October 20, 2014, 02:46:39 PM

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 - pedro

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 52
331
EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 16, 2013, 08:35:36 AM »
Here are some quotes from nikon users:

" I would look for a used D700, D3, or D3s. The D800 files are going to be way too big for your needs. The D4 is somewhat overpriced for what you are going to need."

"D3s is the leader for low light, D4 is a piece of junk. D800 is crap unless you're in a studio. Wouldn't touch a canon unless 5DMrkIII"

" Best wedding camera on the market today is the D3s. The best value wedding camera on the market today is the D700."

" I agree with Brady, D3s is a beautiful camera. Shooting with 2 32GB CF cards with one for immediate backup is a great way to shoot a wedding with confidence! D800 is a body geared towards the landscape/commercial world but not for weddings. D4 was a dud."
I have seen my share of professional and/or accomplished photographers giving poor advice. ("yeah, sonny, get one of them cameras with large pixels, those will have less noise"). I have no idea if the  people you quote give good advice.

-h

OK, here are the sites of some of those quoted --

http://www.nealurban.com/splash

http://www.bradydillsworth.com/

http://www.drewzinckphotography.com/

http://argentophotography.com/

LOL...I find it funny that as opposed to hearing the other side of the fence recommending lower mp'ed bodies for weddings in your mind = obviously bad advice.  Why is it so hard to accept that if you don't need to shoot to print 40x60 or larger a lower mp camera is bad?????   What I find even funnier is that in a standard photography forum (not nikon or canon), you see many nikon users telling younger photogs that the 5d3 is a great idea if your upgrading to FF and are not invested in glass????  File size does matter if you shoot 2000 images or more per event you shoot.

According to my shooting habits the highest amount of files I get while shooting is near 200. Developing them in DPP and some PP in CS2 (old but suits my needs), piece by piece. Due to an old and slow PC I don't even shoot full res. mRAW is way enough for now. So MPs really count. IQ wise as well, if you aim at mostly high ISOs and available light. So for me to go far beyond the current MP count of my 5D3 in a next body cycle would be a loss. As the 5D3 is a great low light tool at a (still) decent price. Especially if your amateur budget is not apt for an 1Dx. I'd prefer a split: 5Dx ("revolutionary" 22 -24MP sensor, decent ultra high ISOs, 50-51k "native", 102 and 204k extended, 0.5-1 stop improvement in RAW in comparison to the 5D3) 5Ds (new high MP sensor, ISOs 50-25kmax, ultra high DR)

332
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Big Sur and San Fran 5D3 Long Exposure
« on: February 16, 2013, 06:57:13 AM »
The GGB looks great with the reflection on the water. To cool the color temperature a bit down gives the edge. But that is up to one's personal preferencies...Keep them coming. Are you on flickr?

333
EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 15, 2013, 06:59:37 PM »
For someone who doesnt't have years of experience with the Canon product line. What caracterized the 1DsIII?

For its time, the 1DsIII was the king of resolution and overall IQ, which made it the go-to workhorse for many studio photogs. However, it's state of the art (for its time) AF and respectable 5 FPS burst rate made it an extremely versatile tool that could be used for occasional action and sports photography as well.

Other than high-ISO improvements, the 5DIII doesn't offer much if any improvement in overall IQ or resolution, but then again, the 5DIII is less than half the price of what the 1DsIII sold for when new. If I already owned a 1DsIII I'd probably still be shooting with one, but I didn't own one, so I'm more than thrilled with my 5DIII :)

I never owned an 1DsIII either, not my budget anyway. But coming from a 30D my 5DIII is a huge step up and it blows me away...anytime I pick it up. If it doesn't it's always the dude behind ;-)

334
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 15, 2013, 06:32:07 PM »

So your belief is that if brand A can make a camera at $2000 and brand B can make an camera at least as good at $1495, the majority of prior brand A customers will stick to brand A?

Why? Due to existing investement (perhaps only a heavily invested minority), or due to being brainwashed?

I like to think that there is at least some "rationalism" in the market, where people choose the supplier that has the best price/performance ratio.

-h

There is also momentum.... Someone who is just getting into cameras may make a very different decision than someone who has legacy equipment.

Take me as an example. I shoot a 60D, have several APS lenses and a few APS-C lenses, and I am going to upgrade. Let's say I decide to go FF and let's say I have around $3000 to spend. I might look at a Nikon or Sony offering and decide that it's a better body for my needs than a $3000 Canon body, but then I would need lenses..... and there lies the problem. It can never be an equal comparison when I ask what $3000 Nikon body PLUS lenses will work as well as a $3000 Canon with a bunch of Lglass thrown in the mix for free.

When I started with Canon coming from a Sony DSC-F 828 compact cam, the reason to switch was a) I dropped the sony, but b) was unhappy with the IQ. While saving up I decided to go back to SLRs (had a Contax 139 Quartz 30 years ago) and chose Canon a) gut feeling b) IQ c) price. Purchased an EOS 30D. While growing deeper into nightphotography I decided to save up for a 5DII, skipped it due to the reported AF issues, and bought the 5DIII last August. So, I changed brands, but  in my case did not loose anything, as the cam was the loss in itself. But, according to sensor tech, it sometimes pays off to stay with the brand and go for a walk through the "desert". Although, at the end of the day, if the mirage of a perfect cam becomes real, recompensation for the wait is tremendously high  8)

335
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Camera in 2014
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:33:31 AM »
In another thread a split of the 5D line was recommended. I'd go that route as well. I don't want Canon to "spoil" the 5D3 as it is now ("jack-of-all-trades" type body) by a high MP sucsessor only. At its price it is the ideal and afforadable body for amateurs like me, shooting high ISOs.

336
EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:29:18 AM »
Canon can call it whatever it wants, but the product line can certainly benefit from a true successor to the 1DsIII. I have no use for a mega megapixel body, but know lots of people that are still hanging on to their 1DsIIIs because neither the 1Dx or 5DIII are compelling enough reasons to trade them in.

IMHO, it makes more sense to build a high megapixel body around the 5D platform, as the 1-series build quality and form factor are overkill for studio work. A lot of the used 1DsIII bodies on ebay have well over 100,000 clicks but look practically new.

seems about right. wise words. for studio use you won't need a brick...

337
EOS Bodies / Re: $1200 7D vs. $1800 5D II?
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:20:26 AM »
This is a tough experience...must hurt more than drop something. Well, maybe slightly higher in price but best for both worlds below 2k: Canon Eos 6D body only at amazon.com at US $ 1879.00. New cam, New tech, good high ISOs and decent AF. my two cents... And yes call Canon for customer loyalty...

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-20-2-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch/dp/B009B0MZ8U

338
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D - error 30!!!
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:10:24 AM »
I feel very sorry for you, man. pfffff....

339
Lenses / Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:03:34 AM »
I'll settle for the '12-24mm f/4 USM & reasonable price' kind of crazy.

Ellen, J.R.: Even more reason for me to go for the 16-35 ;-) thanks anyway, J.R. and I hope to get a proper pic of the "chickadee" in flight and post it for ya, as I have the 5D3 ;-) As long as it is a black-capped species there is enough contrast to focus on it  8)

340
Lenses / Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« on: February 15, 2013, 07:15:39 AM »
No fixed f/1.8 zoom exists till date. There is no reason why this lens will be built.

While nothing is impossible, it is highly unlikely because the cost of a f/1.8 fixed zoom will be extremely high. The cost will be such that one would be able to buy a complete Nikon D800, the Nikon 14-24 and a couple of other lenses in its stead.

No business will manufacture something which has no buyers! 

IMHO, even if Canon does release the 14-24, it will be a f/4 lens.

Will an F/4 lens be a bulb shaped lens? What would the price tag be?

341
Canon General / Re: Lone protester takes on the camera companies at CES
« on: February 15, 2013, 07:11:05 AM »
afaik, over here (Swtzerland) you cannot send your DSLR to another than an official Canon Rep. Even though you take it to your brick and mortar shop where you bought it. They'll do that anyway due to guarantee reasons...

342
Lenses / Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« on: February 15, 2013, 07:05:07 AM »
@steliosk: As discussed earlier on this site, you probably won't get a rumored Canon 12/14-24 f/2.8 at the same price as the Nikon... :-\

343
Lenses / Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« on: February 15, 2013, 06:57:40 AM »
Well, I don't want "crazy" things...

I rather want an UWA with a normal zoom range (16-35 preferred but I can accept shorter zooms like, let's say 16-28, 14-24) with a fast-but-normal aperture (f/2 - preferred but if isn't possible be it f/2.2 or even f/2.8 ) but with stellar sharpness, no flare and low distortions.

And I know that this is possible in a good price range.

Well, what about a 12-35 f/2.8  8) Ironic mood off: I'll go for the 16-35 by this summer. Saving up. The wait for a rumored  14-24 and the pobable price tag helped me make my descision. So my lens set up will be "complete" again, related to my preferencies. As I am not a birder, the 16-35 will suit any need for landscapes and nightscapes/nightsky. After that, I will probaly start to save up for an overnext update of my current 5D3 (hoping for same MPs and a decent improvement beyond ISO 25k). The 5D3 is an insanely good "jack of all trades", so there might be some improvement potential: I'd be glad with 0.5 to 1 stop in RAW. 8) That would be the high ISO IQ of an 1Dx. Let's hope Canon get their sensor design done for upcoming releases.

344
Lenses / Re: How do yall compose a shot using a fisheye lens?
« on: February 15, 2013, 03:07:29 AM »
I never follow any rules with a fisheye... and I admit I am totally addicted to mine :) In the beginning I would over think how to line everything up, now I just look through the viewfinder trying to compose the large items, the horizon and converging lines within the frame nicely. Also, depending on the distortion needed... I can frame my rectilinear lens with a lttle tilt. This can really exaggerate the perspective, creating a unique view.

Canon 5DmkIII  w/ Sigma 15mm ƒ/2.8 EX DG Fisheye


MotoGP 2012 Mazda Raceway, Laguna Seca - Helicopter Ride by David KM, on Flickr

Bryan - Treasure Island, San Francisco... by David KM, on Flickr

Monterey Bay Aquarium by David KM, on Flickr

Wings Over Wine Country Air Show 2012 - P51 "Lady Alice" by David KM, on Flickr

FurCon 2013 - San Jose, California by David KM, on Flickr

I like the Mustang photograph very much! Great shot of a legendary, let's say, the most beautiful plane ever built. Did you see red tails, or the Tuskegee Airmen? The latter is one of my favourite movies.

345
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New body or new lens...
« on: February 15, 2013, 02:52:49 AM »
I am shooting a 5D3 since last August. And it was a big step up for me in low light, coming from a 30D. The 1Dx is definitely not my expenditure league. But If you do birding, although I am not into that, I guess the 1Dx surely has a stellar AF and is a lot more forgiving at higher ISOs relating to what I've heard so far. It has a 0.5 to 1 stop advantage in RAW over the 5D3 according to neuro. How many f-stops do you lose with a 1.4 converter and the 100-400? Anyway you'd have at least a 560mm on the long end. If I were you I'd go for the body...Because neither the 1Dx nor the 5D3 will see an upgrade within the next year. But, that's my 2 cents.

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 52