October 23, 2014, 08:38:15 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 - Maui5150

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 28
Lenses / Going Wide on FF but which.
« on: January 20, 2012, 10:30:36 AM »

So did some cleaning of house on my lenses.

Out EF-S 10-22, 18-135, and EF 70-200 F/4L non-IS

Since I am focusing on the 5DMKII over my T2i which is now a backup body, my current stable of lenses are:

EF 24-105 F/4L
EF 50 F/1.4
EF 85 F/1.8
EF 70-200 F/2.8 IS II

Thinking down the road adding the 135 F/2, though the 70-200 is so capable, I think I can live with that to cover the range.

I still would like to do some Landscape / Architecture shots wide and have been weighing the 15 Fisheye, the 16-35 MK I or the 17-40 F/4L.  Price wise the 17-40 seems like a FF swap of the 10-22, but for the money and since it is slower glass, not sure if that is too much overlap with the 24-105. 

The 14 is obviously a sweet lens, but since this is not a need lens, and more of a creative / play lens for me, I am trying to keep the price down. 

Also debating whether I go for some more length and weight the 300 or 400, though the 2X converter might give me similar results.

EOS Bodies / Re: The 5D Mark III Megapixel Count? [CR2]
« on: January 20, 2012, 10:02:21 AM »
Why is everyone dead sure about a product (D800) that hasn't been announced yet?

I'm not too sure, but this is what I gather from read in this forum. Maybe expectation from the current D700.

I'd argue that nothing about the D700 or Nikon's past strategy would lead one to expect them to release a 36 MP FF camera.

Clearly you are missing the point.  The D700 is a 12MP camera.  It perfectly goes to reason that the D800 would be a 36MP FF camera. 

Try and keep up Neuro... Shesh.  Don't you remember???  When the D300 was out the D500 was rumored to be the 16MP replacement.  So why is it so hard to see that the jump from D300 to D700 was... Oh wait... The D700 lost .2 MP...

Still... You are missing the point...  What indicates that the D800, will not be a 36MP camera, other than history.  Does it not go to reason that if the D4 is 16MP, the D800 will be 36MP.... try and keep up Neuro.

EOS Bodies / Re: The 5D Mark III Megapixel Count? [CR2]
« on: January 20, 2012, 09:14:21 AM »
Why is everyone dead sure about a product (D800) that hasn't been announced yet?

Exactly.  I also have not seen a price tag quoted on it either.  I am all for letting it:

- Be announced
- Be released
- Actually SEEING the performance. 

- Specs and delivery can be two different things... Compare the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 versus the Canon model. 

EOS Bodies / Re: The 5D Mark III Megapixel Count? [CR2]
« on: January 20, 2012, 08:49:14 AM »
I am fine with what Canon is doing.

There are clearly two paths... There is high ISO performance / more studio / low light  - This is the 5DmkX line and FF

There is then a speedier FPS, better suited to moving objects Crop body - which is the 7DMKx line

And if you want both?  Go the 1DMKx line.

Not coincidentally the price of a 5DMK III and a 7D MKII combined will be close to... yes... Yes... You got it... The 1DMKX line.

The more I read these threads, the 7D folks want better IQ and the 5D folks want better fps / AF... The amalgamation of both really is a baby 1DMKX, but they pretty much want almost all the features and performance at half the price.

As a 5D MK II owner I would like a little more AF performance and spread, but over all it is fairly solid.  If I spent more time shooting action, I would probably have gone more the 7D route, and potentially in the future, will try and pick up a 7D body used for around $1K.  I have been very very tempted to sell off my T2i, batteries, grip, and the like for just such a move, but don't want to be caught with out a spare body at the moment. 

I do see Canon introducing a Baby 1DX, maybe the rumored 3D... I believe this will be higher MP, with less FPS and less A/F / ISO than the 1DX line and expect it to be $4k - $4.5K

So I expect the 7D MK II to be a $2K body, a little better IQ, same A/F maybe a little more ISO and some faster FPS but still a 18 MP body.

I expect the 5D MK III to be under 25 MP, still in the 21 - 22 MP range, same A/F points, but all cross points and a bit wider spread, a step up in ISO and around the same FPS.  I don't expect the 5D MK II to be a sports camera and this body to be the entry FF and $3K to $3.2K

I expect the 3D line to be 30 MP, High ISO, little lesser A/F than the 1Dx, lesser FPS, and $4K - $4.5K so the differentiation between the 1Dx line will be the 3D has higher MP, but the 1Dx remains the king in ISO, A/F, and FPS. 

1Dx is the all around top
3D line is a little cheaper, little lesser, but still all around
5D line aimed at studio / FF
7D line aimed at sports / crop

1Dx line is aimed at top pros
3D line is aimed at best of both worlds for the next level (i.e. those who currently carry both a 5DMKII and 7D) and the the 5D and 7D lines are for those one a budget who do more of one style shooting than the other. 

Really makes sense to me

Canon General / Re: affordable but good telezooom advice
« on: January 19, 2012, 10:40:13 AM »

for telezooms ofcourse the canon L glass of 70-200 or 70-300 is typically the yardstick..but its out of budget by a few years for me, and the cheapest one without IS doesn't seem feasible since I can't pump the ISO much on my 40d.

I think you might underestimate the F/4.  What are you shooting?  Tripod or no tripod? 

I had no problem shooting my 70-200 F/4 Non-IS hand held in lesser light (think tree shaded ares) at ISO 400 and shutter speeds of 250 or higher. 

Street & City / Re: Etiquette of Street Photography
« on: January 19, 2012, 10:33:07 AM »
Take a look some time at Kelby Training's "A Day with Jay Maisel"  Really is all about this.

Shoot.  Be nice about it.  Smile.  You may encounter angry people, just apologize, and say "Sorry, I really liked your look"  Most people will not notice if you are comfortable in the environment and relaxed.

I am not surprised.  Most arenas will have signs stating no cameras or recording devices. 

For Hockey especially, if you are down low, there are really only a few places you can shoot well where there are cut-outs in the glass to put your lens through so you don't get reflection and distortion... Hence also a reason for hockey why they prefer point and shoots for non-credentialed shooters if they let you in. 

A lot of it all depends on the security, arena and dumb luck a lot of times.  Have heard many stories in Boston with people having similar issues as well as have seen many fan shot images that are from DSLR with long lenses. 

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF70-200mm f/4L USM
« on: January 19, 2012, 09:20:05 AM »
Thanks for the rowing photos.  Reminds me of my days at Lehigh and the early morning sessions in fall on the Delaware river

Site Information / Re: a thank you letter to Canon Rumors
« on: January 19, 2012, 09:18:40 AM »
Fundamentally Piracy in the digital domain was born because of the price fixing and price gouging the media companies have monopolised for decades.

the cost of production and distribution has fallen significantly yet they still price new movies and music at a certain level. This level is high enough to provide an incentive for people to look for ways around it.

There will always be a degree of copyright infringment everyone has to accept this as fact.
how much is determined by the price.

There is a threshold where if the content is priced low enough it provides a natual disincentive for people to bother with copyright infringement and you could draw a direct correlation between price vs copyright infringement. If providers priced their products more competatively then it would provide several distinct benefits to them and the government and global economy as a whole

1) They would increase sales volume - as price decreases the number of people that were trying to get it for free would no longer bother due to the lower costs, as they can just pop down to their local store and buy it on disc or download it from a purchased online source.

2) They would not need to spend the insane amount of resources on lawyers and chasing individuals for copyright infringement. I am sure just cutting the lawyers from this epic gravy train would fund some significant RRP cost cuts.

3) the governement could spend more time on real issues and probably get rid of some excess public servants saving the tax payers money.

4) Money and resources would no longer need to be wasted on DRM (digital right managment) because lets face it hackers take all of 5 seconds to get around this stuff.

5) people would be happier and more productive because the government would be meddeling and trying to micro-manage their individual lives to a lesser degree.

So in summary 1 simple action can cut piracy down to such small levels it would be hardly worth being worried about. Set the right price and let the free market run!

I will use the Apple app store as an example
while this gets a lot of flak for monopolistic behaviour and the walled garden approach it is successful because of the pricing. If you wanted to say purchase a computer game for your PC you have to pay say $50 - $100 of course people are going to look for ways of not paying this. however on the app store to buy a game for you phone costs say $1, $2 maybe $5 at these prices why would you even bother wasting your time trying to get it for free just buy it and enjoy it. This difference is orders of magnitude.

If media of games, albums and movies were priced the same (and they got rid of this DRM rubbish) 95% or more of people would just buy it.

Big media need to have a look at the business model they have run with for too long in the face of a rapidly changing world. It is such a simple concept these greed driven corporations dont see the wood for the trees

You know, one of the things I always challenge when I hear the MPAA or RIAA state how much they have "lost" to "piracy", I will ask them to "prove" it as well as justify their numbers. 

Most of their numbers are "guesstimates" based upon falling sales versus projected sales, when in fact there are many LEGITIMATE reasons for a drop in sales.

I grew up in the 80s where there were record stores on every corner and if you wanted to buy something used, the vinyl and cassettes were at garage sales or from your buddies.  People still borrowed records or tapes, etc.

Today... How much of it is "Piracy" versus how much of it is eBay, Amazon, CDNow or other sites which allow people to buy used movies, DVDs, Blu-Rays and the like?  I only buy a couple CDs or Blu-Rays NEW a year, but buy a TON used.  So the fact that I can buy a used CD for $2 that they try to sell for $17.99... Is that because of Piracy, or is that because of alternative distribution channels of used materials.

I also grew up in a time where you could buy a SINGLE with an A and B side for .99 cents.  One of the reasons why Itunes took off is from this model, and the fact that today, most of that the "Record Industry" pushes out are CONTRACT produced albums jammed with fillers where an artist has to produce X number of albums in Y number of years. 

The other part that any of the "piracy" or "downloading" arguments never like to address, is how much of this is the Tchotcke mentality.  A person may download an songs or an album and may listen to it, but does that mean that they would have actually PURCHASED the item?  Yes.  There are definitely some sales lost, but I am also a firm believer that a huge amount of the number that you hear are convenience numbers where a person will take something off a table if it is just sitting there, but if they actually had to purchase it, they would pass. 

Conversely, a lot of the new music or movies I have purchased are often influenced by discovering new artists who use these channels to their advantage.

My last album purchase / download was The Joy Formidable - "Big Roar"  Awesome band out of North Wales, and I discovered them from being the opening act at the Foo Fighters concert in Boston in November. 

One of my next movie purchases will be Eric Schaeffer's "After Fall - Winter" which is a film festival movie which is a follow up to his movie "Fall" which will be available as VOD, Download, PPV, Itunes, etc channels., because frankly it is a character based movie with no big stars, and the Studios would rather throw a Big Screen version of Gilligan's Island down our throats. 

Part of what I see from the MPAA and RIAA and bills like SOPA and PIPA have a lot less to do with Piracy, and a lot more to do with the fact that these big corporations are finding out that film makers, artists, musicians and the like can go out and be successful without them.  It is a hard road, few succeed, but more and more I am finding I prefer these bands and movies to the over-priced, over-hyped products of the big studios... Especially when it comes to albums.  To me records from the 60s, 70s and 80s were just more consistent.  There would always be songs you didn't like or would skip over, but I find that number is inverse today and mostly there are only a couple songs produced on an album that I like, hence I tend to by more songs versus albums these days. 

As well.  The majority of my purchases are OOP, tracking down CDs and albums that are no longer published or available.

Canon General / Re: PW Hypersynch and 5DII
« on: January 19, 2012, 08:49:06 AM »
One other piece of advice... Have you configured your MiniTT1 and Flextt5s?

This is especially true if you are using multiple bodies to make sure that the config C1, C2, is set for the right body.  I had some issues when I first got my 5D MKII and HyperSynch because I forgot about this and my PWs were set for my T2i.

There are a TON of configureables in the PW TT line, so make sure your firmware is updated, the right body selected and the right configurations for your needs

Canon General / Re: affordable but good telezooom advice
« on: January 19, 2012, 08:43:48 AM »
The 70-200 F/4L Non-IS is one of the fastest / sharpest lenses you will find for F/4, built extremely well and can be had for around $600 or less.  This may be one of the best all around bang for the bucks in terms of price to performance.  You can get some cheaper with IS in non-L glass and from other manufacturers, but for a few hundred more, I would not pass this lens up.  Especially on a crop body, this is really a 110 - 320 and useable full range

Site Information / Re: a thank you letter to Canon Rumors
« on: January 18, 2012, 07:50:27 PM »
As for concerns about blogs being taken down because they link to a newspaper article or are critical of a product, just not an issue.  Fair use protects will protect those sort of references.  Law ultimately reflects social norms and courts take those norms into account when interpreting words in legislation.  Fair use is not going any place.
I suggest you do your homework.  There is a very well known company that already aggressively sues the hell out of website owners, bloggers, and the like for linking to their newspapers or owned properties.  I suggest you research Righthaven LLC

Also know that many companies engage in hostile legal practices.  They may lose, they may know from the beginning that they have no case, but they have deep pockets, team of lawyers, and especially when a corporation takes on a small website, etc. it often comes down to pay up and settle, or can you afford to spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars to finally prevail.  A website I used to frequent was one of Fairhaven's victims.

As far as "the courts" deciding... That is the sign of POOR LEGISLATION.  Abuse is rampant with bad legislation.  The Patriot Act for example, has been used to side step the law to go after Pizza joints, strip clubs, etc.  99% of "Patriot Act" usage is actually used in domestic non-terrorist cases. 

Site Information / Re: a thank you letter to Canon Rumors
« on: January 18, 2012, 02:18:20 PM »
There is a difference between piracy and fair use.  If you read SOPA and PIPA you see that to the extent it is taken, if you REFERENCE SOMETHING, you are in violation of copyright, and can be prosecuted.  Going so far as mentioning on your blog that you listed to a specific song, technically violates SOPA, because the song title is copyrighted and used without permission and the artists may not want association with the person or the web site.

There also is no real due process.  The blocking and shutting down is an arbitrary one with little or no controls, notification, or recourse.  In fact, the burden of proof is not on the other person that their copyright has been violated, it is up to you to prove that it is fair use. 

Ever link to an article?  A web site?  Guess what, under SOPA and PIPA that makes YOU A PIRATE if they determine that site has a violation.  Example.  You have a link to Flickr on your blog, or say a link to a thread on CanonRumors.  Someone posts an image that someone does not like on either of those sites, and YOUR SITE can be taken down as well.  Guilt by association!

SOPA and PIPA are a lot less about piracy, as they are extending corporatism and a control structure.  It is poorly written legislation that is EXTREMELY dangerous.  Are they that ignorant, or do their veiled attempts portend to something else?

To extend it further, under SOPA and PIPA, if Canon did not like a post or comment on this website, they could claim copyright violation over quoted text, capabilities, product names and the like, and not only could this site be blocked, but any sites that LINK TO IT.

Is that Piracy?  Nope.  Not really.  There is more to SOPA and PIPA that are freedom of speech and fair use issues than there is about pirated music, movies and the like

Software & Accessories / Re: Third party batteries for 5DII ?
« on: January 18, 2012, 09:57:15 AM »
I had decent results with 3rd party batteries for my T2i.  I have a grip on it, have one canon battery, 3 3rd party and can shoot all day and have never had an issue.

I have two canon batteries for my 5D MK II.  I have an Opteka grip, and have done several studio shoots of 5 - 6 hours - 600 or more actuations, probably 30 minutes of viewing time on the screen, and the battery usage has been minimal.  If I throw them back in the charger, it might take 15 - 20 minutes before it goes green. 

I see sales on the Canon batteries now and then.  I picked my second one up for around $50, and to be honest, maybe I could have gotten a 3rd party battery for $25 or so, maybe even a little less, but I have not had to think or worry about my canon batteries at all and have heard far too many stories about 3rd party not holding a charge, holding less of a charge, or simply dying early. 

EOS Bodies / Re: Still waiting for 5d mkiii but should I be?
« on: January 18, 2012, 09:50:04 AM »
The issues are quite simple.

The come down to wants, needs, abilities, and availabilities

-- You can get an MK II now, and while not perfect, is far from a flawed camera.  It is a step up and then some from what you have as well as going from crop to full frame there is some adjustment.  Lenses will be different, and you start seeing things differently.

-- There is not much of an opportunity cost.  I got my MK II with extras with almost no use for $1800.  I can sell it today and probably get close to the same amount out.  Obviously when the MK III comes out, the MK II will take a little bit of a hit, but seeing what the MK I currently sells for, its age, and the fact that the MK II is now close to three years out, the bodies still hold their value pretty will, especially if you consider that the MK I has a successor out and a new successor on the horizon. 

Worst Case Scenario I:

You buy an MK II, you use it, a month later MK III is announced, still likely 3 or more months before you can get it, as well as it will be at the top of the pricing curve.  You lose  $200 - $400 selling your MK II body over what you paid, but in the end you likely got 6 or more months of shooting out of it, so it nets out to $30 - $60 / a month for use of the MK II.  Let me ask you this.  If someone offered to RENT you an MK II for 6 months and $200 - $300 would you do it?  If you are already feeling you are hitting the limits on your current body, would 6 months of a better body help your photography?

Worst Case Scenario II.

You wait.  MK III is not announced to PhotoTinka, Limited supply for the holidays, and you really cannot get it for a year from now, as well as it is priced higher than you expect.  If you have to wait another year for the MK III will you be happy?  Or will you see more and more that your current body is holding you back? 

Best Case Scenario - Which is what I bet on...

Find a cherry used MK II.  Pay no more than $1800 for it.  Use it for a year / year and a half.  Sell it for $1400 - $1500 down the line, and especially if the MK III is anywhere $3K, that is very reasonable.  Pick up a new MK III during one of the sales - either the holiday push, or there also seems to be a summer sale.  Firmware and any early issues should be resolved, initial demand spike should have eased, and price should have eased a little.  The net result should be maybe $200 savings on buying an MK III out of the gate, a $300 - $400 loss on the turn over of the MK II, which will net to a cost difference of $100 - $200 over 12 - 18 months. 

My net cost for the MK II will be about $10 - $15 a month, even less if I hold on to the body for closer to 2 years, and the opportunity cost is a better body for at least 6 months to possibly a year, and an outdated body for possibly 6 months or longer. 

In fact, looking at the eBay prices right now... I can sell my MK II and probably MAKE $100 over what I paid.

I also think there will be a "sweet spot" in timing where the price of a used MK II body post release of the MK III and the drop in price of the MK III body post release will be close to ZERO.  It will probably take about a 8 months to a year post release, but in the end the money I lose on the usage of the MK II I will save on the lower price on the MK III, and the question becomes how long is that time frame where my MK II has a successor. 

Your mileage may vary, but I am betting my usage of my MK II will be close to FREE... yes FREE by the time I turn it over and the money difference purchase price minus sale price compared to the savings of buying the MK III after it has been out more then 6 months. 

Money difference nets to ZERO.  Image quality improvements over my T2i is realized EVERY day I shoot.

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 28