December 21, 2014, 10:09:56 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 - Tyroop

Pages: [1] 2
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM
« on: December 09, 2014, 10:04:16 PM »
I agree with hoodlum. I was using my EF 400mm f/5.6L recently with the EOS M, and holding the combination at arm's length to compose and focus really isn't ideal. With long lenses you need to brace the camera and get it up to eye level.  An EVF option would be a lot better.

Regarding Neuro's comment about being able to buy it in the States if it materialises, I simply can't understand Canon's marketing strategy.  I am a big fan of the EOS M, but living in southern Thailand I was unable to get hold of the EF-M 11-22mm and had to drive down into Malaysia, where it is sold, to buy one.

So far, I haven't seen the EF-M 55-200mm in this region at all, although it is a lens I would probably buy if I could get hold of it. I can't understand why certain products are only sold in certain regions when people who live in the 'wrong' places want to buy the products.

Regarding this new EF-M 70-400 patent, it isn't something that interests me greatly.  I am happy to have two systems for different needs.  I use the EOS M for everyday use and street photography - no great speed or incredibly quick focusing required.  I use it for everyday photos of the kids and photos for my website.

Occasionally, if I get the chance, I might go out birding with a long lens, but then I will want the speed and focusing capabilities of a DSLR system.  Different tools for different jobs because no one camera system is suitable for every occasion.

These days, the lens that stays on my M most of the time is the 11-22mm.  I love the wide angle, but there are also times when I could use a bit more focal length.  An EF-M lens that starts off at 10mm or 11mm and extends to around 100mm would be ideal.  Any lens over 200mm doesn't really interest me for the current M.

If it was made more like a DSLR - EVF, responsive, fast focusing, etc - it might be a different story, but so far no M body like that exists.

2
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
« on: November 29, 2014, 04:59:38 AM »
With two young kids, I get very little time to play these days.  However, a trip to the local zoo today allowed me to take my EF 400mm f/5.6L along with the EOS M and adapter.  I very rarely get a chance to use this lens nowadays.  The combination isn't ideal because with long lenses you really want to get the camera up to eye level and brace yourself in order to keep it steady.  Holding this combo at arms' length is awkward and needs some kind of support.

I still love this lens, even though I may consider trading it in for the new 100-400 (I never liked the original 100-400).  I also love it because the lens it replaced, an EF 300mm f/4L IS, was an absolute dog and gave me all sorts of problems.  The 400 has been completely reliable and the keeper rate is excellent.  With the 300 the keeper rate was about 2%.  It must have had some kind of a problem, even though the Canon Singapore service centre calibrated it and told me everything was OK.

At f/5.6 the depth of field is pretty shallow with the 400.  I was trying to keep the tiger's eyes in focus, but his nose is out of focus.  Bridge tells me that the subject distance was 6.5m.  I have a tendency with this lens to put the camera into AV mode and just keep it open at the maximum aperture.

3
EOS-M / Re: Any news about the new EOSM 3
« on: November 27, 2014, 06:35:29 AM »
No one knows, but with three EF-M lenses this is something that I am also interested in.  There was a mention of this here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/11/another-50mp-ff-dslr-mention-cr2/

4
EOS-M / Re: Using the 11-22 lens on a tripod to shoot video...
« on: November 27, 2014, 06:30:10 AM »
I acquired this lens recently.  If the camera is supported on a tripod I can't see what advantage there would be in having IS on.  I think that in the early days of IS it actually caused problems if you did this, but that's probably no longer the case.  Even if it has no effect on the image it will use battery power.  My suggestion would be to turn it off.

5
Quote
Why the need or want for a second body? Personally I've survived 15 years of not having a second body and none either film 35 or MF or digi FF have let me down. - I have and several lenses let me down tho, in which case id just adapt and use another one.

Interesting comment.

I've survived 32+ years with a variety of film and digital bodies having never let me down. However, if I was doing a wedding I would want lots of backup and no single point of failure - including at least one backup body.  Wasn't there a guy called Murphy who devised a law about this?  And besides, if you are in the States and doing this professionally, aren't Americans rather keen on law suits?

6
Portrait / Re: Post photos of other photographers in action
« on: October 15, 2014, 07:38:52 AM »


Taken with my first DSLR combo over 10 years ago - a 10D and EF17-40/f4L.  The body is long gone, but I still have the lens.  I think these two guys were from mainland China.  I loved their obvious enthusiasm for photography.

7
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Owners Post Your Pictures
« on: October 15, 2014, 07:28:09 AM »


Some great photos in this thread, although Surapon's saturation settings look a little 'Ken Rockwell'.  I am looking forward to acquiring the EF-M 11-22 in a few days' time, a lens that I have coveted for a long time but which isn't for sale where I live and to get it will require driving across an international border.  I can't really work out Canon's marketing strategy.  I love my EOS-M and it feels like such a pain now to even pick up a heavy, bulky SLR and a big, heavy EF lens.  Here's a photo from Surapon's motherland.

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 07, 2014, 10:02:53 PM »
Quote
Yes, the 1-series bodies have that feature.  It's called multispot metering, you can average up to eight separate spot meter readings.

Thanks for that, Neuro. I often wondered whether this feature still existed as I used to use it quite a lot in film days.  It's a long time ago now, but I think the T90 could also average up to eight meter readings.  It was a very advanced camera for its day and handled really well too.

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 07, 2014, 09:30:41 PM »
I liked the way I could put my T90 into spot metering mode, take several meter readings from different parts of the scene with a dedicated button, and the camera would then automatically average out all the meter readings to set the exposure.

Maybe this feature exists in current Canon pro-level cameras, but it hasn't been a feature in the prosumer digital bodies I have owned.

10
Street & City / Re: Street Voyeurism Continued
« on: April 11, 2014, 05:34:13 AM »
Great shots and I really liked the B/W effect that you have achieved - it works very well.  I appreciated the humour and things like the juxtaposition between main subject and background in the first shot.

11
Photography Technique / Re: Help on what to bring to Krabi...
« on: April 03, 2014, 04:38:22 AM »
Without knowing what your photographic interests are it's difficult to suggest lenses.  The destination alone isn't enough.  Krabi is a pretty province and I would definitely recommend something wide for landscapes and seascapes - from your list I'd take the 17-40 with a full frame body.  I took a 10-22 with a 1.6 crop body.

If you like birds and wildlife there is quite a lot in that area and a long lens would be useful.  For example, Krabi is one of the few places where birders can get to see Gurney's Pittas.  You should take a boat tour in the mangroves.  I took a 400 f/5.6L last time I went to Krabi and used it quite a lot.  The 70-300L in your list should be ideal.

Those two lenses should suffice.  With the 6D's low light capabilities you shouldn't need a fast lens.  A possible third lens would be the 85mm f/1.8 (not in your list).  It's small, light and great for portraits.  If you also take an extension tube you can get great macro shots with the 85mm and this combo is lighter than the 100mm f/2.8L.

I always find it interesting to hear which places in Thailand people who don't live in Thailand recommend to others.  These are generally the places that I avoid.  It is also an idea to avoid referring to Krabi as Crabby.  The Thai pronunciation is quite different.

12
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
« on: February 08, 2014, 10:16:03 PM »
I had a nightmare with this lens.  In theory the 300mm f/4.0L and 1.4x converter combination should have been better than a 400mm f/5.6L.

300/4.0 + 420/5.6 + IS vs 400/5.6 No IS

In practice it didn't work like that at all.  I managed to get a few decent shots out of the 300 f/4.0L, but the vast majority were completely unusable.  I took it to Canon's service facility in Singapore for checking and calibration, but it was still no better.

The first generation IS is clunky and not very effective.  My other IS lenses feel as if a giant pair of hands has grabbed the lens and is holding it still.  The 300 f/4L IS helps a little, but not very much.

I sold it and bought the 400 f/5.6L.  This lens has been stellar with far superior image quality and consistency.  I don't miss IS all that much, but an update with the latest IS would be very welcome.

I can't really understand all the written praise in this thread.  Most of the sample images have been downsized so much that there is no detail visible, or horribly over-sharpened in PP.  The squirrel shot wasn't bad.

Perhaps I had a particularly bad copy, but after my experience I could never recommend this lens.  YMMV.  This is just about my own personal experience.

http://phil.uk.net/photography/canon_300F4LIS.html


13
Regional Boards / Re: Anyone from India?
« on: February 03, 2014, 05:18:17 AM »
Jogeshs, I just took a look through your Flickr gallery and was highly impressed. A combination of great artistic talent and imagination, combined with excellent technical skills - composition, colours, lighting, the lot.  You have a great eye and you have created some great work.  Very inspiring.

14
Canon General / Re: Lose or Loose?
« on: October 16, 2013, 03:48:08 AM »
Lose/Loose.  I also notice this one a lot.  The other one that really bugs me is using 'lead' (as in heavy metal) for the past tense or past participle of 'lead' instead of 'led'.  Even BBC journalists get this one wrong fairly often and I find myself having to write to them yet again.

15
Technical Support / Re: Photosharing That Pays Me?
« on: October 16, 2013, 02:45:25 AM »
I signed up for Fotolia a couple of years ago.  Pricing varies, but I normally make around 25c per photo.  They pay out when your account reaches $50, which is therefore 200 downloads.  I'm about half way there and still haven't received a payment.  The photos I like personally don't sell because there is no commercial value.  Stock photography requires very specific types of photo and there are tens of thousands of highly accomplished photographers (and illustrators) selling their work who you have to compete with.

Over 90% of the sales I have made have been of one particular photo.  It seems to be a photo that people want and that other photographers don't have to offer.  It was just a quick snap I took while wandering around a Burmese refugee camp on the Thai side of the Thai/Burmese border in Mae Sot.  The guy who recommended Fotolia told me that his best selling photo was of garbage collectors collecting garbage.  Photos you think will sell don't, and often the ones that sell are the ones you don't think will sell.

People don't necessarily want aesthetically pleasing photos, they want photos to illustrate a certain subject.  There are also lots of cliche photos, for example, happy families in perfect situations, attractive businessmen and women shaking hands on business deals, etc.  These contrived photos are not at all like the real world photos I take.

Then there is the business of model releases if your photos contain people, being careful not to include trademarks, submitting noise-free images, etc.  It can be a real pain meeting all the requirements and submitting the type of photos that are wanted.  I have had far more photos rejected than accepted.

When I started I thought it would be an easy way to make money, but that isn't how it has turned out.  It's still quite satisfying to think that someone has actually paid money - even if only a small amount - for a photo that I took, but like most things online these days the only people who make any serious money are the big boys.

You mentioned Flickr in your original post and I thought that images could now be submitted to Getty Images via Flickr.

Pages: [1] 2