September 20, 2014, 10:05:52 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] 5 6 ... 51
Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 08, 2014, 07:34:11 AM »
There was a photo recently on this site of photographers at the world cup wearing Sony vests, yet virtually everyone was shooting Canon.  It wasn't the high percentage of Canon users that surprised me.  It was that they were all using the standard Canon strap.

Canon General / Re: Seeing Rebels....
« on: July 07, 2014, 07:11:00 PM »
I'm in Australia and at sporting events, its almost all Canon.  This is especially noticeable at rally car races, where virtually everyone is carrying a Canon DSLR.   But otherwise, I think Australia is rapidly become mirrorless central.  In particular, I'm noticing a lot more Sony Nex and Olympus cameras.

EOS Bodies / Re: Comes the next Canon's with a New X-Trans Sensor?
« on: June 26, 2014, 11:06:29 PM »
As I mentioned LR & PS above, I might clarify my opinion.  RAW files in LR & PS are fine.  Certainly as good as a Canon RAW file.  However, there are a few programs that seem to be able to get even more detail out of Fuji files.  If you do a search, you'll find a number of comparison pages.  But as with Canon, most people use Adobe programs without complaint.  So its not that they are bad.  It's just that some other programs seem to process some x-trans sensors images better.  Personally, I use LR & PS and Nik.

(Although in most blind tests, most people can't tell the difference and think it is all much of a muchness).

(In the early days, LR & PS sometimes generated some "smearing" (for want of a better word) in some images , but in recent updates, that problem has been largely reduced/gone).

As above, most of my photos are shot with a Fuji camera.  I also doubt if I'll be making a significant Canon purchase in the foreseeable future.  But all the Fuji forums are so dull.  99% of the posts are from people saying "I just sold all my Canon (or Nikon) gear and have never been happier".  So apart from having a number of camera bodies and lenses and a foot in both camps, CanonRumors is so much more interesting.

EOS Bodies / Re: Comes the next Canon's with a New X-Trans Sensor?
« on: June 26, 2014, 08:03:00 PM »
I hope you're being sarcastic....and not actually worried about DXO and how they may or may not rate the new sensor.  You're 'nervous'....really??? 

Yes, given the general antipathy towards the DxO Mark around here, I thought most people would pick up on the sarcasm. 

Personally, I shoot Fuji and love the IQ.  I'd have no problems if Canon moved in that direction.  But their images are different to Canon.  They come out less vibrant.  This is fine for many things (especially portraits), but something that dedicated Canon landscape photographers might not appreciate.  Some interesting comments above about Fuji RAW files.  I've never noticed anything wrong with them and have always been impressed with the detail they contain.  There are some known issues with RAW converters (such as in LightRoom and PhotoShop).  But I'd assume that given Canon's market dominance, if they were to start using an X-Trans sensor, the software makers would dedicate the necessary resources to support the sensor properly.

EOS Bodies / Re: Comes the next Canon's with a New X-Trans Sensor?
« on: June 26, 2014, 03:36:40 AM »
But DxO have never tested an x-trans sensor.  I'm nervous...what if they give them a worse rating than the current Canon ones?  To play it safe, they should use the Nikon D4s sensor.  At least we know it has good DR (at least until the D810 is tested).

I'm considering getting one of these; I assume you mean the Mitakon Canon FD - Sony E-mount Lens Turbo? Is it any good? I have a bunch of consumer level FL and FD(n) primes that I may use with it, and I'm thinking of picking up a Sigma 21-35 zoom.

That's what I meant.  I've never tried one myself, but I use a few old Minolta lenses on a Fuji X-E1 and often think about picking one up.  (For those curious, there is also the original Metabones Speed Booster, too).

I'm surprised that Canon haven't released anything similar for the EOS-M for both FD and EF lenses. 

With a Sony NEX camera, you can use a lens turbo to give you the same look that you'd get with a film/FF camera.  The Sony's also have good focus peaking options to make manual focusing easier.

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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° 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...

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 51