April 18, 2014, 06:43:30 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 46
61
Thanks for the tip.  But is there a trick to this?  All I can see are the "updater" versions.

62
Canon General / Re: TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
« on: November 26, 2013, 12:22:10 AM »
Advancements will have slowed to a snail pace with new features more related to processing speed (eg better/faster AF) and connectivity than sensor / IQ improvments.  With only incremental improvements to IQ, most photographers will start seeing their camera as "good enough" and sales of higher end cameras will decline.  To counter this, we'll see a more modular approach to the 5D5 and IDX3 with most components able to be upgraded easily (but not necessarily cheaply) at Canon service centres.  Even though many people won't update their camera as frequently, Canon will hope that many people will still give their cameras a mid-life refresh 2 to 3 years after buying it.

One they sort out on-sensor AF, Canon will jump over to mirrorless.  But just as you can still but a 1V, you'll still be able to buy a DSLR.  Interestingly, the mirrorless version will be touted as the higher end model, as it will have more accurate focus and faster fps.

On the 1 series bodies, Canon will take a hybrid aproach.  They will still have a mirror, but at the flick of a switch, the camera enters mirror-up mode and an EVF screen appears in the viewfinder.  Best of both worlds.  (Keeping the EF mount allows Canon to do this).

63
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: used gear
« on: November 22, 2013, 03:27:05 AM »
I buy and sell a lot of used camera gear on eBay.  The cost savings can be substantial and for an item that you might use only occasionally, why not buy used?

Very, very rarely, I have had problems with items that I've bought.  But I just contact the seller and return it for a refund.  I've never had any problems obtaining a refund.  The biggest risk is postage as some sellers don't automatically offer to reimburse postage (and I'm probably too nice to push the point).  On eBay, I place a lot of weight on seller ratings and would never consider buying from someone with less than about 99.6% - no matter how cheap it is.  I'll typically pay slightly more to buy from someone with a lot of sales and 100% positive feedback. 

64
I know a lot of people use Nikon lenses with adapters.  The 14-24 is a typical example. But I'm going to second some other comments above.  Unless you have a compelling reason, just buy the Canon mount lens.  That way, you'll solve two problems.  Firstly, you won't have to worry about about manufacturing tolerances for the adapter.  Secondly, lenses mounted to adapters never feel quite as secure.  Hopefully, you wouldn't have any problems anyway, but why put yourself through the hassle?   

65
But my camera does take great photos.  After all, it is a Canon.

66
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Speedlite guide number question
« on: November 21, 2013, 08:28:59 PM »
I recently came across a flash where the manufacturer compared their GN to some competitors.  I thought that was a smart move as it removes  a lot of potential confusion.  Still it is interesting to see that GN 110 = GN 60 = GN 34. (and, of course, some of these measurements are in feet and others in metres, which also makes it a little harder to make direct comparisons.)

"Every company measures guide number differently. At LumoPro®, this is how we measure guide number:
GN= Distance x f/stop,
Distance = 10ft, F/stop at 105mm, ISO 100, Full Power = f/11
10ft x f/11 = 110, GN = 110
The LP180's power is roughly equivalent to the Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT or the Nikon SB-900."

67
Software & Accessories / Re: Best ND1000 3.0 Filter?
« on: November 18, 2013, 05:11:25 AM »
I have a Hoya ND x400.  Its "only" 9 stops (or, more technically, just under 9), but it is well priced and high quality.  It doesn't have a significant colour cast problem and is a nice filter to use.

68
Portrait / Re: And yet again...great talent trumps any amount of equipment
« on: November 13, 2013, 12:07:44 AM »
It is easy to take a photo of something.  Much, much harder to try and be creative and make art.  And it is those people who can that have a much brighter photographic future.

In an overcrowded market, where everyone is capable of taking technically competent images, with rare exceptions, it will only be those who push the boundaries of processing techniques who will be remembered in 200 year's time. 

69
Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: November 12, 2013, 04:21:41 AM »
Just wondering if anyone had any additional thoughts in relation to lenses for night time F1 races?  Singapore looks like a lot of fun.

70
Lenses / Re: The future of Canon L primes
« on: November 10, 2013, 01:09:57 AM »
I'd be guessing that it would approach $2,000 upon release (ie approx. 50% increase).  But they'd probably add IS and beef up weather sealing.  A new 100-400 could be around $2,500.  As a "cheap" lens person, the current 400/5.6 was a simple decision for me - Noticeable cheaper than the 100-400 and arguably faster focusing and sharper at 400/5.6.  But if the price gap percentage between the two narrows, I might be tempted by a new 100-400.  A tough decision to make when you are weighing up two hypothetical lenses.

71
Lenses / Re: The future of Canon L primes
« on: November 09, 2013, 11:56:57 PM »
I wouldn't be surprised if Canon focuses more on the enthusiast market over the next couple of years.  Updated 100-400 and 400/5.6 lenses would be welcome additions (especially if their release coincided with a new 7D2).  The 17-40 is also in need of some minor tweaking.  For a more budget conscious photographer, an updated 17-40 seems a natural choice for a 6D.


72
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Major IQ advantage of FF?
« on: November 08, 2013, 01:51:28 AM »
I enter monthly club photo competitions.  When you view the entries, you have no idea what type of camera was used, the settings, the lens etc.  Yet I know that other photos are taken with a mixture of FF and APS-C cameras.  There's even the occasional film camera and P & S.  But usually its almost impossible to tell what type of camera was used.  And in 100% of cases, from a viewer's perspective, it is irrelevant, because you are only interested in the final result.  You're more concerned with impact, emotion, etc.

But from the photographers perspective, choice of camera is very relevant.  If your final result relates to an image in low light, fast action, taken in the rain, needs particular lenses, etc then things are so much easier if you are using the right tool for the job.  Given that FF cameras have traditionally been more feature packed, apart from IQ, there are a lot of other reasons why they might be the best choice for someone.  Just as in many situations, a crop camera is the best choice.

In summary - when viewing the final result, nobody cares what camera you used.  But choosing the right camera makes it easier to get the best final result.

73
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.3 VC on Thursday
« on: November 05, 2013, 09:44:43 PM »
Probably goes without say, but it needs to be sharp at the long end.  Given that the two main alternatives - the Canon 100-400 and 400/f5.6 are both getting a little old, I'm curious to see how Tamron's new lens compares.  Maybe it will give Canon a little nudge to come up with some replacements. 

74
Canon General / Photographic Honours
« on: November 05, 2013, 07:11:48 AM »
Just wondering if anyone here has earned any photographic honours?  If so, do you have any tips for those starting out?  I've just been reading that it might be best to focus on prints, as there might be a little less competition in relation to acceptances.   Does anyone know if that's the case? 

75
Canon General / Re: ISO Poll
« on: November 04, 2013, 08:48:12 PM »
90% 100-200iso; 8% 400-800iso; 2% either under 100 or over 800.

I suspect that I'm the same.  When I get home tonight, I'll have a look at the exact numbers (but this might be thrown out by night-time timelapse photos, which I normally shoot at 1600).  Most of my photos tend to be deliberately planned, tripod mounted shots where I want the best possible IQ.  Plus lately I've been getting into long exposure shots, and low ISOs help me obtain longer exposures.  ISO 100 is where I live.

Re changing brands/cameras to get better IQ.  Its never really occurred to me.  I'm happy with Canon and prefer their cameras and lenses.  I don't really choose cameras on IQ, but on other features. My latest purchase was theoretically a downgrade in IQ - to an APS-C Fuji X-E1.  But even it produces great photos.  My reasons for purchasing it included it being enjoyable to use, it has a smaller/more socially acceptable body, direct access dials, better IR performance and better AF with IR filters and ND filters.  I'm one of those people for whom, once image quality reaches an acceptable level, it ceases being an important deciding factor.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 46