December 20, 2014, 08:14:00 AM

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 - RomainF

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Lenses / Re: EF 35mm f/1.4L II to Finally Come as Well? [CR2]
« on: November 16, 2014, 05:33:06 PM »

    • Any chance Canon would try to pull a rabbit out of the hat to make a distinction between this new lens and the Art lens?  Is an f/1.2 lens possible at this FL?


    I hane no idea about what Canon is gonna do, but a 35mm f/1.2 is technically possible.
    Have a loot at the Voigtländer 35mm f/1.2 for Leica M mount, which is quite small and currently in production for a reasonable amount of money (about one grand if i'm right).
    Here it is, compared to a 50L :


    Voigtlander is actually selling a 35mm f/1.4, just as Canon, but in a different size…here is a picture to show you the difference in size…both of them are 35mm and f/1.4.
    [/list]

    2
    I can't be the only one who uses a super tele (albeit slightly lighter than the 600) almost exclusively handheld? The idea you'd always have it on a tripod is a bit perplexing. For sport sure, I seen photos of the sidelines of football matches etc. But for wildlife... I find it rare that the things I want to photograph are static enough that I could set up and use a tripod  :-\

    I've never used a tripod, even a monopod, with my 600 (version I) and I can't even understand how one can work that way… On the side line of a soccer/rugby game, maybe, but that's all. It ain't that heavy, and IS + ISOs these days make it easy for us to shoot handheld.
    Twice a week, i work in the parliament, handheld, with the IS i can get down to 1/125 (but that's the definitive limit).

    Well……if I may say so……when I watch the pictures shot by the people on this forum who tend to only work with a tripod……I think that they really should try to shoot handheld...

    3
    Photography Technique / Re: Paris
    « on: June 28, 2014, 12:37:29 PM »
    The top of the Montparnasse Tower : https://www.google.fr/maps/place/Tour+Montparnasse/@48.842463,2.321988,2a,90y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s-EVjOoeAGSKE%2FUg5eKQqqpUI%2FAAAAAAACE9M%2F5NXtzuFMUd8!2e4!3e12!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0xfc04ff9c1b1c593c!6m1!1e1

    http://www.tourmontparnasse56.com/en/

    That's where we shot the pictures of the Eiffel Tower when there were pollution peak.

    4
    EOS Bodies / 7D Mark.II delayed again + 1Dx replacement mentioned.
    « on: April 14, 2014, 02:12:50 PM »
    http://petapixel.com/2014/04/14/canons-7d-mark-ii-reportedly-delayed-due-dual-pixel-sensor-manufacturing-issues/

    Northlight :
    Quote
    In an interesting set of information we're told (thanks), that manufacturing issues (yeild was suggested) with the dual pixel design of the APS-C sensor in the 70D have delayed the launch of the 7D mk2 -and- the 750D and 100D replacements.
    A higher performance version of the 70D sensor is used for the 7D2, whilst a cheaper version will appear in the 750 and 100D replacement (150D?)
    All are dependent on having sufficient volume of sensor chips available at suitable price/performance points.
    The information was passed along to several larger (European) dealers querying Canon DSLR camera availability for later this year, especially the holiday season. All three cameras were loosely slated for Q2 release, but are now Q3. There was no news of a 'big megapixel' body only that the replacement of the 1D X was 'on schedule'.

    5
    Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Patent: Tamron 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye
    « on: March 25, 2014, 03:00:11 PM »
    The fisheye style is a bit clumsy and it becomes quickly -really- boring.
    But once a year, you'll get a shot that rocks with that distorted look.

    6
    Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Patent: Tamron 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye
    « on: March 25, 2014, 09:41:42 AM »
    "Vibration control" ?
    A stabilised fisheye ? That's funny.

    7
    Lenses / Re: Lens Advise for Europe Vacation
    « on: March 10, 2014, 08:03:31 PM »
    I've been living in Paris for about twenty years now.
    I work as a news-reporter and only use the public transportations (no car, don't even think to park, you'll never be able to ; or motorbike, too dangerous, not for me but for the cameras). I carry too bodies (1D + 5D-grip) ; 35 1.4 ; 70-200 2.8 IS II ; 16-35 2.8 ; 580exII in my bag (lowepro urban-reporter 350) every day. I've never ever had any problems with anybody.

    If you don't wear a white "I Love USA" t-shirt ; a cap with an eagle printed on it and a pair of short with sandals, there is absolutly no reason to be bothered in the subway.
    You just have to keep an eye on your bag (closed) and you'll be serene.
    It may, however, be that you'll meet some pickpockets, as in any big city in the world. There are few of them though. They only look for cash. They might be looking for your wallet but will never try to steal any kind of bag.

    Paris is relatively safe, don't worry about that.
    As someone wrote before, there are a lot of big, wide squares, gardens and monuments but there are also plenty of really tight districts in the "old Paris". There, the architecture has not really change since the middle-age (no joke).

    As i said, i've been living there for about twenty years and i discover new fabulous places every week.
    Weather has been wonderful for a week, i hope it will remain for your trip.
    (i remind you that if parisians -as in any big city- might be in a rush, we all have a shower every day and most of us are really pleased to help foreigners if they're lost or looking for something).

    A wide angle is necessary however a tripod might bother you a lot…distances are significant.
    You can shot stunning pictures of architecture with a telephoto thanks to the available space and insane perspectives, i would really get a long one.

    8
    Lenses / Re: f2.8 16-35mmL vs. f4 17-40mmL
    « on: February 20, 2014, 02:18:23 PM »
    I bought my 2.8 this monday. I use the 35 1.4 and needed a wider lens. I'm disappointed with its overall performances. It's a wide lens i'll use when i really need it. If a can step backward, i'll ever prefer moving a bit than changing the 35L for this 16-35.
    It's wide but ain't sharp. I often need to crank up the iso so I need the one more stop the 16-35 offers but that's the only reason to choose it.

    9
    These numbers are irrelevant because we don't know the original number of photographers. Not because Canon is one sponsor : they wouldn't give fake numbers anyway…

    One thing you have to get is that press photographers doesn't all use a pair of 1Dx, a 24-70 II and a 300mm 2.8 II. Salaried ones, working for the major agencies (AFP ; Reuters ; AP) are the ones who use the best gear because they don'y have to pay for it. For any other press photographer, they are standing alone with their shitty sales report and they have to deal with that money to pay for their living and their cameras.
    Their is not that much 1Dx in the everyday press context. The 5D3 is the most used Canon body. There are some 5D2 and a lot of 1D4 and 1D3. Except for the ones who don't pay it, their is a very few 1Dx. The Dx is so much expensive and a lot of works require the silent shutter of the 5D3. That's why it is the most used camera : expensive but not that much ; great AF ; good ISO and silent shutter. These are what a press photog really need.

    You know that the news economic model collapses more and more every day that passes. Being a press photog is, nowadays, a mostly precarious situation. You simply don't have enough money to buy the version II of lenses and flagship body if you want to pay your rent and your food. You buy a good camera, keep it for two or three years (minus one if there is a presidential election in the year) and broke it after 250.000 / 300.000 pics. That's why you change it. Not because you want the trendy last camera that has a "better DR". No one ever talks, no one even ever think about DR. DR is only good enough for the forums and "experts" chatting.

    I am press/media. What you say is wrong and right. One year ago there is not many 1DX in the field. Now there are. I rarely see Canon 5D as I shoot action.

    If I have taken the liberty to write these statements that's because i'm press too. I work about everyday at the presidency and ministries. I stand by my remarks. In the "news" world, 1Dx are a minority. I can see as many Leicas as Dx.

    Going on the sports side, yeah, sure, I notice more 1Dx than 5D too.

    Because Leica is the cheap alternative to a 1dx? ::)

    You can keep your sarcastic smiley : it is not an "alternative" at all, but it is a lot cheaper for sure. Try to get out of your Canon DSLR exclusive world to have a look on the Leica side. M8 sell actually for about 1000€ and M9 for 2500€. When the 5D3 is about 3300€ with a grip. Regular lenses are, as Canon primes, about 1000€.
    Because of the lack of AF, you'll see a very few Leica. And, the song remains the same : there are as many Leicas above the colleagues than Dx. One is too hard to use every day and the other is way too expensive.

    You're all talking about "press photogs" like it is an ideal and enviable status. It just ain't what you're thinking it is.

    No, I'll think I'll leave it there, over here an M (240) is the same price as the 1dx and the Summilux lenses are at least twice the price over the L equiv. and if you want a 24 f1.4 Summi it's also the same price as the 1dx, FOUR times the 24 L II , so I stand by my previous statement.

    Do you realize your post makes no sense ?
    - 1Dx is so expensive, i see as much 1Dx as Leicas
    - That's a stupid comparison because Leica is more expensive
    - That's wrong, Leica may be so much cheaper than a 1Dx
    - Huhu, i tell you that Leica will ever be more expensive. Let's get an exemple : if you buy the most expensive stuff from the most expensive brand of the world you get a more expensive Leica combo than a 1Dx and a Canon lens

    If you're talking about the Lux lenses, you probably know about the Cron ? And what about the Summarit ? Then…what about your previous statement…? Thank you.

    10
    These numbers are irrelevant because we don't know the original number of photographers. Not because Canon is one sponsor : they wouldn't give fake numbers anyway…

    One thing you have to get is that press photographers doesn't all use a pair of 1Dx, a 24-70 II and a 300mm 2.8 II. Salaried ones, working for the major agencies (AFP ; Reuters ; AP) are the ones who use the best gear because they don'y have to pay for it. For any other press photographer, they are standing alone with their shitty sales report and they have to deal with that money to pay for their living and their cameras.
    Their is not that much 1Dx in the everyday press context. The 5D3 is the most used Canon body. There are some 5D2 and a lot of 1D4 and 1D3. Except for the ones who don't pay it, their is a very few 1Dx. The Dx is so much expensive and a lot of works require the silent shutter of the 5D3. That's why it is the most used camera : expensive but not that much ; great AF ; good ISO and silent shutter. These are what a press photog really need.

    You know that the news economic model collapses more and more every day that passes. Being a press photog is, nowadays, a mostly precarious situation. You simply don't have enough money to buy the version II of lenses and flagship body if you want to pay your rent and your food. You buy a good camera, keep it for two or three years (minus one if there is a presidential election in the year) and broke it after 250.000 / 300.000 pics. That's why you change it. Not because you want the trendy last camera that has a "better DR". No one ever talks, no one even ever think about DR. DR is only good enough for the forums and "experts" chatting.

    I am press/media. What you say is wrong and right. One year ago there is not many 1DX in the field. Now there are. I rarely see Canon 5D as I shoot action.

    If I have taken the liberty to write these statements that's because i'm press too. I work about everyday at the presidency and ministries. I stand by my remarks. In the "news" world, 1Dx are a minority. I can see as many Leicas as Dx.

    Going on the sports side, yeah, sure, I notice more 1Dx than 5D too.

    Because Leica is the cheap alternative to a 1dx? ::)

    You can keep your sarcastic smiley : it is not an "alternative" at all, but it is a lot cheaper for sure. Try to get out of your Canon DSLR exclusive world to have a look on the Leica side. M8 sell actually for about 1000€ and M9 for 2500€. When the 5D3 is about 3300€ with a grip. Regular lenses are, as Canon primes, about 1000€.
    Because of the lack of AF, you'll see a very few Leica. And, the song remains the same : there are as many Leicas above the colleagues than Dx. One is too hard to use every day and the other is way too expensive.

    You're all talking about "press photogs" like it is an ideal and enviable status. It just ain't what you're thinking it is.

    11
    These numbers are irrelevant because we don't know the original number of photographers. Not because Canon is one sponsor : they wouldn't give fake numbers anyway…

    One thing you have to get is that press photographers doesn't all use a pair of 1Dx, a 24-70 II and a 300mm 2.8 II. Salaried ones, working for the major agencies (AFP ; Reuters ; AP) are the ones who use the best gear because they don'y have to pay for it. For any other press photographer, they are standing alone with their shitty sales report and they have to deal with that money to pay for their living and their cameras.
    Their is not that much 1Dx in the everyday press context. The 5D3 is the most used Canon body. There are some 5D2 and a lot of 1D4 and 1D3. Except for the ones who don't pay it, their is a very few 1Dx. The Dx is so much expensive and a lot of works require the silent shutter of the 5D3. That's why it is the most used camera : expensive but not that much ; great AF ; good ISO and silent shutter. These are what a press photog really need.

    You know that the news economic model collapses more and more every day that passes. Being a press photog is, nowadays, a mostly precarious situation. You simply don't have enough money to buy the version II of lenses and flagship body if you want to pay your rent and your food. You buy a good camera, keep it for two or three years (minus one if there is a presidential election in the year) and broke it after 250.000 / 300.000 pics. That's why you change it. Not because you want the trendy last camera that has a "better DR". No one ever talks, no one even ever think about DR. DR is only good enough for the forums and "experts" chatting.

    I am press/media. What you say is wrong and right. One year ago there is not many 1DX in the field. Now there are. I rarely see Canon 5D as I shoot action.

    If I have taken the liberty to write these statements that's because i'm press too. I work about everyday at the presidency and ministries. I stand by my remarks. In the "news" world, 1Dx are a minority. I can see as many Leicas as Dx.

    Going on the sports side, yeah, sure, I notice more 1Dx than 5D too.

    12
    These numbers are irrelevant because we don't know the original number of photographers. Not because Canon is one sponsor : they wouldn't give fake numbers anyway…

    One thing you have to get is that press photographers doesn't all use a pair of 1Dx, a 24-70 II and a 300mm 2.8 II. Salaried ones, working for the major agencies (AFP ; Reuters ; AP) are the ones who use the best gear because they don'y have to pay for it. For any other press photographer, they are standing alone with their shitty sales report and they have to deal with that money to pay for their living and their cameras.
    Their is not that much 1Dx in the everyday press context. The 5D3 is the most used Canon body. There are some 5D2 and a lot of 1D4 and 1D3. Except for the ones who don't pay it, their is a very few 1Dx. The Dx is so much expensive and a lot of works require the silent shutter of the 5D3. That's why it is the most used camera : expensive but not that much ; great AF ; good ISO and silent shutter. These are what a press photog really need.

    You know that the news economic model collapses more and more every day that passes. Being a press photog is, nowadays, a mostly precarious situation. You simply don't have enough money to buy the version II of lenses and flagship body if you want to pay your rent and your food. You buy a good camera, keep it for two or three years (minus one if there is a presidential election in the year) and broke it after 250.000 / 300.000 pics. That's why you change it. Not because you want the trendy last camera that has a "better DR". No one ever talks, no one even ever think about DR. DR is only good enough for the forums and "experts" chatting.

    13
    Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 Pro FX Spotted
    « on: February 17, 2014, 01:16:01 PM »
    What's the interest in coming out with the same old lens ? 24-70 2.8 ? We already have the best one ever in Canon lineup and a cheaper -and still good- alternative with Tamron. If it is better and cheaper than the Tamron one, why not, but i have my doubts.

    14
    Lenses / Re: How many radioactive lenses do you own?
    « on: January 31, 2014, 07:38:47 AM »
    How do ya know ? Is there some kind of a list ?

    15
    EOS Bodies / Re: Patents: Canon 85mm f/1.8 IS, 100mm f/2 IS, 135 f/2 IS
    « on: January 22, 2014, 06:17:25 AM »
    I don't see the point of a 135 f/2.8.
    At the time of superlative sharp f/2.8 zoom lenses (24-70 II and 70-200 II), why would you buy a 135 that doesn't add anything "big" to your pics ? Maybe a tiny little bit sharpening ? Is it really worth it…? For me, it definitely ain't.

    Maybe a quite long prime lens for the 16-35 ; 24-70 owners.
    But i feel it would be a real "downgrade" if it actually is 2.8. Why get less if you pay more ? The 135 f/2 is a beloved glass and is already super compact.

    Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6