October 20, 2014, 10:08:08 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 ... 23
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 750D real world review
« on: Today at 10:58:02 AM »
Absolutely, and I certainly don't want to come off as biased against it. IMHO the D750 means Canon should drop the price on the 5D3 until the 5D4 is available.

It will be interesting to see what happens with 5D3 pricing. For someone who isn't heavily invested in either system, I don't see any incentive to purchase a 5D3 over a D750. If someone who isn't heavily invested in either system asked for my opinion regarding both bodies, I'd tell them both are great tools, but the D750 clearly offers more value for the dollar.

These products are similar, but the price of one has little to do with the price of the other.  That's because they're not easily interchangeable.  Each is attached to a complex system, and that system is at least as important as the body.  The incentive to purchase a 5D3 (or 6D) over a D750 is still connected to the system behind it, the unique lenses, the ergonomics, the service, etc. 

2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 750D real world review
« on: Today at 10:47:47 AM »
he says with the nikon he can now shoot natural light in situations who he HAD to use a flash with canon.

The only place I see a high ISO advantage in the FF market is with the A7S. The D750 isn't any better then the 5D3 at high ISO.

Quote
ps: you don´t have to underexpose 5 stops it´s better too when you only underexpose 2 stops.

No it's not. Generally you have to get into 3+ stop push territory before there's a difference. This is a bit simplified because it depends in part on how deep the tones are. But in the field I've found you can pretty reliably push up to 3 stops with a Canon sensor.

Quote
and who likes blown out windows in interiors shots? every minute saved in PS is money.

Unless the interior is exceptionally bright on its own, even a 5ev underexposure / shadow push is not going to let you keep the windows from blowing out. The one wedding shot in his review with a window in the background is blown out.

The D750 is a fine camera for the price if you don't mind the some what consumer styled UI or the buffer. (Why does Nikon always skimp on the buffer?) But the sensor is on par with what one would expect from any FF sensor.

If you have the money I have to agree with 9VIII, the D810 is the DSLR to buy in the Nikon lineup.

I edit thousands of wedding photos with extremes of brightness and contrast and my pushing and pulling range in Lightroom is from +2 to -2.  Usually it is just from +1 to -1.  In-camera metering is good enough that it's very rare to need to push or pull more than 2 stops.  How often does one get a nearly black frame?

If I were a Nikon shooter, I would be all over the D750.  But I would not sell a 5D3 or 6D for a D750.  Not for 1/3 stop or even more.  Canon lenses are too good to give up.

3
Canon General / Re: "11-24mm f/4" vs The Holy Grail
« on: October 16, 2014, 03:24:53 PM »
What do you all think, can we compare these both or are both of them at a different league of their own?

How does one compare an extremely rare lens against a rumored possible lens?

4
Lenses / Re: Is my Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II ok?
« on: October 14, 2014, 07:23:41 PM »
I'm not sure it makes a difference, but your shutter speeds are very slow in the pdf test report.  I try to run FoCal with a shutter speed of at least 1/100th -- just to avoid any camera shake effects, even with a sturdy tripod.  You can manually raise the ISO in the preferences to get a higher shutter speed.  Also, add more light.

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS6D or 7DMKII ?
« on: October 10, 2014, 11:21:00 PM »
For me, heart and head say 6D.  It really hits the spot in features, size, weight, image quality and price.  I love the way it handles and the fact that it has a big sensor.  I don't need the superior AF or other features of the 7D2.  I believe the 7D2 is a little heavier than the 6D, even though it has a smaller sensor.  I might buy the 7D2 if I shot a lot of sports.  Although I might choose the 70D over the 7D2 just based on the big price difference.

6
Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 04:09:33 PM »
I agree, at f/2.8 it would be a monster in size.  An 11 to 24mm zoom is pretty far from a portrait lens anyway. 

7
Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 01:27:42 PM »
Well, this is typical.  People complained that Canon does not have an ultra-super-wide to match or exceed Nikon's.  Some even bought Nikon's and mounted it on their Canon cameras.  Now a Canon version appears, and people complain about the price.  And they complain that it's "only" f/4.  Gotta complain about something.  If it were f/2.8, they'd complain about the increased size and the weight.  And they'd complain about the price even more.  And they'd complain that the IQ would have been better if it had been f/4.  Quality costs.  Unless you *know* what goes into designing and building the lens, you *don't* know what it should cost.  Besides, Canon offers a full range of wide angle options, starting with the EF-S 10-18mm for just $300 — there's something for nearly every budget.  I rarely need anything wider than 24mm, so this lens has little interest for me.   But if I ever needed something like this with really great IQ, it's nice to know it will be available.

8
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 11:37:30 PM »
I just love how when something doesn't turn out all roses for Canon, people turn to the obvious scapegoats: "Oh, it's just paid off competitor employees making all the comments." "Oh, you represent a tiny fraction of the Canon customer base." "Oh, votes are completely irrelevant and don't represent anything."

One person on another forum is going so far as to say that Canon has never crippled AutoISO and that it's a very advanced feature and that even though they left EC out of it on the 6D and crippled the maximum minimum shutter speed for Av mode that it's perfect and that nobody should expect some magically perfect AutoISO.

Never mind that it's a 10 cent feature that takes like 10 lines of code and that a single ML side hacker re-wrote the entire AutoISO module, without any documentation, in just a short time and that other brands have fully functional AutoISO in even low end DSLRs for years.

But the guy insists that Canon has never crippled the feature and that only people who want some miracle version perfected to their standards could make such a claim.  ::)

Wow, that's a thoroughly re-invented and misrepresented version of what was written in that other forum!  It would take too long to correct all of your misstatements there.

actually it's not

If you're referring to my posts, your version is false from top to bottom, with lots of fanciful rephrasing in-between.

Well people can go read it for themselves and decide that for themselves. I will leave it at that.

Oh please, I know what I wrote, and it's nothing like your blatant misrepresentation.  Instead of responding directly to what I wrote in that other forum by posting *in that other forum*, you sneakily rephrased everything in the most ridiculous way here — as if someone had actually written that.  Really, really uncool forum ethics and etiquette.  :(

9
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 05:26:53 PM »
I just love how when something doesn't turn out all roses for Canon, people turn to the obvious scapegoats: "Oh, it's just paid off competitor employees making all the comments." "Oh, you represent a tiny fraction of the Canon customer base." "Oh, votes are completely irrelevant and don't represent anything."

One person on another forum is going so far as to say that Canon has never crippled AutoISO and that it's a very advanced feature and that even though they left EC out of it on the 6D and crippled the maximum minimum shutter speed for Av mode that it's perfect and that nobody should expect some magically perfect AutoISO.

Never mind that it's a 10 cent feature that takes like 10 lines of code and that a single ML side hacker re-wrote the entire AutoISO module, without any documentation, in just a short time and that other brands have fully functional AutoISO in even low end DSLRs for years.

But the guy insists that Canon has never crippled the feature and that only people who want some miracle version perfected to their standards could make such a claim.  ::)

Wow, that's a thoroughly re-invented and misrepresented version of what was written in that other forum!  It would take too long to correct all of your misstatements there.

actually it's not

If you're referring to my posts, your version is false from top to bottom, with lots of fanciful rephrasing in-between. 

10
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 12:24:56 AM »
I just love how when something doesn't turn out all roses for Canon, people turn to the obvious scapegoats: "Oh, it's just paid off competitor employees making all the comments." "Oh, you represent a tiny fraction of the Canon customer base." "Oh, votes are completely irrelevant and don't represent anything."

One person on another forum is going so far as to say that Canon has never crippled AutoISO and that it's a very advanced feature and that even though they left EC out of it on the 6D and crippled the maximum minimum shutter speed for Av mode that it's perfect and that nobody should expect some magically perfect AutoISO.

Never mind that it's a 10 cent feature that takes like 10 lines of code and that a single ML side hacker re-wrote the entire AutoISO module, without any documentation, in just a short time and that other brands have fully functional AutoISO in even low end DSLRs for years.

But the guy insists that Canon has never crippled the feature and that only people who want some miracle version perfected to their standards could make such a claim.  ::)

Wow, that's a thoroughly re-invented and misrepresented version of what was written in that other forum!  It would take too long to correct all of your misstatements there.

11
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 09:34:36 PM »
I have a 6D, ef 15, ef 8-15, Sigma 24-105 Art, ef 70-200 2.8 II, 2 x TC III, and soon 300 2.8 IS II. Will someday have ef 16-35 f/4 and Sigma 50 1.4 Art.

Is FoCal worth the time, effort and money?
http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/why/about-focal/

Will it work with TC's? Are the adjustments made to the body or lens? Are the adjustments specific to each lens?

I'd rather buy the box than download since I upgrade computers pretty frequently.

Opinions appreciated.

There's a box version?  Is there a disadvantage to getting the download?

The Pro version is £69.95, or about $112.50.  I bought it 2 years ago for around $108.  A lot of money, but does the job very well. 

The adjustments are made to the body, not the lens. 

12
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 09:22:36 PM »
I am drone and proud.  :)

F*cking Canon. Stupid enough to tease about their future advertising rather than working full tilt on their sub-par sensors.

And speaking of the "feel in the air around here these days".  That about sums it up.

Lol. I'd rather be a digital rebel ;-) than being unfocused or on canon's payroll. Must feel really shirty right now.

More light! More DR, Sire! :-)

Sorry, no idea what you're saying!

13
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 08:00:27 PM »
I am drone and proud.  :)

F*cking Canon. Stupid enough to tease about their future advertising rather than working full tilt on their sub-par sensors.

And speaking of the "feel in the air around here these days".  That about sums it up.

14
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:51:55 AM »
Indeed, the way you complain is by not buying Canon products and that's why next April, I won't be spending money on Canon but on Sony. Hit them where it hurts: in the pocket. They won't listen to anything else.

While you're complaining, I'm sticking with Canon.  Which other system offers these options? —
8-15 fisheye zoom
17 tilt-shift
24 with IS
28 with IS
35 with IS
best 24-70/2.8
24-70/4 with IS and macro
23mm pancake
40mm pancake
50 1.2
85 1.2
200-400 with built-in 1.4X
flash with built-in radio
superb ergonomics
dual-pixel AF
12-14 fps
world's lightest DSLR

The option list can go from NYC to SFC for all I care.

If I need to do prints at ~3' in size at 300dpi with out of camera images then there is nothing that Canon currently offers that will do that for me, irrespective of the lens. If I need clean shadows then there is nothing that from Canon that I can currently buy to give me that. And so on.

All the options in the world are meaningless to me if the system doesn't offer me the options that *I* need and what I need is better IQ, not a dozen super expensive and heavy lenses that I'll never own or use.

The point is each brand has some advantages, and none of the camera makers please everybody.  Clean shadows are nice, but I've got that with any Canon camera as long as I expose correctly.  I can't get any of the above items from a Sony camera (with fast AF).  Also can't get a great optical viewfinder from Sony, or great battery life from an A7.  So there are plusses and minuses.

15
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:42:43 AM »
With all respect, but this was the dumbest, silliest, least conceived action I have seen from Canon!
They see everybody complaining about missing DR, high MP or Mirrorless, they build up quite a lot of tension (look at this thread, 20 pages of speculations), everyone does expect a revolutionary product even more, but instead of bringing on a development announcement of the mythical 3D or the M3, what do they do?

With respect, anyone expecting a development announcement coming specifically from Canon USA was deluding themselves.

As for the complaining...people with issues should complain where it matters...  Hint: that's not here.  ::) 

Indeed, the way you complain is by not buying Canon products and that's why next April, I won't be spending money on Canon but on Sony. Hit them where it hurts: in the pocket. They won't listen to anything else.

While you're complaining, I'm sticking with Canon.  Which other system offers these options? —
8-15 fisheye zoom
17 tilt-shift
24 with IS
28 with IS
35 with IS
best 24-70/2.8
24-70/4 with IS and macro
23mm pancake
40mm pancake
50 1.2
85 1.2
200-400 with built-in 1.4X
flash with built-in radio
superb ergonomics
dual-pixel AF
12-14 fps
world's lightest DSLR

Sony A7R with Canon lens adapter.

... yes, if you want s-l-o-w autofocus.  Lot's of subjects benefit from s-l-o-w autofocus and putting on adapters, etc. ;)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23