Messages

16

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is this true

« on: March 06, 2013, 08:58:01 AM »

again, what exactly did you miss? 

what you said sounds more like a "ah other people don´t like the 6D so i get a bad feeling from using it" syndrom.

why would you prefer the 5D MK2 that, overall, has no better image quality?
and at higher ISO the 6D has an edge.

you don´t care about AF (my biggest complain about the 6D) and they cost the same (at least here).

sure the reduced x-sync sucks and the viewfinder could/should be 100% on such a camera, but then the 5D MK2 viewfinder is not much better.

but you get GPS & WIFI, more FPS, better pushable RAW files (less shadow banding), it weights less, has a longer battery life (same battery but it lasts longer. at least without wifi and GPS enabled), better LCD screen, startup time is faster, less shutter lag, CA correction, better exposure compensation and control, full speedlite 600EX-RT Control.

and an electronic level, something i find very usefull for night shots.





 

I'm one of those who is rooting for the 6d have used it and amazed by its quality but a second hand 5d2 will always cost less.The 6d justddoesn't inspire confidence that my 7d does that was the very same reason I bought it over the 5d2 . So u can understand a 5d Mark 3 is all I need and more but money is a big constraint .I need good lensesmore than anything and can't really decide about selling my 7d

17

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is this true

« on: March 06, 2013, 06:28:11 AM »

I'm just more confused now i know I don't want the 6d after the 7d it just felt too weird,I could not get used to it even though I spent a week with it,sure the images were great but I don't know something felt wrong I don't use af anyway so that center point can't help unfortunately

I love my 7d except for low light long exposures and landscapes(the 3 Ls ).a used Mark 2 would save me a lot of money for lenses and that gitzo

18

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is this true

« on: March 06, 2013, 05:08:59 AM »

i don´t trust kids with grey hair..... 

and yes you wont see much difference in image quality.
the ISOs where the 5D MK3 is significant better are ISOs i never use.

i would mabye go one stop higher with the 5D MK3 in special cases.

if you only use it for night photography as you say, the 6D is maybe tailor made for you.
it has better focus in low light then the 5D´s and i guess you use the center AF point most of the time anyway?

I don't know about the 6d,after the 7d it somehow felt lacking
I guess its a choice between 7D and 5D2 vs a 5D3,but I don't want to sell my 7d.Its my first dslr

19

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Is this true

« on: March 06, 2013, 03:03:42 AM »

I don't know,the threads about the high iso looked as if they beat the mark 3 by a mile and the autofocus I thought that the rate of accuracy would be at least 80% .I don't care about video and I will only be using the cam for night photography.I just want to get this straight is a mark 2 really as good as he says

5D Mark II vs 5D Mark III comparison: Portraits, studio, landscapes, wildlife, night, and HDR review	Small | Large

20

Lenses / Re: 135mm L

« on: March 05, 2013, 11:47:07 PM »

Nobody hates the 135L I think that's enough proof

21

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 12,800ISO 5DMKIII Images

« on: March 02, 2013, 04:56:45 AM »

Tom you should shoot above 3200 more often as your just barely scratching the surface with the 5diii at 3200. For me 12,800 is very useful and even 25k in a pinch and not printing terribly large.

Brilliant shots, even regardless of the ISO. The composition is stellar imho, quite inspirational.

7d owners steer clear,this thread is pure pain.
Nice shots though

Thanks for the kind words!

Yes well I came from the 40D then 7D. The 7D I thought everything but IQ was better, but wasn't satisfied. High ISO was better but 3200 was still about its limits and 100-400 seemed quite noisy.

So I got the 5DMKIII and I am very happy with it.

Believe it or not the first time I went out with it shooting some landscape, the available light wasn't great for small apertures and was shooting 1000-3200ISO at F11-16. Surely for landscape the worst idea....?

Have a look this:


Howtown, Cumbria by tom_scott88, on Flickr

From the same day 3200


Lichen and Moss by tom_scott88, on Flickr

2500


Moss by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Quality is fantastic!

True that

Enjoy your camera,I will try and stick to shots below ISO 640,very hard thing to do
Hope I can buy it soon

22

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 12,800ISO 5DMKIII Images

« on: February 27, 2013, 01:21:21 PM »

7d owners steer clear,this thread is pure pain.
Nice shots though 

23

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How Do You Clean your sensor? And how often?

« on: February 24, 2013, 03:13:26 AM »

I just replace it with one of those Nikon/Sony sensors

24

Street & City / Re: Tuscany and Cinque Terre with TS-E 24 II and TS-E 17

« on: February 23, 2013, 11:12:47 AM »

Magnificent set of images!  I too would be interested in what HDR program you use.

+1 me too

25

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark ii with WiFi/GPS or Without?

« on: February 21, 2013, 03:01:12 AM »

I hope we get a 7d without a GPS and WiFi option at a slightly lower cost,I'd buy it

Such a camera already exists ... its called the EOS 7D ... its a great camera ... and its on sale these days ... so no need to wait for 7D II

I already have that one, besides high iso noise performance I really don't have a single complaint against my beloved 7d

26

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark ii with WiFi/GPS or Without?

« on: February 20, 2013, 08:15:27 AM »

I hope we get a 7d without a GPS and WiFi option at a slightly lower cost,I'd buy it

27

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS not good for NASA?

« on: February 13, 2013, 12:52:39 AM »

Hi,

But how does one explain some of the pictures taken from the space station with a 1200mm lens?

    May be they use a telescope... 

    Anyway, they recent install a modified Celestron CPC 9.25" telescope with Canon 7D DSLR for the ISERV (International Space Station SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System) project.


(image source: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/news/iserv.html )

   Have a nice day.

Sorry if I ruined ur post but all I could see was that giant lenscap

28

Lenses / Re: 70-200 is ii vs non is

« on: February 09, 2013, 02:03:21 AM »

Thanks everybody for the replies.I think I'm going to wait till I'm clear on contrast, color rendering and flare control capability of the 2.I just don't want to regret my purchase later,which ever lens I buy,I'm low on funds and in the cost of IS I can easily get a 17-40 so I hope u can understand my dilemma

Thanks in advance

29

Lenses / 70-200 is ii vs non is

« on: February 08, 2013, 05:14:28 AM »

I was just hoping to get some info regarding how they stack up against each other,u don't care about weight or lack of is
I'm interested in af contrast and sharpness. And oh yes flare control.

Just want to know if its worth the premium is I'm not a big fan of is

Thanks in advance

30

Lenses / Re: Metabones Speed Booster -- why only for FF to APS-C?

« on: February 01, 2013, 09:57:34 PM »

Its a shame really,for now everyone is stuck with the brenizer's method