November 29, 2014, 04:01:00 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 - K-amps

Pages: 1 ... 84 85 [86] 87 88 ... 103
1276
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Sooner Than Later [CR2]
« on: December 27, 2011, 05:03:14 PM »
I would be interested in knowing which will happen first
1) 1D-X begins shipping
2) 5D3 is announced

My suspicion (and hope) is that the 5D3 will be a D800 competitor and will therefore be around 30 MP.  I just can't see Canon letting the D800 go essentially unchallenged.  Unless they cripple the AF, a 5D3 with the same sensor as the 1D-X and the AF of the 7D would cause a lot of people to seriously consider whether the 1D-X is worth twice the price.  I know I would be one of them.

This has been discussed before but here it is again... at the MP levels we are today; does it really matter a whole lot? you will find most people preferring a clean High ISO 18mp sensor to a regular/noisy 30mp sensor. So with that being a toss, the rest of the features on the 1dx should be able to make the purchase justifiable over the 5d3 at 2x the price.

1277
EOS Bodies / Re: 5d or 1ds
« on: December 27, 2011, 04:46:40 PM »

It depends if you shoot primarily RAW or use the jpegs too.. if RAW then it is much better, the jpeg rendering is not very good... even the 350d can render better jpegs and the T2i's can outshine it easily, they are less noisier; brighter/clearer... When you look at the raw renditions the margin closes, but still the level of clean details you can get from a 5d are far superior to the 1d2. I am going off personal experience here and have not done 1 on 1 tests on the two bodies, just a few months of taking shots with both.

1278
EOS Bodies / Re: 5d or 1ds
« on: December 27, 2011, 04:07:05 PM »
Hmm. Sounds like it could work. Would it make sense to try and pick up a 1d mk ii (n or not) as well in the near future? They go for next to nothing, unlike the 1ds which still fetches a grand.

Thomas.

I had a 1d2 before the 5d... I didnt care for the image quality a whole lot... it was ok. The IQ with the 5d is better. But you can buy one used and resell after 2-3 months for the same price range thats what I did...  ;)

1279
EOS Bodies / Re: 5d or 1ds
« on: December 27, 2011, 03:58:54 PM »
Thanks so much guys for your help, that was really quick :) Yeah, I'm talking about the mk 1 versions of each cameras. The consensus seems to be the 5d, but there is a lot of mention of AF issues. How bad are they, will I be able to shoot sports at all? (mainly soccer, skiing, snowboarding, plus the occasional hockey, waterpolo. By occasional I mean once or twice a year, the others pretty much everyweek. And can it autofocus quick enough to take good candid shots of people, especially small children in low light?

Thanks heaps guys,
Thomas.

If you use the center point, the AF is very good. Otherwise it can be hit or miss... I shoot usually with centerpoint and never had issues with the AF.

1280
Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 24-105
« on: December 27, 2011, 03:27:33 PM »
For portrait isolation consider a 135 f2 L. There are few lenses that do what the 135 can for that application at that price range. The amount of OOF Blur goes up with a longer lens for the same framing/F stop value.


Thanks for the suggestion, but I am focussing on zoom lenses as I will be using it in the same manner as the Sigma 17-50 - main travel lens.  Now the Sigma definitely did not reduce the background to a total blur (even at F2.8), I am just trying to find out if the F4 with the longer focal length (70mm+) and full frame combination will at least match that???

A lot of factors come into play here... I don't know your crop factor, subject distances etc. So cannot come up with a definitive answer, however if you know the scenarios, you can plug in the variables in a dof calculator here:  http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/dofcalc.html    to get an idea of the amount of blur for different lenses/ bodies:  (go to the bottom of the page for the calculator: )

you can also download the application from this page:  http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/bokeh_background_blur.html

alternatively here's another calculator:  http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html


hope this helps!

1281
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Sooner Than Later [CR2]
« on: December 27, 2011, 02:20:50 PM »
I ALMOST bought a 5D Mk II today, but now I'm undecided again! For the sake of a few weeks or months, should I hold out for the Mk III (at least until the specs are confirmed, in which case I could at least make an informed decision as to which suits my needs best)? There's no doubting the Mk II is a nice camera. I handled one for the first time today, in a camera store and I have to admit I was surprised by just how solid it feels. Having grown accustomed to using a 1 series over the last six years, I thought the 5D Mk II would feel 'plasticky' and a lot lighter but that was far from the case. It felt good - a LOT better than I thought it would. If the image quality is as good as it's reputed to be, no wonder people fall in love with it (especially given the relatively low price point). The three preset buttons C1, C2, C3 also appeal to me what a good idea! Not a camera for serious sports photographers or twitchers I suspect, but for studio work or landscapes it seems like unbeatable value for money, especially at current record low prices. I'm not usually this indecisive ... but there again ... help me someone ... PLEASE!

Good things come to those who are patient.  :)

1282
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM
« on: December 27, 2011, 01:35:34 PM »
Applaud!

1283
Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 24-105
« on: December 27, 2011, 01:27:07 PM »
For portrait isolation consider a 135 f2 L. There are few lenses that do what the 135 can for that application at that price range. The amount of OOF Blur goes up with a longer lens for the same framing/F stop value.

Between the 24-70 and 24-105... you can wait 2-3 weeks and see if there's an announcent for the 24-70 mk.ii if not and you are tight on the budget, get the 24-105 f4, and then use some PP to get you some more OOF blur if that's very important to you. You won't have to PP every shot, just the few you deem worth it.

Many people have had "bad copies" of the 24-70mm to make it a recommendation, but it is F2.8, so it depends what you like. There are guys out there that love the 24-70 (good copies?) but it is an older model and should be replaced soon hopefully.

You choose what you are comfortable with.... personally I don't think the 24-105 will give you a lot of OOF blur... it will do some though.

1284
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Sooner Than Later [CR2]
« on: December 27, 2011, 01:21:26 PM »
April announcement?

<applied> Tax refund </applied>

1285
Lenses / Anyone try a Vivitar 2x extender
« on: December 27, 2011, 10:49:00 AM »


I know... you get what you pay for... but at $109, this is worth looking into: I was wondering if anyone has any experiences with these:  http://www.ebay.com/itm/2X-Extender-Canon-EOS-EF-II-Lenses-/130621881929?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item1e69abbe49


1286
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: December 27, 2011, 10:03:16 AM »
My first shot with this "magical" lens... nothing special but displays the qualities of the lens itself.

Note the razor sharp dof focus line on the table right in front of Scooby's paw.

1287
EOS Bodies / Re: New to Full Frame - some help with lens(es)?
« on: December 27, 2011, 09:41:03 AM »
As so many of you seem to be recommending the 70-200mm options, I've gone and a had a good look at the Canon lens lineup as a result.
You can probably tell by now that I'm not really into the idea of a big heavy tele lens, mainly due to size. I have however noticed that the 70-300 L is physically a lot shorter than the 70-200mm options. This would be one to consider in my books. What are people's thoughts on this lens?
As mentioned before - I very rarely find myself needing anything longer than 50mm (I went through my flickr stream last night and about 98% of my shots are at 50mm or less on a crop body), but I do see the appeal of longer glass, so was wondering what people have to say about the 70-300L as it's probably as large (physically) as I would ever want to go... well for now anyways...

I have one... and once I got the 70-200f2.8mk.ii, I thought I was going to sell the 70-300L... but no.. I cannot bring myself to do it so far...

It is sharper than the 70-200, lighter so used a lot more often... the area where the 70-200f2.8 beat it is perhaps a little more background blur, better in low light. So depending on how much application these have in your usage should determine which one you get. For the money, the 70-300L is an excellent choice and is a bit under respected perhaps because it is f5.6 @ 300mm.

Hope this helps.

1288
EOS Bodies / Re: Sigma Announcing New Stuff on January 10, 2012
« on: December 27, 2011, 09:34:43 AM »
My Sigma wishlist

12-24mm without the complex distortion that plagues the Mk.II
24-70mm f2.8 with OS below $1k that is optically as good as the canon
200-600mm Zoom F4 or better at below $2k   ;)

I know it is too obvious that I am building this around the 70-200f2.8mk.ii  but it's just a wish  :)

1289
EOS Bodies / Re: 5d or 1ds
« on: December 27, 2011, 09:21:41 AM »
I have a 5D and before it; used to have a 1d mk.ii (not DS though): I miss the frame rates and 7AEB on the 1D body, but apart from that it was a bag of hurt. I needed to resurrect an old XP machine to even load the software to control some of the 1D settings. Mine had USB 1 (not sure what the Ds has): Also image quality on the 5d is as good as any current DSLR out there. Much better than the 1D2 I had.

Don't think too hard about it... go with the 5d.

1290
EOS Bodies / Re: New to Full Frame - some help with lens(es)?
« on: December 23, 2011, 10:58:55 AM »
If you got the bucks and want f2.8 all the way

16-35 F2.8 mk.ii
24-70 F2.8 (maybe wait for mk.ii)
70-200 F2.8 mk.ii

If you want to cover the range on reasonable budget

12-24mm Sigma ( you can skimp on this since the 24-105mm is 15mm equivant on crop; so wider than your 17-40 is on the 40D)
24-105 F4
70-200 F4 mk.ii
100-400mm

if you want FF 1 lens on a budget and build around it later on

24-105mm F4
(Later on add a 70-300L on the long end)

All in all the 24-105mm kit makes a lot of sense for you. I have one and have seldom needed anything wider (15mm on crop equivalent)

Hope this helps.

Pages: 1 ... 84 85 [86] 87 88 ... 103