October 22, 2014, 07:22:06 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 - pwp

Pages: 1 ... 87 88 [89] 90 91 ... 108
1321
Lenses / Re: 1DX affect on used 300 and 400 2.8L Prices
« on: April 13, 2012, 11:56:38 PM »
I see a number of shooters (like me) planning to continue usage of my 1DIV right along side my on order 1DX.  I will continue to attach the 1DIV to the 300 or 500 and have the 1DX permanently attached to the 70-200.

As another 300 f/2.8 on APS-H shooter that's exactly my plan for the short term, but the 1D4 won't last forever in daily use. Unless Canon surprise us with a new APS-H release, a 400 f/2.8 will be a required purchase when APS-H eventually reaches the end of the line. (300 x 1.3 = 390)

Alternatively, Canon may really surprise us with a true high performance, sports grade APS-C body.
I'm talking something well beyond 7D spec. The 300 translates into 480 (300 x 1.6 = 480) Nice!


Paul Wright

1322
Hmmm! I do have 1DX bodies on order. OK I'll add the 600exRT as well. Thanks.

Paul Wright

1323
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III for Sport
« on: April 13, 2012, 04:03:34 AM »
I shot four polo matches today using a Canon 5D. The files are extremely ROBUST. By this I mean that they are highly amenable to extreme Lightroom adjustments without beginning to look like crap. Impressive as hell.

6 fps is barely adequate. The swing of an arm happens in a fraction of a second and the length of time between clicks means an entirely different picture. I think to do it right you need minimum 8. Ten is borderline overkill, and you start getting quite a few of exactly the same shot. I think beyond 10 is a recipe for filling your hard drive needlessly.

The autofocus is "jumpy" and a bit frenetic. I just don't know how better to put this. Over the course of the day I tried ever different autofocus preset and it remained jumpy. It would latch onto subjects, then unlatch.

Reach. Obviously I miss the crop factors of the 1D4 and 7D a LOT on a huge polo field.

This is exactly the type of real world feedback I've been waiting to read. Thanks Smirkypants. +1

6 FPS feels slow? Yes, it's amazing how much action happens between frames shooting at 10 FPS on the 1D4. Anyone serious about shooting action needs to sit tight for the 1DX or stock up on 1D4 bodies with the very useful x1.3 APS-H sensor. I've said it before & I'll say it again...I like APS-H. Canon?

Reach? Yep this is another issue with expensive solutions as we move from APS-C & APS-H to FF whether that be 1DX or 5DIII. Who else is looking at less useful 300 f/2.8 lenses and realizing they are going have to drop the Mastercard on a 400 f/2.8 sometime this year. Sigh...

AF? We were told the 5DIII would AF better than the 1D4. Maybe it will improve when the grip ships with the twin battery option. Could be the complex configuration of the AF didn't suit your subject.

Paul Wright

1324
Besides the obvious RT functions and ST-E3 functionality, are there any valid reasons to upgrade from 580exII?

Paul Wright

1325
EOS Bodies / Re: I still don't get the crop debate
« on: April 11, 2012, 06:26:01 PM »
I shoot 1D4 bodies and will miss the x1.3 crop of the APS-H sensor. It's going to COST me.
My 300 f/2.8 will lose an effective 90mm on the FF 1DX bodies which I have on pre-order.

The pricey required solution is a new 400 f/2.8II. I like APS-H.

Paul Wright

1326
Lenses / Re: Used 400mm f2.8L IS lenses - good value now?
« on: April 11, 2012, 03:10:26 AM »
The 400 f/2.8 is the all time favourite with sports shooters, along with the equally remarkable 300 f/2.8. Even older beat up 400 lenses hold their value remarkably well. I think you'll see a lot of demand for 400 f/2.8 lenses as the 1DX starts to sell in meaningful numbers to sports shooters who are upgrading from MkIV bodies with their very useful APS-H x1.3 crop sensors. This will keep second hand prices buoyant for some time, even as photographers  upgrade to the 400 f/2.8II and release their old lenses onto the secondhand market.

With the FF 1DX shooters who rely on the reach of the 300 f/2.8 and APS-H will be wanting more, and their answer lies with the 400 f/2.8.

Paul Wright

1327
Lenses / Re: Active Sports - 135 or 70-200 2.8 II?
« on: April 11, 2012, 02:58:01 AM »
I shoot a lot of sports and have to say it's surprising how often I crank the 70-200 f/2.8isII out to 200mm and want more.  And just as often I'm glad to be able to pull back to 70mm when the action is right on top of me. At most events I shoot with a 300 f/2.8is one one body and the 70-200 f/2.8isII on the second body.

The 135 f/2 is one of the true gems in the Canon L range, but will be a little restricted when shooting something as dynamic as sports.

A lens that has always fascinated me is the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 zoom. They released an updated, no doubt improved version recently. I know they added OS. (Sigma's IS) Personally I'd love to hear from anyone on the list who uses this unique lens.

Paul Wright

1328
Lenses / Re: Why is Canon so slow updating (legacy) lenses?
« on: April 09, 2012, 06:28:27 PM »
I voted, "Until recently, Canon thought that people would like to have zooms..."  Although I don't actually think that's changes - Canon still thinks people want zooms, and I'm sure they think that because they can look at their sales figures and easily see that trend.

Yes, outside of a statistically tiny percentage of photographers who are completely "prime" focused and incorrectly perceive zooms as  optically and creatively lightweight trash, the vast majority of the market either chooses or very happily accepts the flexibility and very high performance of particularly L zooms.

Why are Canon slow to update older glass? First and foremost they are a business with obligations to the long term viability of the company and to shareholders. Pragmatic business decisions are being made daily, based on a whole raft of criteria, none of which would include what they may see as distant background noise from lists such as this one.

I didn't vote as the options were too narrow.

Paul Wright

1329
Is the hood on correctly?
Is it the correct hood for the lens?

Paul Wright

1330
Lenses / Re: Prime VS Zooms.
« on: April 06, 2012, 09:07:07 AM »
Good quality L zooms have been gods gift to busy photographers working in dynamic environments where a lens change may mean lost shots, a barely perceptible improvement or a dirty sensor. I wouldn't mind betting that by far the greater percentage of reproduced images both commercial & editorial are shot with zooms by very satisfied photographers for very satisfied clients.

Other than when I need 300 f/2.8 or 400 f/2.8 I'll be using zooms. About the only time I'll reach for a short prime is when I am after a specific look that f/1.4 or f/1.8 may deliver, or when I'm battling against the light and am reluctant to go higher on the iso, usually because of personal & client expectations for IQ.

There are good, valid reasons for shooting with zooms or primes, but I think the zoom/prime debate has skewed way out of balance towards L primes being perceived as some sort of holy grail. But unless you are making good money from your photography, there is scant justification for spending up big on expensive, comparatively limited primes. Few viewers are going to swoon over the quality of the bokeh, what turns people on are powerful, gutsy images  that COMMUNICATE. As my first picture editor kept reminding us, content is king.

Paul Wright

1331
Just two? Easy.

16-35 f/2.8II
70-200 f/2.8isII

Paul Wright

1332
Lenses / Re: Your Most Used Lens!
« on: April 05, 2012, 09:35:33 PM »
I use my EF70-200F2.8LIS II the most!

I'm with you here re the 70-200 f/2.8isII. It suits my shooting style and the results just sing.
When the pressure is on, this is a lens I TRUST.

Paul Wright

1333
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII
« on: April 05, 2012, 09:30:36 PM »
Interesting question posed by OP.  It's not a cut and dried issue.  1Ds3? It's 1-series qualities ARE compelling.

But looking at the AF, low light capability, video, buffer depth, Digic 5+, monitor, burst and so on, the 5D3 has got to pull ahead of the now aging though very respectable 1Ds3.

If you are a very heavy shooter you'll still be ahead if you need to spend a few hundred $$ on a replacement shutter after the rated 150,000 cycles. But a used 1Ds3 may already have a couple of hundred thousand on it.

(BTW my 5D classic is still on its original shutter at well over 300,000.)

Paul Wright


1334
I'm pretty much neutral on Ken Rockwell.  He does thing differently in a fairly beige world. At least the guy gets a response!

But sheesh! If he offends, just don't read him!

Paul Wright


1335
Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 F4 IS or F2.8 (non IS)?
« on: April 01, 2012, 07:34:25 AM »
So really, not a single word in defence of the f/4? It's twice as light and much easier to carry around, and it also has IS - is the f/2.8 non-stabilised THAT much better?

It's not a matter of "defending" the f/4, it's determining which lens is going to best suit the OP's need to shoot action sports.
The f/4 would certainly be first choice for plenty of other specific needs, but the OP has been correctly advised to look to the f/2.8 in this instance.

Paul Wright

Pages: 1 ... 87 88 [89] 90 91 ... 108