October 31, 2014, 06:17:26 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - AvTvM

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 69
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Whats wrong with the 70 D ?
« on: October 27, 2014, 05:31:59 PM »
Whats wrong? Image quality/sensor. Not much better than the first 18 mp canon aps-c sensor 10 years ago. Not any better than EOS-M for 200 bucks. Only larger and heavier. ;-)

2
I dont want odin. I have canon st-e3-rt and 600ex-rts. I want a small, cheap, reliable rt-transceiver to include 580ex/430ex.
 Nothing else. Not interested at all in yn600ex-rt or shanny 600 clone strobes.

3
yep. So we have to wait, if there will ever be Canon RT-transceivers in the form factor of a regular flash-shoe radio trigger (only smaller). 

There are a gazillion used 580EX/IIs and 430EX/IIs out there. Good, solid and reliable flashes, lacking only one feature: integration into the Canon RT radio remote control world. 

4
I can't find a link for Chuck Westfall mentioning af illumination on the 5d3.  Where is that?  Was it after the 5d3 came out, as in a firmware update?  That's my biggest complaint with my 5d3.  Any chance it will still come?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8EIdV4mAcpo#!
8:30 min. onward

I don't see a chance for it still to come. Or only, if the 5D III is still not succeed another 2 years from now ... like the 7D firmware update after 4 years ...  ;D

5
The very item I was waiting for so long:
http://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/Shanny-SN-E3-MD-Flash-signal-receiver-RT-module/1397592_2052429624.html

55 USD for an RT transceiver. Could even get cheaper, accrding to flashhavoc.com it was first listed at USD 21 only.

Just don't know, whether I can connect it to Canon 580EX II's. That's what I would want them for to create a seamlessly RT-controled envirenment of ST-E3-RT, 600EX-RT and non-RT Canon speedlites (580EX II, 430EX II).

6
If the new 100-400 II gets the same boost in IQ over the original version as 70-200 II did over its first version, how close will it be to the IQ of 200-400/4? ;-)

How much room is there to differentiate IQ somehow related to prices (though not directly proportional) between
100-400 (I)
400/5.6 (I)
400/4 DO (I)
200-400/4 1.4x
and mark II versions of the first 3 lenses?
:-)

Knowing Canon, i would guess carefully managing those differentials might account for up to 90% of their respective mark II develepment efforts.  :o

Personally i am not interested in long tele primes, and even less in DO designs. But i would strongly consider a non-push pull, hand-holdable and compact, 4+ stop IS, absolutely excellent IQ 100-400 II at a price not far beyond 70-200 II. By Absolutely excellent IQ would mean every bit as good as 200-400 MTF, just 1/2 to 1 stop slower.

If canon will finally bring such a lens to market, it will sell as well as the original 100-400 did. No matter the tammys and sigzillas. But any lesser 100-400 II will fail.


7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: LP-E6N Backwards Compatible
« on: October 24, 2014, 03:30:37 AM »
@dgatwood: thanks!


8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: LP-E6N Backwards Compatible
« on: October 23, 2014, 04:35:40 AM »
... Delkin dual universal battery charger ...
And no idiotic chip checks.  :)

Unfortunately neither the Delkin nor the Pearstone/Watson dual chargers seem to be able to (reliable) charge Original Canon LP-E6 (or other Canon batteries) - just read the user reviews on BHPhoto or amazon.

I would love to get a compact universal dual charger with plates for LP-E6, LP-E6N, LP-E10 and NB-6L type original Canon batteries plus USB-Out to simultaneously (!) charge various mobile devices. RELIABLY. Would be willing to pay up to € 100.

Unfortunately there seems to be no such product on the market. Canon chipping their LiIon original batteries seems to have done the trick. So I need to lug around 3 to 5 diferent chargers plus cables. 

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 23, 2014, 03:59:00 AM »
i do understand equivalence.

BUT ... most of the time, in (super-) tele situations full equivalence is not necessary, as long as exposure (brightness of image) and angle of view (AOV) are identical: even on a mFT sensored camera a 300mm lens will have "more than thin enough DOF" @ f/2.8 to sufficiently isolate virtually any subject, unless it is pressed flat against a wall. And framing, perspective, magnification and shutter speed will be identical to using a 600/2.8 on an FF sensor. 

So a mFT 300/2.8 lens would be "good enough", irrespective of not being equivalent.

However, in practice they are not, since physical size of tele lenses is dictated solely by size of entry pupil ... and therefore 300/2.8 lenses are as large and heavy for mFT sensors and FF sensors alike. Unfortunately there are no "un-utilized portions of glass elements in tele-lenses" when using smaller sensors.

10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to argue crop vs. FF
« on: October 22, 2014, 04:12:09 AM »
It's a stop and a third, of noise performance and DOF control (assuming you can keep constant framing through either a change in focal length at the same f-stop or a change in subject distance).  You pay for that just like you do with lenses.

exactly.

It is a matter of how much photographic possibilities, capabilities and image quality you need or want and are willing and able to pay for. 

Also, while FF cameras and lenses are larger, heavier and more expensive than APS-C gear, the relation is certainly not proportional to sensor size. In real life, FF with more than 200% of Canon APS-C imaging area comes with a 0% [e.g. Sony A7/R, and all tele lenses>135 mm] to max. 50% size, weight, price "penalty".
mFT and 1" sensored gear scales even less proportionately against FF in terms of capabilities, size, weight and cost. :-) 

11
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 22, 2014, 03:51:49 AM »
There is another plus of the crop sensors, which unfortunately is lost in Canon because Canon does not make good lenses for their crop cameras.  Crop sensors don't require all that glass.

Even as a very critical Canon client, I think you are mistaken. Canon has the best APS-C lens range in the market from 10mm to 250mm focal range with a sufficient number of *excellent and affordable* EF-S lenses. IQ-wise, some of these are optically right up there with the best L lenses and most of them are actually "dirt cheap" relative to their performance and competitive offerings ... Fuji X, Sony E including the "Zeiss"-labeled stuff and any and all Nikon DX lenses.

Unless you belong to those, who prefer to buy a 56/1.2 lens for a grand for use on an APS-C sensor only, rather than putting that grand towards an FF-sensored camera and much cheaper f/1.4 or f/1.8 glass for even better IQ, DOF, bokeh and photographic capability.  8)

And if those EF-S lenses are not good enough for you ... well guess what, all EF lenses, L and Non-L work absolutely flawlessly on any Canon EOS DSLR, including those with APS-C sensors.   

Specifically I would like to mention the following winners in the EF-S range:

excellent  8)
* EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS
* EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5
* EF-S 60/2.8 Macro
* EF-S 24/2.8 STM pancake [probably, not used it myself yet]

very good  8)
* EF-S 18-135/3.5-5.6 IS STM
* EF-S 55-250/4.5-5.6 IS STM   
* EF-S 15-85/3.5-5.6 IS
* EF-S 10-18/4.5-5.6 IS STM

best APS-C kit lens on the market at rock bottom price 8)
* EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM

The only thing lacking in the Canon APS-C department for some years now is a sensor as good as or better than competitive offerings. Unfortunately 7D II disappoints in terms of IQ improvements, otherwise I'd buy one. :P

12
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: LP-E6N Backwards Compatible
« on: October 21, 2014, 09:33:40 AM »
Yes. http://www.canon-asia.com/snapshot/eos-7dmk2-579/
Quote
Q: Can we continue to make use of the existing battery model
A:“Yes.” The new LP-E6N (1,865mAh) has a larger capacity, while maintaining the same shape as the LP-E6 (1,800mAh). The existing battery charger also remains usable, so equipment that you have purchased for the EOS 7D will not go to waste.

as far as "50 or 100 more shots" are concerned .. forget it. At least with the 7D II.
Battery performance is poor compared to e.g. Nikon D750 [1200+ shots/CIPA] and D810 - using same sized,  1900mAh EN-El15A.

Quote
Q: What is the maximum number of shots that can be taken when the battery is fully charged?
A:“During viewfinder shooting at a temperature of 23°C and at AE 100%, the maximum number of shots is 800. When using 50% of the built-in flash, the maximum number is 670 shots. Under the same conditions during Live View shooting, the maximum numbers are 270 and 250 shots at AE 100% and flash 50% respectively.” These are the numbers when the LP-E6N battery is used.
Obviously Canon is doing something very wrong regarding battery drain. 

And lastly: LP-E6 sell at about 55 Euro a piece, LP-E6N sell at 100+ Euro.
Any more questions?   ;D

13
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 19, 2014, 01:46:32 PM »
Not much wrong with the 6D. Except pricing. It is basically a FF Rebel. It should come at 999 USD/Euro. It would have sold like hotcakes. Most basic, but lowest cost ff dslr.

The way it is, i am not interested. Way to crippled for the price. And way bigger than similarly priced sony A7.

14
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Owners Post Your Pictures
« on: October 15, 2014, 08:55:06 AM »
absolutely fabulous series, just love it. congrats!  8)

Some night snapshot with my EOS M and 22mm f:2 STM

ISO 6400


15
Photography Technique / Re: Yellowstone in Winter - what to take?
« on: October 12, 2014, 03:20:59 PM »
Dont forget to take 2 extra Sherpas along to carry all that gear. :-)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 69