July 30, 2014, 07:57:58 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 - hendrik-sg

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Lenses / Re: Safari 300 2.8 Mkii or 200-400 1.4x
« on: July 17, 2014, 09:56:38 AM »
We were in SA on safari, together with my wife. we had a 300f2.8ISi and 70-200f4IS and a 2xiii Extender on 5dii and 50d

in "good light mode" we had the 300mm on the 50d normally with extender, in the evening, we removed first the extender, next changed the 300mm on the 5dii and maybe the 50d to a fast 50mm.

this, because:

- a crop camera is the better extender than a real extender
- the big whites are so bitingly sharp, that their resolution is enough for the spaller pixels on the crop sensor
- with 2 cams one gets different perspectives at the same time.

For the (in my opinion) way overpriced 200-400 you can probably take a 2nd person on the trip, who does the 2nd perspective (and helps to carry all the stuff).

If money doesnt matter, and if y can carry the weight of the 200-400, i would take a 400f2.8 instead, with the same strategy, and would use a 1 crop and one FF camera instead of 2FF

EOS-M / Re: Cheap 400mm advice
« on: July 02, 2014, 04:32:07 AM »
Maybe not the direct answer to your question, but:

- For best moon pics, you would need much more focal lenght than 400mm eqiv
- you need best athmospheric consitions possibe
- you should do stacking to minimize athmospheric blur
- The moon stays the same, means you need one good opportunity, and you wont get it better anymore

So my suggestion:

- Rent the longest lens you can afford for some days, ad a 2x converter, add a matching tripod and head
- go to a better athmospheric place than your town
- inform how to do the stacking of the biggest amount of pics y can take,and how you have to take them (i dont know)

means for total 1000$ you should get breathtaking pictures of the moon, depending on where you live and what lens you can afford to rent

I would not buy any equipment for shootig the moon only.....

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Interested in Hasselblad?
« on: May 12, 2014, 11:43:44 AM »
Let the ill-informed, irrational whining begin.

Hasselblad is the narrowest of niche market players. They've diminished their most valuable asset – their brand name – by releasing the laughingstock of the digital camera market.

As a consumer, it would be bad enough for Canon to throw good money down the medium format rat hole developing their own product. To buy a failing company in a shrinking market would be ridiculous.

Canon and Nikon have had well over 50 years to research and consider the medium format market. During the film era, it would have been cheaper and easier to develop a medium format camera and the market segment was much larger. Yet, neither company did so. Today, the market has shrunk and the cost of entry has risen.

This isn't about whether or not Canon (or Nikon) are innovative. Innovation has nothing to do with this decision, it's just common sense.

Thanks for you unfocused reply. Some economic principles are to be discussed:

- The market leader delivers acceptable price and quality, but is never the best
- A Label and its reputation has a value and can be sold, either to sb else or it can be milked until its no longer there

Canon is the marked leader, thats unquestioned. For sure pictures and videos can be taken by ther equipment, but either has their equipment the best specs or performance nor is it the cheapest (50L vs 50 1.4 Sigma). Further its not the most innovative, Examples are the Sig 18-35 zoom, again the 50mm Sigma which is the first affordable non Gauss 50mm, or the much better exmor sensors in the Sony / Nikon bodies. In sensor performance Canon is the worst of the bigger players now, why? Just because the smaller players have to be innovative against the market leader and Canon does not.

As for the label value, in my opinion Canon is milking their label. People do change brand only under really high pressure, because of habit and for high changing costs. Newcomer buy what they see most frequent, and thats Canon of course. To compare with cars, end of nineties, mercedes sold their high quality image by building a new generation of E-Classes in much lower quality, sold "Opel" quality for Mercedes prices. They needed expensive warranty efforts to partly earn back their reputation, and are still not finished until now. Audi for comparision worked 20 years to earn their quality reputation and label value, to reach same prestige levelas BMW and Mercedes have.

The danger for Canon is, that by their non-innovation, high price politics they sell their label now. Whats later, when high end users do the swich in large numbers and newcomers buy whats said to be better it might be quite late. They may shrink as the complete medium format world has by not going digital in time. This may happen, when EF-mount is getting old and new trends are overslept.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Interested in Hasselblad?
« on: May 12, 2014, 10:06:16 AM »
Canon doesnt need any innovation at all, just marketing. They can llsensors with technology from 200x and be market leader with them.

Their bosses will get nice boni, and share holders nice divident. Developpement and innovation are a waste of money :)

Lenses / Re: Stacked TCs - 1.4x III + 12mm Extension Tube + 2x III
« on: May 07, 2014, 10:59:31 AM »
The best extender is a crop camera. It gives y deeper FOV (if y want), and by more pixel desity y get more magnification, without accepting IQ reduction by additional glass.

I have expierience with the old 300 2.8 IS, a 2xiii and a 50d. With this combination already its really difficult to overcome camera (and tripod and lens foot) shake, means its better than cropping only under ideal conditions.

Other than from a technical point of view, i dont see much use for a manual Focus, 840mmm f8.0 combination on a crop camera, maybe exept under very bright lighting conditions. Normally, cropping will give better Image quality.

For the frequently seen moon shots, with normal techique athmospheric limitations may be more relevant than all other sources of IQ reduction.

Lenses / Re: New TS-E Lenses for Photokina [CR2]
« on: April 21, 2014, 09:49:30 AM »
Unique feature?

Maybe a uniquely high price?

EOS Bodies / Re: New DSLR and PowerShots in May [CR2]
« on: April 02, 2014, 12:26:50 PM »
maybe there will be a software upgrade announcement for the current 7d. Maybe this amazing upgrade will cost 300$ and give us the security, that no 3rd party batteries are used.... as a special goody it may contain a lens correction profile for the 18-55 STM lens

The higly anticipated lens announcement may be an 18-55 ii STM lens, which optically matches the layout of the software upgrade, with a perfectly weather sealed AF swich, printed on the lens in premium white and cant be switched unwanted

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 11-24mm f/4 Lens
« on: January 25, 2014, 04:06:24 PM »
compared with the 17mm TS 11mm FF seems possible. if the image from the TS would be compresst to normal FF Image circle, there would result a 11mm 2.8 lens. Considering, that this patant is a zoom 11mm f 4.0 seems believable

comparing the angle of view mentioned in the patent with the calculator linked here, it seems to be a Full Frame lens. Not clear is, why the image high is less than 24mm, wich would be the hight of a FF sensor.

Lenses / Re: 7D user - advice on my best option for a 'go to' lens?
« on: January 19, 2014, 09:10:20 AM »
If you have 1000$ to spend, you can get a 17-55 or a 24-105 and use them for your 7d.

Or you could sell the 7d and buy a 6d & 24-105 kit for more less the same price.

Only advantages of your 7d are speed and better AF. Your current 17-85 is f5.6 at the long end, and the new lens is f4.0. A 6d gives you about 1.5 stops of low light capability and shallow depth of field, and the lens gives you another one at the long end.

if you want to change your 50 1.8 you can replace it by a 85 1.8 for about the same Price, and this one is said to be really good (i dont own it).

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcement Talk Begins
« on: January 03, 2014, 11:35:21 AM »
we are used to announcements from other companies only.

So maybe we will se an exiting price increase announceemnt, this will immediately push the sales of "classic" canon products. ;D

Technical Support / Re: Best Possible IQ
« on: December 11, 2013, 05:27:42 AM »
I dont want to offend you, but.....

If i would need (and pay for) this shot i wouldnt give the order to someone woh has to ask in a forum about equipment.

If i take my skills/equipment as a comparision, i would say most bad pics are bad as a result of lacking skill not because of bad equipment.

but anyway two thoughts:

- are the demands so high because the customer knows that a normal FF Shot is not enough, or is this your first order and you want to do your best?
- if there are trees, water, boats or anything other that might move, stitching might be difficult if there is any wind at all.
- maybe do testshot (of anything else) and practise the workflow with the guy who does the PP, costs less than renting MF equipment

For me using unknown equipment (recommended by forum useres) would be a no go, if you do any mistakes, bad settings etc, the results may be worse than with your normal equipment. Example: give a 85ii 1.2 and a 5diii to a rebel shooter who shoots with kit zoom in automatic mode and ask him to take portraits/party pics in low light. I would bet hard money that he will get not even one sharp shot.

Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC
« on: December 10, 2013, 04:21:44 AM »
The amount of detail this lens renders is stunning:

Lots of detail, but I wanted to see a larger version!

Sorry - this one has commercial value, so I don't give away the big ones.

I'm the same way with most of mine.

Don't blame you.  I've managed to make photography somewhat profitable in a day where photography has been cheapened, but it is a fight.

Well you're ahead of me there obviously, but I hope to learn more how to go about it.  Because I have some amazing prints ready to sell right now...at least in my opinion and lots of folks who saw them, but chose to buy hand made jewelry and the like, instead!

At one point I decided not to worry about the commercial side of things and simply enjoy my photography. To me it is strictly a hobby and fortunately my job pays well enough to be a little bit creative on the equipment side of things as well, but I'm keeping it reasonable ;) I admire those who can make a profit out of photography, especially in these timen. Seems like a lot of hard work to me.

Is your regular job not hard work?  If I was making 6 or 7 figures from other types of work, I would still try to sell my photography.  I'd also like to get into film production.  But yes, photography itself has been radically cheapened and diluted in this day and age, and basically the world has 6 billion "photographers".  Almost seems like a billion of them are better than I am, or at least sell more of their work than I do!

My regular job is hard work, so I like to spend my free time not worrying about making money. If there were an easy way to make money from my photography, I might consider it but looking back at the time I was a student (and heavily into mountainbiking), working part-time in a bikeshop killed a lot of the enthusiasm I had for bicycle gear and in the end, cycling itself.

That's a shame, however maybe your chances of getting testicular cancer are less because of it?

There's no relation between cycling and testicular cancer.

Lance Armstrong would beg to differ.

Haha we're straying far off topic, but if this were true, then a lot more people would have it.

Not necessarily.  Anyway I think I'd like to buy a mountain bike after I sell my dirtbike!  I don't foresee buying another dirtbike any time soon, but would still like to ride on two wheels offroad, while trying to stay in shape.  I would not ride it all the time, though.  Also don't want to spend a lot of money.

Can't we go ONE day without talking about testicular cancer......

To make this interesting thread a little mor interesting: no we can't, at least not today. But to be on  topic, its a luck we can't get testicle cancer from buying cycling (or camera) gear, otherwise this forum would have to die. So lets buy something nice for christmas, and enjoy not to carry a to heavy wallet :)

Canon General / Re: TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:32:38 AM »
sensors are near their theoretical limit for efficiency,

Would love to educate myself on this. Pls can you guide me where I can read up on this statement. Thx.

There have been a number of articles posted on the subject.  ideally, a photosite that could read out the charge of one photon would be perfect, if it weren't for several other limits that also apply.

ISO is basically limited by sensor noise, and there is noise even in light itself.

Here is one article, its a bit involved, because its not a simple subject.


Here is a fairly technical paper about sensor noise, which is the limiting factor in high ISO low light photography.

As I said, there are technologies that sidestep the limits by combining multiple images and averaging out noise, but they do not increase the basic sensor limits.


Low light and low iso capabilities are sometimes mixed up in this forum. As far as low light is concerned, the paper mentioned above is a really complete and well founded explanation of whats possible and what not. the theoretical limit of information contained in a photo, is to count all photons and detect their color. This perfect image will be noisy as hell. This perfect image will be limeted by lenses, diffraction, sensor efficency, and by additional noise added anywhere between the incoming light and the photo arriving on the chip card (readout noise).

where sony/nikon are better than canon at the moment is low iso area, where canon is limited by readout or other noise. the way to better IQ would be to have lower native iso capabilities, but i dont know where the actual limitation near 100 is coming from.

maybe there will be more progress in postprozessing, to get the best out of an existing raw file, example here may be astronomics, where not only bigger instruments are build but also better results are obtained from existing instruments.

and the biggest limitation was forgottenuntil now.... most of my bad pictures are bad because of bad composition, to slow camera handling (missed opportunity), or just undone pics, because the camera was at home. But the existing equipment at least allows me to practise my skills, until the really good camera is out, which will compensate for my failures as far as possible....

Lenses / Re: More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]
« on: November 19, 2013, 11:39:39 AM »
wider than 12mm?

the widest fiel of view gives the 17 TSE f4 which has a image circle of 67mm instead of 43mm of a normal lens.

by attaching a hypothetical wide angel converter with x=0.64 this would compress the resulting picture to a 10.9mm f 2.6 view. Allready this is a bit wider than 12 or 14mm, and this converter would give this amazing lens additional possibilities (just with no sense in using the movements anymore, or only on crop).

but to be on topic again, a similar design like this lens would give the possibility of a much wider lens than the existing 14mm, and would even be nearly free of distortion.

Now to be hypothetical: by sacrifying some fastness it should be possible to design a even wider field of view, without sacrifying image quality to much.

Next question may be answered by the marketing compartment, but how many leneses with a 11mm 2.8 or hypothetical 9-10mm and 4 or 5.6 fastness would sell for a price between 2000$ - 4000$ ?

I am not sure, if for such a specialised lens a zoom is needed, assuming it would sacrify either focal lenght, brightness or image quality.

a 5d classic is far outdated by now, where a Nikon 7100 (or 5200, 3200) is state of the art. The Nikon 24MP Sensor has twice the resolution in good light and in bad light has even better per pixel performance than the outdated sensor of the 5d classic. you can compare this here:


The only advantage of the 5d may be a thiner field of view (if you like this), on the other side the Nikon has much better autofocus, faster frame rate, video and numerous additional fetures etc.

For crop cameras there are numerous good and affordable wide angel lenses, where for FF most options are more expensive, that if you wantwider than 18mm crop.

If you are on a budget, the Nikon 5200 and 3200 have the same sensor (means the same image quality) and are less expensive.

i am to deeply invested in canon glass so i will stay with canon, but for a new start i would consider nikon at the moment

Pages: [1] 2 3 4