1
Lenses / Re: Andy Rouse Reviews the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: May 14, 2013, 09:04:58 AM »
A lovely review. Worth of reading even if you never buy one of these toys.
May 20, 2013, 12:43:49 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.
2
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM
« on: April 12, 2013, 10:37:25 AM »
As red ring is not copyrighted (look at Samyang), Sigma should definitely put one on this lens so it sells well 
3
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the EOS T5i
« on: March 24, 2013, 12:14:52 PM »
maybe rebel 5 is a result of miscommunication? maybe DSLR department don't know Canon has developed digic 6 and can provide normal continuous AF during video with high ISO and large DR?
Canon is too big...
Canon is too big...
4
Portrait / Re: Fashion Girl picture test with Dynalite Ringflash 3200w
« on: March 11, 2013, 04:05:24 PM »
even good flash is not enough for a good shot
5
Technical Support / Re: Connect DSLR to PC/Projector wireless
« on: February 12, 2013, 08:31:49 AM »
I have a Wireless File Transmitter grip for 5Dm2 and it's such a pain to make it work with Lightroom, so I quit. And it's very slow for transmitting raw's even with my no so fast shutting tempo, so I use it in LAN mode with EOS utility. And it's an expensive stuff too. And I don't believe CF with WiFi will make your life better.
Conclusion: bad luck. 5Dm2 is too old for using it like this.
Conclusion: bad luck. 5Dm2 is too old for using it like this.
6
EOS Bodies / Re: An EOS 3D Mention [CR1]
« on: December 28, 2012, 01:26:34 PM »
if they say "end of 2013", then at the end of 2014 may be we see specs and in 2015 I'll buy one 
7
Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 70-200??
« on: November 21, 2012, 03:27:41 AM »
these are two totally different lenses. how can you compare them?
8
EOS Bodies / Re: Official DXOMark Sensor Score for the EOS-1D X
« on: October 31, 2012, 11:43:28 AM »
guys, is anyone disappointed with score would like to exchange your 1dx or hassy to some superior camera like nikon d7100? with additional charge from your side, of course 
9
Lenses / Re: Canon 50 F1.4 VS 50 F1.2L Lenses
« on: October 30, 2012, 05:47:33 AM »
Sigma 1.4 is an ugly piece of CA $hit. The only way it's better is a bokeh. In case it focuses at the right point 
Exchanged mine Sigma 1.4 to Canon 1.4 and happy with that.
Exchanged mine Sigma 1.4 to Canon 1.4 and happy with that.
10
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS [CR1]
« on: October 29, 2012, 01:51:56 PM »Well, it's true and false in the same time. on 1:1 imagination - true. the smaller pixel you have, the more details you can capture. and details mean movements as well.how MP are connected to SS?
MPs are not really connected, but pixel size is, and in general, more MP means smaller pixels. A given amount of shake means a specific amount of movement in terms of arc-seconds. With smaller pixels, a given amount of movement covers more pixels on the sensor, which translates to more blur. So, smaller pixels means you need an even faster shutter speed to compensate for camera shake. 1/FL is a film rule. Even 1/1.6xFL is not enough on a high MP, small pixel sensor.
but
up to A4 prints, I guess, no one really mentions it
so downscaling, let's say 24Mp to 8Mp gives the same result as originally captured image with 8Mp.
11
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS [CR1]
« on: October 29, 2012, 12:00:31 PM »how MP are connected to SS?I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?
Introducing this lens together with high MP body will force you to use higher shutter speeds at the same time even for static objects... or simply leaving IS on
12
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS [CR1]
« on: October 29, 2012, 11:59:22 AM »well, as I said, this possibility exists only for non-moving subjectsI keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?
It's about having the flexibility to go slow when there's a need. The two new wide primes with IS - I wonder if the people using them turn IS off? I'm betting no...
13
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS [CR1]
« on: October 29, 2012, 11:53:49 AM »
I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?
14
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 650D Results on DxOMark
« on: October 08, 2012, 08:22:39 AM »I understand their scores for what they are, and more importantly, what they are not. So...I don't care.+1
15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Frankenstein'd EOS 5D Mark II takes Leica M Lenses
« on: October 08, 2012, 05:49:01 AM »The M9 sensor is manufactured by Kodak and not too impressive if you look here:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/DxOMark-review-for-the-Leica-M9
Leica is a niche product, and they have a lot of elitist followers to the brand name. In that sense the true technical ability is secondary to the product image. Such is the world of marketing.
Hey, stop posting DxO crap here. These Nikon fanboys don't like anything besides Nikon. Hassys, Pentax MF, Leicas and etc is an "expensive $t" according to DxO
