April 19, 2014, 06:51:47 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 - 1982chris911

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 14
61
Lenses / Re: 400mm f/4. Anything good and "affordable"?
« on: May 30, 2012, 06:56:17 PM »
How about the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF ???

62
Lenses / Re: A Brief Hands On: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
« on: May 27, 2012, 06:31:18 PM »
Well seeing those two pics I am just not impressed by the sharpness in the far out corners. That is in no way as good a 70-200mm f2.8L IS II and the hood design of the new lens is also not that great if you think about great protection from raindrops the old design offers. Guess my 24-70 MKI will stay with me for much longer ( I am probably one of the happy few who really got a great quality copy, as I did never experience any problems with it)... It also works very well on the 5D MKIII so no need to update ...

Seeing this mini review it looks like my money will go into a 17mm TSE instead of this one as I really don't see a point in getting it if the corner sharpness is not completely stellar compared to the older MKI design...   

63
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake Coming [CR3]
« on: May 22, 2012, 01:11:33 PM »
I would really like this pancake lens to be f2.0 or even better f1.4 ... also if it would make it a little bigger ... that would make an awesome lens for natural light under difficult conditions and still light to always have with you on a FF body ... f2.8 is too slow here ...

64
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]
« on: May 21, 2012, 01:02:30 PM »
70D sounds logical as a more or less rebodied 7D with flipscreen. However the AF of the 7D is already good enough for Bird in Flight and most sports  - so the 7D mkII needs more than just a better AF and viewfinder upgrade. It needs better IQ and that is only possible with a new designed sensor ...     

65
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: May 09, 2012, 09:22:38 AM »
Nice shots Chris.

On the Male Takahe shot... what have you done to the background... it is the weirdest blur... almost a criss cross pattern blur..   :o

It was shot through a fence as the others already said. That is the problem if the Background is then too close to the subject to be extremely out of focus - the pattern still remains   

66

Three lenses max, one tripod, 1 FF body, and one P&S camera - I took a little less up Kilimanjaro summit night, so I should be ok.
14, 15 16 0r 17 mm only three degrees apart, and yet such a difference, in special being the 15 a fisheye... Where's that Canon 12-24mm? Oh, wait! That's onlly with Nikon - darn..

Now, the hard part is wait all summer long :)

Three Lenses: Canon 24-70 f2.8 or Canon 50mm 1.4 + 70-200 f2.8 L IS2 and Sigma 12-24mm HSM II and I would take an extender 2x III to get more reach for wildlife and all things distant
Body: 5d MKIII
Tripod: fitting one for the gear and a very small table tripod (the 30$ Manfrotto one).
P&S: Well a second body like a 7D is also only 200-300gr more and you re safe in case one fails.
BTW 12-17mm is not only 1 deg each it is much more 


67
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 IQ FB, do I need a D800?
« on: May 08, 2012, 10:47:28 AM »
I can seriously recommend a Linhof 4x5 Master Technika Classic Rangefinder for your profile pictures ... it is about the only convenient way to capture snapshots ... I have mine with me every evening I go for a drink just in case I want to make some fun picture with my buddies ...  ;)   

69
C1-C3 with individual settings one for brackets, one for fast action (1600 ISO - sharpness +5), one for portraits... All using Manual or AV mode as base     

70
I don't know where you heard that the 120-300 was better than the 70-200, and I seriously doubt it's as good as the 300 f/2.8 IS II.  Just look at the charts against the 70-200, it's no contest IMO.:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=381&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0
Even with the 1.4x extender the 70-200 is noticeably better.


As for the 120-300 vs. 300 f/2.8 IS II, again, no comparison.  Even at f/8 the 120-300 isn't as sharp as the 300 at f/2.8:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=381&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0



That is not the lens I am talking about, this is a much older design by sigma which did not even have IS ... the new one is a completely different design and much improved 

71

The D800 has absolutely no resolution advantage over the 5D Mark III when using zooms and low end primes this has been proven by many sources ranging from DXO to lensrentals to many minor reviews. The D800 only has a resolution when shooting with the best primes and only between f/4.0-f/8.0. That advantage is also at absolute best only an 11% increase in linear resolution, despite having more than 60% more megapixels.


That is also something that many people don't realize when looking at the D800 vs 5D MK III comparison. The better results especially resolution wise and added details come from using the Nikon lenses (14-24, 16-35 II and new 24-70) ... if canon would finally be able to make a UWA that competes with the 14-24 in sharpness and overall optical quality (even the 14mm f2.8 II L Prime can't) many people would not see differences at all. BTW also the very very good 14-24 of Nikon is not able to use the full resolution of the 36MP sensor across most of the frame ... This said it is still much better than any Canon lens in this area     

<cough>TS-E 24mm II</cough>

Cheers,

b&

True for both L TS-E's, their resolving power is beyond anything you can have in wide angle on a Canon Camera, but they are not what I would call comparable to the 14-24 or 16-35 of Nikon ... and that is the problem. They are also not as wide - I am wondering if the optical elements of both would also make great conventional UWA primes and if yes which focal length they would be when using the very wide TS full image circle.   

72
Thanks Radiating and 1982chris911, very informative posts.

I think it is important for pixel peepers to realize the limited resolution advantage the D800 will have over 5D3 in most cases when it is even difficult to measure under controlled test conditions!

It seems the D800 resolution advantage can only be "significant" with excellent glass under ideal conditions (e.g. studio work, good lighting, tripod), and even then it will be far lower than what is expected from the 60% more pixels! Otherwise, for many situations/shooting styles, it will not be possible to take full advantage of the resolving power of a D800 system due to lack of
 
-excellent optics which are sharp across the whole frame
-available light to use low iso and shutter speeds fast enough for handholdability or subject-stopping
-apertures small enough to achieve sharp focus across the image without causing too much diffraction

I find myself using 1:1 pixel mapping quite a lot during post-production for selecting the sharpest exposure and applying sharpness, NR, etc., and I realize I would probably be more content working with consistently pixel sharp 5D3 images rather than constantly being reminded that my gear, shooting conditions (or technique) was not up to par with the resolving power of the D800 sensor (across the whole image).

Well regarding the D800's additional resolving power I think as long as you use the full image it is not really important at all. This said the D800 does have an advantage if you intent to crop (NOT Resize !!!) the images to match the 22MP - 18MP of current Canon bodies and use only the center of your image as some ppl. here suggest e.g. for sports. It is somehow like having an APS-H 22MP body - some ppl. need this as it is about the same difference as using a 300mm lens compared to a 400mm lens which you would need on 5D MKIII to achieve the same result... However this also requires that the picture is taken with top level glass and is really 100% in focus without any blur to be significant ...

73

The D800 has absolutely no resolution advantage over the 5D Mark III when using zooms and low end primes this has been proven by many sources ranging from DXO to lensrentals to many minor reviews. The D800 only has a resolution when shooting with the best primes and only between f/4.0-f/8.0. That advantage is also at absolute best only an 11% increase in linear resolution, despite having more than 60% more megapixels.


That is also something that many people don't realize when looking at the D800 vs 5D MK III comparison. The better results especially resolution wise and added details come from using the Nikon lenses (14-24, 16-35 II and new 24-70) ... if canon would finally be able to make a UWA that competes with the 14-24 in sharpness and overall optical quality (even the 14mm f2.8 II L Prime can't) many people would not see differences at all. BTW also the very very good 14-24 of Nikon is not able to use the full resolution of the 36MP sensor across most of the frame ... This said it is still much better than any Canon lens in this area       

74
EOS Bodies / Re: Up the game
« on: May 07, 2012, 02:57:59 AM »
I have a D800 on order, but after following the Nikon forums and editing some of the raw images on my I7 equiped PC with plenty of memory and fast SSD, I'm beginning to wonder. 
 
Besides cameras that don't focus, cameras that lockup (workaround reportedly doesn't work), batteries that overheat or explode, editing is extremely slow on the 50+ mp raw images I downloaded, no way could I edit 1500 or 3000 images in a reasonable time, I have to wait 30 sec or more for a simple edit like NR to update and let me proceed.

I was saying this already some weeks ago ... and still there are a lot of wannabe D800 owners that say that the filesize of the camera is not a problem with a modern computer/mac ... But that is exactly what my feeling about the camera was when I had one in my hands ... great piece of tech IQ wise, but unpractical in so many other ways (when compared to the 5D MK III) ...
to some extend the D800 here also compares to MF cameras in this regard ...

75
Lenses / Re: Shooting people with a 16-35... Any good ?
« on: May 07, 2012, 02:40:46 AM »
So my advice to OP would be that, for the sake of your marriage, stick with nice telephoto shots for portraits when you're taking portrait shots of your wife ...

I was really laughing when I read this cause I was just thinking the exact same ... Otherwise he would maybe end up with the choice of keeping photography as a hobby or his marriage after the trip when SHE sees the distorted results ... ;-)   

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 14