January 26, 2015, 10:40:22 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 - bholliman

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 56
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 01:10:11 PM »
Hmm...I think it would be a real mistake for Canon to make use of their 18mp sensor...AGAIN. That thing is becoming the laughing stock of the digital photography world...it's tainted, and would be a real negative for Canon to slap the "same old sensor" into "another camera"...again.

The other specs seem piss-poor for a mirrorless camera, even an entry-level one. If nothing more than for their own reputation, I hope Canon releases something better than what this rumor indicates...


EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 12:20:10 PM »
Yawn.  The addition of WiFi is the only thing of significance here.  Nothing interesting for me.

Lenses / Re: Make it stop! (Photo pun not intended)
« on: November 30, 2013, 05:00:36 PM »
I'm suffering from the same problem!  I finally turned off all notifications from Canonpricewatch.com as I don't want to know about deals I can't take advantage of.  I paid over $2k for both my 24-70 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 II IS so its painful to see those going for hundreds under what I paid.  I did snag a 100L Macro for a great price ($750), not the best price, but pretty good.  I'm done for awhile.  I have all the gear I need.... Really I do (trying to convince myself...)  ::)

Canon General / Re: So what have we bought this Black... Er, Weekend?
« on: November 30, 2013, 01:08:33 PM »
Nothing this weekend.  But, I added a 100L Macro for $750 a few weeks ago.  I'm going to stop buying for awhile, I have all the gear I really need - for now...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Question sir , EOS-M or EOS SL-1
« on: November 30, 2013, 12:24:02 PM »

Yes, Plus I will buy EOS-M MK III the early of Year 2014, If They come with View Finder----Well, My 65 Years old Eyes do not like to look at the 3 Inches LCD screen.
Have a great Saturday , Sir.

+1  My eyes are not that good either, looking forward to the addition of a EVF in the next version of the M.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Question sir , EOS-M or EOS SL-1
« on: November 30, 2013, 07:50:46 AM »
It really depends on the size of compact system you are looking for and if you will be shooting any action or rapidly moving objects.  As Ruined pointed out, the SL1 with small prime (say 28mm 2.8 IS as Ruined recommended) really isn't that much smaller than a 6D with a 40 pancake mounted. 


The EOS-M is considerably smaller than the SL1, its especially compact with the 22/2 prime attached.  While the M doesn't fit in a pants pocket, it will fit nicely in a coat/jacket pocket or in a belt pack.  I sold my P&S S100 when I got the M since for me the M is small enough to carry whenever I want a small/light/inconspicuous kit.  As long as you won't be shooting any action or rapidly moving objects, the M will do fine.  If you are OK with a larger mini-DSLR size camera, the SL1 has the advantage of controls similar to your larger EOS bodies and has a better and quicker AF system.

Lenses / Re: Bargain of the day!!
« on: November 29, 2013, 08:59:59 AM »
Fantastic deal!  Congratulations.

Lenses / Re: lens recommendation soccer
« on: November 24, 2013, 11:56:12 PM »
OK, this is an update;  the fall season just ended.

For the most part I used the borrowed 100-400 with the 6D and during the daytime it was a great combination.  For night games I put he 70-200 ii on and let the action come to me.

I did rent a 300 2.8 and it was a lot better...even took pictures at night but I don't have that kind of cash. 

I did try to have two cameras going occasionally but it never worked for me.  (though it does improve the chances of going anywhere you want on the field without anyone bothering you). 

I'm sure a new 100-400 when it comes out will be great...it will also be 2500 and I can likely get a used 100-400 for 1000.

I used my 70-200 2.8 II with a 2x III extender on my 6D to shoot a few of my nephews soccer games this fall and was happy with the combination.  This lens is so good, even with the IQ and light loss with the extender, the quality is still very good.  I've considered buying a 100-400, 70-300L or 400 5.6, but don't really use focal lengths above 200mm often, so had trouble justifying the expense. 

Lenses / Re: Which lens to start with?
« on: November 23, 2013, 06:27:35 AM »

Here's a panoramic shot with the 40mm. Sunrise at Flamborough Head on the Eastern coast of England.

Beautiful shot Sporgon!

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M [CR2]
« on: November 22, 2013, 11:09:01 PM »
This is just my opinion, but I think that a large part of the allure of the micro 4/3 cameras is the small size. If Canon is to compete with the EOS-M they need to keep it small, and going FF means it is going to be fairly close in size to the 6D....

A FF EOS M would not have to be as large as a 6D.  The new Sony A7 and A7r are between the current M and 6D in size.  That said, I don't think a full frame mirror less brings much to the table.  The somewhat smaller size (compared with DSLR's) is only a factor with small pancake lenses.  For anything 85mm and up, the size of the lens will negate most of the mirrorlesses advantage.

The A7 and A7r I really don't get however.  If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E).  At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.

Maybe because with the D800 you have to commit to 100% swapping systems right now. Give up the better Canon video, the Canon 24-70 II and 17 and 24 T&S and 70-300L and MPE, nicer UI, etc. With the A7R you don't.

If you are a Canon user you are getting it for the MP/DR for landscapes most likely. You are not replacing your 5D3 or 1DX or 7D with this, it's a supplement. A hack to get the DR Canon refuses to deliver to so far.

I wasn't trying to advocate switching to Nikon, just making the point that if somebody was determined to chase the MP/DR of the Sony FF sensor, Nikon is probably a better choice than Sony.  Until its proven that Canon glass works extremely well with the A7/A7r, I'll remain skeptical. 

Lenses / Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« on: November 15, 2013, 07:07:08 AM »
my point is, I can't foresee anyone clutching onto their 24-70 f/2.8 II when IS version inevitably comes out - even if the IS version is slightly less sharp due to the difference in optics (which usually isn't the case, even if it happened once in the past).  Reason, because I think pretty much everyone would like the *option* of IS if it is there.  It is useful even at normal focal lengths, not just tele.

Valid point.  I suppose it all depends on the quality of the IS variant when/if its released. 

I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.

I don't get interchangeable lenses on a mirrorless. If I want a smaller, fake Leica body I'd want a single, fixed lens moderate zoom (24mm-100mm for example). I'm not going to use a 200mm 2.8 lens on a mirrorless camera, much less a 70-300 or 100-400 zoom. No point. I'd rather pay a little more, get a stellar zoom that I can use under all conditions and save the interchangeable lenses for the DSLR, which is a lot more practical form factor for changing lenses.

+1 well said!

This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s

I "get" the RX1 and X100s, there is a need for small, portable cameras with great IQ.  The A7 and A7r I really don't get however.  If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E).  At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 13, 2013, 03:52:58 PM »
I'll take A7 FF mirrorles and Zeiss lenses in this case ;)
I doubt that an A7 with the 24-70 is smaller or lighter than my existing setup so it would end up as an even more expensive paperweight.


An A7 or any FF mirrorless camera is still going to require large, bulky lenses once you move beyond a few small primes in the wide to normal range.  FF Mirrorless systems are a great (and very expensive...) portable option if you want something limited like an RX1 with its fixed lens or an A7 with a small prime. 

But, when you move into the full system arena, they lose almost all of the mirrorless size advantage since the lenses are the same size as DSLR lenses.  Unless you plan to just use the A7 with small primes, you need to invest in a full system of Sony or Zeiss lenses (UWA, 24-70 zoom, 70-200 zoom, 200+ tele, fast primes).  At that point, what have you gained over a 5D3 or D800 and compliment of Canon or Nikon lenses?  A few hundred grams in camera body weight?  What are you giving up to save those few hundred grams of weight?  Quite a bit in my opinion given the lack of native E-mount lenses and Sony's dubious record of changing lens mount systems every few years.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: NX300 AF vs. Canon DSLR's
« on: November 13, 2013, 02:53:45 PM »
Kinda what I thought.  I hardly ever shot sports or BIF, so this question is just to satisfy my curiosity.

So, mirrorless camera's do not continuously focus when shooting in Servo mode?  Do they just fire off a series of shots using the focus setting for the first shot (until the buffer fills)?

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 56