December 29, 2014, 04:32:52 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 - Eagle Eye

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
Lenses / Re: Is your midrange gear insured?
« on: February 17, 2013, 11:04:46 AM »
I have my 5d Mark II, 17-40L, 24-105L, 24-70L, 70-200L, 50L, 100L Macro, 135L, 28 1.8, 85 1.8, 580EXII, and Gitzo tripod  all fully insured for the cost of brand new replacement through USAA for $118 annually. Replacement costs were pulled from B&H and are typically higher than what I actually paid (why lenses are a great investment). This covers every possible source of loss or damage, from theft to dropped out of a helicopter at 3000 feet. There's no deductible. I live in Texas.

I'm just grateful someone takes the time out of his day to maintain this website. Thank you to Canon Rumors. Feel free to post whatever you want on your blog.

Lenses / Re: AFMA Telephoto/Wide Discrepancy
« on: February 09, 2013, 03:47:12 PM »
Thanks, gents. My mistake: I failed to cover the viewfinder during the test. Actual result was -2 at 24mm and +2 at 70mm. Dialed it in at +1.

Lenses / AFMA Telephoto/Wide Discrepancy
« on: February 08, 2013, 07:02:45 PM »
Just purchased an EF 24-70 f/4L IS and ran it through Reikan FoCal on my 5d Mark II to get an AFMA setting. 24mm came in at +10 while 70mm came in at -2. This is the largest discrepancy between wide and tele of any of my lenses. I'm planning on parking it at 0 for the best result, but was wondering if this might indicate a problem with the lens. Anyone have similar results with a 24-70 f/4L?

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 50 f/1.4 for $299 at B&H
« on: December 03, 2012, 08:57:53 PM »
Clearing stock out before a EF 50mm f/1.8 IS announcement?

EOS Bodies / Re: Why I'm Asking Santa for a 6D
« on: December 03, 2012, 12:20:52 PM »
The only problem is if you compare it on paper to the D600... but in hand in the real world, like Kai said theres not much in it.

I agree that when you look exclusively at what has traditionally defined cameras at different price points, the D600 looks like it smokes the 6D.  Where I think the 6D sets itself apart is through the non-traditional features, like the GPS, the wifi with apps for common smart phones and the iPad, and all this in a smaller more portable package.  Canon is in trouble on the point-and-shoot front and they're aware of it.  We've seen more of a focus on high end point-and-shoots recently I think because smart phones have fairly capable cameras in them and have the integrated ability to interact with social media, hugely important to teenagers and folks in their 20s and even 30s.  Canon, rather than being stagnant as many on here claim, seems to be getting out in front of the problem with the 6D features, integrating the SLR into wireless and social media tech.

EOS Bodies / Why I'm Asking Santa for a 6D
« on: December 03, 2012, 09:55:52 AM »
Just wanted to share a few thoughts on the 6D, given all the negativity about it, specifically why I'm interested in getting one.  I shoot primarily with a 5D Mark II.  I use my camera for snapshots sometimes, but mainly for landscape work and travel.  On my honeymoon I took a minimalist approach and we just brought my wife's Rebel T2i with us to Kaua'i.  I shot with it a bunch and enjoyed the lightweight and simplicity. When I got back from the trip, I thought about investing in my own Rebel package for travel, but never got around to it, mainly because it would likely involve some new lenses in addition to a body. 

When I started looking at the EOS 6D, just out of curiosity, I quickly realized how it would fit the bill well for travel.  The main complaints I see around the web, including in forums here, are about the autofocus. A couple thoughts on this: first, during the film era, only the highest-end cameras had a large amount of autofocus points, 45 on the 1V and 3V.  The last ELAN to be released had 7 points.  7.  Just because you can put more autofocus points into a body doesn't mean you need to.  I have 9 autofocus points on my 5D Mark II.  I shoot with one.  I only shoot with one on my 20D.  No, I don't do sports, no I don't photograph children at play.  I tend to believe, though, that a camera is a tool and different tools are designed for different purposes.  I think that the 6D's autofocus system is going to be perfect for me AND represents an advancement for Canon.  Second, people married to numbers may be surprised by the concept that there's more to an autofocus system than points. The 6D can reportedly autofocus in -3EV conditions.  That's a one stop improvement over the 5d Mark III and a two stop improvement over the 5D Mark II.  I fail to see how this is an antiquated system. 

Additionally, for travel and many other applications, size and weight matter.  The fact that Canon placed a full frame sensor into essentially a 20D body is impressive to me.  With a prime on it, I could shoot with that thing for a week straight. I would surmise that travel is where most people's home SLRs get the most use and that's what the 6D is, a high-end consumer SLR.  In my opinion, it's the best SLR camera on the market for travel for these reasons.  It's also telling that it was released near a lightweight L zoom and an image stabilized fast wide prime, two perfect companions on a trip to Europe.

Before some accusations start flying, I'm not a Canon apologist.  If I were buying my first digital camera today, I'd buy a Nikon.  But if I were an amateur photographer with a D5100 and one or two lenses and, like many camera owners, tended to only take pictures when traveling, the 6D would hold a lot of allure. 

Maybe we need to get away entirely from the direct Nikon/Canon comparison?  I talked with a pro landscape guy recently who shoots with the D800 and he said he wishes Nikon had an offering comparable to the 5D Mark III that he could supplement his D800 with.  He didn't say, "I wish my camera had the same features," rather he saw them as different tools.  I think with lenses, top of the line cameras, and entry level cameras, comparisons are easily justifiable and they typically are designed for parallel purposes.  But for the camera bodies in between, I think we all need to keep an open mind that different camera owners use their tool for different reasons and Nikon and Canon are both actively doing market research to find niches for new tools for our toolboxes.  All this said, the 6D may very well fall victim to Canon's failure to differentiate the 6D from the D600 through active marketing, and that is definitely a problem. 

I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on what you look for in a camera for travel and whether you agree that the 6D is well suited for that purpose. 

Santa, if you're reading this (Santa's a Canon fan, right?), please bring me a 6D on Christmas.

Software & Accessories / Re: Gitzo tripod/head recomendation for travel
« on: August 21, 2012, 08:00:13 PM »
This may be too late, but I have the 1541T with a Markins Q3 ball head.  I use it with a 5d Mark II and a 70-200 F/4L IS with no concerns about its stability/capability.  What I love about it is how small it can get.  I can pack it into my carry-on roller vertically with no problems at all.  I'm actually planning on adding the 2541 but only using it for day trips, not oversees travel.

Software & Accessories / Re: Good Camera Backpack for 5D Mark 2 &...
« on: August 21, 2012, 07:48:21 PM »
Canon23, I have been using the Flipside 400AW for about three years for essentially the same gear you're using.  I've recently decided, though, that I'm waisting space with it and can't really carry enough non-photo stuff in it when I fly.  I've recently been looking at the F-Stop Guru and would recommend you take a look as well.  Not to hijack the post, but can anyone recommend the Guru?

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Patent: 24-1060mm Zoom Lens
« on: May 30, 2012, 11:10:55 PM »
Got some info on this.  Talked to the guy at my local camera shop and he said that his Canon rep told him that this lens was going to be for a new 100mp 3D (Mark II) full frame camera with 12 fps.  The lens is going to have eight stops of image stabilization and a "perfect picture" mode.  Not sure what that is...  It's due out in 2018.  I really need a zoom is this range now.  I wanted the 24-105, but this lens will probably noticeably make my photos more perfect.  Should I wait?

Software & Accessories / Re: No 5D Mark III Support in LR4?
« on: March 06, 2012, 07:30:08 PM »
The announcement of the 5d Mark III is not the same as the release of the Mark III.  Why does Adobe need to be supporting a camera not available on the commercial market?  Give them a few weeks.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III: Some perspectives/concerns
« on: March 04, 2012, 10:27:41 PM »
Just my opinion, but all this banter about which camera is better, is the price point justified, et cetera, is all baseless until we see side by side comparisons of the photographs.  After all, the camera is a means to an end, right?  The 5D Mark III has all the right ingredients to make me think it's going to be a beast at producing results.  The autofocus helps you get a perfectly focused print, the 100% coverage helps you properly compose, and the three years of technological advances applied to roughly the same megapixels should really enhance the quality of the image output. 

The whole "jumping ship" thing gets thrown around every time a new camera comes out, including Rebels.  Seriously.  Will there be some people who will sell all their Canon gear and buy Nikon stuff, requiring them to relearn controls and muscle memory and basically flush thousands of dollars?  Sure, but they'll be few and far between and dopes.  Will there be Nikon users who jump ship if the Mark III outperforms the D800 by two stops in low light image quality (for most photographers, a COLOSSAL advantage)?  Sure, but they'll be few and far between and also dopes. 

Look, if the 5D Mark III is too much for what you're getting in your opinion (i.e. the enhancements don't really do a lot for your finished product), take a look at the Mark II.  The results from its sensor are absolutely awesome and at $2,100, it's a steal. 

I tried Canvas On Demand for a small print that didn't matter a whole lot and it turned out great.  I've since ordered a 40" x 60" and it arrived early, well packaged, very well framed.  Can't recommend them enough.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?
« on: March 01, 2012, 01:12:27 PM »
People might get annoyed or offended, but I think this needs to be said (don't smite me, please).  If you are or wish to be a full-frame shooter and really, truly, heartfully can look at the spec list for this new camera and say with a straight face, "wow, Canon REALLY missed the mark on this one.  The D800 is going to crush this!" then I feel confident encouraging you to go buy Nikon equipment, because constantly switching is going to be the only way for you to find happiness in this world.  You could try getting a pet, too.  Like a gerbil.

I made a post a week ago that I now would like to retract, claiming that the 5D III was in trouble if the price point was really $3,500 compared the D800's $3,000.  Given the spec list here and the sheer refined look of this camera, I think it easily justifies the extra $200 or $300 in actual market price over the D800. EASILY.

For the individual claiming that this is just not enough resolution and you need 38 for your wedding photography, you're not going to find a lot of friends over at Nikon, given that they only had 12 megapixel sensors for, like, a millennia, and did just fine.  I'd like to take a moment to remind you that in the 1990s, wedding photographers shot with a medium called "film" with 45 autofocus points.  If you can honestly look me in the eye and tell me with a straight face that your photographs look bad or in any way insufficient at 21 or 22 megapixels, I will do you the courtesy of looking you back in the eye and telling you bluntly that it's not your camera that sucks, it's you.  I will than buy your 5D Mark II from you and give you a pat on the back.  It's going to be okay. 

I had no plans to upgrade from my 5D Mark II, but this camera is making me rethink that given that it didn't just upgrade one or two things, but everything, including the body lines (still waiting on dimensions and weight).  This tells me that Canon has generated a golden seller.  If this thing weighs less and is smaller than the Mark II, I'm advising the wife the credit card bill is going bulge this coming August.  Autumn landscapes, here we come...  Again, no smiting, please.  This is to be a day of joy and happiness.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]
« on: February 22, 2012, 04:50:23 PM »
Sorry folks, but $3500 only makes sense with a kit lens.  The D800 is coming in at $3000 with significantly higher megapixels and marketed as a pro camera vs. a prosumer.  Obviously there are no details, but it's hard to imagine the 5D Mark III having features that outgun the D800 to the tune of $500.  I'd imagine Canon is rethinking their price point on the 5D Mark III as we debate.  I would expect it come in at $3200 upon release.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8