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.
The question is, why is the 5D III so superior to the 6D in this area? Is it processing power or something else?
Thanks,
Drew
Regarding switching between servo and one-shot, what is the appeal or benefit of the one-shot mode, and the switch between the two settings ?
I have always set my bodies to servo, and when the subject is motionless it seems to work fine.
Thanks
Wow, but let's face it. Him buying that is similar to most of us lot buying a coffee! It won't even have caused a bump in his financial statements. Wonder what he uses it for?!
Just got back from my daughter's wedding in Brooklyn and so glad I took my camera! She told me she wanted me to just relax and enjoy the fun, but I took the camera and got shots of the family events and pre-ceremony, when the paid photographer wasn't there. In addition, I got the shots of her coming down the aisle, which he missed completely. Said his card filled up (persnally I always change cards immediately before the ceremony). He had a 5d2 and a 5dc, so I'm not sure why he didn't switch to camera 2, perhaps it was too tight due to a telephoto lens.
I think the 18-135 is the better lens. It's the new version that has the STM that allows for silent auto focusing during video. Also it covers a nice range without having to change lens. As a newbie its better to use one lens so you get used to it and learn. Then as u get better upgrade or buy new leses. The 18-55 and that other plastic thing are pure garbage. Most kit lenses for aps-c cameras are!
I wouldn't say the 18-55 is garbage. It's quite sharp and has IS, obviously a bit slow, but good for the price.
Here's one I took with that lens:
Thank you so much for your kind reply! That shot looks absolutely gorgeous, and now I'm torn again between the two sets
I think the 18-135 is the better lens. It's the new version that has the STM that allows for silent auto focusing during video. Also it covers a nice range without having to change lens. As a newbie its better to use one lens so you get used to it and learn. Then as u get better upgrade or buy new leses. The 18-55 and that other plastic thing are pure garbage. Most kit lenses for aps-c cameras are!
I currently own a T2i as well and do lots of wildlife shooting, so I did quite a lot of research, my advise don't get a 5dm2 as the autofocus is just shitty, no improvement over the t2i, so depending on your budget i'd say go for a 5d mark iii, or IF you don't mind waiting another half a year or longer wait for the 7d mark ii to be released. Another option would be to get a 7D, but it has the same sensor as the t2i which wouldn't be much of an improvement than the obvious AF and FPS.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/CANON-EOS-650D-Strictly-Status-Quo/Comparisons
Enjoy!
Question : I am mostly ignorant about video matters, can someone explain the interest of a 1DC camera versus a C300/C500 dedicated video camera?
No irony here, just an honest question, I don't understand the advantage of a DSLR for pro video.
You guys do realize your complaining about 1/20th of a second difference between the D600 and 6D, right? That is 0.0005 seconds difference! It really doesn't matter that much, and given the design of the 6D as a low-light camera capable of ISO 25600 and AF at EV -3, it matters even less. You could bump up the ISO by a third of a stop for pretty much ANY exposure and compensate for the difference if you really, really needed to. Now, if it was a 1/60th sync speed vs. a 1/200th sync speed, that would matter, but thats not the case.
please stop talking about things you don´t understand!!
ISO affects FLASH and AMBIENT exposure.. it´s obvious you don´t know what strobist are talking about.
yes 1/200s was already bad... doesn´t change a thing that the trend to make it even worse is a bad sign.
I think jrista makes a fair point. I agree that 1/200 s X-sync isn't good, and 1/180 s is worse. But the difference is only 1/6-stop.
OTOH, despite the ISO improvement in recent sensors which would allow you to more than make up that 1/6-stop in terms of noise performance, that's not going to help stop action. That 1/6-stop is well and truly gone.
Aye. I don't disagree that 1/200th isn't great, and neither is 1/250th. But since none of the entry-level full-frame cameras have a 1/500th second sync speed, it doesn't make much sense to complain about a sixth of a stop worth of difference. I wasn't thinking that bumping ISO would help stop action...the flash pulse is for that. I was only thinking if you wanted to compensate for the loss of exposure, you could easily bump ISO without worry on a camera capable of native ISO 25600.
That 1/6th of a stop manifests itself to the budget strobist in the form of additional power required of the strobe itself, to compensate for the smaller aperture necessary to properly expose the background on account of the slower shutter speed. Thats why strobists like high sync speeds and are often found complaining about little things like fractions of a stop.
no its not much, but it will eat more batteries, affect re-cycle time, etc and is more relevant to those using small speedlites, especially outdoors, as upposed to those packing around larger strobes and battery packs on location.
I think your missing my point. Instead of narrowing aperture and reducing shutter speed to compensate for ambient exposure...couldn't you keep flash power, aperture, and shutter the same and boost ISO? That was what Canon-F1 was freaking out about...increasing ISO affects BOTH flash and shutter speed. Keep flash power the same (or reduce it), use the same shutter and aperture, and bump ISO. Does that not solve the problem? Or is everyone here still thinking that high ISO is evil because it introduces noise...which would not be exactly true with the new cameras from Canon.
