November 23, 2014, 01:09:05 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 ... 52
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 04:34:24 PM »
I think I am now leaning towards a mirror less interchangeable lens camera . I feel i would benefit from the size . What would everyone suggest.  Would a camera like this give me images nice enough for a Christmas card etc ?

The only mirrorless interchangable lens camera I'm familiar with is the Canon EOS-M, and I do not recommend it for the uses you outlined.  I have one it its autofocus does not keep up with active kids.  Picture quality is great as long as the subject is not moving or is moving slowly.  Same story for video, quality is excellent, but auto focus struggles to keep up.

For shooting active kids, I strongly recommend a DSLR.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 10:03:06 AM »

Unfortunately Canon has nothing even remotely comparable to the Sony RX100 II at the moment.

By all reports the RX100 II is a great compact camera.  However, there are some significant drawbacks when compared with Canon Rebels and other current APS-C cameras:

1) Sensor size:  The APS-C sensor in the Canon Rebels and 60/70D is roughly 3 times larger than the Sony sensor (APS-C 22.2x14.8mm = 328 square mm vs. Sony RX100 II 13.2x8.8 = 116 square mm).  Larger sensors allow for better depth of field control, reduced noise and generally better image quality. 

2) Fixed lens vs interchangeable lens:  The Sony has a fixed (non-interchangeable) 28-100mm FF equivalent  lens.  The variable aperture goes from f/1.8-4.9 which equates to f/4.9 to f/13.2 on a full format camera.  Not only is the focal length very limiting (28mm isn't that wide and 100mm isn't much zoom), but the maximum aperture is limiting like a typical P&S camera.  There will be almost no ability to isolate a subject with a shallow depth of field.

3) The Sony also as an electronic viewfinder vs. the optical viewfinder on the Canon's.  With an OVF you are using your eyes to evaluate the scene in front of you, EVF's see a very limited range of exposures compared with the human eye and are not as good in bright light.

Those disadvantages are significant enough for me not to be interested in these small sensor cameras, but I'm sure they appeal to many others who are OK with those limitations.

Personally, I like to have the ability to change lenses and have focal length and maximum aperture flexibility.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 28, 2013, 10:05:43 PM »
My sister recently purchased an SL1 with 18-135 STM lens for use with her young kids (1-8).  She is extremely happy with it.  This weekend I borrowed it for a few hours and was really impressed with how well it focuses for video.  I shot four of our kids playing actively together and the AF and STM performed admirably.  A very capable little camera!

It might also be worth waiting a little to see what the EOS M2 holds? Might be just the ticket. I like the current M but couldn't seriously recommend it if you want to shoot video.

+1   As an EOS-M owner, I would not recommend the current M for taking pictures or video of kids.  It's a great portable camera for still or slow moving objects however.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon 135 L for $989 + $100 rebate, good deal?
« on: October 27, 2013, 06:16:38 PM »

-1...with IS, I can see myself shooting this lens @ 1/60 or bit slower for indoor still.

I use my 135L for indoor natural light portraits quite a bit.  I have a pretty steady hand so can get sharp images at 1/60, but I normally just bump the ISO up a little.  I've found that ISO1600 and f/2.0 will handle almost anything indoors during the day and ISO1600 images from a 6D, 5D3 or 1DX look great.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon 135 L for $989 + $100 rebate, good deal?
« on: October 27, 2013, 03:56:05 PM »
If you´re looking for an excellent portrait lens, that´s a good lens and the deal seems to be fairly good. But it depends on what else you have and what you will use it for. I have it, it produces great results, but it is far from my most used lens. The 70-200 f2.8L IS II is more money, but also a lot more value.

I really do not miss IS on my 135L.  I'm normally shooting at wide apertures, so fast shutter speeds are easy to achieve in all but the worst light.  I think this is a terrific price, if I didn't already have one, I'd pull the trigger here.

The 135L is an awesome lens!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: High Megapixel DLSR a niche market?
« on: October 26, 2013, 12:14:25 AM »
I don't have any problem with his comment on prices. Canon and every other company sets their prices based on the market.  Mainstream companies like Canon can price higher than the competition because of their brand recognition and reputation for high quality products.  Companies with less well regarded products historically like Sigma and Tampon must set their prices lower to attract buyers. If Sigma continues to produce excellent quality lenses, their reputation will continue to improve e and they will be able to charge premium prices as well.  Canon can only retain their premium pricing by continuing to me a leader in the industry and to maintain high quality. 

Lenses / Re: Which setup would you have?
« on: October 24, 2013, 08:34:18 PM »
Sorry to say this, but the BIG mistake here is shooting sport with 6D ???

I've shot junior high wresting, baseball, volleyball and football with my 6D and it does OK.  The keeper rate isn't as high as it would be with a 5D3 or 1DX, but its good enough.  The quality of the in-focus shots is great.

As for as lens choice, 200mm is fine for the indoor sports, but I've found you need 300 or 400mm for football.  The Canon 70-300L is a terrific choice for outdoor sports, but it isn't a fast lens, so you will need to crank up the ISO indoors - the 6D is a great high ISO camera, but lower is always better. 

I use my 135 f2 and 70-200 2.8 II for indoor sports and 70-200 with 1.4x or 2.0x III teleconverter for outdoor sports with very good results.  I owned a 7D until recently that I was using for sports due to its better AF system, but found I preferred the 6D due to its better image quality and clean shots at ISO 1600 and up - something the 7D can't do.  Overall, my keeper rate was a little lower with the 6D, but the quality of the shots with the 6D was so much better I sold the 7D and don't miss it.

Great price!  I just sold one of these for $700 used a few weeks ago.

Canon General / Re: Benefits of a mirrorless FF?
« on: October 24, 2013, 09:22:15 AM »
While I don't care that much for Sony's financial well-being, I am thankful for their competition. They have clearly demonstrated to all of us  - the entire market -  that reasonably well-equipped FF-sensored mirrorless cameras cameras can be made today and  be sold at "reasonable" prices


Competition is a great thing for consumers.  Sony announcing these cameras will undoubtedly spur Canon and Nikon to respond, which will result in better products at reasonable prices.

To me, A7 series will be a great walk-around-the-town camera. I'll look forward to see what Sony/Zeiss has to offer in prime lenses next coming years.

The A7+Zeiss 35mm (594 grams) falls between a 6D+40mm (900 grams) and EOS-M+22 (403 grams) for weight making it a very portable FF option.,487.394,351.349,ha,t

The weight advantage will be less percentage wise with larger lenses, as the A7 and A7R will still require large heavy lenses, just like a DSLR.  So the size and weight advantage will just be with the camera bodies (A7 - 474 grams, 6D - 770 grams).  Using the small lenses above, the A7 is 34% lighter than the 6D kit.  Using a larger zoom, the 6D + 70-200 F4 IS weighs 1,530 grams, the A7 + Sony FE 70-200 F4 G OSS weighs 1,314 grams, so only 14% lighter.,487.392,ha,t

Canon General / Re: Benefits of a mirrorless FF?
« on: October 23, 2013, 06:43:38 AM »
Benefits of a mirrorless FF?

+ all IQ benefits of FF sensor = technically better images in any shooting situation (except Macro); more appealing pictures when shallow DOF is advantageous (e.g. often in portraiture)
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = easier to take along and to travel = more pictures at interesting places
+ significantly smaller and lighter than FF DSLR = less conspicuos = more and better images in any "non-staged" shooting situation
+ significantly cheaper to produce and service than any DSLR = = more profit for manufacturer and/or lower cost to customers
+ no mirror slap, less or no vibration = more sharp keepers, especially in tough shooting conditions/low light
+ no mirror = shorter / no viewfinder blackout possible
+ silent operation at full speed possible (with silent shutter; unfortunately not A7R) = huge advantage in noise-sensitive shooting conditions
+ no hard-to-clean oil-debris-splatter on sensor from flapping mirror mechanism (-> Nikon D600)
+ EVF better than any OVF (soon to come) - all shooting relevant information overlayed, camera can stay on eye and image displayed exactly as it will be captured = better images, more often capture "at decisive moment"
+ shorter flange back = use of almost any previous lens via adapter possible (but not always with good results)
+ AF performance inclduing tracking moving subjects will surpass capabilities of today's best DSLRs (soon), because no mirror in lightpath = more keeper action shots

- new lenses needed for optimal image quality and system performance, with less bulk and weight
- operation with 600/4 lens still requires sturdy tripod for optimal results

Agree with most of the above but what you refer to as "coming soon" is a good bit of conjecture and a potential deal breaker for most (including me). 

Also,  I'm not convinced that when all this is made available, the price of the FF mirrorless will remain the same. For the moment,  DSLRs are still more functional.

+1. Many of these mirrorless advantages are speculation about what is possible with the system rather what is available and working now.  I think eventually mirrorless will be able to achieve most of these benefits, but it might take years.

I do not buy the smaller/lighter/less conspicuous argument unless a pancake prime is mounted.  An A7 with a zoom lens mounted is still going to be somewhat bulky.

Lenses / Re: 24-70mm f/2.8 L mkII & 50mm f/1.4???
« on: October 22, 2013, 04:22:10 PM »
I have both lenses. The 24-70 is certainly sharper, but the 50 is 2 stops faster (and much lighter). I use the 50 for dimly lit indoor portraits and in cases I want only want to carry a light setup (in which case I may just as well take the 40 pancake). Opinions about the 50 are quite mixed if you browse the internet, but I do like the look. The lens is quite soft, so I typically stop it down to 1.8 or 2.0.


I have both lenses and plan to keep both.  I also use the 50 1.4 for indoor portraits and shots of the kids.  Its certainly not as sharp as the 24-70, but you don't need razor sharpness for portraits.  I can achieve better subject isolation with the 50 and the bokeh is very nice.

Reviews / Re: Review: EOS M System
« on: October 22, 2013, 01:54:15 AM »
Kind of an FYI / update.  Took my M to see the grandchild this weekend.  The IQ was what I expected and I used, at various times, the 22, the 40+adapter and the zoom.  Did pretty well with existing light.  The "lag" between shots did make photos of an active young child challenging but, in balance, the lightened load of not bringing my big kit was still worth the tradeoff.  Maybe next trip I'll bring the big guns......

That bit of "lag" is the primary reason why the M is really only appropriate for situations where you are, essentially, doing one shot type work.  It does work fine with bracketing exposures, but when you are shooting and looking for any kind of feedback between shots it is limited.

I've tried the Image Review "Hold" workaround suggested by another poster, but I didn't particularly like it myself and didn't feel that it solved the problem suggested here.  I've tried turning image review off, but that doesn't eliminate the black screen lag between shots when the shutter fires.

My experience with the EOS-M and our active toddler has generally not been positive.  I have some great shots with it when I can catch him sitting relatively still at play or on somebody's lap.  But, trying to get an in-focus shot when he is playing actively is a real challenge.  Lag between shots can be frustrating as well, as great expressions or interaction with other kids always seem to occur while I'm waiting or the camera to process the previous shot and be ready to fire again.

My 6D in AI Servo mode with the 24-70mm 2.8 or 50 1.4 are my tools of choice for active kid shots.  While the 6D isn't noted for its AF prowess, I've found it does a really good job with kids.

I still love my M for other purposes.  Its a terrific portable camera with high IQ to take with you for general purpose photography  - pretty much for anything not moving quickly or randomly.

Canon General / Re: Benefits of a mirrorless FF?
« on: October 21, 2013, 01:03:37 PM »
While I'm a big fan of smaller and lighter camera systems, I'm not sure mirrorless FF will have much if any advantage over a DSLR.  The camera body will be somewhat lighter, but the lenses for the system will be as large or nearly as large as those for DSLR's.  So, the overall weight savings will be small percentage-wise, especially when using longer telephoto lenses.

Others mentioned not having to deal with mirror slap, but that is very minor issue and can be easily handled via mirror lock-up for shots where it causes problems.  Also, the mirror helps protect the sensor from dust. 

I strongly prefer OVF's over the latest EVF's (I've tried the latest Sony and Leica ones).  At some point EVF's may evolve to where they are as good or better than OVF's, but they are not that close yet.

I also recommend buying a new T4i.  As others mentioned, a used camera may have issues you are not aware of and no warranty to fall back on. 

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 52