September 16, 2014, 03:50:35 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 948
61
I didn't realize you were within the 30 day return period. By all means return it to B&H. Their customer service is as good as it gets. I'm sure Helen will work it so you aren't out anything more than some inconvenience.

Who is Helen?  Should I have asked for her (or rather, should I ask for her in the future when dealing with customer service)?  I didn't catch the name of who I spoke to.

You could ask for Helen...but you'd have to call Adorama.  Helen is an Adorama rep who has contributed here and on other online venues.

62
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7DII - Did you preorder?
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:51:08 AM »
For all that the 7DII is shaping up to be a mini-1D X, I'm just going to stick with my full-sized 1D X.  :)

63
EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 15, 2014, 09:27:09 AM »
Now, please provide the evidence for your claim. Or I will conclude that you - once again - prefer babbling rants to any fact based discussion.

To be honest, I haven't seen any reliable comparisons online that are conclusive, one way or the other.

Aha so it´s subjective.
But you always make it sound like it´s a fact written in stone.
Scroll up one post above yours where I list the better specs of the 5DIII.  Scroll back a few pages to where I say I tested them head to head personally.
Neuro, there is so much SH!T and pointless requoting going on in this thread that I'm struggling to find your informal head-to-head test.
.....
Can you please help with a string of text to help my search (or quote your post) as I'm really interested to see real experience of an AF comparison.

He has none.
Only a test done by himself without any data.

Correct.  I didn't set out to document my results or to demonstrate anything to anyone other than myself. 

64
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Macro Photography - APS-C Vs Full Frame
« on: September 15, 2014, 08:53:15 AM »
Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame.

In fact, that's not true.  It's one of those 'you can't have your cake and eat it, too' situations...

If you match framing, you do get deeper DoF with APS-C as in your f/11 vs. f/19 example.  So...you stop the lens on FF down to f/19, problem solved.  For the sensors under consideration, diffraction will be no different at those apertures (you'll lose a little bit of sharpness with both).  If you need the same shutter speed with ambient light, you raise the ISO to compensate – there's no noise penalty with the better high ISO performance of FF, and if you don't need to raise the shutter speed you have less noise with FF. 

If you match magnification (same distance to subject), the DoF with APS-C is actually shallower than FF at the same aperture.  You have to stop down a bit with APS-C...and if you're at f/11, the FF image isn't being softened by diffraction, but the APS-C image is losing sharpness, and it loses more if you stop it down to match DoF.

So, APS-C really offers no advantage over FF in terms of DoF.  However, there are potential advantages in other areas.  If you match framing, you're further from the subject with APS-C.  The greater working distance is an advantage when shooting skittish insects.  If you match magnification, you get more pixels on target with APS-C (assuming your subject is smaller than the APS-C sensor).

The OP mentions an issue with noise in the ambient background of shots with the T1i/500D and ring flash; the 7DII might be slightly better in that regard, but a FF sensor will bring noticeable improvement.

Personally, I prefer FF for macro work (based on my experience having the 5DII and 7D concurrently).  Here's a shot with the 100L, no way I'd have used this ISO with APS-C...


EOS 1D X, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS, 1/160 s, f/11, ISO 6400

Given the OP's stated uses, I honestly think the 5DIII would be the ideal choice.  It's the best of both worlds (great AF, great high ISO performance, costs less than the combo of 7DII and 6D).  If that's out of budget, the 7DII is probably the better choice.  The AF should be great for BIF, but it's worth noting that BIF requires high shutter speeds, which often means pretty high ISO, especially with an f/5.6 lens – APS-C is fine if there's ample light, but with heavy overcast or at sunset, often not so much. 

65
EOS Bodies / Re: What about this new battery- the LP-E6N?
« on: September 15, 2014, 12:14:08 AM »
They'll work, the N designation is just changes in safety circuitry to comply with Japanese regulations.  I suspect even the charger is the same in this case.

66
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II- September 15th at midnight? Whose midnight?
« on: September 14, 2014, 11:17:08 PM »
Outside of Photokina, I've noticed that the first announcement often comes from the UK or Europe at around 6 am there, meaning midnight or 1 am in the Eastern US.

67
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 14, 2014, 10:39:53 PM »
Any mention of whether the metering will be linked to the AF point? That would be icing on the cake for me, but see no mention of it.

I would suspect no, sadly.

Wish my 5d3 had this. I almost always shoot in manual mode because of inaccurate metering in many situations. This feature might make me lazy (and happy).  :)

For a few thousand dollars more, you can be lazy and happy.  Just buy a 1D X.   ;)

68
EOS Bodies / Re: More Images of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 14, 2014, 10:30:17 PM »
Any mention of whether the metering will be linked to the AF point? That would be icing on the cake for me, but see no mention of it.

I would suspect no, sadly.

69
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 14, 2014, 08:52:27 PM »
Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed.  LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks

If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket.  Is that true of the LX100?

I don't know why you favor Canon over Sony, you're looking for an argument to make it a better camera!
Sony's not a perfect Camera (RX 100 III), and i am a Canon user, but BE objective and accept what is real.
Anyway we're just talking about something we just saw a picture.

"Fit in a jeans pocket" vs "small enough to store it + EVF + better DR + better ISO"

Actually we don't know anything about the DR and ISO, but knowing the current line of Canon DSLR's we don't expect much.

I've been tempted by the RX100 since the first one.  The series are very nice cameras. 

"Fits in a jeans pocket" is an important priority in some some situations, which is why I got the S95 then the S100.  The EOS M has better IQ (especially in low light or when a fast shutter is needed), but it's bigger and sometimes the 18-55 isn't wide enough, whereas 24mm FFeq would be (that happened today). 

The current line of Canon dSLRs is quite possibly irrelevant as far as this camera goes, as Canon most likely bought the Sony sensor (my S95 has a Sony sensor, too). 

70
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Accessory question
« on: September 14, 2014, 08:21:18 PM »
1.  One reason I got the M was as a travel backup body, need the adapter for that.  I use it occasionally for a tele option on the M (a bit ungainly with the 70-300L), I'll likely pick up the M55-200 soon.

2.  I use the Canon ER-E1 strap, has the lug.  Ordered from HK (as the M55-200 will be, there or Canada).

3.  I just got an extra Canon LP-E12.

4.  Lowepro Dashpoint 20 for the M+22, Dashpoint 30 for the M+18-55, the latter fits with the EW-54 hood mounted in the forward (in-use) orientation.

Thanks, Neuro.
Let us know how the M55-200 looks. Good to know that it exists. Wonder why Canon thinks US is such a bad market for the M (well, probably because it is :( )
ER-E1 is a bit expensive for a strap without a cincher. How do you use it? Can you maybe post an image of you holding it?
Some were saying the Wasabi runs longer than the OEM batteries. I wonder...
I'll probably not get the 18-55 anytime soon, so the 20 might work unless I find something *slightly* bigger so I can pack the batteries in as well.

Will do.  TBH, I wasn't initially planning on building an M kit, but I've been quite happy with the M+22, bought the M18-55 recently.

I just use the ER-E1 as a 'safety strap' around my right wrist.  It's leather, well constructed, and doesn't need a cincher for me (although thanks for the reminder - my daughter has a 'cast-off' camera (PowerShot S95), I just ordered some Wiimote cinch straps to keep it from slipping off her wrist again). 

Haven't used the Wasabi batteries.  I get 400-500 shots over 2-3 days on one OEM battery (I have two).

I also have a little Hejnar plate for my Arca-Swiss type tripod clamps.

71
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Accessory question
« on: September 14, 2014, 08:44:45 AM »
1.  One reason I got the M was as a travel backup body, need the adapter for that.  I use it occasionally for a tele option on the M (a bit ungainly with the 70-300L), I'll likely pick up the M55-200 soon.

2.  I use the Canon ER-E1 strap, has the lug.  Ordered from HK (as the M55-200 will be, there or Canada).

3.  I just got an extra Canon LP-E12.

4.  Lowepro Dashpoint 20 for the M+22, Dashpoint 30 for the M+18-55, the latter fits with the EW-54 hood mounted in the forward (in-use) orientation. 

72
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 14, 2014, 07:49:39 AM »
If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket.
Yeah, has it? Compared to S120 -- the sensor is bigger, the lens it faster, the screen is articulated. As much as I'd like to believe the S series form factor and size -- is this possible?
If I can put the EOS-M with 22mm lens in my jacket pocket and even my dress pant pocket, I cannot see why the G7 X cannot be put in the same way.

That would work well...if I wore dress pants or a jacket on summer weekend outings with the family...   ;)

73
Lenses / Re: 18-55 EF-M STM lens
« on: September 13, 2014, 08:35:57 PM »
...I suppose it is my fault for trying to use this as a point and shoot...

If it was a P&S, the flash would have fired giving you plenty of (harsh) light.

74
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 13, 2014, 07:17:57 PM »
Once again, too late to the game as the field has already changed.  LX100 is the new authority...anything less than Four Thirds sensor, no thanks

If the G7 X has the S120 form factor, it will fit in a jeans pocket.  Is that true of the LX100?

75
PowerShot / Re: The New Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 13, 2014, 07:15:39 PM »
If my calculations are correct it's a 35mm equivalent to f4.9 to f7.6.

So, that's 100mm f7.6 in normal exposure values.

Might be a semantic thing, but to be clear...it's f/7.6 in terms of DoF, but f/2.8 in terms of exposure (until you factor in ISO noise, anyway).

Very interesting.
So to be clear, a 1DX with a 100mm f2.8 lens at ISO 100 and the G7X at ISO 100, zoomed all the way in (maximum telephoto) and wide open, will produce images with the same brightness?

Yes.  Exposure (aperture + shutter speed) is determined by light per unit area hitting the sensor.   An f/2.8 lens with a given shutter speed (say 1/100 s) and a given ISO (say ISO 100) will give the same 'brightness' (within a reasonable variation due to different meters) whether the sensor is an iPhone or a Hasselblad medium format. 

However...the image noise is determined by the total light collected, so at a given aperture + shutter speed + ISO, the larger the sensor the lower the noise. 

For the same framing with a smaller sensor, you're either using a shorter FL or you're further away, resulting in a deeper DoF.  That's why a 'crop factor' applies to DoF as well as FL.  If you need that deeper DoF with the larger sensor, you simply stop down and you have it.  If you need to keep the shutter speed up, you raise ISO; the lower noise from the larger sensor means when you match DoF, you match noise and you're no worse off.

Basically, larger sensors give you the option of thinner DoF if you want it (and lower noise if you do), or the same DoF with no penalty.

For further reading:  http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 948