Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Unimpressed with 6D + 24-105. Am I doing something wrong?

« on: May 20, 2013, 09:06:16 PM »

I experienced the same phenomenon with the 5D/24-70. It didn't seem to have that punch. The pics looked merely above average and I didn't understand what the fuss was about...was it something I was doing? Was it the camera? A mediocre copy of the lens?

It was only later (too late, after the event) that I discovered a backfocus- it wasn't severe but it was enough to soften pics...and ruin a handful of shots, unfortunately.

I figured out the lens needed MF adjustment... -1 on both ends seemed to get it back on track. Now...all I have to say is Wow!

2

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files

« on: May 20, 2013, 09:01:43 PM »

I can only speak from my own experience...the 5D3 raw files DEFINITELY offer more "wiggle room" than those taken with the crop-sensor EOS M (and my old 60D)...

3

Lenses / Re: Canon 24 - 105 for event photography?

« on: May 05, 2013, 06:26:22 PM »

you can, but you'll have to get quite close to the stage if you want any close-ups. For me, the loss of reach when shooting concerts was noticeable when I switched from the 60D to the 5D.

4

Lenses / Re: Best Lens for FF 6D

« on: May 05, 2013, 06:24:47 PM »

Best all-around lens for walkaround use - probably the 24-105.

5

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DMK3 new firmware - Silent shooting in "one shot" is now very loud???

« on: May 03, 2013, 08:50:54 PM »

  hmm....for better or worse?

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DMK3 new firmware - Silent shooting in "one shot" is now very loud???

« on: May 03, 2013, 07:38:04 PM »

Just updated and tested for myself...still works like it should!

Someone else also mentioned being unable to change focus modes...that seems to work fine for me as well, no issues.

7

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M? [CR1]

« on: April 27, 2013, 01:07:02 PM »

Why all the hate on the M?  Anyone who has used mirrorless cameras knows the AF is the weak point, and otherwise the M is an amazing little camera.  It got some bad reviews from people who didn't take the time to get to know the camera, and those negatives have been repeated over and over by a bunch of trolls.  I'd like to see how many poopooers have actually used one.

As an owner/user of this camera I have to agree, actually. It really isn't nearly as bad as folks are making it sound.

8

EOS Bodies / Re: The Future of EOS M [CR1]

« on: April 26, 2013, 10:42:55 AM »

I'm more interested in the lenses they come up with. The current one is serving me just fine- I've been taking it out recently and the more I use it, the more I like it...if I need the AF performance (or IQ), I've already got the DSLR.

I wish they'd come out with a relatively fast ~50mm lens with IS that doesn't add considerable bulk to the camera. Between that, the 22 and the 18-55 I'd be all set for that system.

9

Lenses / Re: Canon 50mm f1.2 worth?

« on: April 21, 2013, 12:18:12 PM »

I had this same question. The 1.2 is the only weather sealed 50mm lens in the lineup...yet, with a test unit and a test 5D3 at the store I was able to confirm the "focus shift" phenomenon, which I figured would drive me crazy (backfocus that even the AF microadjust couldn't compensate for)...

10

Lenses / Re: 24-105 &/or 24-70

« on: April 19, 2013, 09:29:29 PM »

I have both, may sell the 24-105L.  I suspect that a 'walkaround' shot from the 24-70 II at 70mm cropped would equal or beat the IQ of the 24-105 at 105mm (which is where the lens is weakest). 

Actually, the utility I can see for the 24-105 is for portraits in a studio-type setting.  While a 70mm image can be cropped, the perspective is not going to be the same as a shot at 105mm.  The shot at 105mm will be a much more appropriate perspective for a tight portrait.  In a studio setting, there's plenty of light and the background is controlled - so f/4 is fine.

Interesting, Ive always heard it sucked at 24.

On the 60D it is great, no issues at all.

But on the 5D, there is definitely some distortion and softness toward the edges.

Still, despite those flaws, I find it a much more versatile lens on the 5D than the 60D. Although the lens gave more reach at the telephoto end with the 60D, it often wasn't enough for true telephoto shooting so it could be a bit awkward sometimes...

11

Lenses / Re: Trading my Canon 70-300 L for a 70-200 2.8 L ?

« on: April 15, 2013, 01:54:04 PM »

I have both of those lenses and to me, they each serve a different purpose.

The 70-200 2.8 is great but it is heavy to manage for an extended period of time. So unless I really need the 2.8 (and I do, many times, shooting indoors) I just stick with the smaller, lighter 70-300 for my telephoto needs.
The question I would ask is if you really need the extra stop(s) because if you trade in, you'll carry around the extra weight whether you need it or not.

Quality-wise the difference is not huge. I find the 70-200 sharper at 70mm but they are almost indistinguishable by 200mm.

12

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 07, 2013, 05:52:25 PM »

Oh well basically the same sensor again.

Yeah but we knew that... They don't want to undermine the 7d2.

I fully expect the 70D will be a refreshed 7D: "new" sensor with on-chip AF, built on the same process. Better sealing than 60D, somewhere in the 6-8fps range, and decent (maybe 7D) AF. Given that 7Ds now go for 1300ish new, I'd think that 7d specs would put the 70d right where they want it in the lineup. That sets them up well for a 7d2 to be a better camera, that they can charge accordingly for.

Yes, all indications seem to point to the prospective 70D being to the 7D what the 6D was to the old 5D II - a sort of modernized version of the same camera with the same specs and same features, giving and taking a few small items.

13

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]

« on: March 28, 2013, 10:22:29 PM »

Actually, if the 70D or 7DII (whatever) had those same specs, but the sensor had a 2/3 - 1 stop improvement in high ISO performance, that's more than adequate for me.

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Here I go, the Full Frame way!!

« on: March 28, 2013, 10:11:20 PM »

Nice!

I sold the 60D I had in hopes of getting a decent amount for it before the 70D came out. I love the additional reach of crop but the mediocre high ISO performance (above 1600) was really becoming a drag. That's when I decided to spring for the FF 5D. I haven't gotten to use it too much (winter, etc.) but when I did, the IQ was amazing. The last straw with the 60D was shooting an outdoor nighttime sporting event - I had the 5D at the time but elected to take the 60D for the extra reach (I knew it would come in handy). I put the 70-200 2.8 lens on it and the show lighting was absolutely atrocious. This resulted in vastly underexposed/ISO 3200 shots at the shutter speeds I needed to freeze the action, and the resulting noise stripped so much detail out of the photos that I think I may as well have taken the 5DIII and cropped after the fact...and my hit rate probably would have been higher too. (this is noise that's visible even in 640x480 crops!)

Anyway, I still want a decent APS-C camera to supplement the 5D. I'm hoping for a beefed up 70D (7DII probably will cost too much/have to wait too long) that will have better AF tracking for sports. Still cheaper - and lighter! - than one of those massive 400mm or 500mm behemoths...

15

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]

« on: March 28, 2013, 08:58:43 PM »

It's just a test camera, a rumored spec list, etc. Wouldn't put much (if any) stock in it. That said, I admit to not being too excited. It comes down to what the price will be in the end.