April 19, 2014, 08:03:13 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 - MLfan3

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Lenses / Re: Canon 300mm f4 L lens: buy now or wait?
« on: March 19, 2014, 12:01:28 AM »
if you can wait, I am also waiting , the current one is not a very good lens, and its IS is really dated old tech.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm F/1.4 Art listed in Belarus for $790
« on: March 19, 2014, 12:00:14 AM »
this lens and some other high quality Sigma Zeiss lenses are the reasons why I just sold all my Nikon gear.
you may not be able to use some of the best Sigmas and Zeiss primes on Nikon any more, Nikon tries very very hard to just restrict use of third party lenses.

I think it will hurt Nikon since this will really narrow F mount ecosystem.
anyway, I briefly tried it at CP+ event in Yokohama this feb , it is big but not as big as my Zeiss 135mm f2 APO or 100mm f2.
it is about the same size as the Canon 135mm f2L , the Sigma is a bit shorter in length , though.
it felt about as heavy as my 100L macro lens or my Nikon 85mm f1.4G, I could not use my SD card in my 6D at the time , so I do not really know how sharp it really is, but it seemed very very sharp and well corrected.
I think if it is really this cheap , I would get 2 of these.
but what I really want to see from Sigma is a new Art line of 85mm f1.4 lens.
I like the 85mm L I had it but it was just too fat to hold and kind of awkward in real life use.
I also had Zeiss 85mmf1.4ZF2 but it was not a sharp lens at f1.4, and I sold it.
I am also interested in a great AF 135mm f2 prime but I think it is extremely tough to beat the Zeiss 135mm f2 APO,which is the sharpest lens I have ever used(sharper than the Leica 125mm f2.5 S mount lens).

Lenses / Re: 50mm upgrade or 85mm coverage?
« on: February 17, 2014, 03:34:25 PM »
I can't wait to see a new 85mm f1.8 ISUSM, I think f1.8 is fast enough for most of apps considering the high ISO performance of the 6D ,the 5D3 and the 1DX.
I also want to see a new 135mm f1.8LIS USM.

Lenses / Re: 35mm f2 IS for city photography at night?
« on: February 17, 2014, 03:32:51 PM »
it is a very practical lens , I love it, I much prefer this lens to the Sigma overrated 35mm f1.4.
for hnadheld night photography, there is no better lens than this one. with the Sigma , Canon or the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 , you cannot shoot at extremely slow shutter speed with decent DOF even in extreme lowlight(of course you can always use a tripod but for street work it does not work).
so I think the Sigma Zeiss 35mm f1.4 lenses are way too overrated , they are not very practical in real world where you can't or do not want to use a tripod.

not many of us love uselessly thin only one eye in focus kind of DOF, in fact, in most of scenes we need decently deep DOF, say f2.8-5.6 at least to get good photos.
f1.4 , f1.2 primes are always overrated , they are not really sharp at f1.2 or f1.4 and most of times we do not want that super shallow DOF.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 11, 2014, 03:47:19 PM »
12mp in 2014?
what a joke!

Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 09, 2014, 01:26:43 PM »
actually DXO marks is a great site and they do all right.
for that we should respect them.
however , the way they rank all sensors is plain silly.
they put too much weight on base ISO DR, so some people do not like their site(not all of us can or do use a tripod all the time).
 that all said , most of their sensor measurements are correct maybe except lowlight sports part of their scoring.
I have both the 6D and the D800E(the A7R too) and even resampling the D800E files to 12mp , it is still not as clean as the 6D file.
But they obviously rate the D800E better for lowlight sports(I do not know what they mean by sports, though).
other than that most of their sensor quality assessments are correct , and I have to respect their hard work.

when you go to DXOmark site , just shun their over all ratings, just read detailed graphs and numbers in measurement section.
I personally read lowlight score , color depth and DR, and to me color depth and lowlight scores are much more important than DR score.

I hate him but I have to admit in this case he is right , spot on nailed it extremely well.

I upgraded from the Rebel XTi to the 6D about a year ago, primarily because I outgrew the XTi and needed a camera that could do more.  A few months after upgrading, my XTi got wet and died during a trip to Iceland so I've been looking for a 2nd camera body for my wife.

A little about my shooting style, I mostly shoot landscapes, night photography and portraits (also macro but not as much).  My wife and I travel a lot, so street photography (and low light) is also part of our shooting style.  I do events every now and then, but it's not my focus and is usually done at the request of family/friends.  I can't say I don't like shooting fast action (sports)/wildlife because I've never really tried (I'm sure if I did I would like doing that as well). If you're interested to see photos, click here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/97429425@N05/

in your case , maybe the Sony A7 would be a great back up camera to your 6D.

A little about my gear, I have a 35L, 17-40L, 100L macro, and the 24-105L (which I'm going to sell to help pay for this new body).  The 35L was the last lens I bought, and I realized I liked shooting with primes over zooms.  My wife is the opposite, she likes the versatility of zooms.

Anyway, I'm down to 3 different cameras, the 70d, 5D Mark iii, or another 6d.  Price is definitely a consideration, but I'd rather spend a little more (or a lot) to get the right camera.  I've looked at enough spec reviews and sample photos to know the difference among all 3 cameras.  My shooting style screams 6d (and the fact that I really love my current 6d), however my wife's shooting style is suited more for the 70d.  She really wants the rotating screen, and I think the new touch screen focus system of the 70d is a major advantage.  Also, she isn't into learning the technical side of photography as I am, so having a 70d that has a few advanced features but is simple to use is also a plus.  I think the 7fps of the 70d would only get used every once in a great while.  For me the 5diii is still under consideration (in that case, my wife would use my 6d), but it does cost an arm and a leg.  I'm not going to get into the 5diii specs, but there are times when I'm shooting where I could benefit from some of the 5diii's capabilities.

That being said, I was interested in getting user opinions on real world shooting, not a spec comparison.  Thanks ahead of time for your thoughts!

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: February 05, 2014, 09:00:30 AM »
why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's????  I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low?  And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera.  shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?     

The mirror is gone, but the mechanical shutter is still thereā€¦and it's the shutter that imposes the Xsync limitation (shortest duration where the sensor is completely exposed - above Xsync both curtains are traveling across the sensor in a 'rolling' slit).


Aside from the "generic problem" of a mechanical shutter, Sony's greedy and shortsighted (!) choice of A) whimpy battery and B) crappy mechanical shutter unit [noise, lots of vibration, bad X-sync] for the A7R seriously degrades what would otherwise have been a truely amazing camera. Unfortunately. Shutter situation in A7 is somewhat better since it has an electronic "first curtain" and 1/250s X-sync as opposed to only 1/160s for A7R.

Much shorter X-sync times are one of the reasons why I am clamoring for true "solid state" mirrorless cameras, with "no moving parts whatsoever" inside. :-)

see also: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19224.msg364739#msg364739

Exactly, the shutter issue and the slow flash sync speed of the A7R really hurt what would otherwise have been a truly amazing pocket camera.
This thing shouldn't have been rushed , after all , not many of us want to be beta testers for Sony or Samsung or whatever.

Dear Friends and Teachers.
I have read " Fred Miranda has completed his review of the Sony A7R camera body using Canon EF lenses.
Read the full review | Sony A7R at B&H Photo"   from front page of CR.,  and start to hit center of my heart that Why Canon not do like this too, Yes, I am waiting for Canon 3D= 36 + MP, or Canon 1DS MK IV = 36 + MP for many years already, BUT Canon do nothing like this.  Yes, I check the Price of Sony Alpha a7R at B&H = $ 2,298 US Dollars + Canon EF Lens adapter = $ 350 US Dollars = Total  $ 2,648 US Dollars = Super Cheap compare to Canon Top Line 1DX MK I.
Yes, Sir, My stupid question ( I have GAS./ Gear Acqisittion Syndrome  Illness  NOW) is= I should wait another 6-9 months to get the Canon  36 MP. or Jump the ship to buy Sony Alpha a7R now ???.

YES, Sir, The More I use Canon EOS-M past 3 weeks, The More I love the Size of Tiny EOS-M, and the quality of the photos of this tiny camera.---And Sony Alpha a7R ( have eye AF control like my Old Canon A2E too) is a lot smaller than Canon 1Dx too.
 Thanks for your answer, Sir.

hey it all depends on what you shoot.
I have the A7R , the A7 , the 6D ,the 5d2 and the D800E....and I've just got Panasonic GX7

I think I'll keep them all for a while , they have different pros and cons, the A7R 's cons are:
1 super slow AF.
2 weak physical mount design(so do not use heavy lens on it via an adapter).
3 no quality native lenses other than the 55mm f1.8(if  55 is your favorite view , then it is great)
4 there is no proper flash system(so it cannot be a main camera for studio work or any location type of formal portrait work).
5 it's  weather sealing is useless, it literally failed working in cold snow mountains a few times and I had to send it to Sony.
6 its ergonomics is not really good , the back LCD is of poor quality without sapphire glass protection.
7 this is a big con for me , its video mode is really a joke, the AVCHD codec really really is bad(in fact its video IQ is worse than that of my D800E) if you are interested in video aspect of this camera read EOS HD review on this one(he is quite honest).
8 the battery last very short especially in cold environment.
then go on to its pros:
1 the super clear EVF that allows you to actually see through what the camera is seeing rather than what you eye is seeing.
2 the peaking works really fine.
3 its low light AF is amazing although it may be a bit slower than most of D-SLRs or OM-D(it can go down to -4EV).
4 the AF is far more accurate than any of Canon Nikon D-SLRs.
5 it supports 1080/60P albeit the poor video IQ.
6 its metering system is far more accurate than any of mirror based D-SLR metering system.
7 it IQ literally rivals Leica S2 or Pentax 645D , not as good as real backs but better than any 35mm format cameras including the D800E.
8 it is small enough to put in my normal bag (not silly ugly camera bag)for my day work.
9 I can use it on subway or in a mall and no one freaks out at it or complains about it.
10 it does not invite annoying cops.

so while I feel this type of cameras will eventually win out the market and I like the A7R a lot more than I thought I would , honestly I do not think this line of Sony will become the choice of most advanced mirrorless cameras, I mean there will be a better executed one from someone else (maybe Samsung or Fuji), or at least wait for its successor.
the A7R is a good snap shooting camera but in real life , it is not versatile enough to be a main camera for most of us.  it is too week and fragile to hold up a big lens, I think Sony rushed it a bit too much , should have matured it before actually releasing it.
after all , not so many people are willing to become beta testers for Sony, or lens selection or over all versatility for a bit better IQ or small body.
I was a beta tester this time , but next time I will try not to be an early adapter.

But if you do only tripod based landscapes or snaps of your everyday life (not including any kind of action), then it is a great camera for you.

so horses for courses always but if you want to try it just try it yourself and if you dislike it sell it. no amount of reading or what FM tells you helps you here, they are all paid or biased. try not to be naive , there are almost no fair objective reviews online.

Canon General / Re: Top sites for Canon gear reviews!
« on: January 22, 2014, 01:57:38 AM »
Hi All,

I though it would be nice to start a Topic based on favourite spots around the internet people use to help them decide, which Canon gear to get.

I found inspiration for this Topic from a post I just replied to. If this has been done before, it doesn't hurt to get get a fresh update.

To start this list is from Rienzphotoz:

1. michaelthementor.com
2. the-digital-picture.com
3. Dave Dugdale's youtube channel
4. thecamerastore tv youtube channel
5. digitalrevtv youtube channel
In addition I also, follow/watch at least dozen other reviewers, infrequently.

I've added these youtube channels:

Matt Granger - (He's a Nikon guy in Canon Clothes... but his views have help me with my 70-200 purchase)
Jared Polin - If you like Kai, this guy must be his US counterpart with substance.
Dan (Learningcameras.com) - Nice and clear. Great video on Canon 5DmkIII vs 6D
Indy Mogul - Top for Indie DSLR film makers! If your into that stuff.

actually the best camera review site is Amazon.com(not DPR crap, I mean Amazon user reviews)

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 22, 2014, 01:55:59 AM »
I too am thinking about switching to Canon. I am getting more and more into video and it would be cool to someday make the transition to something like the C100 seamlessly.
Not sure my reasons are totally logical though. Nikon has been screwing up badly with the D600 and then not acknowledging the issues even exist. Plus most video guys are already using Canon or Panny

What kind of loss would I take by switching though? The thought of taking a huge loss on my D800 and all my glass keeps me with Nikon for now.

I think you may want to get a 5D3+ 2 AF lenses in addition to your current Nikon set up and use an adapter to use all your Nikon lenses.
I have only 3 Canon AF lenses and 6 Zeiss primes, Nikon old D primes and some Samyong primes for Nikon and I  use all my F mount lenses on both and Sony.

in this way keeping many systems is not that expensive , when I need fast AF , then I use Canon 5D3 + 70-200mm L IS lens , the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8VR is a ok lens but not as good as the Sony or Canon similar zooms.
the Sony 135mm f1.8 ZA is a super sharp lens and this and 50mm f1.4ZA , I always keep at least on A mount camera.
there is ntohing wrong about having many cameras from many different brands , only die hard fanboys hate the idea or deny it.

all brands are good , but for AF or video , I think the 5D3 is the camera to get.
for sheer resolution or DR , the A7R is the best.
for extremely cold place , I think the OM1 is the camera to beat.
but if I have to keep only one camera , I 'd get the A99v or the 5D3, they are extremely versatile.
the D800E does many things ok but it cannot be the best in any particular area of photography.
the TSE lenses are better than Nikon PCE , so for buildings or interior , the A7R + Canon tSE beats the Nikon D800E + PCE set up.

so try the Canon but do not sell the Nikon before you test them side by side in real life for a month or so.
even then , I do not recommend selling either, keep both and share the F mount lenses for most of things.

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 22, 2014, 01:44:18 AM »

Based on DXO tests (i.e. "on paper"), no, the 1D X high ISO is theoretically the same as the D4. However, from a visual standpoint, I've seen ISO 16000 images and even some ISO 51200 sports images from a 1D X that simply blow me away...similar images from the D4 just don't engender the same feeling of low noise and clean quality.

That is because the DXO tests are CRAP.  What a "sensor" rating is versus the pictures produced and the capabilities of the bodies are two VERY different things

Which would your want - Nikon D600 or Nikon D4 as a pro camera... According to DXO marks, the "sensor" on the D600 is close to 10% better than the D4.

easy, if you do not shoot any sports, then go for the D610, which has vastly better sensor than the D4.
but what Nikon did to us D600/D800 owners , I cannnot tolerate the D610 around me , so I did not buy it.
but if there was no dust issue or shutter issue , it is a better all around camera than the D4 or the D800.
I had all the 3 and I kept the D800E.
honestly, the D4 is you know a weak camera , the 1DX is a much better body , this is why Nikon only Nikon updates its sports camera.

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 22, 2014, 01:39:15 AM »

As an aside, I think it's particularly weird that people feel the need to accuse Mr. Kelby of somehow "selling out" or being dishonest because he likes Canon cameras and is saying so.

No one is accusing anyone because no crime has been committed.

Mr Kelby is a well known photography expert, and as such his words have more impact than mine, yours, this whole forum put together. He is a living ad machine: companies know it and so does he. So I guess it's smart to at least wonder if he might have untold reasons for declaring this or that. Same as Ken Rockwell is not, by and large, considered the most unbiased reviewer.

The whole thing depends on how likely you think it is that Mr Kelby never got a chance to play with a 1Dx before 6 months ago, then it was love at first sight. For all his talk about ergonomy, skin tones and UI, I would say with any Canon camera at all, actually. How likely it is that someone like him has to "switch system" instead of just adding Canon gear to his Nikon kit. And please mind the fact that switching means making a mutually-exclusive choice. It's either this or that.

I believe he has been using Canon and Nikon stuff, and probably also Sony, Leica and whatnot (he is a gear geek by his own admission) for a long time. In the past he had reasons to present himself as a Nikon guy, now he has reasons to claim a "switch" to Canon. All fine for him, but let's try not to infer universal photographic truths out of this.

well said I think you are right , many of celeb pros like Scott have access to many many brand systems.
and many of us here use many many camera systems.
Ipersonally use Sony Canon and Nikon but I do not have plan to sell any of them anytime soon.
so I guess I cannot understand why some one rich like him has to make a poor switch from brand a to b when even a poor man like me can afford keeping all my 3 or 4 camera systems intact.

so he is dishonest and I am sure he is shooting many many brands kit when no TV cameras catch him.
he is a rich guy he can afford keeping all his Nikon and add Canon if he really thinks Canon skin tone is that much better than that of Nikon(personally I agree with him on the skin tone comment  though).

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 22, 2014, 01:30:44 AM »
Boy, there's some SERIOUS hate and bickering in this thread.

If you honestly believe this is true, I think you must have been born and raised in Disneyland.

What I see are people saying what they think, and that's a fine thing. Thanks to good mods and posters, we don't have actual flame wars here.

If someone's opinion offends you, deal with it.

no need to be so hard on the guy since most of us actually use more than one camera systems here.
I mean no need the "born and raised in Disneyland" comment.

No one goes through this world without being offended. Life is about being offended. How you cope with it determines how successful, happy you are.

One thing I'd ask: If Kelby is so smart, why did it take him so long to figure out that Canon is superior? And another, why did it take Canon so long to get in the game and recruit him?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7