August 28, 2014, 07:05:18 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 - Lawliet

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25
EOS Bodies / Re: Are you planning to purchase a 7D2
« on: Today at 02:54:26 AM »
With all the hype on the forum about the 7D2, the question is asked.... "Are you going to get one"?
Lets first see what we get eventually. :)

Depends on the little details that don't make nice bullets on the feature list.
From the actual sync speed over processing lattitude to clean HDMI out and not super softening processing.


If you have shots that make it "crazy clear" you are not testing what I am asking.

To get the results you want you have to approach the issue in about the most ham-fisted way possible. That's not evaluating the gear, but manhandling it - not exactly the best way to find out if one could get better results using proper, or at least reasonable, technique.

Sure, you could use a filter made from ground glass and declare that as standard to proof that a smaller pixel pitch makes no sense...but anyone interested in results will take it off and invalidate your conclusion.

Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: Today at 12:17:39 AM »

Agree, but have you tried handling an A7? 

Add the battery grip and it improves to "somewhat awkward".

EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 27, 2014, 11:52:04 PM »

Come on now.... the only way this is going to happen is if someone does a controlled test.... it does not happen under normal use...
I'd go a step further: Why should I spend big bucks on a long lens and then use it unsupported? Getting a cheaper one and a good tripod for the difference would lead to better results.
Not that I'd want to handhold them for the amount of time normally involved with wildlife and such anyway.

EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 26, 2014, 11:16:45 PM »
and when they eventually make their way to the pro level cameras they are solid.

Well, atm you need a 3rd party hack to bypass the internal processing and create video material that's at least somewhere near of what's expected for HD work, i.e. won't get you reprimanded for technical quality by content management.
Same goes for the idea that it will still take some time for 4K to take of. It takes just as much time to get a project to be shown on those screens to go through the complete production process.

Pro level solidity sounds nice, but in the end Canon cooks just with water, as everybody else - from the POV of someone working in a heterogeneous environment, of course.

EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 26, 2014, 06:46:33 PM »

If you already have a camera for stills and need a serious performer for 4k you would be crazy not to go GH4.
If HD is a secondary usage I'd look at the A7s as well. That one reads the full sensor and samples down - better raw data to feed to the recorder or codec.
That's if you can accept the limited frame rate options. :-X

Which will give better resolution, putting the 70-200 2.8 mk2 on a 70D body with the 1.6x  20.2MP crop sensor APS-C, or putting a 2x Mk3 teleconvertor on the 70-200 2.8?
The big question is: which one will get the focus better - otherwise its a pointless exercise.
That's where a 70D, or whatever will be available past the upcoming tradeshow, has an advantage over the TC.
Use the full capabilities of the AF sensor and avoid the mandatory slowdown of the lens drive.
Also with high ISO - you can stay two stops lower with the crop camera, that compensates for the lower noise levels of a FF camera.

EOS Bodies / Re: Update on the EOS 7D Mark II Spec List
« on: August 24, 2014, 02:21:05 AM »

They have to do this at some time. The sooner the better.

Putting basically four of the current aptina sensors next to each other would be a nice start...Phase one-like resolution at 60fps. :)

Lenses / Re: A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]
« on: August 23, 2014, 10:30:52 AM »
as well as it would be cheaper.

That could be a problem: The 400 prime would have to go against the 100-400 in the same bracket, and the 200-400/4 (or 400/2.8) for the high end customer. Which means a limited customer base to spread development costs around, keeping the unit price higher then that of the current model. Plus the mandatory adjustments of course.

As for wide angle zoom and 15-85, wouldn't that be the standard zoom? It has a quite narrow FOV at its long end after all.


No, No, NO---You can count  each Item, Not the Quantity of the Items.

Maybe, just maybe: Camera, the drink, the (implied) strobes, and depending on personal preference the lens or the set of gels?
In certain locations, some additional clothing might be nice to have as well. :)

Lighting / Re: HSS with Einsteins win!
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:22:36 AM »
Therefore, having multiple very short and likely less intense flashes during the exposure seems more efficient and must result in a more repeatable/consistent lighting than one long flash.
And there is power regulation. Those little flashes can have a relatively wide range f power levels, making the output adjustable.
The long flash method works only at/near full power.
The energy cost is from keeping the output almost constant for the duration of the illumination, at least that is my understanding.
Most of the cost comes from the shutter blades blocking a good portion of the light, and from a little oversight in the flash protocols. The camera doesn't tell the flash how long its sync speed actually is, so the HSS-flash has to be long enough for the slowest camera. You use that 1D4? Half of your speedlite's power went into compatibility with the 6D or 5Dx. (The FlexTT has a hack for the second part, if I remember correctly)

Wow, I am very glad that I am not the real Photographer.

Looking at the photographers around town:
Quite a lot do day-to-day media work/small scale event coverage on a freelance basis. This pays, once you do the bookkeeping properly, below minimum wage for untrained labor.
A handful do work for in advertisement/commercial photography. That nets you an annual income similar to what you could expect as a MSc, although with greater fluctuations from month to month. The clients also pay for your creative input, giving you more freedom in that regard. And you meet interesting people & get to play with fancy toys.

Anyone in the first group should take a step back and think thoroughly about your statement.
I'd say those who did either advanced into the second group or got a different job.

EOS Bodies / Re: popup-flash - made a "pro feature"?
« on: August 14, 2014, 02:56:06 AM »
I thought ring lights were for macro stuff where the subject is virtually pressed against the lens and just getting any light on it can be a challenge?

Have you ever looked at studio strobes? You get ringlights from all brands, and they aren't excactly useable for macro work.

It might only have the power of a Rebel. It might be the equivalent of having a D700 with it's built-in flash for Canon full-frame, that could be used as a Master.

The 90EX speedlite would come close. In that case maybe a bit too close to the popup flashes, as its optical only & afair fixed forward.

On camera light and radio comes in only two packages, both on the big end. (600EX-RT as master, and the new Phottix Mitros+ has Odin/Strato included)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doing Market Research on Medium Format?
« on: August 07, 2014, 11:05:23 AM »

The fact that Canon entered the cinematography market which you could equally argue is a much smaller market than the DSLR market means it could be feasable and in that market they have designed three cameras C100, C300 & C500 and a set of primes & zoom lenses which can be had in both EF and PL mounts, its a market also now crowded for both cameras & lenses so there are similarities.
Notably they entered that market from the price angle. Canons cine lenses are among the less expensive  of the bunch, as strange as that might feel for some.
The Super 35 format however is not too disimilar to APS-H / C wheras much bigger glass is require for MF. 
Only in size though. Motion picture has those additional requirements that make completely different designs, esp for the zooms, desirable. For MF one could start with small frame lenses as baseline template. The elements would be large, but nothing that hasn't been done in the new TS-Es or the big whites. Even the new 24-70 is at least for the front part in the MF size bracket.

The question is whether there are strong differentiators as with the cine lenses, or if its more cost efficient to get a similar result by more conventional means.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25