August 01, 2014, 02:11:37 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 - Hillsilly

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 49
16
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR vs Mirrorless :: Evolution of cameras
« on: June 23, 2014, 11:22:22 AM »
 
If I can travel with Fauji XT-1 and some XF lenses such as 35mm1.4, 56mm 1.2, UWA 10-24 F4 OIS, 14mm 2.8  etc then why on earth should I invest in DSLR or these new lenses being released by canon, sigma etc while I get a huge advantage on other things while only sacrificing a very little in quality or any other feature?

High ISO.  The Fuji system uses crop sensors exclusively, AFAIK, whereas most of Canon's lenses are designed to accommodate full-frame sensors in their higher end cameras.  For indoor shooting, that extra bit of surface area makes a huge difference.

As far as most image quality attributes go, images produced with Fuji cameras are essentially indistinguishable from Canon 16mp FF sensors.  The only significant difference is the extra degree of background blur that is  possible with the FF sensor.  But this is where is gets really interesting.  The Fuji lenses are very nice.  They are also fairly sharp wide open.  I'll throw it out there - does anyone really use the Canon 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 wide open when they are seeking sharp images?  I suspect not many.  But you can use the Fuji lenses wide and get very nice results.  The Fuji lenses also produce nicer bokeh.  Given that you might be more likely to use the Fuji lenses at wider apertures than comparable Canon lenses, even the background blur argument probably results in a tie. 

The key benefit of the Canon system is that there is such a wide variety of cameras, lenses and accessories available.  There are also a lot of specialised equipment such as tilt/shift lenses, fish eye zooms, big white lenses etc that many manufacturers don't have.  Compared to Fuji, the Canon flash systems is noticeably more advanced.  Most camera/lens combinations will focus faster.  And if you are into sports and wildlife, shooting with Fuji is an exercise in frustration.  For many reasons, Canon is the sensible choice.

Still, I bought into the Fuji system, and while acknowledging its many weaknesses, for everyday photography, I think it is awesome.

I read the comments above about mirrorless wildlife shooters with a smile on my face.  I'm sure those people exist.  But I suspect most people buying mirrorless cameras are more experienced photographers who are realistic about their expectations.  As long as you don't believe any of the hype about "world's fastest AF", but understand that AF speed is fine for things that aren't moving fast, you can't go wrong.

17
EOS Bodies / Re: What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
« on: June 23, 2014, 09:09:45 AM »
EF-S 12mm f/2.8 (with no IR hotspots).

18
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR vs Mirrorless :: Evolution of cameras
« on: June 20, 2014, 03:51:02 AM »
I agree that mirrorless is the future for most photographers.  There are a lot of reasons why Canon hasn't embraced mirrorless cameras, but many of the reasons centre around Canon wanting to continue their dominance in the DSLR market where they enjoy excellent market share and good profitability. 

In many countries, the use of mirrorless cameras is already high.  Progressively, over the next 10+ years, as mirrorless cameras continue to improve with AF and EVF/hybrid OVF technology, as more EF-M lenses are announced etc, you'll see a steady shift in other countries, too.  With a few more generational improvements, I struggle to imaging where a DSLR will have an advantage.  Eventually, we'll reach a point where we'll consider the concept of a flapping mirror in a camera to be a quaint idea held onto by a band of traditionalist purists.

BTW for those comparing Fuji prices, just note that XF lenses are the better quality lenses and probably aren't a direct equivalent to most EF-S lenses.  The XC lenses are probably a better comparison. I also see that I can get a Fuji XA-1 with a nice XC 16-50mm lens for $385.  A significantly cheaper alternative to any Canon DSLR kit.

19
Canon General / Re: Is Australia Canon's favorite?
« on: June 19, 2014, 03:54:18 AM »
We're Canon's favourites because we'll happily pay up to twice as much for their gear than people in other countries.

20
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: ND Filter in software
« on: June 18, 2014, 10:39:54 AM »
We just need an ISO 25, 12, 6, 3, 1, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.06.  With ISO 50, that gives the same as a Big Stopper without the colour cast.  Problem solved.

Other cameras (such as the Fuji x100) have an inbuilt ND filter.

21
In all of the major sporting events I have been to, this would not be possible. 
Hockey people are very easy going.  And while the World Cup is big, it's not THAT big of an event.   I'd give it a highly possible. 

BTW, how did you find it?  Looked pretty good on TV (but did not spot any 7Dmkii's in the crowd....).  Australia are playing Netherlands again in Soccer tonight.  I suspect Netherlands will reverse the Men's final result.


22
EOS Bodies / Re: Ye Olde Film Photography
« on: June 16, 2014, 04:20:09 AM »
Don't worry, you're not missing anything.  A fully digital workflow has numerous advantages over film capture.  And it is so much easier and faster to learn using digital cameras than film cameras.  You just have to look at the quality of images produced these days by serious amateurs.  They'd easily eclipse the work of most professionals 20 years ago.  Still, I still shoot the occasional roll of film and love the results I'm getting from some of the more recent films like Kodak Portra. 

On a less serious note, shooting film is also good for your ego, as you just know that you are superior to the billions of people shooting digital.  You can actually afford a Leica (or a Hassleblad or any number of other great cameras).  And girls think of you as an artist, and not some computer geek who can only talk about DR or whether DXO is biased.  You'll stop worrying about noise at high ISOs....because there aren't any high ISOs.  And you'll no longer wish for a Canon FF mirrorless camera once you pick up a Canonet QL17 GIII.

23
Animal Kingdom / Re: A new take on BIF
« on: June 14, 2014, 07:37:55 AM »
Based on the actual offset of the shadow, it was moving at a vector of about 120° then...as the shadow is not directly behind, it's offset to a about a -35° angle. That seems a little odd...but, eh.
And then, of course, you have camera shake, wings flapping etc etc.  Another one without any shadows...

24
Animal Kingdom / Re: A new take on BIF
« on: June 13, 2014, 10:30:44 PM »
It was shot at 1/160s with rear shutter curtain synch.  The rear drop shadow is the movement of the flying fox before the flash kicked in.  But that's the sort of problems I'm trying to work around.  If I shoot at faster speeds, I can avoid this, but then I lose detail in the sky and if I shoot faster that 1/250s then I'm also stuck with HSS, and the bats are too far away for this to work effectively with the gear that I have.  To counter that, I can increase ISO and decrease flash power, but increasing ISO results in more noise.  Its hard to get the balance right.

25
EOS-M / Re: Got my new IR eos-m!
« on: June 12, 2014, 10:39:57 AM »
Cool!  You're in Australia, aren't you?  Any problems with the whole process?  I see there are a couple of cheaper places in Sydney advertising on eBay.  You weren't tempted by one of these?

26
Animal Kingdom / Re: A new take on BIF
« on: June 12, 2014, 04:16:24 AM »
One of my better attempts.  Taken with a 1Ds Mkii, ISO 400, with a 135/2 lens and flash.  My camera isn't ideal for this.  It focuses fine, but struggles with noise at higher ISOs.

27
Software & Accessories / Re: 1-Hour Photo iPhone App - Why?
« on: June 11, 2014, 10:08:54 PM »
My 1000FN has a window in the back to see the film, don't tell me they left it off the pro cameras?
Cheers Graham.
I love how my 1000FN plays music during delayed shutter release.  Very entertaining!  And another great feature noticeably missing from pro cameras.

Re the app - live for the moment.  Take the photo now, but don't waste time reviewing it, facebooking it, twitter it etc. You can do that later.

28
Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 11, 2014, 04:17:14 AM »
My first was a 400/5.6, followed shortly after by a 17-40 and a 70-200/4.  The 135 is my only other L lens.

29
Lenses / Re: This thing's gotta go!
« on: June 11, 2014, 04:09:50 AM »
I've got the worlds biggest collection of undesirable Canon lenses, including numerous 35-80/35-105/28-105 kit lens variations.  I've got the 100-300 (with micromotor). There's a 400/5.6 with fungus problems.  A 100mm macro on which all of the buttons have fallen off.  A 50/1.8 that's not getting much love since I purchased a 40mm.  A 17-40 that's had no use since I purchased a Fuji 14mm.  A 70-200 that gets minimal use since I purchased a 135/2.  Then there's my entire Minolta collection.  At least 40 filters.  Throw in some bags, tripods, ye olde high voltage flashes, 2 enlargers, all the darkroom equipment, chemicals and papers you can imagine and a model left over from a photo shoot, and I'm starting to think it is time for a garage sale.

30
It would be a nice and fun camera to own,  but you'd have to wonder if it would add much to your photography.  I'd agree with the above about scanning at home - it can get very frustrating very quickly.  But if it is possible to scan the negatives at the time of development, you might be pleasantly surprised by the results.  (Of course, you can always print nice images from the negatives.)

Personally, I'm waiting for something like a Linhof Technorama 617 to come into that price bracket. 

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 49