August 27, 2014, 03:36:06 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 - wockawocka

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 26
331
Lenses / Re: ? on why Canon ignored...
« on: November 16, 2011, 08:03:58 PM »
It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

Really?  Which would give you a better result - a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on a T3, or a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on a 5DII?  There's a reason for the 'glass before body' maxim.

Anyone who can buy an L lens should be able to afford a decent semi pro body, even if that's a used 5DC. The EF-S lenses are aimed at the Canon amateur range and are cheaper to reflect this. Canon doesn't need to make L series EF-S lenses as they fit all their cameras regardless. Sure, perhaps a L series 10-22mm would make sense but then they'll be merging the distinct categories between amateur and pro kit.

There's also something to be said about the ability of a camera to make use of the light an L lens shines on the sensor. I don't think the T3 would be as good as a 5D2...

332
Lenses / Re: ? on why Canon ignored...
« on: November 16, 2011, 01:56:47 PM »
It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

333
Canon General / Re: Is anyone awake in Canon HQ?
« on: November 12, 2011, 11:33:48 AM »
Well, the 7D can hardly be described as having a great sensor.... not by todays standards.

Still a good camera and all but never was impressed with it's output.

334
Canon General / Re: 50mm Focal length for portrait
« on: November 12, 2011, 08:50:59 AM »
No, on full frame. 135mm whilst flattering, can end up with you leaning backwards over a wall to get someone into the frame.

335
Canon General / Re: Is anyone awake in Canon HQ?
« on: November 12, 2011, 05:24:03 AM »
I also still think the AF will be crippled as studio stuff doesn't need such 'advanced' AF

336
Canon General / Re: 50mm Focal length for portrait
« on: November 12, 2011, 04:28:13 AM »
Close up facially 135L, Headshots 85L, 3/4 portraits 50L, human eye equivalents 45 TS-E, Full length 35L

337
Canon General / Re: Is anyone awake in Canon HQ?
« on: November 12, 2011, 04:25:16 AM »
I wouldn't worry as next year you'll see the 5DC for video and the 5DS for studio.

Just be patient. Enjoy what you have.

338
Canon General / Re: Got a problem...
« on: November 12, 2011, 04:24:04 AM »
If you have the physical receipt from the store I'd be surprised if Canon didn't honour the UK warranty. They're pretty damn good here in the UK or at least CPS is.

Territorial warranties are to prevent grey imports but with these you don't usually have the store receipt. Make sure you mention this when contacting Canon and I would imagine you should be ok.

339
EOS Bodies / Re: Concept Cinema DSLR Official
« on: November 04, 2011, 08:03:35 AM »
But will it blend?

340
EOS Bodies / Re: Live Coverage of the Announcement
« on: November 03, 2011, 07:38:40 PM »
That's a completely new DSLR, they just showed the EF and PL mount on the C300 bodies, completely different and new camera. New 5D replacement that right there.

341
Lenses / Re: Will it be a EF 14-24 2,8 L is from Canon
« on: November 03, 2011, 04:45:10 AM »
Exactly. For UWA the f2.8 is important for the light, I'm less concerned about subject isolation.

At 16mm f/2.8 on FF, with the focus distance set to 10 feet, everything from 5 feet to infinity is in focus.  Thus, f/2.8 delivers the ability to shoot handheld in very low light.

Neuro, how does that work? Not dubting you but I was out back shooting the stars in the sky with mine and was setting the focus to infinity. Should I be setting it to 10ft instead?

342
EOS Bodies / Re: Used 1DsIII Prices
« on: October 29, 2011, 10:33:30 AM »
They still go for 3k on ebay used (UK). I've got mine listed on Play.com for £2699

Even though the 1DX is out in march a lot of guys still want the autofocus and resolution...and at half the price. I'm still keeping my other one for studio and portraits because of this.

343
EOS Bodies / Re: No 5D Mark III on Novemeber 3 [CR2]
« on: October 26, 2011, 04:17:28 AM »
According to hte bods at PRo Solutions something nice is appearing on the 3rd.

No idea what that is though. But it's good.

344
EOS Bodies / Re: Feedback on 1D X from 1-series users?
« on: October 24, 2011, 09:41:33 AM »
Until I owned a 1D body I had a 5D2. I always looked at the 1D bodies from the eyes of someone whose camera was amazing as it was and I 'could see' what the benefits were and as such was unfairly critical of that line.

Then I bought one and it made the 5D2 like a toy in comparison.

345
EOS Bodies / Re: Feedback on 1D X from 1-series users?
« on: October 23, 2011, 05:24:32 PM »
I own a 1D4, 2 x 1Ds3 and a 5D2.

I'm primarily a wedding photographer (47 this year, 35 already booked for next) who also does a significant amount of portraits.

For me I was perfectly happy with the 1Ds3 apart from a few things which I'll list below in the order or most important:

Rubbish LCD (Biggest hinderance to me)
High ISO performance
CPU speed (buffer emptying speed)
Shutter Noise

To counter this, I used the 1D4 which addressed all of the above....except it wasn't full frame.

You could say it was like dating a hot girl who was a psychopath.

For me the 1Dx is the (almost) perfect camera and indirectly it's beneficial in other areas.

I can sell my 24L prime and I can start using my 24-105L in a church by bumping the ISO.
I also now effectively can effectively replace my 24-70 and I may not need to carry around my 70-200L as much.

Thing is, I shoot at 2.8 because I have to, not because I want to. A lot of the time I'm at an angle to the bride and groom and have to decide which one is in sharp focus.

Also, I don't need to upgrade my PC for another 3 years to handle 40mp Raws.

What I don't like is the drop in 3mp - I would of expected them to stay at 21mp and even though it is ony a small percentage smaller overall I do like my images to breathe and to have the option to crop later.
 
What worries me though is the ISO 100 performance. The 1Ds3 was totally unbeatable and because of this fear I'll be keeping hold of the 1Ds3 for portraits.

I never use the 5D2 apart from some small scale video and as a backup camera for my assistant. Even though the 5D2 shares the same sensor (apparently) to the 1Ds3 it's output isn't the same, colours are too warm and in my hands the weight is unbalanced with any serious glass attached to it. You can't push the RAW files anywhere near as much as the 1Ds3.

Going back to the 1Dx, all I wanted was better iso performance and a better screen. I would of been happy with that and Canon kinda overdelivered. Let's hope they did a good job. I'm one of 200 going to the Pro Solutions private hands on this coming Wednesday.

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 26