October 21, 2014, 01:57:59 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 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 52
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Free and Inexpensive Video Editors
« on: November 04, 2012, 10:57:27 PM »
I don't do many videos.  As such, I just use Windows Movie Maker.  (I think this differs to the Live version?).  Anyway, its free and should do all that you want.

Canon General / Re: EOS-M kicking butt in Japan
« on: November 04, 2012, 12:02:50 AM »
They’re not perfect for everyone, but they fit the bill for a lot of people.  It offers a reasonable level of capabilities and image quality.  It is significantly better than phones and most point and shoots.  In that price range, excluding DSLRs, it is difficult to say that anything else is “better”. And, if you already have some Canon lenses, it would be the logical choice for a small camera.  But personally, I’m holding off until version 2 with the EVF, improved battery life and bundled EF to EF-M adapter.

I noticed that someone said they were designed for women.  Well, they do make up half of the population.  But what's next - a camera designed for left handers?  The whole camera universe would implode. 

Lenses / Re: Guess what Canon's next wide angle zoom will be
« on: November 01, 2012, 09:20:33 PM »
Another vote for the 17-40 f/4 IS.  Unless it came with a significant price increase, I think it would be a winner.  I assume it would replace the current 17-40.  As such, it would be a lens with wide market appeal and would find a home in a lot of amateur photographer's bags. 

Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: October 31, 2012, 09:55:32 PM »
Being a rumors site, I'll just mention that a Tamron 150-600 was discussed recently.  If it becomes reality, I'll be keen to hear confirmation, reviews and pricing on that.  There are also persistent rumors of the Canon 400 f/5.6 being upgraded to include IS.  Personally, the only long lens that I've used is the 400 f/5.6.  Its a good lens at an ok price.  But you give up the flexibility of a zoom and the IS of the 100-400. During early morning and late afternoon, when you're likely to get great photos, IS can be handy (although, obviously is doesn't stop subject movement).

Lately, I've gone a different path.  Realising that I can't really justify what I really want (or need?) - a 500mm or 600mm - I'm using smaller lenses and trying to get in closer or having more background to portray wildlife in their natural environment.  While its no good for birds in flight, it is much better on the back and wallet. Alternatively, for a small outlay, you can hook a Panasonic 100-300 on to a Micro Four Thirds body.  This gives you an image stabilised 200-600 equivalent.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D for a 1DS mk2 ??
« on: October 31, 2012, 09:02:09 AM »
old nickle metal hydride type they dont hold charge well and will likely drive you nuts

With constant heavy use, you might only get a few years out of a battery.  But I think in the US, genuine batteries are only about $100.  And there are also a lot of cheaper 3rd party batteries out there as well.  I can typically get around 1500 shots per battery with mine - when they're working properly, they're usually pretty good.  (But the battery charge indicator is useless.  You need to keep a mental tally of shots taken or just recharge it regularly).  Also the battery charger has a "refresh" feature that helps keep the battery in good condition. 

BTW - Make sure you get the battery charger as they are expensive

Bear in mind the 1Ds Mk ii is a much bigger and heavier camera.  You notice the weight when carrying it all day.  It also draws a bit of attention.

I've never used a 5D Classic, to compare, but I love the image quality of the 1Ds Mk ii at 100 ISO.  Noise becomes apparent reasonably quickly and is obvious at 400 ISO and over.  But it still captures nice images all the way through its range.  I've read some articles that suggest that it is less sharp than a 5Dii.  Personally, I don't think that's the case.

On the plus side, it is fast and responsive.  Apart from the size and weight, it is a pleasure to use.  The downside?.....it lacks video.  Also, you need firewire to connect directly to the camera for tethered shooting etc and later versions of Canon DPP don't seem to support this.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M or ...???
« on: October 30, 2012, 12:29:21 AM »
Any reason that you're looking at the "G" bodies?  The S110 should have similar performance in a smaller, lighter, lower cost body.  A pocketable camera is a good supplement to a DSLR when travelling.

When you look at the price of the EOS-M and G1X, I just feel there is better value options out there with other brands. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Projection question
« on: October 29, 2012, 09:59:28 AM »
Brand B is spot on.  At best, you'll have HD resolution (2mp).  With older facilities, resolution will likely be less.  And then you have to deal with lighting and focus issues.  You won't notice the minimal differences in sharpness, colour accuracy, tonality, noise between cameras.  A new camera won't give you any noticeable improvements for most photos.  Differences in background blur will still be noticeable (well...as much as any APS-C vs FF comparison).  Also, photos at very high ISOs from the 5Diii will probably look better projected, assuming you are in a completely dark room.  Therefore, for nearly everything, any differences will be negligible.  At the very extremes, under ideal projection conditions, the 5Diii should give better results.

Given that used slide projectors are very cheap, have you considered shooting slide film and bringing your own?  Projected film looks good, plus, there is no such thing as "Post Production".  Once the slide is developed, that's it.  It's either a good shot or its not.  No more time spent in front of computers.  (Although I note your EF-S lenses....) 

Pricewatch Deals / Re: New Canon INSTANT REBATES for October - December!
« on: October 29, 2012, 06:42:39 AM »
Just picked up a 40mm f2.8 for $149.  Don't really need it, but they're just sooooo cute!

Lenses / Re: Rationalise my kit!
« on: October 28, 2012, 09:02:06 PM »
The 14-24 has a good reputation.  If you go down that road, make sure you to give us a review and whether it is worthwhile using on a Canon body. 

Lenses / Re: Bring 120-300 OS or buy 55-250mm ?
« on: October 27, 2012, 02:55:53 AM »
Whoa...the Sigma weights 2.6kg?  Are you out of your mind?  You're going to carry that boat anchor everywhere you go for two months?  Haven't you heard of carry-on weight limits?  Unless you have a specific use in mind or aren't moving around much, I'd consider something else.  Common sense says to take somethng smaller and lighter.   

Also, not sure what your plans are, but if they involve typical tourist things 120-300 might not be a focal length that you'll use much.  Whereas the 55-250 is a good supplement to a wider lens.  I don't know about IQ of the 55-250.  If you're concerned maybe consider a 50mm or 85mm?  (Of course, if you're there to photograph wildlife, pleawse ignore everything I've said.)

On the other query, the chances of having gear stolen is low, but it does happen.  Make sure your travel insurance covers it with minimal excess and then, apart from the inconvenience, its one less thing to lose sleep over.  Look at ways to back up memory cards.  I typically travel with a laptop and HDD for work anyway - but this adds to the weight.  (When she's not looking, I drop the HDD in my wife's handbag for safe keeping.)  And I try to upload favourite photos to smugmug whenever I can.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Zoo Pics
« on: October 24, 2012, 11:07:24 PM »
Is there a general consensus of the best focal lengths for zoo trips?  Will be visiting Taronga Zoo in a few weeks time on holidays.  Just working out what to pack.  My initial thought is bigger the better.  But I'm surprised to see a lot of the photos here have been taken with more moderate sized lenses.

Lenses / Re: Are Lens Hoods Universal?
« on: October 24, 2012, 09:09:35 AM »
They are actually expensive, because this is the kind of accessories where brands make a LOT of money (in Europe, Canon ET-73 for the 100mm macro is sold around 40 Euro, costing probably 1 or 2 Euro out of the factory), as you are likely to loose or break it, this is a good source of money.

Part of the reason why there is also a roaring eBay trade in third party replica Canon hoods.

Canon General / Re: Canon vs. Nikon from Google Trends
« on: October 21, 2012, 06:16:09 AM »
Unless I'm misinterpreting it, there is just as much Nikon interest in the USA as Canon interest.  Which appears to be in stark contrast to most of the rest of the world which is heavily Canon weighted.  I wonder if that's partly why a lot of internet sites with a large US contingent (eg this one) seem so fixated on Nikon?  Every day, the same topics arise - Is the 5Diii as good as the D800?  Why does DxO favour Nikon?  Should I switch to Nikon?  Nikon certainly generate more discussion than their sales figures (and worldwide internet interest) would warrant.  There are other camera brands out there.

Australia / Re: Legal question on photography
« on: October 21, 2012, 05:55:20 AM »
With South Africa playing, you'd think they'd let them in to make them feel at home and welcome.  But sadly there's also a ban on musical instruments.  Its a pity - when the pommies come out, some of their fans are actually pretty good musicians.  (At least it compensated for their very ordinary cricketers.)  And the windies have some good drummers and musicians too.  I don't know about Sri Lanka, but I'm sure they've got some talent too.  All of these bans take some of the colour and fun away.

EOS Bodies / Re: Iconic photographs
« on: October 21, 2012, 04:10:53 AM »
Very good point....except that at least two of your photos were taken with Leicas!  :)

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 52