April 18, 2014, 09:39:13 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.


Messages - Dylan777

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 210
2
"IS" is great. In prime world, I prefer f1.2 or f1.4 for more creamy bokeh over 3-4stop IS. I do wish for an UWA f4 with "IS" in near future ::)

3
I didn't even know this thing existed let alone how expensive it is.  I'm curious... how's the image quality?


You gonna need 2-3 people to lift this lens on the tripod: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/supertelephoto/sigma-200-500mm-f2.8-ex-dg-apo-for-canon

4
Do they have f1.4 version?  ;D


5
oh that's really cool, I didn't realize 3rd party have started to embrace the M mount!

However, I'm not sure why I would prefer this over Canon's excellent 11-22 IS zoom?

I prefer IS over fast aperture for UWA any day, and AF is just really nice to have, not to mention a convenient range of focal lengths in one lens.

Granted the OEM option likely costs 50%-100% more...

+1....16-35 III with IS would be nice ;)

6
Lighting / Re: Benefits of a 600RT system ...
« on: Today at 12:38:26 AM »
Standard warning here: Speedlites are gateway drugs. If you don't watch yourself, you'll wake up one morning with five 600 RTs next to you in bed and you won't remember how you got there.

 :o :o :o....Although I haven't own any speedlites yet, however, I do understand your concept in my L lens situation ;D

7
Third Party Manufacturers / New Samyang 12mm f2 for EOS-M
« on: April 17, 2014, 09:48:53 PM »
For those interested:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/03/21/samyang-announces-12mm-1-2-0-ncs-cs-wideangle-for-mirrorless#press

Here is one review with Fuji camera: http://www.aps-photo.com/2014/04/rokinon-12mm-f2-0-for-x-mount-a-first-look/

19mm equivalent to FF, which I think is very nice focal lenght for landscape.

8
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
« on: April 17, 2014, 05:18:53 PM »
Playing about with my daughter's 1100D. I'm surprised by how much latitude there is in the RAW data. I can pull it around much more than I thought would be possible.

This is just one exposure, no flash, shot on the 50/1.4 @ about f2.8. ISO 200
Bokeh looks good. 2008 is when I first got introduced to dslr. 40d and 50mm f1.4

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS
« on: April 17, 2014, 04:44:00 PM »
I'm in if iq is good as ii or better, otherwise, I have no need for IS. Since I don't shoot slow shutter much in this range.

10
Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: April 17, 2014, 11:24:24 AM »

No comment which better, but here is one of shot I took with 300. For creamy bokeh, I like my 85L II @ 1.2


To which I refer you back to my earlier link. http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_300mm_f_2_8l_is_ii_usm

Just because a picture was taken with a $7,300 lens doesn't make it worth a cent.


That photo taken at Santa Ana Zoo.

I emailed the zoo office of Ted's photos, the train captain. He personally offered my family a VIP ticket(FREE) to the zoo for one month. We went back there couple times with our VIP ticket. My kids got free ride there as well.

I think my photo worth more than a cent ;): http://www.santaanazoo.org/visinfoa.htm


You might, and the subject, who presumably isn't a photo enthusiast, might, but that isn't and wasn't my point. My point was if you want blown out backgrounds in your portraits there are vastly better lenses for doing that than the overly hyped 50 and 85 f1.2's. Using a 300 for compelling portraits is far more difficult than using either of the other two and, in my opinion, gives a much "nicer" image, but even if you don't agree with my opinion, you cannot argue the fact that the 300 destroys backgrounds far more effectively than the two much shorter lenses.


I understand & agree. I wasn't born with photography skills or have enough times to practice getting the right shots like the pros. However, I believe taking photo in the right moment could still be able to tell story - without  thinking too much about rule of 3rd, back and front ground etc... ;)

11
Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: April 17, 2014, 11:15:01 AM »
Dylan, that's pretty cool that you were able to get a free pass just by emailing the photo.  I agree that the 300 2.8 (and 200 f/2) is probably the best lens if you want to obliterate the background, but for anything beyond headshots it is a bit tough to use in terms of communicating with the model.  The results speak for themselves when they are carefully done, however.  I'm (very) fortunate to own the 24, 50, 85, and 300 (yes, I love fast lenses) and really enjoy using each one for their own strengths.  It's really just a matter of how much background (context) you want to include in the photos, but I think the 85 is probably the most versatile of these.  I find that I can use it for 80%  or more of the portraits I shoot. 

The 50L is the lens I reach for when I want something smaller, lighter, and less conspicuous than a zoom, faster focusing and wider than the 85, and with less perspective distortion than the 24.

I didn't know I'm gonna get free pass and didn't expect any return from Ted. I just want to send Ted some photos. I forgot to mention, we got a chance to meet his wife too - who also works in the  same zoo, farm area. Just a wonderful couple ;)

12
Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: April 17, 2014, 10:34:27 AM »

No comment which better, but here is one of shot I took with 300. For creamy bokeh, I like my 85L II @ 1.2


To which I refer you back to my earlier link. http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_300mm_f_2_8l_is_ii_usm

Just because a picture was taken with a $7,300 lens doesn't make it worth a cent.


That photo taken at Santa Ana Zoo.

I emailed the zoo office of Ted's photos, the train captain. He personally offered my family a VIP ticket(FREE) to the zoo for one month. We went back there couple times with our VIP ticket. My kids got free ride there as well.

I think my photo worth more than a cent ;): http://www.santaanazoo.org/visinfoa.htm

13
Lenses / Re: Canon 50L - Love or Hate?
« on: April 17, 2014, 09:48:33 AM »
The 300 f2.8 absolutely blows both the 1.2 50 and 85 L's away when it comes to bokeh orientated portrait imagery.

But, the distance required for 300mm kills a large amount of portrait situations.

True, nothing comes without effort.

But however difficult manipulating the situation is, if you want the results that 50 and 85 lenses are incapable of delivering, whatever their speed, then do what it takes. If super bokeh and shallow dof are the primary characteristics wanted of a session then you have to go where you can use a vastly superior lens.

"...super bokeh and shallow DoF..."

Let's consider the latter.  If you frame the subject the same, e.g. a full-body portrait at 2 m with the 50/1.2 or 12 m with the 300/2.8, the subject magnification is the same.  So, the f/1.2 aperture of the 50L will give a thinner DoF.  If the subject-to-background distance is less than ~9 m, the 50L will deliver a stronger background blur.

Obviously, that's OOF blur amount, which is distinct from bokeh.

I wondered how long it would be before somebody pointed that out. It would be interesting to know what the actual true focal length and aperture is with a 12mm tube on the 300mm f2.8.

But I digress, I, personally, prefer the combination of destroyed background, slightly deeper dof, and perspective you get from the 300, rather than the far busier background slightly shallower dof, and perspective from the short 1.2's. Though I fully understand it is all personal preference and in many cases limited by practicalities, I only ever used the 300 at one wedding but used the 50 f1.2 at lots!

P.S. The OOF blur might be more with the wider aperture, but we both know the elements of the background will be vastly bigger, and hence to the eye appear more blurred, with the 300.

No comment which better, but here is one of shot I took with 300. For creamy bokeh, I like my 85L II @ 1.2

Edit: I'm removing this photo - since I haven't ask him for permission yet

14
I thought you were discussing side AF points.  Those eyes look pretty centered in the FOV to me, unless this is heavily cropped...which I doubt.

Did you read the description? There is no crop. Her right eye is near the center of the frame, and because she is nearly parallel to the sensor plane it is in focus. But AF was on her left eye.

"1st photo SOOC, untouch: 5D III + 85L II, 1/160 @ f1.2, outer AF point, was focus on her left eye"

I get that kind of performance from my 5D3 outer cross-type points too (in one shot, I disable non-cross type AF), at least as best I can tell with shallow DOF from say 200mm/2.8.

5D2? Not so much. The 6D outer points are vertical line sensors like the 5D2, right? In landscape orientation it will just hunt on the outlying points if there is no vertical contrast. The 1Dx unit is sensitive in two directions widely across the frame. That's a significant improvement over the 5D2/6D.

I don't know of anyone who wanted a 5D3 at 6D prices.  Rather, I suspect there are plenty who would pay $4500 for a 5D3. 

Willingness to pay and a desire to pay are two different things. I certainly would have wanted a 5D3 at 6D prices. However, that's unrealistic.

As for there being plenty who would pay $4,500... I don't know. There may be some, but at that point, many may look elsewhere or decide to save a little bit more for the 1Dx.

+1....same here 3kramd5. It's nice to have over 40 cross type AF points.

15
- The 6D's -3 EV lowlight sensitivity is currently unmatched by any DSLR on the market

If you shoot lowlight, sunsets, night photography or landscape photography the lowlight AF performance on the 6D wins.

As I pointed out a few pages ago in this thread:

How do you define 'low light'?  For example, the difference between shooting at -2 EV and-3 EV could mean 1/15 s, f/2.8, ISO 51200 vs. 102400.  Neither is very usable from an IQ standpoint.  What most people call 'low light' is generally substantially brighter than either spec.

Long exposure night photograpy might benefit from that extra stop of AF capability (but in that situation, you are on a triod and probably using Live View to focus anyway).  Sunsets, landscapes and general shooting have plenty of light relative to the AF sensitivity of even lower end dSLRs. 

I think the -3 EV spec of the 6D is Canon saying 'we did it because we can, and to throw a bone after otherwise limiting AF functionality of this body' - it looks good on paper, but is of little practical benefit in the vast majority of shooting situations.

As I've said many times, due to the low noise of the 6D, the low light sensitivity of the center AF point, can be very useful in the majority of situations where you are shooting wildlife (or people) around, before, or after sunset.  Or else if you are shooting landscape hand-held, with an IS lens, up to an hour after sunset...or during a full moon.  Or if you are shooting inside a club, or outside on a dimly lit city street at night, that -3EV capability is very useful.

ISO 6400 is extremely usable for professional prints via the 6D (with a bit of post processing), and ISO's a bit above that are still useful.

As for bashing the other AF points on the 6D, you need to bash the 5D2's as well, because they were no better.  It might not still be on sale, but plenty of forum readers still own and use the 5D2.

For anyone shooting with strobes, or shooting fast sports action in well lit areas, the 5D3 or 1DX is the camera you need (or perhaps a D800 at low ISO).

If you're shooting portraits with an f/1.4 lens, wide open at f/1.4, and require peripheral AF points to be used (for focusing on eyes, etc.), then yes the 6D will not give consistent results.  But then the 1DX and 5D3 don't fare much better in that situation, which is why serious portrait photogs who shoot this way, either manually focus, or use live view.  Of course most of them are closing that fast lens down quite a bit, in which case there is more wiggle room for AF inaccuracies.

And besides, in that peripheral area of these lenses (other than the Zeiss Otus)...those eyes that you claim are so razor sharp...actually are not, and are suffering from coma and astigmatism.  It's unavoidable...especially with such lenses as the 50L and 85L.
This was fine until you mentioned the 5D3 not being much better than the 6D for f/1.4 portraits using the outer AF points. The 5D3 makes the 6D look broken doing this and it's a shame a 60D or a 7D would also make the 6D look broken.

+1 with RLPhoto, I have no problem with outer AF points on my 5D III. Doesn't matter 85L II or 50L

Photo below was taken with 5D III + 50L, outer AF point @ f1.2. Oops...sorry, that was f1.2 not f1.4 as he mentioned

That's a chair, not someone's eyes.  Post one of those please.

A lot of thing to say...little to show ::)

1st photo SOOC, untouch: 5D III + 85L II, 1/160 @ f1.2, outer AF point, was focus on her left eye
2nd little edit in LR

BTW, I have no problem using AF in -3EV lighting condition, yes, with 5D III. Wanna see sample photos?

I thought you were discussing side AF points.  Those eyes look pretty centered in the FOV to me, unless this is heavily cropped...which I doubt.

As I mentioned, 1st photo came straight out from camera, untouch, JPEG. 

The only I did reduced photo size down to 3000x2000 for posting purpose(zero cropping). It was a 3rd outer AF point, from the center.

I'm not bashing 6D, but the #1 reason I went from 5D II to 5D III is 61 AF points. 5D II feel much better in hand...that just me of course.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 210