February 26, 2015, 08:02:10 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 - sawsedge

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 20, 2014, 10:26:13 AM »
I moved from crop to full-frame when the 5D3 arrived.  The main reason for me was the AF system;  I found myself unable to track the kids with the 50D as they got bigger and faster.  In fact, I passed on the 5D2 and bought the 50D because the AF was a little better (the 7D followed too quickly to justify it to she-who-must-be-obeyed).

I immediately noticed the other improvements of the 5D3 as well.   I love being able to track and get more keepers.  I love the image quality improvements (yet I have nice big prints on the wall from the crop cameras).  I love how the 5D3 retains details as you increase the ISO.  I can get nice hand-held portraits indoors with window light that didn't work well with previous cameras.  I don't even mind the "grain" at ISO 8000-10000.

But there is one frustration I have with the full-frame, and that is for closeups.  I got used to what 1:1 meant on the crop, and I can't get that magnification with the FF unless I crop.  So I think about getting another crop body every now and then.  Or maybe it is time to get the MP-E.

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f/5.6 L
« on: December 13, 2013, 02:58:38 PM »
Looking at numbers always makes me feel like my 100-400L is inadequate, yet I get good images from it.    ;D

Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 13, 2013, 10:16:02 AM »
Of the two, I only have the 24-70 II, yet I often wish I had a little more reach.  The range of the 24-105 seems ideal to me.  In my film days, my trio was a 24, 50, and 100mm.  But, the AF speed, accuracy, contrast and resolution of the of the 24-70 II are outstanding and I'm unlikely to give that up.  About my only complaint with it is the size.  It's just fat with the 82mm filter.  :-)

All that said, I still think about picking up the 24-105 for certain occasions.  But I'd prefer one with a 67mm filter to match the 70-200 f/4L IS.

Perhaps someday Canon will make a 24-105 f/2.8L IS, match the current IQ, and then we'll all know what to do.

Lenses / Re: Any Old Gem Macro Lenses?
« on: October 30, 2013, 08:49:30 AM »
If you can find a Kiron 105 f/2.8 macro (perhaps a Nikon mount + adapter) for a good price they are great. I had one in my Minolta days and loved it.  There may be other old manual macros you can adapt for a decent price as well.

But I generally think you should save for the Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM macro (non L, non IS) as you won't have to deal with stop-down metering.  They are around $550 new, which for that lens is a steal.

Another option would be a Tamron 90mm.  As far as I know, unless you luck into a deal, you'll need at least $400 for a true macro.

Yet another option: find an old Pentax or Nikon 135mm, adapt it, and put extension tubes behind it.

Extension tubes do not increase focal length, they only cause a lens to focus closer. 

Lenses / Re: What should I upgrade? I can't be done, can I?
« on: August 07, 2013, 10:29:45 AM »
1st, open another bank account and drop your extra cash in it so it can't be spent.

2nd, think long and hard about wants vs needs.  As others have asked, what do you want to do that you CANNOT do now?

My first thought, like another earlier, was "buy a lens".   :)

I take photos of everything.  Anything interesting, hopefully with good light!   So any lens is better than none.  I love macro, so that would be in the back of my mind.  I love landscapes, and I love tighter framing than many.  I also love wildlife.  So $2000 is a tough call, I could easily spend more if I had it.  Within that budget, I'd try to get bargains on a 24-105 f/4L and 70-200 f/4L IS, and hopefully have enough left for the 100mm f/2.8 USM macro.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Am I crazy to sell my Canon gear?
« on: May 20, 2013, 10:31:31 AM »
I like the idea of going with smaller gear for certain situations, and the IQ is certainly very good now... but have you held on in your hands?

I held a friend's NEX a couple months ago and it cramped my hands inside a minute.  Ergonomics are worth something I'd say. 

When I decided to go digital, I had an older Minolta manual focus system, so I had no upgrade path to follow, and I looked at every brand and option.  I went with Canon for both lens selection and how they felt in my hand. 

So, if you try something new, try it in your hands before you sell the old gear, at the least.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D or 5D3 for low light candids?
« on: April 03, 2013, 10:26:21 AM »
I moved to FF in the middle of last year and the difference is astounding.  I did a portrait of my daughter with a 50mm f/1.4 at ISO 25600, lit by a single candle in a dark room, hand held.  Yeah, it's a bit noisy by that setting, but still quite usable.  There is no way I could have done it with the 50D (I realize the 7D is a lot better than the 50D).

The AF of the 5D3 is incredible.  As others have noted, having more shots in focus is a major plus.  That was the main reason I upgraded.

I get the sense that the 6D is a little better in low light, but not as good for action, but I have not tried a 6D.

As others mentioned, crop sensors don't even enter my mind when you say "low light candids".  You are not focal-length limited with candids. 

Lenses / Re: Lens Help - 17-40 & 70-200 f/4 or 24-70 f/4
« on: January 28, 2013, 03:48:49 PM »
If you were just talking landscapes, I'd say option 2 because the missing 40-70mm range is nothing for landscapes, unless you happen to love 50mm with landscapes.

With kids, family outings, and general walk-around, I think the 24-xx is a more important range to cover.  The 85mm f/1.8 will cover your portrait needs in style.  I'd hang onto that no matter what else you get.  Kids are kids for such a brief time.

I tried the 24-70 f/4L and apparently had a bad copy.  At first I thought I needed MFA, but found I could not get anything sharp even with 10x liveview on a solid tripod.  Everything was soft, and I've used enough lenses to know I could do much much better.  For the money, it had to go back.  My 15-85 on my old 50D worked far better at half the cost (I'm now using a 5D3).  The 15-85 is outstanding, but of course is EF-S and won't work on full-frame.  So now I'm considering the 24-105 (still waiting for B&H to refund me, it's a long wait).

I would do what others have suggested, and see if you can swing the 24-105 + 70-200.  If not, then just get the 24-105 for now, and save for the other.

Yes there is absolutely a difference in quality caused by mirror vibrations.  Mirror lockup definitely reduces the vibrations in the camera.

It's easy to test.  Use a sturdy tripod, focus accurately, use a remote release.    Try something at 1/8 and 1/15 sec.  Do this both with and without mirror lockup.  The greater the magnification, the easier it is to see the difference.

Contests / Re: Gura Gear Giveaway!
« on: December 06, 2012, 10:11:55 PM »
Sign me up please, I'd love to win the 18L! 

My friend has the Kiboko 30L and it is wonderful.  I've been looking for a bag with a good harness system.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D MkIII instructions - Rant !!
« on: December 06, 2012, 02:02:22 PM »
The OP made me chuckle.  Yeah, some of those are pretty silly, but like others have said, there are people out there who really need the help.  I encountered quite a few of them when I did tech support.  Wizard's First Rule.

OTOH, before my 5D3 arrived, I browsed the manual and read up on relevant parts like the AF system and various customization options.  Most of the features are pretty obvious to someone familiar with a Canon DSLR, but the camera is way more feature-packed than my previous bodies and I had a much better idea of how I'd customize it when it arrived.  There were a few tidbits in the manual that helped me, that would not have been obvious to me without going over it.

Nikon bodies, on the other hand...  I was out photographing a waterfall and someone approached me, asking if I knew how to enable the movie mode on their D90.  I figured it would be obvious, but I could not figure it out.  It's totally obvious to me on Canon bodies without reading a thing.   Then again, Nikon does focus backwards...  ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop
« on: December 03, 2012, 10:02:09 AM »
Something isn't an upgrade if it doesn't improve your situation.  Likewise something isn't a downgrade if it works better for you.   Lots of folks use both types.

Lenses / Re: 24-70/4 MFT charts
« on: November 08, 2012, 09:13:17 AM »
My $0.02. 

I just sold half of my gear to pay for the 5D3.  I was left with the 50 f/1.4, 100 macro, and 100-400.  I've been using the 50 as my walkaround lens, and just love the IQ.  I'm kind of spoiled by it. 

So I'm in the market for a general purpose zoom, with a taste for quality (tough spot to be in, on a budget  :D). When I want wide, I've found, historically, that 24mm is usually just right for me.  I was eyeing the 24-105 as a great range, but just a little put off by the not-quite-stellar performance at 24mm.   I have a feeling I wouldn't be happy with the 24-105 on the wide end, and adding the 24mm f/2.8 IS kind of puts me close to the 24-70 II price range...

Enter the 24-70 f/4L IS.  While not a bargain, it might be closer to what I have in mind, IQ-wise, and be a bit more affordable, cheaper and more convenient than other combinations I've considered.   I'd still prefer a 24-105, but I'm also likely to take the IQ over the range.  I'm waiting to see test results, including bokeh.

EOS Bodies / Re: How often do you go through a body? Why do you upgrade?
« on: November 02, 2012, 08:51:41 AM »
Prior to digital, I kept my Minolta bodies (SRT-102 and XD-11) for at least 20 years without an upgrade.   When it became clear that digital was at least equal to film and I had to pay for repairs annually on the XD-11s, I switched to EOS.  I had the 20D for around 5 years, felt the 50D was a good enough upgrade (then kicked myself a year later when the 7D came out), and recently I found the 50D's AF system just doesn't track well enough, so I moved to the 5D3.  The 5D3 knocks the socks off the previous bodies.  I don't see needing an upgrade for years... as long as the body lasts I think.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7