Messages

661

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Low light compact for £250

« on: September 29, 2011, 06:40:25 PM »

A friend at work is looking for a new camera, she's asking me about the Samsung MV800 but she's wanting something for taking pictures at weddings and family gatherings, in particular where light is a poor.  She isn't wanting a DSLR and I'm not sure she would be up for a second hand G Series... 

Any suggestions for £250 that will fit in a pocket ?

How about a used micro 4/3 (e.g. panasonic GF series or an olympus Pen) ? The sensor size to camera size of these things is pretty hard to beat. That would be the best performing option short of getting an SLR.

For compacts, stick with a 1/1.7" or so sensor -- Canon S90/S95, Panasonic LX3/LX5, Olympus XZ1. The smaller the sensor, the worse it will perform in low light.

662

Canon General / Re: Nikon's FB Page "A photographer is only as good as the equipment he uses..."

« on: September 29, 2011, 07:00:22 AM »

Obviously, the people who get annoyed by that comment are those who have not exploited their gear at the maximum. Which means that they have wasted money on their current equipment.

If this is true, we could all spend a life time with a point and shoot, and still fail to produce better images than those who truly mastered using one.

Thankfully, it isn't true. They've only "wasted money" if the added utility of the more expensive equipment is less than the utility (to them) of the extra money they spent on it. 

If I get $1500 worth of joy in jumping from a Rebel to a 5D Mark II (and what constitutes $1500 worth depends entirely on my subjective preferences)  then it is not a waste to buy one. There is no rule that says that I have some obligation to spend a certain amount of time using cheaper equipment and maximizing the results obtained from it to acquire skills that make me "worthy" of a more expensive camera.

Of course those who want to maximize the results from a point and shoot before buying a more expensive camera are welcome to do so. But those people will never own an SLR (and never upgrade their point and shoot)

Remind me, why are you waiting for 5D3 / 1Ds 4?

I'm not in the class of people who have to own a camera that doesn't exist but I  did buy a full frame and I'm pretty sure that there are some much better photographers using much cheaper equipment. The reason was that I really enjoy using it for taking the types of pictures that I take. I don't see it in terms of "going further with my skills". I am not a pro and I don't participate in photography contests, so have no interest in "going further". Indeed, I think one could "go further" with a point and shoot, and if "going further" were truly the goal, one might be better served by using a variety of very inexpensive cameras.

663

EOS Bodies / Re: Price point of a 5Dmk2 replacement

« on: September 29, 2011, 06:32:45 AM »

My calculation is: $300 difference between FF and APS-C, $300 for larger prism, larger shutter, lager mirror, larger body (compared to 7D). Assuming that the 5DIII have all the features of 7D then, the 5DIII should be  $600 above 7D. The current 5DII have less feature than the 7D and sells about $1000 above the 7D. Therefore the 5DII is over priced. Canon should be able to sell the 5DIII at about $2200. Since 5dIII is a FF, Canon may price it at $2800 for deeper profit.

Canon have manufacturing costs (per body produced) but they also have fixed R&D costs. How do they distribute those between the different models ? For example, if the R&D costs average $200 per camera sold, does that mean that entry level powershots "should" cost $200 plus manufacturing costs plus markup ? If you don't want to pay for the R&D, then why are we discussing prices of a model that doesn't even exist yet ? The way it ultimately works is that the way those costs are distributed among their models depends on relative supply and demand for the different models. Higher end models (those where a price increase doesn't hurt sales as much) are likely to cover more of these costs.

In terms of manufacturing costs alone -- Sony has already sold a full frame camera for $2000 (the A850). So it is likely that it is possible to get full frame cameras on the shelves for $2000 a piece with 0 marginal cost per unit  to the manufacturer.

But pricing does not depend on marginal production costs alone.  It depends partly on fixed costs and partly  on supply and demand economics (and these interact as fixed costs are likely to be distributed based on demand). The 5D Mark I has similar full frame hardware to the 5D Mark II, yet it is "underpriced" at $1000. The reason is that there is limited demand for an older model.

664

EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only person who isn't interested in a 5d mkIII?

« on: September 28, 2011, 06:42:11 AM »

It's so frustrating seeing everyone praying for their new 5d/7d/60d/ti etc!.

I think I'm about the only one here who actually likes the 5D Mark II (I just picked one up) and isn't in a hurry to dump it for the 5D Mark III (never mind the fact that we still don't know anything about the Mark III and therefore aren't really in a position to decide whether the upgrade is a good idea). Sure it could have more autofocus points, but I just use the middle one all the time anyway. I suppose there are some who would like to be able to bump the ISO up to 409600. Not me. Camera tech simply isn't on a Moore's law curve, and the 5D Mark II while "old" was ahead of the curve when it came out.

665

EOS Bodies / Re: Price point of a 5Dmk2 replacement

« on: September 27, 2011, 07:17:44 AM »

Excellent topic, and really interesting picture is emerging here.
Looks like except hand full of professionals, some really crazy enthusiasts, may be some lawyers, dentists and yes neuroanatmist, nobody else can afford FF or in other words humble 35 mm format digital camera.
I really hope Canon, and others are not creating this elitist  club with premeditation...
Good night everybody!

Price of entry to "full frame goodness" is quite a bit lower than the cost of a new 5D Mark II. If you're willing to go with film, the EOS 3 is about $300 now. It works with EOS mount lenses and has a good autofocus system. If you really want digital (no one really needs digital except possibly pros and only because they are competing with other pros who have digital) , used 5D classics sell for about $1000 or so -- about the price of a new 60D.

About the "elite club" -- it boils down to whether you want to take great photos, or crank out pictures on a tight schedule that meet  the expectations of clients. For pros, the latter is important but for amateurs, it isn't . So pro equipment won't necessarily produce the best results (what it will do is produce quick gratification which is why everyone wants it)

If you really do want to turn pro,  then you're looking at it as a business startup cost. The cost of a 5D Mark II looks expensive compared to discretionary income, but it is not expensive by the standards that you'd measure business startup costs.

666

Canon General / Re: Improving composition - photography skills

« on: September 26, 2011, 08:24:32 PM »

Firstly thank you all for the references and tips.  will need time to digest the materials mentioned here.

Let me share 2 specific challenges I face with my photos:

1) Exposure - with digital - even a slight brightness often "kills" the colors by "blowing them out". When I shoot outdoors (I live in a very sunny country) I find it very hard to set exposure - as "normal" exposure often is much to bright and colorless, if I start to underexpose - I get dark spots in the frame? Any tips on outdoor shots in bright light ?

"Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson discusses metering in some depth. The first step if you are taking pictures of a scene with really bright highlights is to make sure that you are metering the primary subject and how to meter when photographing challenging scenes.

A quick summary: the way Peterson likes to do it is put the camera on manual and fill most of the frame with whatever he wants to use as his point of reference and manually set the exposure, then recompose. Alternatively one can use AE lock combined with shutter/aperture priority.

2) Portraits. Everyone talks about using a small f/stop >=2.8 to produce background blur (bokeh) and give the shot a nice affect. However I find - that f stops 2.8 and smaller - can easily produce blurry shots as the smallest movement of the subject (not to mention a group shot where people are not all the same distance from you) causes blur. I found that nothing ruins a nice portrait more then a blurry kind of picture (unless this was intended for some artistic purpose)
What is the best F/stop for portraits ? What about if you use a flash ?

The best F stop depends -- depth of field varies with subject distance. If you're close to minimum focus distance, you could need a much narrower aperture than f/2.8 to avoid "foreground blur".  If you're taking a full body portrait with a 50mm lens on a crop, subject movement will not throw them out of focus (assuming you focused correctly). See online depth of field calculators.

For portraits, there is no one best F stop, but if you go with a narrow aperture, you will need a more cooperative background.

Flash can be used as necessary to provide enough light. Ideally, you choose the F stop based on depth of field preference. As you've probably observed already, for group shots you often need more depth of field, especially if the subjects aren't conveniently lined up in the plane of focus. A flash really helps for these because then you don't need to stretch the aperture to get enough light, instead you can close it to get enough depth of field.

667

EOS Bodies / Re: Opinion - What EOS Will Look Like by Photokina

« on: September 25, 2011, 07:09:03 PM »

The more I think about this, the less I'm beginning to care! Don't get me wrong I like the Canon products I have but I've pretty much grown tired of waiting for Canon to wake up to the fact I want a good small camera.

I'm very close to ditching my Canon SLR gear and picking up a Fuji X100 and maybe eventually a Leica. I don't like that Canon are being so slow to market, they don't impress me with innovation that I care about any more, that will help me take better family photos, videos and studio shots. I want either an affordable, smallish, superfast, 45 point AF FF SLR with a flash built-in, or a small rangefinder style camera.

If someone said to you "I want a small camera with decent image quality, I don't care very much for shallow depth of field, and I want something compact and not too expensive", would you tell them to get the 5D with the 24-70mm f/2.8 ? Why not just sell it all and get the EP3 or the GH2  ? Even if/when Canon do announce a mirrorless product, their lens lineup will be 3-4 years behind micro 4/3.

668

EOS Bodies / Re: Big 5D Mark II Price Drops in Canada & USA

« on: September 25, 2011, 04:35:42 PM »

dang such a disappointment i was also planning on getting one as well. real tempted to just get one shipped from canada for $2k...the only difference is the 1 year warranty from a us version?

Canon sells the refurbished version for $2000 in their online store. They usually sell out pretty quickly, but if you check the site each day for a little while, you should be able to pick one up. If you can do without the full warranty, it's a deal.

669

Canon General / Re: Improving composition - photography skills

« on: September 25, 2011, 03:04:47 PM »

Can you suggest some tips on how to advance my composition skills ?

I posted a book before, I can add a few tips (without repositing a mini tutorial) I'm not a seasoned photographer, but I'll fire away anyway --

for family pictures (e.g. birthday parties), I've found dealing with backgrounds to be one of the key challenges. I don't know about you, but my residence while well kept is not a photo studio, and sometimes where I will be shooting, it's just a mess.

Neuroanatomist's tip to scan the frame is a good one. I'd go a step further and suggest that you need to move around and position yourself so that you have a good background. This also includes considering a high or low camera position.

Telephoto lenses (or the long end of a normal zoom) give you tighter control of the background. Wider shots really force you to look at the frame carefully because they really pull in a lot of background.

670

Canon General / Re: Improving composition - photography skills

« on: September 25, 2011, 02:03:35 PM »

Dear All,

Pardon me for interrupting the flood of tech - equipment type posts. I would like to ask those of you who are seasoned photographers a question about PICTURES (not cameras) for a change.

I am an amateur photographer (as a hobby) for about 14 months now. I started out right at the bottom coming from simple p&s pics at a birthday party - and I'm trying to improve my skills.

Can you suggest some tips on how to advance my composition skills ?

"The Photographers Eye" by Michael Freeman.

671

United States / Re: Upgrading lenses

« on: September 19, 2011, 10:24:52 PM »

Hi! I am an amateur photographer that mostly focused on flying birds when they come into the area. But now, I'm thinking of shooting some high school night football games (time while I spend waiting for the birds to come back).

However, given the lack of light, and the uncertainty of being on the sidelines(although I'm going to try!) I am not sure if my ef-s 55-250mm mk 1 will be able to serve me well. The fastest lens I have is just the nifty fifty f/1.8 but I will need the zoom. and then I have the kit lens....

What lens should I look to be saving up for first, keeping in mind that I mainly to birds and now trying to get into night sports?

I'm looking for a light lens(to handhold) that will allow me to take photos with little noise/blur. Which lens do you recommend?

Meanwhile, any tips on using the 55-250 for football?

Currently I am using the Canon Rebel XSi -my first dslr, acquired 2 years ago.

Thanks to all who read! =D

The 70-200mm f2.8 non IS would be a good fit except that it's very heavy and you want something light.

If you're prepared to do without zoom you could look into telephoto primes like the 135mm f2 and the 200mm f2.8. You can pair these with teleconverters to get some extra reach (again without too much weight) for the bird photos.

672

Canon General / Re: After-market Focusing Screens

« on: September 19, 2011, 06:28:52 PM »

please let us know what you bought and how does it work out for you

I have the EG-S on a 5D Mark II.  This screen looks like the standard focus screen except that it shows max aperture dof during focus for fast lenses (and I take it a darker image for slow lenses)

With an f/1.4 lens I can easily/accurately manually focus at f/2.8 with the viewfinder. At f1.4 it's somewhat more hit and miss (though I may find practice helps) - I need to rely on focus confirmation more. However even with wide open shots it is useful because I can manually get the focus in the right ballpark more easily.

673

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon SX40HS? what can we expect...?

« on: September 18, 2011, 07:42:01 PM »

Since when the "crowd" that want high ISO are not buying superzooms? 
The internet is full of discussions about "the best P&S for low light (aka high ISO)" including superzooms.
However, I agree with you, they shouldn't use a small sensor P&S at high ISO. But, they do and that's the problem.

I'm assuming that the user in question is informed. There's not much point trying to meet the demands of people who don't understand the trade offs involved -- you will never be able to deliver everything on their wish list. For example some might wish for the S95 sensor in a super zoom, but are they willing to have a camera that is double the weight and costs twice as much ?

I'm not completely sure what you meant by "high ISO". High maximum ISO is easy to do (and in my opinion the ISO settings on most of these cameras go quite a long way above usable levels SX30IS goes up to 1600, I'd have reservations about using an APS-C this high), but I think we both agree that being able to crank the ISO up is of limited use if the sensor can't produce decent images at high ISO.

674

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon SX40HS? what can we expect...?

« on: September 15, 2011, 06:17:43 AM »

But I don´t think Canon dare to do it because of the protection of their own DSLR line

They could put an S95 sensor on it, and it would be more expensive than their DSLRs and still come nowhere near bridging the gap in terms of image quality.

Canon worrying about a super zoom threatening their DSLR line is like Toyota worrying about the Corolla threatening their smaller Lexus models.

675

PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon SX40HS? what can we expect...?

« on: September 15, 2011, 06:13:31 AM »

I think, maybe Canon should produce 2 parallel versions of each SX model - HS for high sensitivity and HD for high definition (for low ISO details). The crowd was yelling for high ISO, but the results are - smeared low ISO details and lots of useless megapixels (specially JPG output). This may work for S and G PowerShots as well.

The "crowd" that want high ISO are not buying superzooms. An 840mm effective focal length on a big sensor isn't  hand holdable.