January 28, 2015, 11:31:18 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 - Hillsilly

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 54
Hi.  Don't know how scientific your tests were.  But as a 1Ds Mkii owner myself, I've yet to be convinved that newer cameras offer significantly improved image quality at ISO 100 (where I'm at for most of the time).  The 5Diii might have better dynamic range, but I don't know how noticeable this would be in the real world.  And of course, if you try to shoot at higher than ISO 3200....

Makes you wonder what Canon have been doing for the last 10 years.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 05, 2013, 03:57:36 AM »
I can see fuji and sony will take a BIG bite in smaller body models build with ff and crop sensors - X100(s) and RX-1 are great gear on the market.

I agree.  In particular, in the $600 to $1200 price range, there are so many good cameras around that I'm amazed Canon maintains such market dominance.  But they must be getting a little worried.  And this is one of the reasons why Canon will (hopefully) return the 70D to its roots - a more rugged, feature packed, well built, action and wildlife orientated camera for those with around $1200-$1400 to spend.

Great autofocusing capabilities is the only significant advantage Canon holds over many competitors.  I'm pretty sure it will be the foundation of their camera bodies and marketing efforts in coming years.  That way, when people go into a shop to buy their first serious camera, the salesperson will agree that the new Sony or Olympus or Panasonic or Fuji takes great photos.  Just not of anything that moves.  The 70D, however, not only takes great photos, but also has a state of the art AF system.  They'll never miss an important shot again.  Add in weather sealing, WIFI, GPS, dual card slots etc etc and, as long as it comes in different colours, Canon can lock in another three years as market leader. 

Also, it must have hurt Canon's feelings for everyone to say the D7000 was better than the 60D - especially given that it was cheaper.  I doubt they want a repeat of that.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 04, 2013, 09:24:52 AM »
A 7Dii has a value proposition problem.  Go back a few years and there was a big performance difference (AF, FPS) between the 7D and the 5Dii, and buying a 7D made a lot of sense to people who didn't want to step up to a 1D4.  But the 5Diii narrows the performance gap considerably.  And given the overall IQ benefits of the 5Diii, I have doubts that there would be many, if any, 7Dii buyers out there. 

We'll only see a 7Dii when Canon develops a next generation of APS-C sensors in which the image quality is noticeably better than a cropped 5Diii image.

Lenses / Re: Telephoto choice for Australia
« on: January 31, 2013, 10:46:42 PM »
With birds, the bigger lens the better of course.  But in most tourist locations, getting close to other wildlife won't be a problems and a 70-200 (with extender just in case) should be fine.  Dingoes have no problems getting close to people on Fraser Island.  In fact, dingo attacks are fairly common - As tourists give food to the dingoes, they have started to expect this.  Keep your eye open for humpback whales on the way over there. 

Living in Brisbane, I don't really know what other people find exotic or intersting.  On the Gold Coast, if you want to photograph some wallabies (and if you're lucky koalas) in the "wild", try the Coombabah Lakelands Conservation Area.  While 500mm will be great, a 70-200mm is a good focal length here.  You mention birds, so if Rainbow Lorikeets are your thing, try Burleigh Heads beach in the late afternoon.  A 70-200 will also work well here.  If you want to get really serious/adventurous, try searching for Lyrebirds in Gold Coast hinterland.  You'd want a 500mm+ for this. 

I guess my final answer would be to say that you'd do pretty well with just the 70-200.  But there will be occassions when you will wish for something longer.  But unless you are seriously into wildlife photography, I'd leave the 500mm at home.   

Lenses / Re: Please explain the need for f2.8 zooms
« on: January 31, 2013, 04:34:59 AM »
Hardly a pro, and a lot of the time I take group photos I often wish I had used a smaller aperture for increased DOF.  So I see where the OP is coming from.  But when I look at a good set of wedding photos, the photographer will generally have a good selection of narrow depth of field photos.  These would tend to be the less formal shots and are often the best / favourite photos of the day.  (Although, many of these are probably taken with a prime with an even wider aperture than f/2.8).

Hi Jens, I think everything has been covered, but just wanted to weigh in with my 2c.  First up, as a predominantly film shooter myself, I just wanted to say you're making the right decision to go digital for the trip.  The freedom to take as many photos as you want without worrying about processing costs, xray machines, availability of film, ease of sharing photos etc can't be underestimated.  Plus, you'll probably be surprised how good digital is compared with film these days.  Its no longer a competition.  However, as mentioned above, there are new challenges, including batteries, backup storage, security, should you take a laptop with you, raw vs jpeg...I'm sure you'll have fun figuring out your own solution. 

On to serious matters.  You've inadvertantly stumbled onto the deep, dark secret of the camera industry.  In well lit conditions, a camera phone can take a photo that is as captivating as a full frame camera.  Canon and Nikon jointly fund a PR company to deal with problem people like yourself.  I'd be expecting a knock on the door any moment from someone offering hush money....  So why go full frame with the 5Diii?  Marginally more background blur.  Better image quality at high ISO's (and if you look really closely, better at low ISO's too).  A little bit less "noise" in dark parts of your photo. Comparing your two cameras, the 5D will have better autofocusing and subject tracking abilities (not that the 650D is "bad') and will be less likely to break if you get some rain on it (although, I'd be very surprised if the 650D couldn't withstand a few drops).  The 5Diii is a better camera and at the extremes, you will be able to take photos with it that the 650D will struggle with.  Do these differences matter to you and are they worth the price increase?  Some people say yes.  Many say no.

One of the earlier posters raised a very good point.  If keeping the 5Diii impacts on your ability to fund lenses (or have an enjoyable trip), I know which way I'd lean.  Also, I get the impression that you're a little older than the average Canon Rumors poster.  If that's the case, I'd be really wary about weighing yourself down with a lot of camera gear unless that's the driving focus of the trip.  Anyway, have fun!

Hi, I'm reasonably new to time lapse too.  I'm using a JJC Multi Exposure Timer.  Its cheap at $35.  But works well and its pretty easy to figure out.  I picked it up from a company called gadget infinity, who also sell wireless ones.  Do some research.  There are some advantages for going wireless, but a wired solution uses less battery power.  This is important if you want to leave it running for a long time.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recommendations for a friend
« on: January 29, 2013, 11:42:17 PM »
....any reason not to push her towards a nex or micro 4/3's?

One of the benefits of sticking with Canon would be that she can take advantage of your experience and knowledge and you could lend her a lens or two when needed.  But if we're allowing new options, I'd at least consider the Olympus EPL-5 with kit lens and EVF.  And, although currently out of your price range, the OM-D EM-5 has been discontinued and a new model will be released soon.  There should also be some good deals coming up on this too. 

While hogging shelf space (as mentioned above) is probably the driving motive, as long as they are adding new features and capabilities, I say good on them.  For example, the new-ish SX50 HS looks quite interesting.  I'm tempted to pick one up myself.

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 29, 2013, 04:07:01 AM »
My first Canon (AE-1 program) was a gift from my dad.  He was a Pentax shooter, and like most dads, probably wanted better for his children  :)  In hindsight, it seems like a ill conceived idea as it would have made more sense for everyone to be using the same mount.  But at the time, brand snobbery was very big.  My dad always thought his competition entries were at a disadvantage when he listed a Pentax camera with Sigma lens.

That was a long time ago, and I've since owned a number of different systems.  Throughout most of the 90's, I predominantly used a Mamiya RB67 kit.  Recently, I've started playing with an Olympus m43 camera.  I've also owned Yashicas and Minoltas.  I'm constantly wondering if I should switch to Nikon, Sony or [insert brand of the month here].  But no matter how far or how wide I roam, I still call Canon home.  Canon and Nikon are really the only two companies with the complete package.  Once you've bought into one system, there is rarely a compelling reason to switch sides.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recommendations for a friend
« on: January 28, 2013, 11:35:18 PM »
For what its worth, I've got both the 50 f/1.8 and 40 f/2.8.  Although sharpness is similar, the 40mm is a much nicer and quieter lens to use.  It would be my pick if I had to choose between them.  (Although...the 50mm is a little longer and a nice portrait length on a crop camera).

With the cameras, I'd probably just buy the new t3i given the smallish price difference.

Technical Support / Re: at what shutter speed you turn IS off?
« on: January 28, 2013, 01:11:29 AM »
IS - one of the topics where it seems like no one has any idea what they're talking about.

I can't even remember the last time I turned IS off.  Yet, I've read numerous times that you should turn it off when not needed.  For example...


Maybe Canon's system is better.  Maybe some of my shots would be better without it.  Who knows?

If there are benefits with keeping it off in some cases, maybe there is an argument for a camera setting that allows you to disable IS automatically under certain conditions (eg above a certain shutter speed).

I had the nickname hillbilly.  (I assume that was because my surname started with Hill...but you never know.  Maybe it was because of my love of flannelette and my VH V8 SLE). Over time, it morphed in hillsilly.

EOS-M / Re: Micro four DoF and lenses
« on: January 24, 2013, 01:35:57 AM »
For subjects at close distance, the primes can produce nice background blur.  The lack of very large aperture lenses is just in keeping with m43 philosophy of small and light.  For a similar reason, there are no large aperture longer lenses.  But overall, it is a good compromise system.  It just needs a few more tweaks of the AF speed and a reasonably priced, high quality 300mm f/2.8.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Up to what ISO are you willing to set?
« on: January 23, 2013, 01:51:58 AM »
No limit as such and I've been known to go all the way to the dizzying heights of 3200 (my 1Ds Mkii's limit).  But 90%+ of the time, I'm at ISO 100 and I rarely go above 400 or 800.  Interestingly, though, I've started playing around with night time timelapse photography and have been pleasantly surprised how well ISO 1600 works for this.

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 54