September 22, 2014, 10:16:02 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 - pwp

Pages: 1 ... 87 88 [89] 90 91 ... 104
1321
EOS Bodies / Re: L lens for 5d MK III
« on: March 18, 2012, 01:57:31 AM »
I am thinking about getting the 5d Mk III even if it looks like the D800 is better on paper... I still think it remains to be seen if IQ would be better. I have used the 5D Mk II before and IQ is just superb! And Im not planning on printing billboard size pics anytime soon so I think 22MP is more than enough.
While 22 MP should be plenty for the vast majority of photographers, there are obvious exceptions. 22 high quality MP will deliver absolutely spectacular output with the right glass. Glossy double page spreads or full sized billboards carefully shot with my 16 MP 1D4 are 100% OK to both my clients eyes and my own over-critical eyes.

The sometimes controversial Ken Rockwell makes some completely valid points in his Megapixel Myth article. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

Your 28-135 may disappoint on FF but at least give it a test drive on your 5DIII.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/190-canon-ef-28-135mm-f35-56-usm-is-test-report--review
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=10

To help determine which L lens to start with, you could check the EXIF data on shots done with your Rebel & 28-135. See what focal lengths recur most frequently. This will help locate a suitable first L prime. Otherwise your budget will easily handle a MkI 24-70 f/2.8 or the usually excellent 24-105 f/4is.

Paul Wright

1322
Lenses / Re: 24-70 2.8 L II - any images/first impressions online?
« on: March 18, 2012, 01:35:14 AM »
Would you believe I bought a 24-70 f/2.8 MkI on the MORNING of the day the new lens was announced. It was my third 24-70 f/2.8, the previous two being huge disappointments especially on FF. The new lens is a little better, the later builds have ironed out most of the bugs.

If the MkII lens lives up to the pre-release hype it should be a "must have" lens. I'll wait to see samples of RAW images and read credible reviews before taking an inevitable hit on the MkI to update to the new lens.

Paul Wright

1323
Site Information / Re: Karma is gone?
« on: March 18, 2012, 12:00:32 AM »
The Karma system has gone. What a welcome move! Thanks Craig.
When I started posting on CR my intention was to contribute in a 100% positive way, drawing on 30+ years experience as a professional shooter.

As a creative game I thought I'd see if I could post in a positive, relevant way and never get a smite. I didn't get too many, but all were undeserved, baffling and eventually undermined my willingness to continue posting on CR.

There was a deep dislike of the system and I'm certain it kept successful professionals from contributing. It was starting to get a little trashy.

As most of us value the long term well being of CR Forums, and keep the quality of contributors high, then dumping the divisive applaud/smite system should deliver an overall quality surge.

Paul Wright

Username:pwp
Posts:226
Karma:+52/-18


1324
Lenses / Re: "Walkaround" prime for FF?
« on: March 11, 2012, 01:29:07 AM »
It's an impossible question to answer because everyone has a subtley different shooting style. Lot's pf people have suggested to 50 f/1.4. Whether Canon or Sigma, they both great lenses. Bear in mind that the Sigma is much bigger and heavier than the Canon 50 f/1.4 which may be a consideration for a walkabout.

One way to find the answer to your question is to spend half an hour polling the exif data on your existing shots you've done with your 24-105 f/4is. For example if the greatest percentage of shots are done at the wide end, then your answer is you'd need a 24mm prime. If your budget allows, the 24mmL f/1.4II is unbelievable, and a lot of shooters favourite lens.  If most shots are up at 105 then check out the 85 f/1.8 or f/1.2L or the stunningly good EF 100mm f/2.8L M.

You get the idea.

Then of course there is the rumored EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake lens that was discussed on CR on Feb 22. Lots of choices! Just a matter of making the one that's best for you.

Paul Wright

1325
Quote
On the Friday I started shooting only RAW, as this is how I would normally use a camera. Then I received a message from London saying ‘Frits, there is no RAW converter available at the moment, so you can only shoot on JPEG’. I received that after my day’s work and I thought it was a shame I couldn’t use these pictures – I could only see them in the camera. So, I decided to shoot JPEGS for the next two days.

That evening I was thinking ‘in this camera it is possible to work on your pictures, so it must be possible to work on a RAW [file] and save it is a JPEG’. My camera was in the locker at the racetrack so I went there the next morning. I took one picture as a RAW and I could change it to JPEG. I decided to put the pictures of the day before onto the card again and changed them to JPEGs in the camera so I could have a proper look at them and use them. So I shot the first day RAW and changed it [images] in the camera to JPEG.”

1,000 shots a day normally? Sounds like he wasn't slacking trying it out :)

1000 sounds fairly restrained for a day shooting action.You could have a full-on day in the studio and be lucky to shoot 100 captures but at a full day shooting track & field or swimming & diving it's not hard to come back with 3000-5000 shots. A day like that needs to be followed up with a brutal slash and burn editing session with only the very very best shots making the cut.

After reading this piece I can't wait to get my pre-ordered 1DX. The potential of this camera as a tool to really push creative boundaries and possibilities makes my mouth water. For a certain type of photographer and in the right hands it will be the best, creatively satisfying money making machine Canon has ever produced.

Paul Wright

1326
Lenses / Re: 24-70mm f/2,8 I or 24-70mm f/2,8 II with 5D III??
« on: March 09, 2012, 12:12:11 AM »
I'd drop your dealer like a hot potato, and do him the favour of letting him know why. If what you say is correct he sounds like a door to door vacuum cleaner salesman. That sort of behavior says loud and clear he only as his own interests at heart and has no concept of long term customer loyalty and its high value to both parties.

There's a guy at my local dealer who naturally is always keen to make a sale, but not if it takes BS to do it. He's completely honest with me and as a consequence almost 100% of my new gear over the past 12 years has come through him. That loyalty is rewarded with very good, close to grey prices.

On the other hand, if all your guy was actually saying is that the new lens should deliver better image quality than your current lens, then he's probably correct. If you're not sure why, then there's enough to read on CR and the www about the new lens to get you up to speed on the differences between the old and the new 24-70 f/2.8 lens.

Paul Wright

 

1327
The high volume grey importer Discount Digital Photographics in North Sydney is listing the 5DIII for $3739
http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/categories/Digital-SLR/Canon-Digital-SLR/Canon-5D-Mark-III/

The better authorised dealers are a lot closer to grey pricing than they used to be...just bargain hard. They know full well they are losing sales to the grey importers and they know they have to compete. The fact is their margins are pretty thin.

I prefer to buy from the authorised dealers because of the quality and scope of their service to loyal customers, plus the requirement of purchasing from them to qualify the item for CPS support.

But having said that, a lot of the grey pricing is so compelling it's almost impossible to ignore.

Paul Wright

1328
Lenses / Re: Still need a fast lens?
« on: March 07, 2012, 03:34:41 AM »
Depending on your shooting style the answer could be that f/2.8 & f/4 glass is fine. For me this is already the case with the f/4 24-105is and f/4 17-40 when hooked up to the 1D4 body in particular.

I hankered for very fast glass more back in the film days when my default film stock was 100 iso. Later it was still important with cameras like the 1Ds which got noisy after 200 iso. It was often a job saving decision to pack the 50 f/1.4 and the 24 f/1.4.

But really since the original 5D I'm happy to have f/2.8 glass in the bag from the "need for speed" viewpoint. The situation has done nothing but improve with each subsequent release. Photographers more skilled than me can deliver great results in dynamic shooting situations with f/1.2 - f/2 apertures. I need that touch more DOF to guarantee an acceptable percentage of keepers.

Paul Wright

1329
Lenses / Re: Where do you sell used lenses
« on: March 06, 2012, 11:58:17 PM »
I sell mine on gumtree (the Australia equivalent of Craigslist).

Yep another strong vote for Gumtree if you are in Australia. eBay is officially on the nose now for private sellers.

Paul Wright

1330
Lenses / Re: When to use IS and how many stop does it really save?
« on: March 06, 2012, 11:52:14 PM »
IS is overrated! I often switch it off on my EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM and can still shoot at 1/25th. Only use it when fully zoomed. Impossible to shoot video with it cos' its louder than ambient environment!!

Mike, I envy your steady hands! Most of us with a worse case of the wobbles than you definitely benefit from IS.
When I got my first 70-200 f/2.8is there was an immediate increase in the number of keepers.

I recently added a 24-70 f/2.8 (would you believe on the same day the 24-70 f/2.8II was announced) to complement my freakily good 24-105 f/4is. I was surprised how much I had come to depend on the IS on the 24-105, even at the wide end.

To the OP, I couldn't say how many stops the improvement is, but IS is an indispensable  tool for those of us less steady than Mike. Your new 70-300L is a great lens. There may be times when you choose to switch it out but I'd just leave IS switched on all the time as default.

Paul Wright

1331
Lenses / Re: Replacement suggestions for 17-40mm f/4 L
« on: March 06, 2012, 11:34:12 PM »
My 17-40 f/4L which I've had since they were introduced in 2003 is not great wide open..mushy corners especially on FF. But past f/5.6 it is the equal of any 16-35 f/2.8II I've matched it up to. For static subjects I try to use f/11 with this lens. It's long been considered one of Canon's bargain lenses. It's great so long as you are aware of it's limitations. I also have the Sigma 12-24 which is a handy lens to reach for when 17 just isn't wide enough. But the Sigma is nowhere near the Canon 17-40 f/4 in IQ. I'll only use the Sigma at f/11 where it is respectable but certainly not stellar.

Not sure what to suggest to you. Canon have never been famous for stellar IQ wide zooms. You may be expecting too much from your lens or you may have a rare soft copy. I hope Canon is looking to Nikon's well recieved 14-24 for inspiration.

The recent CR news item on the patent application for a f/2.8-4 17-40 caught my eye. This may signal an update for the current lens.

Paul Wright

1332
EOS Bodies / Re: Locking Mode Dial.
« on: March 06, 2012, 07:24:17 PM »
When upgrading to 1D series I fell in love with the mode buttons. However, a lock for the mode dial would be a major improvement.

One thing I value on my 1D4 is the option to switch modes OFF.
For 99% of my work it's either going to be manual or AV aperture priority.
So I can toggle from one to the other very quickly without taking my eye off the viewfinder. Cool!

Paul Wright

1333
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon: 22 megapixels is enough for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: March 06, 2012, 04:49:06 PM »
At the end of the day, there are many of us here who only need to answer one question: "Will it be a fun camera to use?"
I think, and I hope I'm correct, the resounding replies from the 5D3 are going to be YES!  Fun indeed. :)

+1 for the important fun perspective Redeye! Thankyou...

Any creative having fun in their work generally produces the best work.
I was like a kid with a new toy when I got my 1D4 and I love it just about every time I use it. It's FUN.
Once I heard it said that being a photographer beats the hell out of having to work for a living.

Fun? You bet; it will be exactly the same when I get round to picking up a 5DIII.

Paul Wright

1334
EOS Bodies / Re: Locking Mode Dial.
« on: March 06, 2012, 04:32:16 PM »
Give me the lock every time. Particularly when working with two bodies, the 5DI or II, without the lock, hanging at your side either with the standard strap or a Black Rapid, the mode dial often gets easily bumped.

On my old 5D I had to tape the mode dial onto the chosen setting. Not a good look. Working fast and in the zone on commissioned jobs I have lost shots due to the dial being bumped.

Thank you Canon, this is what the user feedback requested, and you have delivered.

Paul Wright

1335
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon: 22 megapixels is enough for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: March 06, 2012, 06:12:10 AM »
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2012/03/05/canon-22-megapixels-is-enough-for-eos-5d-mark-iii/

Quote
jmeyer | News | 05/03/2012 09:30am

Twenty two million pixels is the ideal number for theCanon EOS 5D Mark III, Canon has said in response to questions why it doesn’t closer match the 36-million-pixel sensor of the Nikon D800.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark III has only one megapixel more than its predecessor, the 5D Mark II, which has led some to question whether the new Canon camera is enough of an upgrade.

Speaking to our sister website TechRadar, Canon UK’s David Parry said he believes that 22 megapixels is enough, adding education needs to be done to convince consumers of that.

“I think there’s difficulty with having higher megapixel counts. What we tried to do is create a camera that’s good for all types of photography,” he told TechRadar.

“We feel that this is an ideal number for this type of camera, if you’re a journalist or sports photographer, you need to get the images off the camera quickly, and they need to be as sharp as they can be.

“It’s OK [higher megapixel counts] for studio photographers, but that’s not who we envisage using this camera,” he added.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark III is currently the highest resolution DSLR available in the EOS range, which is outgunned by the Nikon D800, which is the world’s highest resolution full-frame DSLR.

To see more of Parry’s comments, read the full interview on TechRadar.

Posted on Monday, March 5th, 2012 at 9:30 am

This article parallels my thoughts and experience almost to the letter.

When the original 1Ds came out in 2003 it WAS the megapixel monster...11.4 megapixels! Whoa! Respected independent reviewers gushed; "You can produce ANYTHING with the massive files from this camera..."

When the 1Ds3 shipped in 2007 it was the undisputed megapixel monster...21.1 megapixels!! The reviewers gushed. OMG who needs all this headroom? It was expensive but worth every penny for the amazing 1-series build and mind numbing 21.1 megapixels. This was the ultimate. Then less than a year later the 5DII shipped with 21.1 megapixels at a very realistic price. The future was here. Canon had delivered.

Fast forward from September 17, 2008 when the 5DII was announced to March 2, 2012, the 5DIII announcement day. Only 22 megapixels? Awww! But how many photographers actually genuinely NEED an even bigger megapixel monster? Some do. My very demanding professional needs are mostly met by a 16.1 megapixel 1DIV, with occasional 5DII use for that little bit more.

There are photographers who genuinely need a 35-45 megapixel camera, and cannot justify the huge $$ leap to medium format. I'd be surprised if Canon didn't deliver for the goods this year for these photographers and also for the few high appetite enthusiast pixel peepers. Look out though! If Canon responded to every call for more megapixels we could end up with the camera equivalent of the ultimate automotive bloater, the Hummer.

The future is certain to trend differently but right now for the great majority, 22 megapixels is a highly practical sweet spot.

Paul Wright



Pages: 1 ... 87 88 [89] 90 91 ... 104