November 23, 2014, 07:24:08 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 - jhanken

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Singel Image HDR
« on: September 16, 2013, 12:25:12 AM »
I am a big fan of single image HDR in Photomatix for very subtle exposure fusion images.

Anyone that complains about Canon DR and hasn't tried this technique should reconsider their complaint.

Never used the PS layer trick, will have to try.

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M [CR2]
« on: September 13, 2013, 11:20:45 AM »
Any more CR dirt on this?

I am eagerly waiting for some kind of signal as to whether the EOS-M is an evolutionary dead end (at least in the US), or whether it will continue and be worthy of investment.

EOS-M / Re: EOS M or Powershot S110?
« on: September 07, 2013, 02:00:45 AM »
I have the S95 which I have used a lot, carried to the top of mountains and on 100 mile bike rides. I also have the EOS M, which I am only beginning to explore, but I like.

I see the EOS M as the kind of thing I would traipse around a European city with for a few days. The S95, I literally carry it in my bag every day, and often in my pocket.

They are both very small compared to a DLSR, but there is a significant difference in size for the function. You need to decide just how portable you want it to be.

OMG get the Canon. Not to knock the Kenko, I am sure it is not terrible, but small imperfections are magnified with teleconverters in a big way. This is not the place to cheap out! The Canon version III would be even better, but I say go for the Canon (and this from a raging Sigma fanboy!)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Leads in Sensor Tech
« on: September 04, 2013, 03:33:39 AM »
I remember an interview where some Canon executive said that part of their long term strategy is to introduce larger sensors into lower price ranges. Lowering the cost of large sensors actually seems like the most beneficial improvement they could make.

Thank you. The business reality is this:
- The collapse of the point-and-shoot market is an existential threat to Canon, Nikon, and Olympus, and perhaps Fuji and some others I am forgetting.  The significance of this fact cannot be overstated when trying to understand each company's moves in the DSLR market. Other companies might survive a nuclear scenario in point-and-shoots, but with significant hits to their photo arms (e.g. Sony, Samsung, Panasonic),

- Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Samsung have all had strong technical responses in terms of new offerings in the MILC category or othe new categories  Nikon's 1 system approach has been a bit iconoclastic, and Canon's M system was a least initially bungled, despite some promising hardware

- The vanilla middle seems to be a terrible place to be alone, i.e. APS-C sensor or smaller sensor, not interesting body, nothing crucially differentiating (e.g. the leaf shutter Fuji x100 family), based on critical reception. While the photo technology may be fantastic in this space, it is very difficult to differentiate. Cash cows are mooing but perhaps endangered.

- Canon, for sure, has a bit of an albatross with its current investment in sensor tech production capacity.  That, and its confidence that it can wrestle competitive tech advances from current technologies, goes a log way to explaining the be split-receptor technology pioneered in the 70D. Probably no coincidence that this new tech also is biased toward video users in terms of attractiveness, that makes sense for any company trusting to shore up defenses against the IOS/Android phone camera onslaught.

- Given the need for companies to differentiate in some meaningful way, Canon and Nikon's relative position with respect to high-end DSLRs makes sense, given Nikon's reliance on more up-to-date chip fans, and canon's growing popularity in the increasingly competitive video hardware market.

- And finally this: Canon's most durable competitive advantage is in the development, production and sale of high-end lenses.  Not that Tay aren't great at camera bodies, it's just that so are others, depending on what you prefer.  A focus on full-frame users, even if at reduced ultimate margins, serves to further increase the size of a customer base with extremely high switching costs and generally high loyalty.

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M [CR2]
« on: September 03, 2013, 02:30:41 PM »
I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward  hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.

To me, that sounds like bigger.  In the case of the M, I don't think bigger is better.

Agreed.  I think we need to remember that we just got the SL, which sounds a lot like what c.d.embrey is looking for.

Site Information / Re: The 10 Commandments of CR
« on: August 24, 2013, 01:46:41 AM »
4. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours dynamic range

4a. Nor thy neighbors 14-24mm

Lenses / Re: New Lens Announcement Tonight [CR3]
« on: August 21, 2013, 08:08:10 PM »
Um, hello? There is an EF adapter for EOS-M

Yes, but it is an inelegant solution for many of the M use cases. It works great when your M's job is to serve as a backup/second body.  But for the reason I believe the M really created, to serve as compact travel system and compete with the NEX et. al., the adapter is sub-optimal.  I am glad I got one, though!

I would love the the EOS-M 11-22mm and a nice telephoto zoom, likely 55-250mm or similar. Maybe a 35 or 50 prime and we have a pretty complete system.

Canon General / Re: Where's the competition for the 24-105?
« on: August 20, 2013, 01:33:27 PM »
Canon has spoken with the release of the 24-70 f/4L IS, and I suspect the 24-105 is an evolutionary dead end. Too bad, I find I use the 70-105 part of the range fairly often.  But don't sweat it either way, the currently available lens is a great every day lens that will serve you well, especially for the price that it is available at today.

BTW, in my experience the 18-xxx ranges are almost exclusively for APS-C sensors, 18 being an effective 29mm on a Canon APS-C body.

seamonster said:
for the millionth time: 50mm now! 50mm now! Say it with me!

Just get the current 50mm. It was pretty good on my 5D, it is absolutely ridiculous on my 5D III.  What a great lens.  If/when it gets the ART treatment, you can upgrade if you think it is worth it.

The whole reason I got the 35MM was how much I loved the 50mm.

Great. And the 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art?

Or the 85mm or 135mm with OS, that would be very cool.

Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Sigma 85 f 1.4
« on: August 12, 2013, 12:49:16 AM »
Cool shot!  I am very curious about this lens, so I am eager to see what people think about it and the images they have made.  I have the Sigma 35mm and 50mm, like them both.  I have the Canon 85mm 1.8 also, and I like it a lot, yet there is a big gap between 1.4 and 1.8 in low light performance.  Not chomping at the bit, but curious.

Lenses / Re: Best Filters for 24-105 f/4
« on: August 09, 2013, 02:07:59 PM »
I recommend that if you are getting into filters for artistic purposes (i.e. anything beyond using a clear or daylight filter to protect your lenses), that you look into getting a Cokin P system, comprised of a holder and rectangular filters. 

Vossie said
For landscapes you may want to have a look at ND (neutral density) filters; homogeneous to allow use of very long shutter speeds or graduated to balance between light skies and darker grounds. I use the Lee filter system, which is not cheap but very good. You could have a look here: to see what it can do for your landscapes.
I actually have some Lee filters that are compatible with my Cokin holder, in my mind the two systems are interchangeable for the most part, and Singh Ray makes good ones too.

First off, a system like Cokin or Lee is pretty much the only way you can use graduated ND filters properly. I recommend getting both soft and hard edge, and maybe reverse grad ND if you like to do sunrise/sunset landscape shots. Two stops is a decent compromise.

Another factor in favor of Cokin for me is that I have lenses with 77mm, 67mm, 62mm, 58mm, and even 52mm with the new EOS M. With a Cokin P system, you can buy the filters once and get adapter rings for your lenses. They are a bit bigger than the screw in ones, but holy cow, you could go bankrupt buying good quality circular polarizers for your whole lens collection.  With Cokin P, if you get a new lens with an odd filter ring size, your total cost to adapt your filters to it is a $20 ring.

One thing to consider is that the P series doesn't work with the widest angle lenses.  I don't have a 16-35mm or 17-40mm, and I think they work down to about the widest on those lenses, but I am not sure about that.

EOS-M / Re: You Get What You Pay For - Warning for EOS M Adapter
« on: August 06, 2013, 08:46:35 PM »
Also, my Viltrox EOS-EF to EOS-M adapter works great, $69 shipped on ebay.  Lenses go on and off no problem.

EOS-M / Re: You Get What You Pay For - Warning for EOS M Adapter
« on: August 06, 2013, 08:44:36 PM »
Is it a button that you press, or a tab that you pull or slide?

Yes, ruined a set of extension tubes once, thinking that a slide was a push button.

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