April 16, 2014, 09:57:57 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 - koolman

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 13
Site Information / Re: In Sympathy for CR Guy
« on: July 18, 2012, 06:32:49 AM »
May G-d send you condolences on your loss. We are all here for you.....

Portrait / Re: What did I do wrong?
« on: July 18, 2012, 03:48:02 AM »
For group shots, where people are standing at varying distances, I would use F/2.8 - F/4 only.

F/1.4 is for a carefully focused isolation shot of one person.

For those seeing no difference between crop and ff:
- difference exists, and it's huge: in DoF and DR/IQ.

If you want to start shooting fashion, you must have gear according to the fashion level you want to shot. If it's some school stuff, then it's Kiss camera. Going to pro means going to (at least) FF.

I would suggest kiss+85mm as starter level and 5dm2 or 3 + 100mm IS/70-200 f4 is as semi-pro/pro.

Nobody said there is "no difference between crop and FF". The question was advice on a logical step up from a p&s on a budget. Sure for super quality on a full pro level the sky is the limit. For a person making their first step in the DSLR word, the t2i is a very good option.

Here is my 2 cents. For shooting in a well lit area on a tripod - the t2i should be more then enough. I would invest more in the glass then the body. The canon 85mm on the t2i - should be fine, as you need to stand further away and have the magnification of a 135mm lens.

So t2i + 85mm = < $1,000.

I would add the 50mm 1.4 - as it is also an excellent portrait choice.

So you can get the whole set for $1,500. Save your cash, and add as needed.

Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II
« on: July 04, 2012, 10:09:25 AM »
How exactly do you read these patents when they come out? I see the aperture and the film plane, but what about the focal length? Is it apurture-FP? Is it the same basic concept in all modern lenses?

Focal length is the distance between is rear nodal point with the lens at infinity focus and the sensor/film plane.  Note that the rear nodal point is an optical point which depends on lens design, may not fall within the physical dimension of the lens.  Most telephoto lenses have the rear nodal point right behind the front element.

Can you please explain this in more detail - possibly with a chart or diagram ? What is the "nodal point" ? How does its position affect the distortion of the lens?

Capsule version - EF-S lenses project a smaller image circle, which covers an APS-C sensor but it too small for an APS-H or FF sensor.  The advantage is that a smaller image circle means smaller elements (in the case of wide angle lenses), easier to design lenses, and thus lower costs.  Most of Canon's EF-S lenses also have a short back focus (meaning a shorter physical length of the lens, Nikon and 3rd party lenses don't), which means a mirror larger than that for an APS-C sensor will hit the lens, so they designed the mount to prevent that from happening.

Thank you short, sweet, and to the point (as always) !

Lenses / Understanding the diffrence between FF and EF-S - Question
« on: June 20, 2012, 07:24:23 AM »
Can some of the more tech oriented members, please explain in layman's terms, what the difference is between FF and crop lens mounts, advantages and disadvantages of each type of mount, why crops can take EF and FF cannot take EF-S? Thank you. I have heard/read all kinds of partial descriptions, but still don't have a clear picture.

Lenses / Re: Battle of the 50mm's (1.2L , ZE 1.4, ZE 2.0)
« on: June 19, 2012, 03:42:15 AM »
I own the Canon 50 1.4, and the zeiss 50mm macro f/2 (got it as a gift) used on my t2i.

The zeiss gives a unique type of 3d'sh shot. Its super sharp even wide open. I use the focus confirm (which actually works!) or LV.

You need a patient subject (model) to sit still for a MF portrait. The macro also close focuses insanely close and is fun for all kinds of still life photos.

I tried the 50L - and even though its nice, I could not see it offer more the $1k more then the 1.4

zeiss macro planar f/2 + t2i

Lenses / Re: Samyang 24 ts
« on: June 17, 2012, 04:49:04 AM »
As far as I know - the new Samyang 24mm 1.4 for canon is NOT a TS lens.

I own the Samyang 14mm - as a wide angle on my t2i. The MF does not bother me at this FL.

I also own the Samyang 85mm 1.4. You need to really know what you are doing to extract the best from this lens. It is MF, and you need to adjust the exposure and WB carefully. When used properly it gives awesome results.


Canon General / Re: Will 550d be discontinued?
« on: June 13, 2012, 04:41:09 AM »
In my opinion, the 550d was one of the best "bang for buck" bodies of the past 4 years.

Stellar IQ, ISO 3200 totally usable, today you can get it for $599 !!

Lenses / Samyang 85mm 1.4 on canon t2i
« on: June 12, 2012, 06:53:47 AM »

Lenses / Re: 50mm 1.2L + 24mm 1.4L on crop body?
« on: June 12, 2012, 06:32:10 AM »

I have experienced the same dilemma. I have a t2i - but lusted for quality glass.

True, by using a FF lens on a crop you are "wasting" the sides of the lens. On the other hand you are utilizing the "sweet spot" of the center of the lens. The newer crops such as the t2i, 60d, 7d have awesome resolution, and you will easily see the difference between L glass and consumer glass.

In your post you asked about the 24L and the 50L. Again theoretically you are "wasting" the whole idea of the 24L as being a wide angle on a FF, and are "only" getting a 38mm lens. On the other hand, 38mm is a nice walk around focal length, and the 24L can work as that.

The 50L could work as an awesome portrait lens, with the working distance of an 85mm on FF.

In short, you could benefit from the L glass as far as IQ. If you want to spend the money.

I personally have the 35L on my crop, and the IQ is awesome, much better then say the 35f/2 which I also have. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Full Specifications
« on: June 07, 2012, 03:12:13 PM »
I have a t2i and was "itching" to upgrade. I shoot stills only, as a hobby.

Is this t4i a real step up ? For me it would be if:

- The live view manual focus was usable in daylight ?

- The AF was actually more accurate and reliable then a t2i ?

- The digic 5+ and improved sensor ? actually made real life difference ?

Thoughts ?

Lenses / Re: A small walkabout lens - lay it on me!
« on: June 06, 2012, 04:53:23 AM »
Voigtlander 20mm + canon t2i

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* Canon Rebel T4i/650D on June 8 [CR3]
« on: June 06, 2012, 04:40:12 AM »
Jrista, you bore me.

Please. Either you have a well founded, factually valid response, or you just validated my point about you.

I feel I am succinct, though my point was valid. You have tremendous scientific knowledge of what should go on in inside a camera. However, you neglect to comment on or compare real world results with mathematical possibilities. I can agree even without your posts that the 7d should produce more fine detail...but mine and many others' real world testing can show the camera does not produce in the field what it does on paper.

Sure it does...your just comparing 1:1 results. The farther you push sensor resolution past lens resolution, the "softer" 1:1 crop will look. That doesn't change the fact that higher resolution sensors ARE capturing more detail. When pixels become significantly sub-detail sized, viewing things at 1:1 crop becomes incredibly useless. Scale your 7D photos DOWN to your 40D size, or scale a 40D photo UP to 7D size, and the superiority of the 7D in the real world, even WITH additional noise, will be clear.

If by some fluke they are not, then the problem is not the camera...its the way the camera is used. Find ways to eliminate camera shake, make sure your using an "ideal" aperture (i.e. an aperture within that band between a little wider than f/3 to about f/6.2), or anything else that can improve your technique.

As for being succinct...sure, however telling me I bore you is simply an evasion, not a counter argument. ;P


I enjoy your posts and you obviously have a wealth of tech understanding.
As far as the 7d softness debate. I too, borrowed a 7d for a few days, and compared it with my t2i. The out of camera images appeared softer / fuzzier. This mystified me... as the 7d is supposed to be far superior. Could you explain again in terms for laymen,  :) why this is - and how I can make the 7d's jpgs appear sharp ?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 13