March 06, 2015, 04:51:43 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 - 9VIII

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 50
Canon General / Re: T3 to 7D.....the right thing?
« on: March 05, 2015, 12:20:26 PM »
I  would only take the 7D over the 70D if I were going into a war-zone. Barring resistance to shrapnel the 70D will be the better option, and for the same price if you get some of the deals on E-bay.

I'm in the same situation and right now I'm waiting for the SL2, if it has the same sensor and AF as the T6i then it will be almost perfect for me.
The only caveat being if the new sensor has bad ISO performance then I'll go straight for the 7DII and never look back (I don't expect it to, but you never know).

On a side note, the T5 is brobably a good option too. It won't be an AF upgrade, but the sharpness off the last generation of 18MP sensors was good, and it uses the same batteries. I just wish they would sell them as a standalone body for $50 off.

Lenses / Re: Canon - Give us 400/5.6L IS NOW!!
« on: March 05, 2015, 12:06:49 PM »
Forget 400f5.6 IS, they can make the prime almost as compact as the zoom with a 400f5.6 DO IS.

Trouble is, they're not going to make another 400f5.6 prime lens because if they did it would make their entire line of Big Whites obsolite. I have no doubt that the best optical formula for that combination would be both inexpensive and one of the sharpest lenses ever produced.

Canon can't have that.
(Unless we convinced them that we would still buy it for $3,000 and let them have twice as much profit as normal, that might work.)

The best we can hope for is a new Sigma 400f5.6 (the old one was actually better than the Canon to begin with, under the Global Vision line it would slaughter the competition. I know you're giving up native AF at that point, but it's the only option that has a realistic chance).

Basically  your options are: the old lens, the zoom, or pony up $8,000 and join the Big White club.

...There's nothing to justify the inflated price.  He's got solid technical skill as a photographer, but tremendous skills in marketing.

In my opinion this is the definition of "fine art".

My what fine clothes the Emperor is wearing...

It's almost like the photography industry has been hit with a plauge of honesty and the high end guys desperately trying to maintain the justification for their existence.
I guess this should encourage the rest of us to just get our stuff out there, and everyone will be better for it.

Right now the artists I respect most are drawing out bulkheads and floor panels in my favourite videogame.

Lenses / Re: True reach of 100-400 L II
« on: February 28, 2015, 10:56:52 PM »

Brian at TDP measured the focal length of the 100-400ISMkII from 42 feet as being 383mm, that being the case it doesn't look like you have to go too far away before you get very near the specified focal length.

I'm betting they had to make some concessions to get the incredible Maximum Magnification that they do, but as someone who takes pictures of small things as often as large the trade off is definitely be worth it for me.

It's funny how the 400f5.6 is still (still still still, lens after lens none of them are solidly better, I feel like I'm going to be saying this for the rest of my life) the best lens of its type on the market. If you don't need the zoom and want to save a grand definitely get one of those.

EOS Bodies / Re: Smartphones Already Won -- Laforet
« on: February 27, 2015, 05:46:05 PM »
There's always the things that a phone camera physically can't do.
Sports and wildlife.

I honestly don't think the enthusiast market is going to shrink, but we've all known that the P&S market was dead a long time ago, so that's just stating the obvious.

Canon General / Re: Do More Mega Pixels translate in a richer photo?
« on: February 27, 2015, 05:16:27 PM »
I actually think that my 4MP computer screen is about halfway from giving the full detail in a 14MP image (produced by the T3/1100D).
My guess is that you only need half the screen resolution to effectively see everything in an image due to the Bayer filter and AA filter (for now I'm just going to pretend that all sensors have one).
So viewing those pictures on a 4K monitor (8MP) should be as good as looking at a high quality full resolution print.
Once we have 5K monitors your 5D3 isn't even going to fully saturate the image a PC is capable of out -putting.
Right now I can't tell the difference between a T3 image and 5D2 image when both are fit to screen, but the sad reality is still that we need to massively oversample images to get the same quality per pixel seen in other formats.
Once 8K hits the market even the 5Ds is only going to be barely good enough.

On a full resolution print it should absolutely make a difference, I just need to print something before I can say for sure.

EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 10:27:57 AM »
I still wish they had just stuck the 5Ds sensor in the 1Dx body, I want the resolution along with the huge battery and integrated grip (more stable on a tripod).
But I also want wi-fi and a touchscreen.
Sigh, now that they have a 24MP sensor, chances are the SL2 is actually going to be the best body for me (whenever they get around to it).

The 50MP sensor??  I wont say it's impossible, but it's pretty far down the pecking order of probability.  That was a sensor they obviously tuned for low ISO, not the end all be all action sensor.

Give me a 1DX2 with a mid 20 sensor, 14fps, an absolute criminally insane number of AF points that can focus at f2, and make 12800 ISO look like 3200.  There's your unicorn list.

I guess a simpler way of putting it is "1DsIV".
ID body with landscape sensor. But yeah probably not going to happen.

EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 01:23:15 AM »
I still wish they had just stuck the 5Ds sensor in the 1Dx body, I want the resolution along with the huge battery and integrated grip (more stable on a tripod).
But I also want wi-fi and a touchscreen.
Sigh, now that they have a 24MP sensor, chances are the SL2 is actually going to be the best body for me (whenever they get around to it).

Lenses / Re: My "Minimalist" Lens Arsenal on Crop?
« on: February 21, 2015, 11:30:29 AM »
My current plans are to use the Sigma 18-35, Sigma 50/85/135 Art (depending on a variety of factors once we can compare them all), and the 100-400II (because I like shooting wildlife).
Honestly I could do without the portrait lens, but sometimes it's nice to have the option of using bokeh to hide the background.

Lenses / Re: Broke my 16-35mm f/4L IS
« on: February 21, 2015, 11:09:46 AM »
My one repair experience with Canon was very positive, they thoroughly understand the importance of customer service.
It's not uncommon to hear about that being the differentiator between market leader and "the rest".

Lenses / Re: APS-C 60mm or 100mm macro lens?
« on: February 21, 2015, 11:00:27 AM »
I love my Sigma 150mm macro, the extra working distance is great. Like with any telephoto, you can shoot handheld as long as you keep your shutter above 1/1000 (which normally requires daylight).
The only 60mm macro I would consider is the one with a 5x zoom, I've spent too much time bumping into things trying to get close to bother with shorter focal lengths anymore.

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon Unveils the HJ24ex7.5B Lens
« on: February 18, 2015, 11:04:44 AM »
For the curious, B&H lists the previous version at $34,929.95

Canon General / Re: Imaging Resource: Canon Q&A @ CP+ 2015
« on: February 17, 2015, 11:20:11 PM »
Well I loved the questions about the 400DOII, at least he got a bit insistent there. That was the highlight for me and hearing that the IS is so good on that lens is certainly making my wallet nervous.
I probably should get the 100-400f5.6 first though, I would use the close focus a lot, and after seeing the build quality I'm much more optimistic about the value of that lens.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art Lens Next? [CR2]
« on: February 17, 2015, 10:37:59 PM »
Too bad they've abandoned the 24-70 f2.0 for the 2.8.  I personally think it would sell *better* due to unique value. Sigma's selling factor isn't only price, but also making lenses that simply don't exist anywhere else, like the 120-300 2.8, the 18-35 1.8, the 50-150 2.8, the 50-500, 200-500 2.8 :P, et cetera. Sigma already discovered with the 24-105 that the midrange zoom market is flooded, why keep trying to make something everyone else already makes?

I think quite the same, I don't understand why Sigma isn't focusing onto formulas no other produces. I, for instance, would consider a new 20mm f/1.4 ART (if that is doable, otherwise f/1.8) much more interesting than the 24mm they released recently. If I want a 24mm f/1.4 I can get that from Canon or even Samyang (if I want to get it cheap). No unique selling point in this formula. Sigma, please, bring on something outstanding.

I mostly agree but a unique focal length alone isn't what makes these lenses popular. I thought with the 35A
and 50A that they had figured out sharpness sells, and when you combine that with a world record aperture
it flies off the shelf (18-35A), the 24-105 was not sharper, cheaper or faster than the competition, anyone
should have been able to tell you it was going to bomb.
The only caveat here is we haven't seen a Sigma Art lens for more than $1,000 yet, so whether or not a
24-70f2 would sell well at $2,000 is still a good question. $1,000 is a huge mental barrier and Sigma would
have to nail everything down perfectly to sell a lot of those even with a world record aperture.
I think they're right to be pessimistic about an expensive wide aperture zoom, if their design estimates
weren't turning out good sharpness it may be for the best, but I would dearly liked to have seen another
crisp wide open f2 zoom lens.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 50