
There's not a single technology/capability in the 6D Mark II which wasn't available in 2014 or earlier. That's horrible for a camera which is likely going to continue to be sold into 2022 or possibly later.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 13:53 UTC

I hope Canon gets forcibly removed from its dominant position, especially if it's due to complacency and/or timidity. 1) I think it's good to have shakeup at the top, it keeps things fresh and very competitive, and 2) if the dominant position is lost due to complacency or timidity it'll be a stark reminder to whomever takes the spot that aggressiveness and advancement are valued by consumers.
Signed,
A long-time Canon user.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 13:48 UTC as 133rd comment | 8 replies

Rulings like this will inhibit business. In a world where cameras are connected to the internet via phone and one can upload a photo to Instagram within a minute of capturing it, rulings like this will discourage photographers from sharing work instantly which could make them money.
This is a law (or group of laws) which need to be rewritten for the modern Era. Now.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 13:39 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
Total: 287, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »