March 04, 2015, 02:22:09 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 - zlatko

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
1
Lenses / Re: Advice on Canon PRIMES
« on: February 11, 2015, 01:36:07 AM »
Hi everyone - thanks for all your input.  I guess I'm venturing into primes wanting to not be lazy with my zooms, be more creative and after better IQ in lower light situations, shallower DOF etc.  I know I have some great lenses, but I can get some of these lenses at great prices very soon & didnt want to pass up the opporunity.

I guess I was referring more to bettering my street photography, candid people shots (more candid people shots than actual posed portraits), so possibly the 35mm and 85mm would be good options.

Ive heard that there can be issues hand holding the 135mm re sharpness, any truth to that ? Ive read that people go with the 100mm with IS instead, but is this lens primarily for macro (which I dont do a lot)

Also the 85mm 1.2 may not be worth the extra money due to bulk especially when the 1.8 performs nearly as well ?

The 24-70/2.8II is as sharp as it gets.  For the photography you're describing, I'd recommend just these two:

35/2 IS
85/1.8

Don't buy too many lenses — they'll be a pain to carry around!  The L versions of the 35 and 85 are great, but too heavy for general use, especially if you also carry one or more heavy zooms.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 09, 2015, 03:14:43 AM »
And using DPP to test DR is kinda silly. DPP does all sorts of hidden NR so it's not really a safe way to test and it's tricky and time consuming. All they had to do was take a black frame, load it into Iris, drag the measuring bar, get the number, math math and in 30 secnds total they'd have the exact engineering DR score that could be compared to the DxO numbers or exactly to what they find for the 1DX. So it might be risky to trust this DPP test.

The black frame test and getting an exact score is what an engineer would do, not what a photographer would do.  I presume the person was a photographer and used DPP to make actual photos.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 09, 2015, 02:12:35 AM »
How many landscapre phootgraphers are there that can afford 4000$ camera that demands 2000% lens?

This is a STUDIO CAMERA. So, product photography, commercial photography!

Learn you market.

I don't know.  How many are there?  Read the Luminous Landscape forum and they are using cameras & lenses that cost that much and much more, for landscape, product, commercial, and whatever.  Some landscape photographers are willing to pay a lot for resolution.  Camera makers know their market better than internet commenters do.

Exactly my point. Some landscape photographers are able to pay that much, but every commercial photographer is willing to do so.
But, because all these high-end marketing executives are wanna be photographers who got absolutely no idea what market wants or needs, it's left up to the engineering department to their job as well.
This camera is a great proposal, and if you look at it's features it's clearly meant to battle MF offerings. It doesn't need gps and wifi to do so, because those cameras don't have those features, either. It is a great landscape camera, but mentioning wedding photography and stupid things like that???? Come on, it's the worst possible camera for the job. Low shutter count, large files, small frames per second count... 1DX is a camera for that.

This is a studio camera, just like MF cameras, it absolutely works as a landscape camera, but it's buyers are likely commercial photographers, and landscapes are just one part of their job. No decent wedding photographer is going to buy this, unless it's a shoot for the cover of a magazine.

The 1DX is a fantastic camera, but I much prefer the 5D3 and 6D for weddings to anything as large & heavy as the 1DX.  The 5DS would be a *great* wedding camera too.  "Worst possible for the job"?  I don't know how anyone can say that.  The estimated shutter count is fine for a number of years, and shutters are not that expensive to replace.  Large files of the 5DS are absolutely no problem because the raw file size is variable, so you have large when you want large and medium and small when you don't want large.  Frames per second is perfectly adequate for weddings.  A wedding is not the Olympics or professional sports.  It's no surprise that previous 5D series cameras have been extremely popular for weddings (with the same or similar shutter count and frame rate).  And the 5DS now brings the possibility of shooting very high res square photos, similar to some wedding cameras of the film era.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 08, 2015, 08:04:02 PM »
As a long time Canon customer, I'm not thrilled with the apparent complacency.

Not sure why they would release a 50MP sensor that can't at least match the competition in dynamic range, or release a UWA for full frame that matches the base aperture of their chief competitors FF UWA.

Someone is sleepwalking over there.

Why stick with a brand that is so complacent and sleepwalking?  Just go buy the competition's fabulous equivalent products, such as their high res 50mp cameras with anti-flicker technology, 7D2 with anti-flicker technology, 11-14 zoom, 8-15 zoom, 24/2.8 IS, 28/2.8 IS, 35/2 IS, 17 T-SE, 400/4 DO, 85/1.2, 24 pancake, 600RT-EX, ST-E3-RT, etc.  ;)  Good thing the competition is not complacent about anything.  ;)

5
Lenses / Re: EF 50 1.8 STM
« on: February 08, 2015, 05:03:26 PM »
It's worth noting that Sony's FE 55mm f/1.8 is one of the sharpest autofocus lenses ever measured by DxO, and it's not a big lens.  It's not exactly a 50, but close.

6
Lenses / Re: EF 50 1.8 STM
« on: February 08, 2015, 01:46:47 PM »
50/1.8 STM doesn't violate any resolutions for me.  I would love to see it!  I use f/2.8 zooms, 4.0 zooms, 1.4 primes, 1.8 primes, 2.0 primes, 2.8 primes, etc.  They're all good for something.  The smaller aperture primes are great at being lightweight & small and offering fine IQ at the same time.

Some of the best 50mm lenses ever made have been f/2.0 — Leica makes two of them, one for $2K and one for $8K.  The EF 35/2.0 IS justifies itself every time I use it, as do the 85/1.8 and 135/2.0.  And I enjoy the 20/2.8, 24/2.8 and 28/2.8 primes — small and delightful to use.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 08, 2015, 01:38:57 PM »
His name always come up here but I never heard him speak before.
Maybe it's just his style but he didn't come across very enthusiastic or give any compelling reasons to buy the new cameras. He seemed to more recommend the 5D Mark III .
It has a feel of a last hurrah for Canon sensors. It's a maxed out full frame version of the 7D II sensor.
I'm not over enthusiastic so far with the picture quality of the 7D II .
Canon have gambled here that 50mp outweighs a total lack of any other improvements (in fact almost a downgrade from 5D III in some specs).
I'll be really curious to see detailed reviews on it.
I hope the detail is amazing or I won't be buying.
I am a typical Canon customer, heavily invested and looking for a compelling reason to upgrade . I had expected a little more than 50mp in the three years since the 5D III launched.
You expected a little more than 50mp?  Why not check out the sample photos on Canon's web site to see if the detail is amazing enough for you.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 07, 2015, 02:38:22 AM »
Well I guess Chuck has answered the question of whether the sensor will be limited when compared to Exmor (the answer being "Yes".)

Every sensor is limited, including Exmor.  It's not as if one sensor is limited and another is not.  All the photography ever done was done with limited sensors.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 07, 2015, 12:20:39 AM »
How many landscapre phootgraphers are there that can afford 4000$ camera that demands 2000% lens?

This is a STUDIO CAMERA. So, product photography, commercial photography!

Learn you market.

I don't know.  How many are there?  Read the Luminous Landscape forum and they are using cameras & lenses that cost that much and much more, for landscape, product, commercial, and whatever.  Some landscape photographers are willing to pay a lot for resolution.  Camera makers know their market better than internet commenters do.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 06, 2015, 10:46:20 PM »
I would say Chuck Westfall probably should've prepared better if he really wanted to present the 5Ds in a good light. As far as I can see it, it was not a good idea to compare the dynamic range of the 5Ds with the 5D Mark III, right after the DP Review guy says there has been concerns about that (DR of 5D III). He is just feeding the frenzy here. Similarly, comparing the noise capability of the 5Ds with the 7D II isn't really complementary,the latter being a crop sensor camera. I think on these notes Chuck Westfall could have just said that the 5Ds has competitive dynamic range and noise capability, and let people figure it out for themselves rather than surmising based on his comparisons.
The problem is, the camera raises too many questions to be slam dunk, the same way 6D did. It was a great camera that received negative PR due to missing some key features.
Chuck Westfall was clearly unprepared; when he was asked who would buy 5D Mark III versus a 5Ds,instead of pointing out the target audience for the newer camera and highlighting its strengths, he went on to say that people looking for lowlight performance, high ISO capability and advanced video tools would be looking for 5D Mark III, pointing out the 5Ds' shortcomings. Very odd.

Chuck did a great job and presented the camera in a good, honest and informative fashion.  He's a straight shooter and doesn't play the games that you seem to want him to play.

Please don't be presumptive. I think that his responses in this interview seemed unprepared, and potentially liable to bias people against a new product instead of being objective. Clearly, your standards for good and informative might be different than mine. He does seem like an honest person, I will give you that, and I think he is quite popular for that reason.

For example, he compared the noise levels to the 7DII on the basis of pixel pitch and processor, but when the interviewer asked him why that wouldn't result in better noise performance as the sensor is much larger- he switched to saying cameras are evaluated independently. Fine, then why compare it with the 7DII and mention similar pixel pitch to begin with?

Secondly, if you are asked how the target audience of a new product is different, do you go to great lengths describing the strengths of the old product and its target audience. The interviewer had to specifically ask him again, to get him to talk about the strengths of the 5Ds, which is all he should have been espousing in this interview.

Regarding dynamic range- he says it is comparable to the 5D III. That remains to be seen- but saying that the DR hasn't changed when the interviewer specifically mentions there being concerns about it, was odd. Having said that, this was really a minor point compared to the above two, which seemed like "gaffes".

Say what you will, but I have seen a disconnect between Canon USA and Canon Inc. In a past interview, Chuck Westfall had specifically mentioned that Canon was interested in bringing back AF point illumination in 5DIII through a firmware update (unbidden, he brought it up). However, we haven't seen it yet, have we?

Anyway...

It seems that you're seeing what you want to see. He was quite factual and I appreciate that.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 06, 2015, 09:54:38 PM »
The data I plotted was Sensorgen data derived from DxO.  By the way, I've found that there are many areas on DxO data that is self-contradictory, so I generally tend not to believe any of it anymore, especially their "photographic DR" because their normalization approach is questionable at best.

Their ratings have some mysteries.  At some point, DxO rated the $499 EF 100/2 USM as their highest scoring lens made by Canon.  It's currently the 2nd highest, according to DxO.  It's a fine lens, but that rating doesn't accord with my experience.  Anyone want to confirm that the $499 EF 100/2 USM was the BEST lens that Canon made, deserving of the HIGHEST score?  Currently that crown is worn by the EF 35/2 IS, with the 100/2 coming in second place, ahead of every other lens that Canon makes.

Their lens tests are total crap.  They declared the 70-200/2.8L IS II no better than the I, and worse in resolving power.

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8L-IS-II-USM-measurements-and-review

By the way, my 100/2 was outstanding.  Every non-L prime should be like the 100/2.

Every photographer who has tried both versions of the 70-200/2.8 says version II is better than version I.  Somehow DxO doesn't agree with every photographer who has tried them.  Strange. 

Yep, the 100/2 is outstanding.  But there are a lot of outstanding lenses in the system.  I never heard any photographers say that the 100/2 is the top-most outstanding lens in the system.  Only DxO said that.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 06, 2015, 09:50:57 PM »
I would say Chuck Westfall probably should've prepared better if he really wanted to present the 5Ds in a good light. As far as I can see it, it was not a good idea to compare the dynamic range of the 5Ds with the 5D Mark III, right after the DP Review guy says there has been concerns about that (DR of 5D III). He is just feeding the frenzy here. Similarly, comparing the noise capability of the 5Ds with the 7D II isn't really complementary,the latter being a crop sensor camera. I think on these notes Chuck Westfall could have just said that the 5Ds has competitive dynamic range and noise capability, and let people figure it out for themselves rather than surmising based on his comparisons.
The problem is, the camera raises too many questions to be slam dunk, the same way 6D did. It was a great camera that received negative PR due to missing some key features.
Chuck Westfall was clearly unprepared; when he was asked who would buy 5D Mark III versus a 5Ds,instead of pointing out the target audience for the newer camera and highlighting its strengths, he went on to say that people looking for lowlight performance, high ISO capability and advanced video tools would be looking for 5D Mark III, pointing out the 5Ds' shortcomings. Very odd.

Chuck did a great job and presented the camera in a good, honest and informative fashion.  He's a straight shooter and doesn't play the games that you seem to want him to play.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA
« on: February 06, 2015, 08:15:44 PM »
The data I plotted was Sensorgen data derived from DxO.  By the way, I've found that there are many areas on DxO data that is self-contradictory, so I generally tend not to believe any of it anymore, especially their "photographic DR" because their normalization approach is questionable at best.

Their ratings have some mysteries.  At some point, DxO rated the $499 EF 100/2 USM as their highest scoring lens made by Canon.  It's currently the 2nd highest, according to DxO.  It's a fine lens, but that rating doesn't accord with my experience.  Anyone want to confirm that the $499 EF 100/2 USM was the BEST lens that Canon made, deserving of the HIGHEST score?  Currently that crown is worn by the EF 35/2 IS, with the 100/2 coming in second place, ahead of every other lens that Canon makes.

14
Lenses / Re: A New Nifty Fifty Coming [CR1]
« on: February 06, 2015, 07:48:33 PM »
Here is an example of two lenses that are often compared but are completely different lenses for different users. Canon offers two 85mm prime lenses, one that goes for about $300 and one that's close to $2000. Just because they're the same focal length, does not mean they cannibalize each other. No one in the market for the $2000 lens is going to realistically buy the $300 as a replacement. Similarly, if you're in the $300 price bracket, you can't even afford the $2000 one.

Well, sorry, but that's simply wrong.  I have bought and sold all of the Canon 85mm lenses several times over the past 15 years, including both the original 85/1.2L and the 85/1.2L II.  I have had three copies of the 85/1.8.  The 1.2 and 1.8 are very different in many ways but they are the same in one way — they are both 85mm — and sometimes that is what is important.  If Canon only made the 1.2L version, I would presently only have the 1.2L.  But because they make the 1.8 version, I only have the 1.8.  Sometimes a person can go either way, depending on what is available.  Because both were available, consider the 1.2 version cannibalized

Likewise, I have the cheaper f/4 version of the 70-200.  If they only made the f/2.8 version, I would have that one.  So the f/2.8 version is cannibalized.  Yum.  Yum.  Likewise, a second 5D3 was cannibalized in favor of a 6D.  And so on.

The point is that there is a degree to which these products compete with each other.  Not always, not for every photographer.  But enough that it's real. 

Is Canon bothered by all of this cannibalization?  They aren't.  Canon knows that they sell many more of the cheaper products, so the cannibalization ultimately doesn't hurt them.   I do agree with your point about the strength of these products together.  That's a point that is often overlooked.

That's why an excellent new 50/1.4 wouldn't be a threat to the existing 50/1.2L.  I expect Canon will make a much improved 50/1.4 in due time.

15
Lenses / Re: 11-24 is here, with images of it compared to Nikon 14-24
« on: February 06, 2015, 07:19:56 PM »
Compared to 11mm, 24mm looks like a telephoto! :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31