Messages

1

Reviews / Re: 7D2 or 5D3?

« on: April 29, 2013, 09:41:10 AM »

I am an amateur photographer that spends most of my free time trying to shoot wildlife... I currently have a 50D that I use primarily with a 400mm F5.6L lens, but will on occassion also go to 70-200 F2.8L

I have been waiting for the new Canon 7D2 to come out later this year, thinking that for my purposes it would make the most sense to stay with an APS-C sensor... but the more I read about the 5D3, the more I question if I should not act now...

Typically i find with the pictures I take, i will shoot nothing over ISO400 as i find the noise too much with the 50D.... and i am sure that with either the 7D2 or 5D3 - i would have much more range in terms of ISO...

In terms of cropping, I will often crop a photo to no more than 50%, as i find going more than that will affect the quality of the photo... again, I believe that with either of the 7D2 or 5D3, i would like be able to crop to a higher percentage...

I guess my big concern is that shooting with an APS-C camera and 400mm lens, that going to the 5D3, will not allow me to crop in to as tight a shot as I am currently doing....

And help or suggestions would be appreciated...

My recommendation - go with the 5D3. That's what I did.

This sounds almost exactly like my situation a few weeks ago, except that my camera was a 20D (my lenses are 400mm f/5.6 and 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS). I was going to wait for the 7D2 but decided to go with the 5D3. Instead of getting the *apparent* 1.6x with the crop, I got an optical 1.4x with a Kenko 1.4X PRO 300 Teleconverter DGX. The Kenko is wired such that it allows the 5D3 to focus with the 400mm + 1.4x converter before the new firmware upgrade even though the EXIF says that the image was taken at f/8. And it focused incredibly fast. Here are a few images that I took with the 5D3 + 400mm f/5.6 + 1.4x. The camera's high ISO performance means that I can leave the shutter at 1/2000 to minimize blur, even at f/8.

http://bartolini.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v93/p1562235064.jpg

http://bartolini.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v95/p1562235016.jpg

http://bartolini.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v85/p1562235082.jpg

Good luck with your decision, there probably isn't a "wrong" decision between the two.

Dave

2

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:

« on: March 17, 2013, 09:32:51 AM »

This is my first try using HDR. Taken with a 20D and a Tamron 28-75 2.8 lens. I welcome any opinions (does it look too artificial?)

Thanks,
Dave

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

« on: February 20, 2013, 08:32:18 PM »

I really can't say how Canon decides what products to bring to market. I imagine it is a rather complex process with far too many "moving parts". I work at a very large, established company that develops online educational platforms. From the outside things look very simple and cohesive, but decision making processes are extremely complex, usually involve hundreds of people, and take a very long time. We have an 80-step process that must be followed to patent anything, that spans at least 7 departments.

Given how large and established Canon is...I'd imagine their decision making processes are fairly similar, at least on the complexity front. Although them being a Japanese company, things are probably more orderly and refined (something the Japanese excel at, where as American companies tend to get mired too deeply into political infighting, empire building, petty squabbling, etc.)

I think that they need to watch out for too many lines cropping up (no pun intended) that makes the buying decision difficult. In the DSLR world, it used to be an easy decision:
xxxD (e.g. 450D, aka Rebel) as the entry level DSLR
1Dx as the professional DSLR
xxD as a little of both worlds

The clear distinctions in terms of price point and functionality made my choice of the 20D very easy.

Now I'm pulling out the precious few hairs that I have left trying to figure out what to get as an upgrade for my aging 20D. I'll never earn a dime with my photos; my preferred subjects are wildlife/birds, but I would love to try landscapes as well. I was thinking 7D for a while, but longing after a 5DIII. I have been holding out hope that the 5DIII would reach a price point where I can mention it to my better half with a straight face. It's starting to get there, but now the 7DII is on the horizon, so I may wait to see what it looks like in terms of specs/price. I keep dragging my feet, and Canon is missing at least one sale (mine) as a result.

[My prediction - I'll buy a 5DIII towards the end of the year unless the 7DII really rocks. I bought my 20D right after the 30D was introduced to take advantage of the price drop.]

Don't get me wrong, it is better for the consumer to have more choices, but with so many options now, I question the ROI on some models. Is the DSLR market really big enough to support so many choices from one company? It's starting to feel like GM of 5-10 years ago.

4

EOS Bodies / Re: need an upgrade from 40d, can't decide: 5D 3, 70D (when available), 7D?

« on: February 10, 2013, 02:57:00 PM »

hi,
i can't decide what to get as an upgrade to my 40d, which is having some metering issues after getting wet (or perhaps it's just the age).

I am not a professional photographer, although I do enjoy it as a hobby.

I'm in a similar boat but a couple years behind you - I'm trying to figure out what to get to upgrade by 20D. I bought the 20D right after the 30D came out in order to save money and have no regrets going that path. However, at that time, there wasn't really anything between the 20D/30D and the 1D line. Now there are a lot of choices between them.

Frankly, I think that the 7D is a phenomenal value at the moment, and if I'm rational, that's the route that I will go. I wish that the 7DII would come out reasonably soon so that I can make a more informed decision, but that doesn't seem like it's going to happen any time soon.

However, I'm not ruling out the the "irrational" route and going with a 5DIII, mostly because of the AF performance that it has. And if cropped down to an APS-C size, it has nearly an identical pixel density to my 20D but ISO performance that puts it to shame.

You didn't say if your 70-200 has IS or not. I have the non-IS version (as well as the 400 f/5.6), so being able to crank the ISO up to get faster shutter speeds is a big attraction to the 5DIII. For me, it offsets the "reach" of the 7D.

5

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?

« on: January 28, 2013, 10:12:34 PM »

I had an old Nikon N2000, but none of the lenses were compatible with the DSLRs. So I was starting from scratch. I was still leaning towards Nikon because of a slight brand loyalty. However, I am mostly interested in bird/wildlife photography, and the 400mm f/5.6 lens fit a price (not insane)/performance (insane) point that Nikon couldn't counter. All other glass was fairly comparable between the two companies, so I went with a 20D. Now I'm waiting to see if my next upgrade will be to a 7DII or a 5DIII or something else, not ruling out a 70D if it comes in better than most folks fear on this forum.

Dave

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Question about 5DIII's NR settings

« on: January 27, 2013, 12:23:38 PM »

I don't use in camera NR but I do keep long expo NR on standard.

My "solution" also.

I have this disabled as I believe that NR was best taken care of in PP.

What are the benefits of this?

It takes a dark frame at the same exposure settings, which ends up being a frame of noise. It then subtracts that noise from the original exposure. I believe that the biggest non-random noise is thermal noise from the amplifier. I was looking for an old comparison of thermal noise among cameras of the 20D-era, but can't find it offhand.

*UPDATE* Here are the articles: http://ghonis2.ho8.com/DSLRcomparison.html
Specifically, look at the bottom of this one: http://ghonis2.ho8.com/rebelmod500d/rebelmod500dcompare.html
These are now "ancient" cameras, so likely this type of thermal noise has been fixed in newer cameras.

Dave

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Question about 5DIII's NR settings

« on: January 27, 2013, 11:02:43 AM »

Unless you are doing astronomy photography, keep long exposure nr off.  It will take a dark frame of the same length as the exposure and subtract it to remove thermal noise.  So, if you have a 5 minute exposure, another 5 minute dark frame exposure will occur.  People turn this on and then think their camera is defective.

Actually, for astrophotography, I would turn NR off and do all of that with post. I would be afraid of losing *any* details with in-camera NR. The astrophotography-specific post processing applications do this best by averaging many fark frames.

One reason that Canon dominates DSLR astrophotography is because on Nikon DSLRs, you couldn't turn off all in-camera NR, even with RAW files. As a result, Nikon DSLRs got the nickname "star eaters" among many astrophotographers.

Dave

8

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 10:42:49 AM »

In another forum they suppose >2500$ for the MK 2.     I hope they will be wrong with this rumor

I have a hard time believing that. The 7D was $1,700 when introduced. History of the XXD series was that the new models come out near the introductory price of the previous model. At $2,500, that would be too close to what the 5DIII will be at the same time. I can't imagine what whiz-bang features would prompt me to buy a crop camera that is roughly the same price as a 5DIII. If Canon wants to squeeze money out of a top-of-the-line APS-C camera, my uneducated guess is that it would come in slightly under $2k. I would put the Vegas over/under at $1,899.

Dave

9

EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?

« on: January 24, 2013, 12:06:49 AM »

This makes a lot of sense as I think the APS-C segment needs a jolt and not more of the same.

Huh?

APS-C segment needs a jolt yet happy with the 70D being more of the same?
Is anyone thinking about what they write on the front page of CR?

I believe they are talking about the 7DII as the jolt in the APS-C market, not the 70D.

10

Landscape / Re: Spiral Arm of the Milky Way above the Texas Desert

« on: January 22, 2013, 09:55:53 PM »

Keep in mind these are individual exposures, most of the really insane pictures of the Milky Way you see are a bunch of stacked exposures, but I don't have a tracking mount yet so I couldn't do that.

I know alot of astronomy buffs may be sickened by these, but the general public love shots that look like this.  It was a learning experience and I'm thrilled to have had the chance to finally get some shots like these.  I'm going back in the summer since that's when the brightest part of the Milky Way is visible.

A few quick comments:
1) Excellent photos! I love the colors and the contrast.
2) I'm somewhere between "general public" and "astronomy buff" (closer to the latter in visual experience and knowledge, but a newbie in terms of astrophotography skills and experience), and I can assure you that nobody would be sickened by these. For starters, this is precisely the right way to start taking nighttime images. And these are phenomenal regardless of how long you've been doing it.
3) You can actually stack photos without tracking, although you might need to do a little photoshop work with the landscape. There is stacking software that takes into account the movement of stars, both lateral and rotation.

And, it is possible to stretch images and sqeeze data out of even relatively short exposure images. Here is an image that I took a number of years ago of Comet 17P-Holmes on a tripod, only 4 seconds exposure at ISO 3200, 200mm @ f/2.8 with a 20D. Not eye-popping by any means, but just showing what you can capture in just a few seconds at a longer focal length (8 seconds started showing exaggerated star trails).



Keep 'em coming!

Regards,
Dave