Neil Schofield

Lives in United Kingdom MK, United Kingdom
Works as a FM Retired
Joined on Jun 25, 2008

Comments

Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

I had a problem with the camera not retaining any changes to the C modes even though retention was enabled, the firmware resolved this issue, only had the body for two days though, so firmware was a swift update for me

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2020 at 07:04 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: Now this is shocking news. After making over 130,000,000 lenses in EF mount, Canon decides to turn their attention to a newer mount where few lenses are currently available.

130000000 lenses and we are still waiting for anything over 400mm that costs less than a kidney

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2020 at 09:11 UTC
In reply to:

DrCastle: interesting how they charge about $700 more for the exact same camera as EOS R WITHOUT IR filter. Charging more for less...
btw I understand that it requires different manufacturing process, it still doesn't justify a 40% price boost.

If that is the case, then one has to wonder how many 7Dlll units they could have shifted if developed, don’t you just love their bean counters

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2019 at 07:54 UTC
On article Nikon developing D6 professional DSLR (1010 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ayoh: Seems like a pointless announcement. No specs, no release date. I guess they want to give a signal that they are still working on DSLRs

It might give a bit of confidence to buyers of non Z lenses, sales may have taken a hit after the Z introduction because of the uncertainty going forward, same with Canon, however they have just announced the 90 D, which says we’re still in the mirrorslapper market

Until announcements of new and production of lenses in the old mounts stop, then mirrorslappers may be around longer than some expect

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2019 at 07:25 UTC
In reply to:

IdM photography: 1000 per month is a lot for such a lens... Good sales for Nikon...

Canon please note

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2019 at 07:47 UTC
In reply to:

Horshack: Incontrovertible evidence that Hasselblad makes great studio cameras. 😀

Both using the same modelling light though

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2019 at 07:16 UTC

Any chance that Canon will re introduce an A size crop into their DPP4 software crop drop down box or have we all to continue to key in 1.41 to 1.00 ratios manually to use these printers

Canon, if you’re going to sell A size printers and A size papers the least you can do is give us an A size crop in your photo processing software DPP3 had it why not DPP4

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2019 at 08:34 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Necip: Nice lens despite the issue, all Canon needs is a good series of Camera bodies well overdue..

I'll take one at that as it may well be the last with an OVF, hopefully they will put the remote socket back on the left hand side, its a bloody nuisance where it is currently

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2019 at 16:04 UTC

I don't know if any of the new 600 versions have hit the UK as yet, I am very interested in the performance with teleconverters, particularly the 2x

Recently I was loaned one, briefly a kind gentleman in a hide in Mallorca, and got to try it with my 2x teleconverter only for about 10 minutes as I gave it back, weight and balance were fantastic, however performance with my 2x on my 1DX2 whilst trying to lock on to and track small fast flying waders was not good, it simply wasn't in the same ball park as my version 2 600mm which I had been shooting for over an hour immediately before and after, on exactly the same subject in great light

I was very disappointed, but must stress that this relates only to my short field experience with the 2x teleconverter mark 3 on one copy of the new lens, my wallet did breath a noticeable sigh of relief though

Not too sure if this firmware update will help however I await the reviews

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2019 at 16:19 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

Eddy M: Posting photos without their consent here and blurring faces, that would attract lawsuits!

Geez you got to get a life

Or do you have a professional interest 😳

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2019 at 19:10 UTC
In reply to:

J A C S: It should be iBokeh.

Or I Bokeh therefore I am

Link | Posted on Feb 19, 2019 at 18:25 UTC

Ok so Flickr has problems, is it

1. Technical issues with folk down loading
2. Technical issues deleting so many mages
3 Moral issues deleting images
4. Another trawl for new Pro members

How I wish it point 3

Why don’t they have an account storage size limit rather than a numerical image restriction

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2019 at 08:17 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

Neil Schofield: I have a Flickr account and it had just over 2000 low res images, total storage 2gb, they were species record shots for a wild life conservation site as a feeder to the group account, these helped save the site from commercial development

Now if 2gb storage is too much to expect when we were originally given 1tb, then it’s a very poor money grabbing decision by Flickr

They could have set a reasonable maximum storage size rather than a numerical limit on images

I have deleted just over a thousand images, and am now compliant with the 1000 number, this account will now go dormant, and I am sure future advertisers on Flickr will not be encouraged by many accounts becoming dormant, or people leaving

B&&&&&ds

I have been on Flickr for a number of years, and view the current changes to be illogical, whilst I appreciate that data storage costs money, 2gb isn’t overkill when I was allowed 1tb originally, its the illogicality of 1000 images versus data storage that is annoying

Is it worth it for me to stump up the money, no not in my view for the usage I had or now have, so account will go dormant

Don’t care if they make a mess of it going forward either

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2019 at 17:31 UTC

I have a Flickr account and it had just over 2000 low res images, total storage 2gb, they were species record shots for a wild life conservation site as a feeder to the group account, these helped save the site from commercial development

Now if 2gb storage is too much to expect when we were originally given 1tb, then it’s a very poor money grabbing decision by Flickr

They could have set a reasonable maximum storage size rather than a numerical limit on images

I have deleted just over a thousand images, and am now compliant with the 1000 number, this account will now go dormant, and I am sure future advertisers on Flickr will not be encouraged by many accounts becoming dormant, or people leaving

B&&&&&ds

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2019 at 12:14 UTC as 36th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

ozturert: And you can use it with 2.0x teleconverter :) 750-2000mm lens. I hope AF will not be impacted much.

Generally speaking using a teleconverter on a zoom lens isn’t usually a good idea, using 2 seems a bit optimistic or over ambitious to say the least

Stacking has never really been a good idea

if they are going for quality and reach why didn’t it they consider making a prime 400mm

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2019 at 07:52 UTC

I have a small Flickr account and its only used for images from one particular wildlife site, it is used as a record for the wildlife site and feeds a group site on Flickr for that particular Nature Reserve

It has 2217 very low res images on it which takes up less storage than about 2 GB, that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

However for Flickr to restrict the numbers because of storage capacity cant be the real issue, if it was then they would simply put a more reasonable storage limit on it

By reducing the number of images to 1000 they are clearly trying to either persuade togs to pay or move on in a very abrupt move

I suspect many will move on and their accounts will become dormant, and that won't be good for Flickr advertisers

I don't have pro and wont use it, so I will stop using Flickr and either await the deletions or I might cull it myself and then the account will go dormant, not happy with Flickr at all

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2018 at 14:19 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Hugo808: My shot of Blackpool didn't make the cut again....

Up the Pool

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2018 at 06:51 UTC

Another two opportunities of supplying a lens with an arca compatible foot have been missed, when will they do this, most folk will either change out the lens foot or stick an arca plate on it

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 07:18 UTC as 87th comment | 2 replies

Yes other lenses need updating prior to these two, and new ones such as a 500 f 5.6 IS L ( 400l f 5.6 upgrade) which would stop folk going down the sigma/Tamron route, as every lens these companies sell is one less canon sale

There are two reasons in my view for the f2.8 upgrade if indeed it does happen, firstly it may help with introduction of any new mirrorless pro bodies, secondly its a way of Canon building obsolescence into their products in order to increase overall sales numbers

As the older models going forward will become unsupported by Canon, and businesses and individuals will change them out over time whilst new purchasers will by the newer versions at a premium

Link | Posted on May 18, 2018 at 15:45 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Clyde Thomas: We need new words to describe these, these lenses.

You already have the Sigmonster, and the Sigzilla, so this could be either the Sigzooka, or Sigbucket

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2018 at 07:27 UTC
Total: 49, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »