August 28, 2014, 09:25:42 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 - Don Haines

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 203
1

Interesting that you shot the 100-400 mostly from a tripod, except for BIF (if you don't have a gimbal head for your 600 II, get one!).  I think the fraction of 100-400L shooters who shoot birds/wildlife with a tripod is very small. 


Most of the people that I know who have gotten into shooting birds, got there through bird watching. Among serious birders, you see an awful lot of tripods holding the binoculars. It is a small step to go from binoculars on a tripod to cameras on a tripod.... so you see a lot of bird photographers (around here anyway) shooting from tripods.

As to wildlife photographers.... I haven't a clue...

2
What you shoot with depends on what your needs are and what your budget is.

For example, if I have $2500 and want to take pictures of distant birds.... I'm going to grab a 70D and the Tamron 150-600.... If my budget is $25,000 I am going to grab a 1DX, a 600F4, and a 2X teleconverter.

Right, yes, but the point is that FF is clearly better in many more common shooting situations than crop is, which is why the 1-series and the Dx-series are full frame.  If pixel density was king for wildlife/sports, M43 would be ruling that realm but it doesn't.  Its not even a consideration for anyone even somewhat serious about that kind of shooting.  Pro wildlife and sports shooters overwhelmingly prefer full frame cameras and Canon and Nikon both agree that FF is the preferred size for action/sports/wildlife.  There is no real technical reason to prefer a crop over a full frame, all other specs being equal, and the only real life reason to go with a crop is cost.  If the technical advantage really existed, pros would be putting their $12,000 600mm f/4 IS II's + 1.4x TC's on 7D's all day long and throwing their 1DX's back in the bag.  They almost never do, though.
I would go one further.... I would say that technically, FF is clearly better in MOST common situations. I doubt that there is a single person on this forum who would argue otherwise.... the only case, where in technical terms, crop beats FF is for reach limited scenarios under good lighting.

The thing is, there is more than just the technical aspects of sensor size to consider. For the vast majority of people it comes down to what they can afford to spend. It does not matter what the technical specs of a camera are if you can not afford it.

You can't leave glass out of the equation. If I was going out to take bird pictures (tiny birds) and had to pick between a 1DX and the Tamron 150-600 or a T3i with a 600F4, I'd grab the T3i. Too many FF against crop anecdotes involve great glass on the FF and kit lenses on the crop camera.... not a fair comparison but an accurate comparison because if you have the money for a great FF camera, then you usually have L glass hanging off of it, while many with crop cameras do not.

For many people it comes down to size... a SL1 is a heck of a lot easier to carry on a hike than a 1DX, but even here it comes down to personal preference. In my opinion, for going on a week long hike, the best Canon gear you can bring is a 70D, an 17-55, and a 70-200F4. There are better cameras and better lenses.... but they weigh too much!

Of course if I was hiking in the mountains I would quickly change my mind to a 6D with a 24-70F4 and the 70-200F4.... Your subject matter greatly influences the choice of kit too.....

In the end it comes down to what you as an individual want to do and the balance of factors that influences your decision. There is no easy answer.

3
I'm sure this thread is full of bad information all around, and I'm not even going to read the previous posts.

What can one say to that?
I can say "go get an SX-50" :)

4

Stop trying to break down a simple system test to a series of theoretical concepts you think you can prove, system tests don't work like that and you can't supply "evidence" to support your position.

Yes, I did.  You just didn't like it because it was shot on a tripod.

The tripod/handheld argument is a bit of a red herring. How good is the tripod? how well does it control vibrations? And shooting without a tripod depends a lot on the person, how stable their stance is, and are they leaning up against a tree/rock/building/??? for extra stability. I can hand-hold steadier than the typical tripod, but a good tripod is steadier than me.....

and yes, I can shoot the moon at 600mm, handheld, with nothing to lean against and still get a sharp picture...

The point is, that "handheld" is a nebulous standard that can never be defined, so therefore it can never be a controlled variable in tests...

Fair point Don, but mine is that you can't handhold without some impact in resolution and that impact, even though it is to both systems, will make any small resolution differences even smaller.

also a fair point.....

May I suggest that we let this discussion drop for a while and over the weekend go take some pictures of the moon and carry this on in a new thread?

I propose that those interested get their hands on a FF camera and a crop camera of approximately the same vintage.. (6D and 70D would make a good pair, 5D2 and 7D/60D would make a good pair) and go out and take some moon pictures with the same lens/ISO/aperture/shutter speed and scale them up to the same size... Get 4 pictures and post the results... FF tripod, FF handheld, crop on tripod, and crop on handheld.... and for entertainment's sake, add in any other camera you wish to try.....


Great idea, though I'd suggest anything but the moon unless your main normal focal length limited subject is the moon. I was thinking soft toys or birds feathers.
I was thinking moon because everyone will be at the same distance and shooting the same subject with the same light levels.... the hallmark of all successful experiments is to control the variables...

5

Stop trying to break down a simple system test to a series of theoretical concepts you think you can prove, system tests don't work like that and you can't supply "evidence" to support your position.

Yes, I did.  You just didn't like it because it was shot on a tripod.

The tripod/handheld argument is a bit of a red herring. How good is the tripod? how well does it control vibrations? And shooting without a tripod depends a lot on the person, how stable their stance is, and are they leaning up against a tree/rock/building/??? for extra stability. I can hand-hold steadier than the typical tripod, but a good tripod is steadier than me.....

and yes, I can shoot the moon at 600mm, handheld, with nothing to lean against and still get a sharp picture...

The point is, that "handheld" is a nebulous standard that can never be defined, so therefore it can never be a controlled variable in tests...

Fair point Don, but mine is that you can't handhold without some impact in resolution and that impact, even though it is to both systems, will make any small resolution differences even smaller.

also a fair point.....

May I suggest that we let this discussion drop for a while and over the weekend go take some pictures of the moon and carry this on in a new thread?

I propose that those interested get their hands on a FF camera and a crop camera of approximately the same vintage.. (6D and 70D would make a good pair, 5D2 and 7D/60D would make a good pair) and go out and take some moon pictures with the same lens/ISO/aperture/shutter speed and scale them up to the same size... Get 4 pictures and post the results... FF tripod, FF handheld, crop on tripod, and crop on handheld.... and for entertainment's sake, add in any other camera you wish to try.....

6

Stop trying to break down a simple system test to a series of theoretical concepts you think you can prove, system tests don't work like that and you can't supply "evidence" to support your position.

Yes, I did.  You just didn't like it because it was shot on a tripod.

The tripod/handheld argument is a bit of a red herring. How good is the tripod? how well does it control vibrations? And shooting without a tripod depends a lot on the person, how stable their stance is, and are they leaning up against a tree/rock/building/??? for extra stability. I can hand-hold steadier than the typical tripod, but a good tripod is steadier than me.....

and yes, I can shoot the moon at 600mm, handheld, with nothing to lean against and still get a sharp picture...

The point is, that "handheld" is a nebulous standard that can never be defined, so therefore it can never be a controlled variable in tests...

7
Get a GoPro, set it up to do time lapse, and leave it on the bottom of the pool...

Is a time lapse GoPro how you post those cool cat pictures Don?   ;D   Thanks!  I have a buddy who has a GoPro that I can probably borrow.  I'll have to learn more about it.

It's funny you mention underwater.  I was considering a more complicated approach of putting my scuba cert to use and laying on the bottom of the pool during practice with various gear I already have.  Canon D10, D20 and a S95 in a dedicated underwater case.  I wish, wish, wish that Canon would make intervalometers a standard feature on all their cameras like Nikon and Pentax have for years!!  Aaargh!   >:(

Anyway, thanks for the tip and please keep 'em coming!   :D
I have an IPad app and a special cable so I can use my 60D as an intervalometer.... but no way am I going to try that at the bottom of a pool.... although it would clear the way to getting a 7D2 and a new tablet :)

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Pricing for the 7D Replacement
« on: Today at 02:03:46 PM »
What is this, The Price is Right?
The one who comes closest without going over wins the right to say "HAW HAW! I told you so".....

9
Hi all,

I'm starting my forth year of swim team shooting for my sons' high school.  Up to now I've felt like I was on a learning curve as my gear/technique improved, esp the first year.  Now I'm looking for ideas to be more creative and keep it interesting.  The venues are the same and basically repeat every year.  The rare events that are held outdoors are well lit and colorful.  Unfortunately, the majority of the pics happen inside poorly lit natatoriums.  So there is always plenty of post processing happening to fix WB, lighting, clarity, shadows, etc.  Any ideas on post processing improvements is also welcome.

I have shot the last 3 years with a 60D and then a 5D3.  The lenses improved as I acquired better gear.  Now I have a 70-200/2.8L-II and a 70-300L and I have used a Kenko 1.4 TC with both on the 5D3.  I now also have a 70D to try out.  So I'm trying to also decide what lens combos I'll do now.  I'm considering putting the 5D3 on backup status (hanging left side) with a 24-105 for up close and using the 70D (faster fps, more reach) as the primary with the 70-300L or the 70-200/2.8-II with/without TC.

To summarize, I'm looking for composition and shot ideas, post enhancement tips and I'm looking for thoughts on lens+body combos.

Here is a link to all the swim pics I've posted from the last 3 years.  That should keep you busy for a while!   :P  (And THANK YOU!)   :D

http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/lamarswim

Get a GoPro, set it up to do time lapse, and leave it on the bottom of the pool...

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Pricing for the 7D Replacement
« on: Today at 01:52:54 PM »
And my prediction is $2,349.95.... but be warned.... I haven't guessed one right yet :)

11
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: Today at 01:51:00 PM »
Malachite Kingfisher, a small bird but great to see.
Kingfishers are so hard to get close enough to for photography.... Congratulations on the shot!

12
Weirdly, despite the overwhelming evidence of crop superiority presented in this thread, both Canon and Nikon insist on putting full frame sensors in their pro level action/sports/wildlife cameras.  Hmmm.
One is superior under one set of conditions, the other is superior under another set of conditions, and for other conditions it is a wash.

The general rules of thumb are if you go wide, get FF.... if you go long, go APS-C, unless you are going long in poor light where the increased ISO capacity of FF cancels out the higher density sampling of APS-C... but only in the limits of what you can afford.

What you shoot with depends on what your needs are and what your budget is.

For example, if I have $2500 and want to take pictures of distant birds.... I'm going to grab a 70D and the Tamron 150-600.... If my budget is $25,000 I am going to grab a 1DX, a 600F4, and a 2X teleconverter.

13

Do you see a detail difference between these two?  They were shot with the same aperture diameter.


What did you shoot the second image with... and what settings?

14
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: Today at 10:40:39 AM »
... and improved ISO (5d MKIII or better)

I do believe in Santa Claus. I do I do I do.  And flying reindeer.  And rainbow-pooping unicorns.  Any of those are more likely to be real than an APS-C sensor that's as good or better than the 5DIII at high ISO. 

In a fight between physics and fantasy, my money is on physics.   8)
and Neuro moves his hand from left to right, saying "These aren't the droids sensors you're looking for"

15
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II & Photokina
« on: Today at 10:01:53 AM »
... and improved ISO (5d MKIII or better)

I do believe in Santa Claus. I do I do I do.  And flying reindeer.  And rainbow-pooping unicorns.  Any of those are more likely to be real than an APS-C sensor that's as good or better than the 5DIII at high ISO. 

In a fight between physics and fantasy, my money is on physics.   8)
and you loose!

I'll take the photo scanner from BladeRunner (it can zoom in and in and in and read things off of the reflection of something that was around a corner) over the best current sensor any day..... and the main screen on the enterprise beats any 4K display for sale at Best Buy :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 203