« on: August 03, 2014, 09:25:15 PM »
Craig, totally bummed out to hear about your business loss. I hope the Police nail whoever is responsible for the thefts.
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.
I do agree on longer focal lenghts, and bigger lenses, but there is still something to do, and as you mentioned, it lags especially at primes. I want f/1.8 M primes! Small 12mm, 32mm and 50mm primes. (35,50 and 80mm FLs).Agreed. Something like a Fuji 56/1.2 equivalent would round this out as a nice compact portrait kit. The kit lens has you at 5.6 when at 55mm - making the next town in focus
The time between new models seems to be increasing. There is typically little difference other than a few features.
Canon has said that their high end point and shoot models are doing very well, particularly the super zooms. I expect to see more in the $500-$800 range.
Typically a new S series comes out every September/October.I don't recall anything being announced to succeed the S120, have any of you heard anything of a looming release?
Thanks in advance
Nailed it at 1.4! Great shot!
Here's a shot from earlier today, I have rediscovered hard light, and I love it!Nailed it at 1.4! Great shot!
Two Canon 600 RT bare bulb to the back left at 1/1 power, zoomed to 50mm. Triggered by the Canon ST-E3. Sigma 50 Art at f1.4, iso 100, 1/8000s.
One slight frustration with the EOS-M system is the currently three different filter sizes across four lenses - is that really necessary ?Agreed - this is certainly a pain. Even if you buy a CPL for the biggest lens you still would need a step-down ring for the others which adds bulk. I would imagine they made the lenses as small as possible to keep weight down hence the three sizes.
Much clearer now - thanks for this!Admittedly I have not looked into Speedboosters but I wonder how they increase stops of lights passing through them? Changing perspective such as what an extender does I get but extenders degrade the amount of light rather than boost it.A teleconverter enlarges the image projected by the lens. This is much like moving a projecter further away from a projector screen - much of the image is missing from the screen, and even though the quantity of light coming out of the projector is no different, what is on the screen is bigger and dimmer.
Do it the other way only works if you're using a lens designed for a larger format. It telecompresses the light into a smaller imaging circle, producing a brighter, smaller image. Same concept as a projector throwing out too big an image for a screen, so you move it closer.
Obviously using a larger projector screen (read: sensor) in the first place would have captured the same quantity of light, even through the intensity per unit area on the screen (sensor) is lower.
Or a different way of looking at it is the focal length has changed due to a teleconverter or telecompressor, but the physical aperture still has the same diameter. Therefore the aperture ratio (f stop) has to change.
A telecompressor is just a way of using a smaller sensor to do most of what a larger sensor would do with that lens natively. Even though numbers all get shifted around (focal length, aperture ratio, ISO, but not physical aperture or shutter speed), the end result should be the same (presuming the telecompresor ratio is that same as the crop factor, and you tweak all the settings to create equivalence).