April 19, 2014, 06:15:47 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 - bholliman

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 46
Lenses / Re: prime focal length choices
« on: August 28, 2013, 06:02:39 PM »
For me it's 35, 50 and 135. 

I recently acquired a 24-70 2.8 II which I've been using in place of my 35L and 50 1.4 most of the time now as its as sharp or sharper and has great bokeh and color.  I generally step-down the fast primes to 2.0 or 2.8 anyway to keep all of my subjects face in focus, so the primes don't have much of an advantage unless I'm looking for a really shallow DOF or am in really low light at greater distance from my subject.

EOS-M / Re: Mount EF, EF-S or L lens on EOS-M --- Your thought???
« on: August 27, 2013, 12:18:07 AM »
If you wanted a pocketable camera, why not buy a S110 for smallest size, a G15 for versatility/manual controls, or a Sony RX1 if you want small full frame.

I own a S100 and no longer use it because the IQ of the EOS-M is much better and its nearly as small and portable.  I can live with the M's slightly larger size to gain the advantage of image quality.  Even though the G-series have more manual controls, I have come to really like the M's touchscreen interface and prefer it to the G's.  The RX1 and RX100's are great camera's from what I've read, but personally I really don't see a need for one.  I'm happy with my current options of my 6D, 7D and EOS-M.

The EOS-M can also backup my DSLR's by accepting my EF lenses with the adapter, something the G15 and RX1 cannot do. 

EOS-M / Re: Mount EF, EF-S or L lens on EOS-M --- Your thought???
« on: August 26, 2013, 03:39:49 PM »
I'm really happy with my M. 

Bodies:  6D, 7D, EOS-M, S100

I'm curious - since getting the EOS M, how much do you find yourself using your S100?

Almost never!  I plan to give it to my 14-year-old son.

EOS-M / Re: Mount EF, EF-S or L lens on EOS-M --- Your thought???
« on: August 26, 2013, 11:51:37 AM »
I'm really happy with my M.  My 6D is my primary camera and I use it whenever practical, but its nice to have a light weight camera system as a alternative.  I use the EOS-M with 22/2 lens mounted as a replacement for a P&S when I don't want to carry a DSLR but still want good IQ. 

The primary advantage of the M is its size and weight, so after some initial experimentation, I don't use it much now with my EF lenses.  I occasionally mount the 50 1.4 which makes a great portrait lens on the APS-C body and the size isn't too bad.

As other have said, I also view the M as a backup body to my 6D.  With the EF-M adapter, its an ideal backup.  So, going forward I probably won't use the M much with EF lenses, but its nice to have the option to use them if I need to.

EOS-M / Re: EOS M – 3 native lenses compared
« on: August 26, 2013, 11:28:04 AM »
@sneakerpimp - Which of these lenses do you use the most?  Which is your favorite?

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS : Seller's remorse?
« on: August 23, 2013, 05:46:02 PM »
I have the same dilemma.  I purchased a 24-105L last summer and just added a 24-70 2.8 II a month ago. 

The 24-70 is an awesome lens!  Extremely sharp with little distortion and smooth bokeh.  I use it frequently.  However, I still find plenty of uses for the 24-105.  I must have a good copy as it's pretty sharp above 24mm.  The 24-105 is an ideal lens for attending festivals or day outings when I don't want to carry multiple lenses.  It's nice to have the 70-105mm range when carrying a single lens and the IS saves shots that I would probably blur otherwise.

So, I'm hanging onto my 24-105 for now.  If it starts to gather dust at some point down the road, I'll sell it.

CANONisOK:  $800 is a really good price, I would take it since you haven't been using the lens anyway.

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G16 Announced
« on: August 22, 2013, 05:57:54 PM »
Not a word about the crappy viewfinger, so it will be the same as in G15 - unusable for me
I prefer no viewfinger than unusable.
24mm wide would be nice too, actually for this type of compact camera 24-200 2.8 range on 1/1.7 is better than 28-100 with bigger sensor like RX100.

Yeah, the G15, G1X viewfinders are horrible!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Camera for keen 9 year old.
« on: August 20, 2013, 09:26:58 AM »
My kids would have quickly destroyed an SLR.  And then what good is a broken camera?

I think it depends on the kid.  My older son (a teenager now) tends to be reckless and rough with things and they don't last long, so I would not have bought him a Rebel at age 9.  We gave him a "throw away" old Kodak that only lasted a few months, but we kind of expected that when we gave it to him.

Our 7-year-old niece on the other hand is an entirely different kid.  She is very neat and careful and takes great care of her toys and other possessions.  If/when she shows an interest in photography, I would feel good about giving her a somewhat more expensive camera (used rebel) because I'm sure she would take good care of it.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Camera for keen 9 year old.
« on: August 19, 2013, 06:53:11 AM »
When my oldest son was 7 (he is 14 now) he showed some interest in photography.  We had an old Kodak 1mp digital camera, circa 1999 that hadn't been touched in years.  My wife had won it in a contest, but it never got much use - it took dreadful pictures compared with the Pentax film camera she had at that time. 

The Kodak was an ideal learners camera for a kid this age.  He took a few hundred pictures over several months, some showing some interesting creativity, but it ultimately ended up falling into a pond (while he was trying to take a picture of water spiders) and that was the end of it.  He received an iPod later and used the camera on that until he got a cell phone.  Still no additional interest in photography however.

I would suggest you look a a dead brand, say Olympus 4/3rds such as a E420, that way it is dirt cheap.

As to glass, if you can I advise a fixed prime 1/ so they can learn about depth of field and 2/ it really does help you learn.

These are both great suggestions.  Dead brand gear is very cheap and and some of it is pretty competant.

Back in the film days I spent my first 18 months of photography with just a 50mm lens.  You can do a great deal with a single (normal range) prime! 

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for upcoming road trip and beyond?
« on: August 18, 2013, 06:53:44 PM »
All three of the lenses you listed are excellent!  I own 2 of the 3 and hope to add the missing 70-300L in the next 6-9 months.

The 135L is the ultimate portrait lens in my book.  I love the focal length and image sharpness and bokeh are awesome.  I find lots of other uses besides portraits for the 135.  I use it for shooting my son's and neices junior high sports:  wrestling, cross country, golf and volleyball.  Its small and light enough to make it easily to carry along anywhere.

The 70-200 2.8 II is an all-around excellent lens, maybe the best zoom available under 200mm.  I use mine lots, but not for travel or hiking - too heavy!

The 70-300L is an excellent travel lens paired with a 24-70 or UWA zoom.  Its light and portable, but doesn't have the low-light/portrait capabilities of the other two lenses.

Given your full description of use, I think adding the 70-200 2.8 II makes the most sense for the long term if not for your immediate travel needs.

I'm really blown away by the image quality of primes and wonder if the "L" zooms would be the same or close.  Something tells me "no", but an all-in-one solution would be a bonus if nothing else is lost.

The image quality of the 70-200 2.8 II is L prime quality and has the huge advantage of flexibility.  I shot some of my nieces volleyball games last year and primarily used my 70-200 2.8 II on my 7D.  Ended up with some excellent shots. 

I've since added a 6D and 135L to my kit.  This year I plan to use my 6D with the 70-200 2.8 and 135L.  This combo worked great for my son's junior high wrestling last winter in similar lighting conditions.  The 135L has the advantage small/moderate size and weight over the bulky 70-200 2.8 and an extra stop of light.  So, I'd recommend both the 70-200 2.8 II and 135L for volleyball.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Camera for keen 9 year old.
« on: August 18, 2013, 06:32:42 PM »
A used Rebel or lower end DSLR would be better for learning manual controls.  As you pointed out, its difficult to get shallow DOF with any small sensor PowerShots.  That said, you can learn composition and develop a photographers eye with any camera.

Lenses / Stabilization for IS lenses?
« on: August 18, 2013, 08:57:58 AM »
Nasim Mansurov points out in the article at Photographylife.com that Nikon VR lenses need a few seconds to stabilize before vibration reduction is really effective.  He also indicates that VR is only beneficial when the shutter speed is less than the focal length of the lens.  It may actually hurt image sharpness otherwise.  His testing was with supertelephoto lenses, 300mm and up so this may or may not apply to shorter lenses.


Does anybody have any information if this is also true for Canon IS lenses?  I plan to do some testing myself at some point when time allows.

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 IS vs Tamron 24-70 VC
« on: August 17, 2013, 07:48:47 AM »
It really depends on what type of photography you normally do.  The 24-105L is a really good, versatile, lens.  I have one of these and recently added a Canon 24-70 2.8 II.  I don't have any experience with the Tamron, but Dustin Abbot and others have had excellent experience with it.


I use my 24-105 as a travel/day trip lens as its nice to have the added zoom reach (70-105mm) and IS.  I use the 2.8 lens more when shooting portraits and the kids at play as it can isolate the subject better. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS-M sharper than 6D?
« on: August 16, 2013, 09:44:43 PM »
Glad to hear Canon service was able to take care of the problem!

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 46