October 01, 2014, 01:04:23 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 - JohnDizzo15

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27
Experience, knowledge of shooting and how to properly operate original rig, and post processing would have been way more valuable.

Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 23, 2014, 04:52:11 PM »
Like others have mentioned, every system has its strengths and limitations ... the trickiest part is to know how to get around the weaknesses and use the strengths to their full potential ...

Figuring out how to get around those weaknesses is the part that starts to get the most troublesome after a while. This is especially true when you have multiple systems to choose from which offer very different shooting experiences.

Taken by themselves, I could imagine that my Fuji or Sony rig would be just fine. But when used in conjunction with my Canon rig and my sometimes borrowed Nikon rig, I realize how much having to "get around" weaknesses truly bothers me.

This was a key point to bring to light regarding work arounds. While I do not mind thinking about and planning for getting around obstacles with shooting a certain rig, using the Canon rig after all is said and done reminds me of how it feels to shoot (for all intents and purposes) in a hassle free fashion. I am not preplanning for how I am going to get something done and how to deal with the compromises of the rig I'm holding. I am simply just......shooting.

It all goes back to what it is I can accomplish with any given system. When you latch onto specific strengths and ignore weaknesses is when you get into the trap of seeing the greener grass on the other side. GAS, unfortunately grabs ahold of you during this period. I have now gone through the a7r, xe-2, xt-1, and a slew of adapters, work-arounds, etc.

If I have a rig out with me, I don't want to have to think to myself "oh sh*t, wish I had the other rig." And that is where the Canon (for me) comes in. It is the only kit I have currently that allows me to feel confident in that I can shoot absolutely any scenario that I come across. I may not have the most dynamic range/resolution, it may not be the smallest/lightest, but I never have to worry about solving the problem of how to get a shot because my rig makes it difficult to do so.

The other issue I have with this is that often times, I will go ahead and work around the issues of the rig I'm using. But then upon review of the images, I realize that the end product isn't really much, if any improvement at all over my Canon kit which then makes me feel as though it was all done in vain.

There will always be the guys that only shoot this, or that, and don't concern themselves with other things. For me, I chase my kids around, landscape/travel, events on occasion, portraiture, macro - food and product, and possibly some other things I have forgotten at the moment. The Sony and the Fuji can get a lot of that done. But neither one handles all of it very easily. The rig that has consistently allowed me to get the most usable/keeper shots in general?  Still the Canon.

Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 23, 2014, 11:58:14 AM »
I absolutely agree with much of what has been stated. The Canon kit and my feelings about it are definitely subjective from the the vantage point with which I have made my assessments.

I agree that everyone has different needs and differing systems may serve those specific needs much better. I also recognize that large companies like Nikon are also very developed and would be a great choice for any photographer should they decide to go that way.

My main goal was just to point out that through my own experiences of trial and error, I have found that I always return to my Canon kit when I need something faithful that I know will not fail me through any of the shooting scenarios I find myself in.

Yes. There is lighter, smaller, more DR, more resolution, better this, and better that. But what I have found is that with those advantages from other systems come with plenty of disadvantages.

I know that when I pack up my Canon rig to go out (regardless of what I am shooting that day), I have every single tool I need to choose from right in front of me.

I also know that none of those tools will be compromised in such a way that would make it supremely difficult for me to accomplish my goal for that day.

To briefly illustrate:
Canon kit = multiple fast portrait lenses, multiple macro lenses, multiple 2.8 stabilized zoom lenses, multiple telephoto lenses, TC, multiple tilt shift lenses, multiple fast wide angle lenses, a specialty zoom in the 8-15, and multiple native flashes/triggers.

All of those items work seamlessly together for everything that I do.....ever. I don't have to worry about focus issues, battery issues, compatibility issues, lack of lens or tool choice issues (adapting brings a slew of other issues), amongst other things.

All of it just works. And while there are things about it that could be slightly improved, all of the characteristics of the system are already pretty stellar. I have tried the other systems that are supposed to yield great improvements over my Canon kit. However, it takes more work to get myself the shots I want and they don't always look better than what I would have gotten with the Canon kit anyway.

I've learned now that it is much better to have the ability to get any job done either well enough or excellently than to be able to do one or two things slightly better and be crippled in a multitude of other significant ways.

Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 22, 2014, 07:14:05 PM »
Something just struck me. To put it all into more of a nutshell, all systems have compromises. I'm certain we are all aware of this whether we like to admit it or not.

The issue I have with all the other systems I have tried is that while there are compromises to my Canon kit, they can all generally be worked around or dealt with relatively easily. The compromises with the other kits however, are ones that are just inherent in what they are and how the company has packaged them. They are issues which either cannot currently be helped, or issues that can be helped but are not so easily accomplished.

Either way, if someone told me at this very moment in time that I could only keep one kit.... without hesitation, you know what the answer would be.

It is because of this that Canon currently has most of my camera money and will continue to get most of it until others truly step up to the plate to fully replace my kit and/or meet all of my needs.

Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 22, 2014, 06:51:45 PM »
Thanks john for this piece of opinion, well written and with necessary amout of nuance.  :)

Thank you, hachu and markoe.

Just felt like it was something that needed to be said for all the people that are still dealing with the burning decision of whether to switch or try other systems. I wish I had been able to read more extensively about perspectives from other Canon shooters (with candid views) that had tried out all the other systems I was interested in prior to buying them. I have found that most of the opinions you do find online are pretty biased and not indicative of how one would feel in the real world when actually having the rigs in their hands.

Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 22, 2014, 06:32:15 PM »
Good points John. May I ask, what your next steps from here...?

My kids still small and they have activities. Current mirrorless systems couldn't keep up with them. However, I do find my RX1 quite handy on lazzzy days.

Dylan, I too have young kids that are not still even when they aren't participating in activities lol. The current mirrorless systems are definitely a compromise when it comes to AF speed and accuracy. Just like you though, it is nice to have a compact system like the rx or the x100s in my case for day to day snaps.

As far as what my next step is, I think I may put the Sony rig up for sale soon as I am finding that the xt-1 is just way more enjoyable to shoot (for a compact ILC). I would still like to have something that offers me high res and overall high IQ with good focus aids. But I've had so many ongoing issues with the a7r that I just don't think it is worth it to keep around.

I like the Zeiss 55/1.8 on the a7r. But the issue is that I am only shooting in conditions that allow me to be at ISO 100-400 about 10% of the time at best. When I shoot above that sensitivity, the images are no longer offering me anything over my other rigs. As a matter of fact, the colors are always the poorest amongst all of my rigs straight out of camera. So I would not only be dealing with IQ that isn't much different, but colors that are definitely worse.

When shooting adapted lenses, I find that for some reason, I am dealing with shake/softness in a lot of images where I absolutely did not anticipate finding any with the Sony.

Also, the size factor is lost on the a7r as it is full frame which requires full frame lenses like the 55/1.8. While the combo is smaller than a DSLR rig, it is still not small by any stretch of the imagination for what it is. My view has always been to either truly be small, or just have the whole enchilada and be big. To me, there is no sense or use in being smaller but still too big. While the whole size issue isn't really a big deal to me, I figured I would mention it since it is still something that I have noted.

So the only thing left that's leading me to keep the Sony is the fact that I have electronic communication with my tilt shift lenses through it. But is that worth keeping almost 3k worth of kit around for? Only time will tell I suppose.

If a company like Metabones would release an electronic adapter for EF to X mount (or a speedbooster), the Sony would almost certainly be gone immediately.

Canon General / Re: Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 22, 2014, 05:09:17 PM »
Always interesting to hear from people who have real, practical experience with the different systems, rather than those who fantasise over what they think a different system can do to improve their photography.

I must admit I'm a bit of a Fuji fan myself, but having learnt over the years that multiple systems are, to me, a distraction from making real images, I now religiously just stick to one, other than trying out the opposition now and again to keep myself up to date.

Multiple systems have only mildly been a distraction for me as I know exactly when I want to take a specific rig out for a specific reason. My main issue as far as distraction goes is when I sometimes forget how something worked on one rig because I had been using the other ones more frequently more recently (although it is usually like riding a bike and is only a momentary hickup).

I have to agree with you on Fuji. I too, am a fan of theirs. I feel like they have accomplished a lot with their system in a relatively short amount of time. I absolutely enjoy using their current line of offerings but still find that there are frustrations at times. Most recently, I was trying to shoot mildly dynamic situations where the AF on both my x100s and xt-1 + 56/1.2 were not getting the job done. There is the ever so slight lag here and there with the lens trying to focus. There is also the relatively frequent EVF hickup that gets kind of annoying when combined with the lens hesitation. Suffice to say I missed a lot of shots in a situation that was not as high speed as a sporting event.

The second little annoyance is with the battery. It seems to be worse on the x100s, but still present on the xt-1. Both devices show full battery even though they are probably closer to 50% or less. Usually, as soon as I show one tick less from full, the battery is ready to take a crap within minutes after. Not a deal breaker as I know to carry extras with me. But still super annoying when it happens as I don't think it would be too much to ask on cameras that cost upwards of 1k to have slightly more accurate battery life indicators.

Canon General / Gets the Job Done....Every Time
« on: September 22, 2014, 04:38:30 PM »
My Canon kit - It works. It does what I need it to do. It never fails me. Gets the job done....every....single....time.

Having now owned and played with multiple systems from different companies, I am truly learning the value of the Canon ecosystem.

With as much chatter going on as there is about all of Canon's deficiencies and shortcomings, I felt as though it would be refreshing to bring a different view and experience to the table. Sorry if this has already been stated elsewhere, but this is my two cents that I've come to realize as of late.

Without fail, I have never gotten frustrated with the functionality of my kit to the point where I felt that something else could serve me better in every facet of my shooting.

Having now owned an A7r rig, multiple modern Fuji rigs, and played with a Nikon rig, I have come to the conclusion that nothing really beats the overall functionality, completeness, and usability of my Canon kit.

Yes yes, I know. Canon Fanboy, right? Wrong. If that were the case, I wouldn't have spent my last 6-8k on trying out other company's offerings. To a fanboy, that is blasphemy.

Anyhow, I have found that comparing IQ between all of the rigs, I am generally splitting hairs. There are a finite number of instances where I actually look at an image and say "wow, I am so glad I own ABCD rig because the images are so much better than the rest."

The differences for me at least, are in functionality and feature set....not IQ. Sure, IQ on some levels can be slightly improved with my Canon rig. But assuming I properly expose (or get close) and properly compose (or get close), there is nothing IQ-wise that my Canon rig cannot accomplish.

The only reasons left when I really think about why it is I enjoy using other rigs are due to feature sets. For instance, A7r, allows me to use my TSE lenses with a very good manual focusing aid feature set. A smaller plus would be the increase in resolution and slight bump in DR (not as important to me). The xt-1 is super compact for what it brings to the table and has an even better manual focusing aid feature set (prefer it for all my old lenses that do not require electronic communication with the body). However, that's where the positives end for me when comparing them to my Canon DSLR.

For me, the autofocus is still way too unreliable and slow on every mirrorless camera I have owned or used. Battery life has been consistently atrocious across the board. Ergonomics are almost acceptable at best. And the worst part? The ecosystems range from barely starting to develop, or mildly developed and still lacking significantly. All of these things taken together make for systems that involve a lot of compromise. It makes them very niche/specific use tools.

This brings me back to my original point, the Canon rig that never fails. Slight shortcomings, I will admit, are present. However, as a general rule in my experience, it has always gotten the job done and I have never felt it lacking to the point where I looked to another system and felt that I could do better.

The one truth I have found, the grass is almost never greener....

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Invested In 3 Different Systems
« on: September 18, 2014, 05:48:21 PM »
I used my D800 alongside my Canon bodies, a 1D MK IV at the time.  The D800 was fine, my Nikon lenses suffered a lot of CA.  Since I do high ISO, and the huge amount of noise at ISO 12800 in D800 images took NR a long long time to run, I realized that the D800 was impractical for my use and sold it (for more than I paid new). 

If I were only using ISO 100-400, its a fantastic tool, but at ISO 800, noise creeps in.

That's what I've found with the Sony. Anything past ISO 400, and I just assume use any of my other rigs as the experience of making images is much easier and enjoyable with every other system. Starting to get the feeling that the Sony is going to have to go at some point when there is a better solution for my TSE lenses and shooting high resolution.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Invested In 3 Different Systems
« on: September 18, 2014, 05:46:54 PM »
Hi John,

We run in similar circles. I've been a Canon shooter for many years and love my 1DX/5D3/1D4 for sports and landscape.  I'm also heavily invested in Fuji's mirrorless system and I can confirm that the XT1 and 56mm f1.2 is the best combination Fuji offers.  Their 10-24 wide angle lens is also a consideration if you're considering going wide.

While the Fuji's are light and getting faster at 8FPS, they still will not replace a DSLR designed for sports. I've tried to shoot sports with my Fuji XT1 w/55-200 zoom lens and while the lens length was acceptable, the XT1 simply could not lock on as quickly or maintain AF for fast moving subjects.  The images from the XT1 were 'just about' as good as the 1DX from the same venue but I missed so many more shots with the Fuji.  Agreed too that the smaller Fuji's are not designed to be at the edge of a football field or a racetrack but they really do a great job at portraits and landscapes.  Their built-in intervalometer is also a nice feature for timelapse.

Welcome to the 'circle of confusion'. Which system do I take?

Regarding Sony, I too have considered the A7R or S but at this point, and based on some others comments, its not for me. 

Best of luck!

As far as respective uses, the Canon is what I reach for when needing telephoto. The X100s is my go to for daily random shooting (family, or just quick captures, etc) and the xt-1 will now be used for all of my vintage glass (or when I need compact with the native lenses). The Sony will still be in the stable for usage with TSE lenses as they do not have aperture control when adapted to the fuji. Starting to wonder whether I should bother keeping the zeiss 55mm.

I haven't been able to do any torturous testing with the xt-1 as far as shooting action with native glass. But I am certain it will not be on par with a DSLR. Though so far, with the 56 at least, I have gotten a pretty high rate of keepers with my kids. Not quite sports, but still some action involved. The low light focusing ability is also rather surprisingly good on the Fuji.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Invested In 3 Different Systems
« on: September 18, 2014, 05:32:40 PM »
Canon DSLRs (60D and 6D), with modern Canon, Sigma, and Samyang lenses, and (via adapters) film-era all-manual pre-AI/AI/AI-s Nikkor lenses (inherited) and my own M42-mount (various brands) lenses.
Sigma DP Merrill fixed-lens compacts.
Film gear.

Interesting to hear that you don't like the Sony shooting experience. I have toyed with the thought of the Sony A7r. Not going to happen soon.

The Sony just has a lot of issues for me with regard to UI, ergonomics, the shutter, and lack of some features. The biggest knock against it now for me is the softness that I get in the majority of my shots (including tripod mounted work) with some adapted lenses. I realized it this week when I started using some of my vintage lenses on the Fuji. I found that the images were signicantly sharper and cleaner with equal to or less shutter speed than the Sony. One of the things I thought to myself initially was that the Fuji is a crop sensor thus only using the center of the image circle. But comparing subjects at the center of the frame, the Fuji just blows the Sony out of the water.

The A7r is pretty good when paired with the 55/1.8 (the only native lens I have for it). If it weren't for the fact that it is capable of electronic communication with my EF lenses, it would have already been returned or sold by now. Honestly, if a company like Metabones were able to produce a speedbooster for EF to X mount (that allowed aperture control), or even just a straight up electronic adapter, that would also prompt the dumping of the A7r. The Sony, with all those pixels, basically gives me 36mp of softness vs the 16mp of sheer sharpness with the xt-1 when using adapted lenses (the main draw for me).

The Xt-1 has a significantly better viewfinder (especially for manual focus) than the A7r. It also has a much better shutter mechanism, better ergonomics, and just better overall photographic user experience.

Third Party Manufacturers / Invested In 3 Different Systems
« on: September 18, 2014, 04:13:12 PM »
So I was recently presented with the opportunity to trade out my seldom used 24-70II for a Fuji Xt-1 w/ kit lens and 56/1.2.

I am now officially invested in systems with Canon (6D and EOS M), Sony (A7r), and Fuji (xt-1 and x100s).

As ridiculous as the initial thought of being bought into all these systems was, I am now finding that they all have their respective uses for what I do. While I understand that it is not necessary to have all of it to get the job done, it is nice to have the option of choosing the best tool for the job when needed.

An unexpected side effect of getting the xt-1.....I'm once again reminded that I really can't stand the shooting experience of the Sony (even more so now).

EOS Bodies / Re: 5diii to 7dii?
« on: September 18, 2014, 04:04:46 PM »
If your goal is to get more money for a prime, I'd say go with a 6D instead as another poster previously stated. That's actually exactly what I did and do not regret it at all.

For the type of shooting you said you do, there really is no "need" for the 5D3. From an IQ standpoint, I also prefer the files out of the 6D for whatever reason. Ever so slightly, but I do.

Also, depending on the deal you get, I'm certain you could probably pocket around 800-1000. I sold my gripped 5D3 earlier in the year for 2600 and bought a 6D for 1400. No brainer for my situation.

The other issue I see with you swapping out for a 7D2 is that it completely changes your lens collection. If one of the main things you do is landscape, you will surely miss the full frame sensor and not having to deal with the 1.6x crop. Even putting landscape aside, it will change the way you use your lenses for everything.

Is there a specific feature of the 7D2 that you feel is necessary for what you do?

Lenses / Re: Your favorite older EF lens
« on: September 03, 2014, 01:14:52 PM »
45 or 90 TSE

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 03, 2014, 01:01:43 PM »
Pretty sure Nikon will have released at least 18 more bodies at the rate they're going before Canon releases an update to their lines. So they are much more than just 2 generations behind  ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27