November 28, 2014, 02:01:45 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.


Topics - Khufu

Pages: [1]
1
Heya guuuiz!

Picking up on thoughts and efforts I made in around Summer 2012 I'm wondering what everyone's thoughts & opinions, approach, application of, workflow etc. is regarding Canon's EF system as developed for film photography in the present day or relatively recent times?

Also, any thoughts on other systems and how we use them in today's camera-climate are welcomed!

Rewinding back to 2012 I was considering The EOS 5D Mark III or 6D (I think around the time of pre-release speculation and/or announcement?) as my first FF digital camera, after shooting the 60D since around release, and having the cash available to invest come September/October... but I was itching to produce some images of my own with that FF look going on!

Obsessing over knowing everything ever I soon learnt that Canon had been producing 35mm film cameras way into the new millennium and that they're compatible with all my EF lenses - How cool is that?! A little more obsessing down the line I found myself considering the latest models, which were sadly to be the last models, in the forms of Canon's Pro, Enthusiast-ish and Entry models (1 series, ELAN/something about the number 7(?) and Rebel lines, respectively) - and if I recall correctly was a little surprised to see that their very latest design before abandoning ship was the EOS Rebel T2, aka EOS 300x, and it had pretty current and advanced technology, including lots of the modern taken-for-granteds of digital SLRs, squished in there!

It's essentially a 300D/Rebel-whatever which you can bang a roll of film in the back of... and I wonder how many people who would appreciate these things realise that?! Decent metering, 7 AF points, IR Remote Triggering & Cable release, all kinds of custom functions, bracketing, multi-exposure, illuminating screen(!!) - and the image quality is as good as the film you put in it and the lenses you slap on the front, including any L glass!
This thing is stupid-lightweight and pretty small - giving you the option to "just bring it along anyway" and have it be no real hindrance, which the other series' bodies may be (best camera's the one with you, blah...)
They only produced it in Silver. Lame. I soon painted mine with a discount store's "Blackboard Paint", which turned out to be a weird, rubbery, grippy black coating - which I love! For me, I now have an ideal 35mm film camera! (Cost around £20 on eBay Vs., I don't know, around £600-£900 at the time for the cheapest second-hand FF, 5DC?)

Also, here in the UK I pick up AGFA Vista Plus 200 for £1 a roll in Poundland and my last lot of CR2 batteries I picked up being sold off for 9p each in a drug store which I think was quite baffled about how to sell these things and to whom - ASDA (Walmart) process for £2 a roll and stick them all (up to 4) on to a CD for £1 (ie. £7 for 3 rolls and scans) though the scans are kinda' websized, around 2mp.

So is anyone still shooting film? Enjoying the quirks of it and the whole process in this modern age?! Finding any benefits over digital? What's your set-up and why, or maybe just because that's what you have?

Interested in hearing thoughts on the EF/EOS cameras and how you make use of them, autofocusing, custom-feature-ing or otherwise - Indulge me, indulge us all... type away :D

- Drew

2
In short: What are the best solutions regarding ultimate resolving power, looking at real world results cropped to display the same subject at the same size?

I'm asking because after a bit of questionably-scientific-ish testing, I'm not sure the 70D shoots any more detailed images than the 5D3, despite cramming so many more pixels into any given area.

Obviously the resolving power of the lens will play a part here but I'm wondering if there's maybe a pixel size/density tipping point where adding more just becomes redundant - counterproductive, even?.. and if it lies somewhere between FF and APS-C, possibly around APS-H territory?

As of today I'm considering trading in the 70D and being done with anything APS-C outside of the SL1 and M, where the obvious pros keep me content with their existence!

As an amateur/advancing Birder and Wildlife & Animal Portrait shooter I'm wondering if those times I've opted for the 70D over the 5D3 "for reach" when I could possibly have used the latter with much greater ISO usability and therefore faster shutter etc. was a counterproductive measure? What are my options here?..

Is there any merit to considering a 1.4x III extender and 5D3 over a crop body to achieve greater actual resolving power?

Would the 1D IV possibly be a contender for best resolving Canon body?

Is the a7R (and whatever Nikon uses it) actually the best there is? I hear it's considered pretty sharp!

Is the 7D II up to much in this area that the 70D isn't? Apparently it'll have cleaner high ISO results due to microlenses or something, but is this likely to make it produce sharper images with the same lenses?

I know lots of lenses aren't considered up to resolving high pixel density sensors but I've heard people pushing the argument here recently about the engineering of APS-C sensors just not making them "as good" as similar density on larger sensors - though I'm yet to really get myself educated on that front...

No particular question, just insight and opinions sought!
1D IV? Mk III extenders? 7D2? APS-H? FF? SONY/NIKON?

I think I might consider dropping the 70D for either a 1D IV, a 1.4x III or both...
Also, where would you place the 10mp 1D III in all this, considering it can be had for around the 20mp 70D price?

I'll be back. Play nice!

4
EOS Bodies / Ever such Rumours as APS-C, Low Density, Low MP sensors?...
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:25:50 PM »
Has it ever been rumored for their to be prototypes in testing of what would essentially be a physical 1.6x crop of a FF sensor, allowing the ISO capabilities of the 6D/5D3 in, say, an EOS M or xxD body?

I'd love me an EOS M with 6-9 megapixels of low light goodness!

Thoughts?

Would this be stupid-expensive to develop? I can imagine the right advertising campaign could sell the concept of fewer pixels for low light, arty, shallow DoF shooting with the 22mm f/2 with results that're still 2-4x larger than necessary for Facebook ;)

5
I've been frustrated and unsettled on this for so long;

EOS M Vs Samsung NX1000...

I say these because I have them here - I like to shoot FAST and love the NX offerings of the 16mm f/2.4 and 30mm f/2 pancakes - the 16mm can get amazing close-ups with wiiide backgrounds, the 30mm just makes more sense than the 22mm to me (re: crop DoF, perspective, portraiture etc) and I've always felt the Canon offering was a rubbish compromise.
Unfortunately; Samsung's sensor AND jpeg compression sucks, relative to the M.

I love the Canon sensor (though I'd possibly kill to have it replaced with half a 5D3/6D FF at 8-10 megapixels of Low Light Awesomeness - why is this seemingly never discussed?!)

...only today has it occurred to me that whilst Canon, Sony, 4/3 etc have a flange distance of 18mm, the Samsung NX system utilises around 7mm more - this means I can use these lenses wide open DESPITE their electronic focusing, simply by moving them slightly back and forth for focussing!

Give me a few hours/days and something can be fashioned here out of body/lens caps - but for now I can confirm this 16mm f/2.4 optically works insanely beautifully just being dangled infront of the EOS M - aaahmahgah!!

I'm really excited about this, I think I'm right to be, too! I've wanted a wide, fast pancake on here for aeons and can't believe this has never occurred to me!

Shall try and get pics to share soon - I think it might also be worth noting the Tilt-Shift capabilities here! I've done a lot lot lot of experimenting this morning (50mm f/1.4 hand-held T/S play has been fun!) and could babble on for hours, but won't.

Somebody tell me I'm being awesome and not an idiot, please?!

Ps. Hi, I'm Drew - new-ish to posting, long-time reader... be nice ;)

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Back/Front Focusing: a Lens Issue, not Body?...
« on: November 02, 2013, 06:29:08 PM »
Whenever I catch people talking about f/b focus, the lens manufacturer always seems to have the fingers pointed at them... but I don't understand why!

I'm open to being schooled here, really, but if the camera has a sensor which detects that a subject is in focus at its distance from the glass, to me, it seems the image capturing sensor must be at a slightly more or less distant position than the focusing sensor if it's not receiving the same light distribution, right?! Anybody?

I LOVE my Sigma glass but they require so much MFA on my 5D3 (50mm f/1.4 @ +16!!) which I've lazily accepted, I couldn't use them on my (now sold) 60d, though I'm looking forward to maybe grabbing a 70D for wildlife, with the option of throwing my Sigmas on there... But investing in MFA cameras out of necessity seems... Unnecessary? I'd love to use these Sigmas with a 100D but there's no chance of it if I can expect focus to be off on all bodies.

Maybe I'm way off with the physics/mechanics and it makes sense when you guys exlain what's really going on ;)

Thank you in advance!


Pages: [1]