July 23, 2014, 10:23:00 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 - bdunbar79

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 171
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Where do you buy 5D Mark iii?
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:45:23 PM »
My sincere advice to you is to wait.  If you are cutting it this close with budget, just put some money away and save up to get a $3399 with $200 rebate deal.  This way it's only $3199 and you get a full USA warranty.  If you have to wait several more months than I'd do that.

2
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 04:34:18 PM »
I'd like the chime in with a neutral stance.  I owned the 50L for over a year and also own the nifty fifty and the 50 f/1.4.  Love all 3 of them.  The 50L was brilliant from f/1.2 to f/2.8.  Absolutely brilliant.  After f/2.8 though, it was the worst of the 3 lenses.  In fact, at f/5.6, the 1.4 lens looked much better and was much sharper and if I were shooting stopped down I always went for the 1.4.  Now of course I go for the 24-70 f/2.8L II because I don't shoot wider than f/2.8 anymore.

Should I take up photography again at razor thin DOF then I'd definitely consider buying it again, probably refurbished.     

Depends on which aperture for sure on this issue.  This is a weird case where the 50L is good at one aperture range while the 1.4 is best at the other.  Odd situation.

3
Lenses / Re: New Canon 16-35 f4 IS not listed in CPS directory
« on: July 21, 2014, 11:50:08 AM »
The lens is on my amazon wish list.  Feel free to log in and purchase it for me :)

4
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 20, 2014, 11:43:27 AM »
Unfortunately I never really had a great comparison.  Most of my 50L shooting days were before the 5D3 was out, and so most of them were done on a 1Ds3.  I got the 5D3 and that was consequently about the time I sold the 50L and began shooting with the 50 f/1.4 a lot more.  Oh well...

5
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 20, 2014, 10:48:22 AM »
PBD,

I agree with your point in the other thread.  What is truly interesting, and there are tons of people claiming it has a unique look vs. the other lenses and yet NO ONE has risen to the challenge and identified which lens for which photo.  In the other thread one person claimed that there was "clearly a unique look of color and contrast that sets it apart from the other 50mm lenses" yet that person had no attempt or answer of identifying which photo was taken with which lens. 

Very interesting.

I think it's the internal sense of justification of purchasing something.  When I buy something for $1699 or whatever I need to internally validate the purchase and I need to hear from others that yes, it was worth it, especially if I'm insecure about the purchase.  It's the same as recommending gear.  People tend to think that the gear they bought is best for everyone else, because it was best for them.  I did buy the 50L and used it for over a year and was trying to pry at my photos to justify it.  I admitted that I couldn't, sold it, and kept the 50 f/1.4. 

6
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« on: July 19, 2014, 05:19:13 PM »
I owned and shot with the 50L extensively for over a year. 

It is a specialty lens specifically designed to be used primarily from f/1.2 to f/2.8.  Narrower than f/2.8 there are better 50mm lenses, namely the 50 f/1.4.  I didn't shoot wider than f/2.8 enough so I sold it and kept the 50 f/1.4.  TO ME, it wasn't worth the $1699 vs. $399 price difference.

If you love f/1.2 to f/2.2ish and you love the 50mm focal length, then I'd say it would be worth it.  If not, no way.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 19, 2014, 11:07:19 AM »
If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

Interesting that Art Morris (of who's website your URL is seemingly a parody, and who actually shoots birds instead of posed pooches) uses the 1D X and 5DIII with Canon 500/600 II lenses and delivers impressive images. 

I must say, your opinion smells like birds that fart.  :-X

  Non sense.  I personally do not like his pics that much, but many do.  Many others that use Canon equipment I like much better.
Just went to your site. Looks like you use the 1dx and 5D III & 600 II.  Birding photography, you are not very good IMO. Very poor.  Jrista, on the other hand is very talented IMO. But, I don't have to agree with him for sure.

  Great hobby though.... all the best.

 

Good job man.  You should be proud of yourself.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 18, 2014, 09:26:36 PM »
Technique beats gear EVERY TIME?

You're telling this to someone who shot in dark gyms with a 1D4 and a 7D then switched to a 1Dx.  Technique hardly beats gear every time.  I highly doubt my "technique" increased my keeper rate by about 150% and gave me tons and tons of clean images at ISO 6400.

I'd rather shoot NCAA D2 basketball with a 1Dx and 70-200 f/2.8L II IS combo than an NBA game with a 7D, that is for absolute sure.

I swear sometimes you guys just argue to argue.
point taken.... how about technique USUALLY beats gear :)

 :P

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 18, 2014, 09:04:11 PM »
Technique beats gear EVERY TIME?

You're telling this to someone who shot in dark gyms with a 1D4 and a 7D then switched to a 1Dx.  Technique hardly beats gear every time.  I highly doubt my "technique" increased my keeper rate by about 150% and gave me tons and tons of clean images at ISO 6400.

I'd rather shoot NCAA D2 basketball with a 1Dx and 70-200 f/2.8L II IS combo than an NBA game with a 7D, that is for absolute sure.

I swear sometimes you guys just argue to argue.

10
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 18, 2014, 03:13:36 PM »
Sorry, it is reserved for f/1.2 and faster lenses only ;)

Sorry, mythbuster alert.

Since when was the Sigma 50 being incapable of f/1.2 a myth?

He was making the point (successfully, I might add) that most can't tell the difference between the Canon 1.2 and most other 50mm lenses in just about all real-world and practical situations. All that "wow it's just so different" bla bla is usually post-hoc judgement once a person knows what lens created the image.

Yes, this.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 18, 2014, 03:12:36 PM »
How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate.  The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.


   I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me.
  After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

 If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html


Good thing in your post you put "IMO."

12
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: July 17, 2014, 06:25:50 PM »
I'm not great at this type of photography, but in the summer there are 1.  No sports and 2.  Lots of thunderstorms followed by sun.

13
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS -- Reviews are trickling in...
« on: July 17, 2014, 08:40:51 AM »

IS data re-run with Neuro's advice in mind.  A solid 2s run-up with the IS was used for each shot.

New IS data below.  Same non-IS data as before.

1) IS OFF at 16mm, I netted:

  • 3 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure

2) IS ON at 16mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure
  • 4 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/2s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1s exposure (two borderline ones were called 0.5 each)

3) IS OFF at 35mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/60s exposure
  • 4 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/30s exposure
  • 1 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure

4) IS ON at 35mm, I netted:

  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/60s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/30s exposure
  • 5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/15s exposure
  • 4.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/8s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)
  • 3.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/4s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)
  • 2 out of 5 sharp shots at 1/2s exposure
  • 0.5 out of 5 sharp shots at 1s exposure (a borderline one was called 0.5)

I'll be damned.  Neuro's trick shows 16mm IS is more like a 2 stop benefit, but the 35mm data only slightly improved (still around 3 stops).

Neuro, is this true with all IS lenses?  That might imply sports guys with long glass never net as sharp a shot with the first frame in a long burst that they might get with the rest...

- A

I use long superteles and shoot sports and I never use IS because my keeper rate is lower than with it off...exactly from what neuro stated.  I didn't really think the 300 f/2.8L II IS speed or mode 3 helped vs. the version I lens either.  IS certainly has it's places though, for sure.

14
I find the 6D to have better focus than any crop camera (and I've owned them all). If the 6D can nail bighorn rams unpredictably smashing heads, it can keep up with your kids and track race cars.

Have you tried it on kids?  It couldn't keep up with mine... 

Like the 5DII before it, it does a decent job at tracking subjects moving across the frame, like the bighorns in your excellent image.  Where the 5DII and 6D fail are when a subject is moving toward or away from the camera (away is worse).   I just processed a burst sequence taken with my 1D X and 70-200/2.8L IS II of a gymnast running straight at me and vaulting from springboard onto the pad (which I was standing behind).  All 26 shots in the burst are in crisp focus (lighting was pretty poor, shots were at 1/800 s, f/3.2, ISO 12800).  The 7D would have gotten many of the shots in focus (but they'd have been unusable due to the ISO noise or the motion blur with a slower shutter speed.  The noise from the 6D would have been acceptable, but after the first couple of frames, most of the shots would have been backfocused (and I'd have had far fewer shots, of course).

I found this to be true in diving and in long jump/triple jump.  If I put zone AF on the 1Dx/70-200 f/2.8L II IS combo, it will track the diver from the jump, up in the air, and all the way down into the water.  In long jump, I can get the entire sequence in sharp focus as the jumper springs off the runway and all the way into the sand, even at f/3.2.  I am not aware of any other Canon camera that can do that, because I tried it with the 7D, 1D4, and 5D3, and none of them could do it as well.  I sold my 7D, 1D4, and 5D3, and bought another 1Dx as a result.

15
What I need is longer lens. :D

I don't do shallow DOF, and my subject are often on the floor, on furniture or against the backdrop, so...

I know I want one of these two, and I hate changing lenses so 135 and 200 were not an option.
If you're mostly doing studio work without needing shallow DOF, I'd definitely go with the f/4 IS.  It's a great lens and the size, weight, and cost savings are well worth the aperture trade off, especially if you don't NEED f/2.8.  Besides, if you watched the Olympics in Sochi, you might have noticed that nearly all of the indoor sports shooters were using the 200-400 1.4x, which is f/4.  Yes, they were using 1D Xs, but just four years ago, they were all using 200 f/2s or the 300 & 400 f/2.8s, so fast lenses aren't what they used to be.

I'm going to point out something here.  Big events like the Olympics and NCAA Div. I basketball are very, very well lit.  Even the lighting at bigger schools in non-basketball sports is awful.  Shoot anything less and f/4 believe me, will NOT cut it.  Most of the shooters on here will not likely be at these bigger events.  I shot volleyball at St. John Arena at Ohio State (MSU vs. OSU) and most of my exposures were 1/500s, f/2.8, ISO 5000-6400.  I wouldn't have shot that event had I not had a 1Dx AND the 2.8 zoom lens.  Just walk across campus to the Schottenstein Center for a basketball game and you're doing 1/500s, f/2.8, ISO 1250-1600 easily. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 171