Messages

31

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss 70-200 f/2.8 Coming to Canon for NAB 2012?

« on: March 19, 2012, 10:42:16 AM »

Where did the product mock up come from?

I hope it has AF. MF prime is one thing but a MF zoom is another.

You mean, MF wide-angle is one thing but a MF telephoto is another - anyway, I get your point ;-)

Seriously though, 70-200mm is a great focal-length range for many portrait 'togs. For these Guys, AF is very handy if you're using shallow DOF and/or zooming at the longish end. I'd be a bit surprised if it doesn't have AF, even though that would be a first for Zeiss.

32

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 or 5D2.1, please compare old vs. new model (real life)

« on: March 19, 2012, 10:32:38 AM »

Why are you all writing out spec lists and making comparisons on the basis of that? The topic title clearly states "(REAL LIFE)"... He wants to hear the experiences of people that actually have it, not over-chewed spec lists that we all already know by now... :-)

+1 Tijn

Oh.......wait....

33

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Distagon 15 f/2.8 ZE Official

« on: March 16, 2012, 08:59:43 AM »

[quote author=recon photography link=topic=4386.msg89370#msg89370 date=1331902303
thankyou , but ouch 95mm filters i dont even want to know how much they cost but i guess it could be a really nice lens for landscapes then
[/quote]

Well, I'm just relieved that it can take filters.

34

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Zeiss Distagon 15 f/2.8 ZE Official

« on: March 16, 2012, 08:57:08 AM »

The lens will start shipping in May 2012 for a cool $2948 USD. It’ll be interesting to see how it stacks up against the Canon EF 14 f/2.8L II.

This lens, while priced steeply, appears to have the specs of an absolute cracker. I'm very much encouraged by the 'exceptionally low distortion' statement by Zeiss, and the way it's being presented as a great lens for architectural 'togs. Can't wait for a review, preferably on the 5dIII or D800 ;-)

35

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?

« on: March 16, 2012, 05:44:57 AM »

The heated discussion shows that it's not as simple as saying "get the one you like", but there are many doubt about the future r&d capabilities of Canon vs Nikon/Sony.

There is absolutely no reason to doubt Canon's R&D capabilities. If there's blame to be handed, point it towards the marketing, sales and finances departments.

Look, it wouldn't surprise me. Over the last 20 years, the hugely increased (relative) power of these departments, and the obsession with cost-cutting has produced many downsides for the consumer. It brings to mind Porsche's shenanigans of disabling the Cayman's full potential to protect 911 sales.

36

Australia / Re: For those in Aust who want the 17-40L

« on: March 16, 2012, 05:31:25 AM »

What was the price? It's $743 now

Hmmm, it was $679 when I checked, yesterday.

37

Australia / Re: For those in Aust who want the 17-40L

« on: March 15, 2012, 08:16:52 AM »

Deal of the day at DWI. Not sure how it compares but looks ok. I have no affiliation with these blokes fwiw.

http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/dealoftheday/landingpage/index.asp#

Doesn't seem bad at all for Australian prices. I checked: I was expecting to have to flame you, but they don't come up with inflated delivery charges in checkout. So, yeah, pretty good ;-)

38

EOS Bodies / Re: Here we go again: 5DIII vs. D800 raw files head-to-head

« on: March 15, 2012, 04:04:00 AM »

use Light room 4 or download camera raw 6.7 beta

Cheers for that.

39

EOS Bodies / Re: Here we go again: 5DIII vs. D800 raw files head-to-head

« on: March 15, 2012, 03:36:03 AM »

14-24/2.8 kills Canon's wide-angle zooms.

Nikon 24/1.4 has like 1 stop of vignetting in the corners. Canon's has like 3.

If you compare most MTF charts of primes, Nikon has higher MTF wide open than Canon (and usually you buy primes to shoot them wide open or thereabouts).

So please someone explain to me why Canon glass is better.

Look, the Nikon 14-24mm is a great lens. The problem is, it has almost 4% barrel distortion at 14mm. For someone like me, who shoots architectural stuff almost always at f/8 or smaller, and for whom the widest fov is critical, it just doesn't cut it next to the Canon 14mm.

Canon's vignetting decreases significantly by f/8 or f/11, and in any case, it is very easily fixed in post.

When you fix 4% barrel distortion, unfortunately, you lose the fov advantage that 14mm might have because part of the image has to be thrown away.

So, it really depends on the application.

On a side note, Guys, how are you viewing these RAWS ? I have updated Lightroom 3 and PS5 and it says the Nikon file is 'incompatible??? Can someone help??

40

Canon General / Re: OMG....you always get smited for offering your opinion!

« on: March 12, 2012, 02:46:57 AM »

put it this way.
If you speak your mind but put forward a civil and decent post then sure you will probably get some smite from some purile people but there is no way to know who it is and it will only be  a few. however if you put the same argument forward with name calling and abusive language then ALOT more members will smite you. I am sure there are people that smite just because they disagree. so getting smites is just par for the course really.
Fear of being smited should not stop you stating a point of veiw in a civil manner more often than not you will get applauds than smites, I quite often applaud posts i dont agree with just because it was a well presented argument, and i'm sure others do too.

Wikid, I largely agree with your post above and with the way that you believe people should use the Karma system.

I repeat, smites don't bother me,personally, one little bit. However, I fear that in a not-so-insignificant amount of cases, it limits the extent of debate (even if people aren't aware of that on a conscious level). You get a feel for that with some of the restrained responses on hot topics.

I am not privy to business/operational information on this site. There need to be some checks in place, and the moderators can only do so much moderating. I can envisage that the "total karma" system would be less likely to limit (useful) debate when compared to the status quo.

41

Canon General / Re: OMG....you always get smited for offering your opinion!

« on: March 11, 2012, 11:07:35 PM »

I wish we could only have positives, it just is not a option.  We can have a total, or positive and negative, or none.

I personally don't give a rat's proverbial about smites/karma. What concerns me is the prospect that this system is stopping some/many people from truly speaking their minds. We want to delve as deep as possible into the topics raised, don't we? Then again, I'm looking at it from a photography enthusiast's point of view rather than from a business/SEO perspective.

42

Lenses / Re: Rumored 10 new lenses, 5 of which (CR) mentioned...

« on: March 09, 2012, 11:44:15 PM »

The 135 f/2L, though, is 16 years old and could definitely use an update on all fronts.

A bit surprised at that comment. I know that it is has some LoCa issues at the wide end, for instance, but, based on the feedback/reviews I have read and the samples I have seen, this is one hell of a lens - both objectively and subjectively. Great bokeh, very sharp across the whole plane from f/2.8 (check out samples and the mtf graph/figures), and of course, fantastic color rendition. Then again, if it needs to work on a 45MP monster.....

43

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: No Focusing Screens for 5D MIII?

« on: March 09, 2012, 10:42:15 AM »

No interchangeable focus screens is disappointing. I've noticed that the Nikon D800 has the same limitation.

I guess, however, to offset that to some degree, the 5dIII has a decent 3.2" lcd screen which will make liveview-based-focusing a bit easier than on the mark II.

44

EOS Bodies / Re: Are you happy with the 5D III Specs?

« on: March 08, 2012, 12:02:45 AM »

And we in the UK will be paying the equivalent of about $4700 for it (apparently). I can't believe some people in America are complaining at a $3500 price tag, which I guess is equivalent to just £2000 here. We're paying £3000!

Wow, Fleetie. I sense a conspiracy to charge Mother England and *all* of its colonies a premium over the rest of the world (here is Australia, we are similarly screwed with pricing, as you may have gauged). Funny thing is, it's not like they need to convert the darn thing to right-hand-drive.

45

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 30D to 5D Mark III - Too big of a jump? (advice please)

« on: March 07, 2012, 11:54:31 PM »

Hmmm, I have the 30D. It's a fine camera. Still. Thing is, it's a bit awkward being restricted to ISO 400 

The only reason I can think of that may make a switch to the 5D III too great a 'job' is if the said person has a heart condition or the like.

No, seriously, I can't think of any major issue. The 5DIII weighs 950g with battery versus 810g for the 30D. Also, the 30D has a smaller profile, and might be slightly easier to hold. I know it can be an issue with small-statured people.

I say: go for it !!!!!