September 14, 2014, 10:28:10 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 - bseitz234

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 19
151
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 01:14:08 PM »
I doubt we'll see the 7D AF in the xxD anytime soon.

I don't see why not... It's a very good system, but they could absolutely improve it for the 7D2. I think putting 7D AF in a 70D would be a huge step up from the 60D AF, and putting the 1Dx/5D3 AF in the 7D2- even if they remove some points so it's 48 (or whatever) instead of 61- would also be a huge step up. Granted, we'd be charged accordingly, but it seems to fit the bill for who these cameras are marketed to- enthusiast (xxD) and pro APS-C (7D)

152
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 09:09:37 AM »
It seems to me that if you believe the 7DII sensor will be cut from the same wafer as the rumored "big megapixel" camera, then I'd say 21 MP is too low.

21x1.6=33.6, and I would be very surprised if the FF biggie came in at only 33.6 MP, less than the D800's 36 MP.

Of course this assumes the two camera sensors would be sharing the same sensor design, but that seems to be what a lot of people are thinking around here. So.... :-\ :-\ :-\

1.6 is the crop factor, not the difference in area of the sensor. I think 1.6 comes from the diagonal, if I'm right?
Not feeling up to doing much math this morning, but that's what google is for, right? I've heard people say FF has a 1 1/3 stop advantage in light gathering, which I assume means more than twice the area (really 2 ^ 1.3333 times the area), which means 52.9mp.

153
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 08:32:12 AM »
I do like the 21mp number better than 24 for APS-C... I personally have no problem with 18, but I'd be OK with 21. I'd certainly take 21+less noise over 24+more... I'm not trying to print 48" wide.

Splitting hairs a bit aren't you? Personally, I'd like exactly 20.85MP ;)  The difference in file size between 21MP and 24MP is pretty small (though not the files themselves!).  It sounds like you are falling for the "fewer megapixels equals lower noise" myth.

OK, I see your point, and it does sound like that. I'm more in the camp of "I highly doubt canon will give us 24 mp AND much-reduced noise, because that would be too much camera and they can milk us for more money by not putting them in the same camera".

154
Lenses / Re: Canon 50 L II
« on: March 28, 2013, 08:29:09 AM »
Sigma: Please release a 50/1.4 mk2 just like the new 35mm with usb dock...

I feel like we should start a petition to sigma:

we, the undersigned, are disappointed with all current 50mm lens offerings from Canon. We know that whatever you come up with, based on your latest releases, will meet all our wants and needs. We hereby pledge $750 to the purchase of a new 50mm f/1.4 (or faster), to be part of your art series lenses, to be released in the coming calendar year.

Sincerely,
bseitz234
....

155
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]
« on: March 28, 2013, 08:10:24 AM »
I do like the 21mp number better than 24 for APS-C... I personally have no problem with 18, but I'd be OK with 21. I'd certainly take 21+less noise over 24+more... I'm not trying to print 48" wide.

AF and most of those features sound to me like a 70D. And I think releasing this camera as the 70D would set up good things for a 7d2 to come later. In fact, depending on prices, I might consider this over a 7d2, which I'm sure would be a dream to use, but might be more camera than I actually need.

The spec that gives me pause is the 10fps. Now, if they can make the 7d2 do 12 (or, dare I suggest, 14), then 10 makes sense for a 70d. But then the 7d2 is encroaching on 1dx territory. It would make a lot more sense to me as a potential 70d if it had 7-8 fps, leaving double-digit fps for the professional cameras.

That said, if this is the 7d2, I wouldn't swear off it- I'd just wait till the prices came down to what I paid for my 7d, and pick one up then!

156
Lenses / Re: 50mm: Wich one?
« on: March 27, 2013, 07:44:42 PM »

I second the notion that sigma update the 50mm 1.4 to join the art line

I third that, hoping it would happen if enough people kept saying it  :'(  Dare I even wish for f/1.2?

1.0, like the 50L from the days of yore?  ::)

157
Lenses / Re: 50mm: Wich one?
« on: March 27, 2013, 12:32:32 PM »
And this is why I'm very excited for Sigma to announce the new art series 50 1.4...

158
Lenses / Re: New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: March 27, 2013, 11:39:36 AM »
No, not the 100-400 as a kit, but a new lens otherwise.
Well, they just updated the 18-55 and 18-135 lenses within the last year; maybe they'll do the 18-200 too, who knows. And they already have a good 17-55 and 15-85, not to mention a 24-105 that works well on crop. Not sure what kit lens they could put out that they don't already offer.


15-60 F4

get 2mm on the wide end, and 5 on the long end, and lose a stop of light, plus IS? I'll keep my 17-55, thanks...

159
Lenses / Re: Best sports lenses for Canon 7D
« on: March 22, 2013, 08:45:45 AM »
Oh, darn.  I am the one that mixed up the apertures. Shame.  :-[  I contacted the seller and it was f/4.   My fault on that one.

A local seller has a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 Non IS USM lens for $550.  What'd y'all think?  Is that a good deal?  I still want the version II and will still get it, but this looks a little tempting.  I trust Canon's build quality and I'd test the lens of course, but it is as is.

Hmmm....
The current retail price of EF 70-200 f/4 is $659 ... so your local seller is selling it for about $100 less ... if it is new, that's a pretty sweet deal and I would buy it ... but if it is used, you are better off buying the new one for just another $109 more
you're mixing up your apertures  ;)

I agree that if it really is a 2.8, that seems too good to be true... even used from B+H, the 2.8 non-is usually goes for around $1000. ish. If you can really get one in good shape for $550, I will be very jealous.

probably just as well... if it had been a 2.8 for that money, I probably would have found the seller, and called them, and bought it out from under you  ;)

160
Jealous of all of these... still looks like this here. (made it small so as not to detract too much from all the pretty flowers...)

I can't wait to go to DC in two weeks and see cherries!

161
Lenses / Re: Thoughts on Canon 20mm f/2.8?
« on: March 21, 2013, 03:03:45 PM »
Agreed, I've been uhhhming and ahhhing for some time about which one of the new primes to get for my 7D as a walkaround lens, the 35 IS appeals to me because it's 2 stops faster than my f4 lenses, but it's fractionally longer than a 50mm on full frame, the 28 is just slightly wider than a full frame standard lens and the 24 is closest to the 40 pancake, but both the 24 and 28 are only f2.8. I like the thought of a slightly wider than standard compact stabilised walkaround lens, and the 24 comes closest...... but the 35 is faster..... decisions, decisions  :-\.... Still, the longer I wait the more they come down in price!  :D

New sigma 30 1.4 is supposed to be available March 31st. Granted, it's a little more expensive than some- I think $599? but that's less than canon's new IS primes, and it promises to be as great as the sigma 35. It's a crop-sensor only lens, which is the tradeoff for small/light/inexpensive.

162
Lenses / Re: Best sports lenses for Canon 7D
« on: March 21, 2013, 02:34:27 PM »
A local seller has a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 Non IS USM lens for $550.  What'd y'all think?  Is that a good deal?  I still want the version II and will still get it, but this looks a little tempting.  I trust Canon's build quality and I'd test the lens of course, but it is as is.

Hmmm....
The current retail price of EF 70-200 f/4 is $659 ... so your local seller is selling it for about $100 less ... if it is new, that's a pretty sweet deal and I would buy it ... but if it is used, you are better off buying the new one for just another $109 more
you're mixing up your apertures  ;)

I agree that if it really is a 2.8, that seems too good to be true... even used from B+H, the 2.8 non-is usually goes for around $1000. ish. If you can really get one in good shape for $550, I will be very jealous.

163
Anyone have any idea how the SL1will stack up against the 5Dii / iii in low light? I'm a 5Dii owner and want to know if I can get decent high ISO out of it as a backup camera...

I highly doubt it'll be any better than any other APS-C... if you're used to FF performance, you'll likely be disappointed. That said, I've never owned FF, and I find the 7d to be perfectly serviceable... you just have to open your lens all the way up, shoot as slow a shutter speed as possible, or give up and bounce a flash. So to answer the question, it probably wouldn't hold a candle to the 5dII, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't function as a backup in a pinch...

164
Lenses / Re: Best sports lenses for Canon 7D
« on: March 20, 2013, 10:21:53 PM »
I agree with what has already been mentioned- IS is most worthwhile if you plan on shooting a lot of video. If you're looking primarily at lenses for stills, then I have been very happy with the non-IS version. If money was no object, I'd probably consider an upgrade to the v2 IS, but the vast majority of the time, my shutter speed is fast enough to render IS useless. So do bear that in mind when choosing a 70-200. Oh, and the background blur/subject isolation you get at 200/2.8 is awesome, so don't be tempted by the f/4  ;)

As for a shorter lens, the  17-55 is great. If you plan on shooting video, and want IS in your 70-200, then you get IS with that lens, and a 2.8 max aperture. But, the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC is supposed to be a great lens also. Personally, I have found 17 more than wide enough for most uses- especially sports. I usually use my 70-200 for all the action, and then put on the 17-55 for candids and crowd shots when everything's all said and done. So I don't think a 10-xx lens should be an immediate consideration- 70-200, then a 24-70 or 17-55, and finally an ultra-wide IF you think you really want it.

again, just my 2 cents.

165
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D, DIGIC 6 & 18mp Sensors
« on: March 20, 2013, 06:05:28 PM »
We’re told today that the 70D has been pushed into April, we had hoped that an announcement would be coming next week.
April! But I'm impatient NOW!

Probably just means they're trying to announce closer to availability... they knew it wouldn't be ready to ship till June, so just delayed the announcement till closer to that date.
</random speculation>

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 19