April 18, 2014, 09:09:03 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 - kirispupis

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 21
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why so much trust in DXO.
« on: April 22, 2012, 11:29:38 AM »
They are like that computer in Hitchhiker's Galaxy that spits out the number 42.

Wait, wait, Douglas Adams have the 5DIII a score of 42?!?   :o

If Douglas Adams did, I would trust it more than I trust the DXO score. :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Sorry 5D3, Insufficient Value
« on: April 22, 2012, 11:27:50 AM »
What I find funny is how all of the negative '5D3 isn't worth it' replies are coming from people who do not actually own the camera.

I think it is valid to make up one's mind based on tech specs, iq comparisons and reading many reviews, and I don't think having something in your hand magically adds something to this apart from the fact that all current dslr bodies are "good and fun to shoot with".

Properly done reviews are useful, but nothing takes the place of actually trying it out for yourself.  It's kind of like reading a review on a new Ferrari. Sure, I can read a review and make a call whether it's worth it, but ultimately if I need to know what the car is truly like I need to get inside one and drive it.

I read quite a bit of info and looked at a lot of sample images of the 5D3 before mine arrived, but there's a big difference between seeing someone else's ISO 12800 shots and examining your own.  Only when you integrate the camera into your professional workflow can you truly see how well the camera fits you.

Keep in mind that my definition of "worth it" is entirely a professional one.  The way I see it, if the income I make from shots not possible (or not sellable) with my 5D2 but possible and sellable from my 5D3 exceeds $3500, then the camera is worth it.  So far, the combination of high ISO performance, much better AF, and little things like the viewfinder leveler mean that for my uses this is very likely the case.

For the hobbyist this is a more difficult decision and depends on where you put your values.  Even a hobbyist, though, will not truly understand the value of the camera without trying it out.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why so much trust in DXO.
« on: April 22, 2012, 09:56:32 AM »
But I really don't see the relevance of this. Again, I believe this is just a data dredging exercise that Canon fans have undertaken because they are unhappy with the 5DIII test scores. The complaint is misdirected -- they should be complaining to Canon.

As far as I can see this here is about DXO and how they do their tests (number ratings) and not limited to the academic poor sensor quality of the 5d MKIII... I guess there are 3-4 other threads in this forum here parallel to this one where people who never used the MK III on their own are doing this...  Btw I own both the MKII and MK III so I can at least tell that the MKIII is much better IQ wise... and I have also tested most of lenses myself so I know that the 300mm f2.8 II is the about the highest resolving lens I have ever seen.

I absolutely agree with you here on the 5D2 vs. 5D3.  What I find funny/sad is how many people there are who prefer to trust a number vs. reviews from people who have actually used both cameras.  DXO is a joke. They are like that computer in Hitchhiker's Galaxy that spits out the number 42. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Sorry 5D3, Insufficient Value
« on: April 22, 2012, 09:52:30 AM »
What I find funny is how all of the negative '5D3 isn't worth it' replies are coming from people who do not actually own the camera.  I did upgrade from the 5D2 to the 5D3 and absolutely find it to be worth it.  The shots that I will take in the next few years that I could not have taken without the 5D3's AF or high ISO quality will easily pay for it.

Stop looking at the numbers.  Go out there and actually try to camera before commenting on it.

Lenses / Re: 100L vs 70-200L II for portraits
« on: April 22, 2012, 09:48:42 AM »
I also own both lenses and strongly favor the 70-200 II for portraits.  At 200mm and F2.8 the bokeh is hard to beat (without spending at least $5k).  I use both lenses very often, but for people the 70-200 is my first choice.

Even if you could do everything in the Nik Suite with just PS, it would take you many, many hours to draw the masks that they enable in just a few clicks. Many of their effects also are simply not possible to create with just PS.  Most of the top Photoshop pros I know use their suite.

I use their suite on almost every post processed image and definitely find it to be worth it.  In particular I use Color Efex, Viveza, and DFine on most shots. Sharpener and SilverEfex are also very useful.  My one complaint with them is they do not offer reduced price updates for owners of the complete package as they update individual components.

In terms of price, if you are patient they have deals from time to time.  A good place to look is Ron Martinsen's blog - http://www.ronmartblog.com/.  They usually have nice discounts around December.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why so much trust in DXO.
« on: April 20, 2012, 10:17:18 PM »
People trust DXO because they do not have the skills/time to actually learn photography.  Rather than think for themselves, they trust some company to compute a number and believe if they own the camera with the highest number, their photography will automatically improve.

In terms of sharpness, the 100-400 and the 70-200/2.8 II are about the same.  They are also similar in terms of AF.

If you're getting paid for this and are on a budget, I would recommend the 400/5.6.  I honestly have no experience with it - though I do own its sister lens the 300/4.  I would expect it to be much quicker than the first two in terms of AF.

For sports shots AF speed will be your primary concern.  If you can, the best option would obviously be to rent a 400/2.8.

Note that I have noticed that on the 5D3 my 70-200/2.8 II + 2x III does seem to AF faster.  I would still not call it a speed demon, but I did manage to get this shot with it - http://500px.com/photo/6268179

You can see a comparison of them here - http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=2&LensComp=113&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=0

I have the 70-200/2.8 II + 2x III and used to own the 100-400 (I sold it to finance the 70-200).  Although I did not own them at the same time, my experience mirrors the results from the link above - the 100-400 is slightly better. However, the difference is not huge and really takes pixel peeping to notice.  Given the versatility of the 70-200/2.8 II, IMHO this is the far better choice.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5D3 vs 7D for birding thoughts
« on: April 03, 2012, 10:26:20 PM »
Thank you for the replies, but just to target this discussion.

- I am sure a 1D4 is much better than a 7D, but that is not the question.  The question is whether it is worth keeping the 7D along with a 5D3.

- I already have both the 5D3 and the 7D, so it is not a question about which camera to purchase.  I have already compared the two cameras - unscientifically - and found that even when the crop is considered the 5D3 produces much better images.  My main question was whether anyone else who actually has both cameras has done a similar comparison.

Just curious, I know almost nothing about astrophotography, but how does the 60Da compare to the sensors that cost tens of thousands of $ that many astrophotography nuts use?  I am mainly curious to know what the difference is.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5D3 vs 7D for birding thoughts
« on: April 03, 2012, 03:54:33 PM »
I have taken two bodies on my last two trips - to Uzbekistan/Tajikistan and to China.  At the time I felt it was very useful.  I generally kept a TS-E 24 II on my 5D2 and a 70-200/2.8 II to my 7D.  This allowed me to quickly take photos near and far.  However, looking through my photos from those trips I do wonder if this really helped my photography.

The problem is I travel with my wife and two kids and I therefore have a feeling two bodies cause me to rush more than if I just took my time with one.  I also have shots where I pushed my 7D too much.  Had I taken it with the 5D2 the shot would have been better.

I do believe for pro jobs such as weddings two cameras are essential, but for my travel purposes I am beginning to think they are not.

The main question though is whether I am giving up anything wildlife-photography wise through losing the crop the 7D offers.  So far on initial inspection this does not appear to be the case, but I am curious to hear other opinions.

Software & Accessories / Re: Looking for an ND filter for waterfalls
« on: April 03, 2012, 03:06:37 PM »
I have the Singh-Ray Vari-ND and find it great for photographing waterfalls.  It will vignette on UW lenses on a FF camera, but in general it does a good job - particularly at the low end of its range.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Canon 5D3 vs 7D for birding thoughts
« on: April 03, 2012, 01:09:58 PM »
I currently own a 5D3 and a 7D.  I still have the 5D2 my 5D3 is meant to replace and am waiting for the market to clear a bit before selling it.

Yesterday I photographed a pair of hooded mergansers that I had earlier photographed with my 7D.  The lens was the same - 70-200/2.8 II + 2x III, and the location was exactly the same.  I also photographed the birds at the same exact location in the pond with both cameras.  The only difference was the shots were taken several weeks apart.

I was curious to compare them, so I took two photos of the same merganser at the same location and compared them.  The crop from the 7D made its version larger, but the following is what I noticed with my very unscientific experiment (partly due to laziness and partly because there are flaws in this test I will not post the crops).  Here are two different shots from each shoot, but note that these are not the ones I compared.  They won't tell you much about the quality of the cameras but they'll give you an idea of the conditions.

7D - http://500px.com/photo/5118931
5D3 - http://500px.com/photo/6268179

- The 5D3 had a huge advantage in noise.  I had taken the 7D shots at ISO 800, while the 5D3 shots were taken at ISO 1600.  Nevertheless the 7D had very noticeable noise while the 5D3 was significantly cleaner.
- The 5D3 had far more detail in the shot.  I could see far more details in the feathers than the 7D - even when the crop was taken into account.
- The 5D3 seems to have better dynamic range.  With the 7D the black parts of the bird were solid black, while with the 5D3 there was a lot more detail there.  This may also have been an exposure issue.

When I look at this, I am seeing really no reason to keep the 7D.  Other than having two more fps, the 5D3 outperforms it in every aspect - even when the crop is taken into account.  Perhaps this may not be true for ISO 100, but for bird photography that is extremely rare.

My question is to those who also have both cameras.  What have you noticed in the difference?  I am not looking for theoretical discussions here but practical ones from other individuals who have used both cameras.

This is just a single test and ideally I should test both cameras on a tripod with the same subject at the same time, but I am curious if others have noticed the same thing.  At this point I am strongly leaning towards selling the 7D and going back to a single body, with the proceeds going towards funding a future 600/4 II.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Backup body for dangerous areas
« on: April 02, 2012, 02:02:53 PM »
This really depends on what you term "dangerous areas".  Last year I travelled with my full gear (5D3, 7D, several L lenses, tripod) to Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.  Never once did I feel unsafe.  I have also been to Turkey, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Oman, UAE, Mexico, and China in the last few years and never had an issue with my gear.  The only time I felt a bit nervous was in Peru - but even then only in Lima.

While I was travelling in Uzbekistan, I ran across two guys with had taken their SLRs on motorcycle trips throughout Asia and Europe.  One guy had been to every single country in Europe and was on his way from Germany to China and another guy had biked in numerous countries in Africa and was on his way from Bulgaria to somewhere in Siberia.

So when you use the term "dangerous", do you mean somewhere truly dangerous or somewhere you simply perceive as dangerous?  Southern Iraq, parts of Afghanistan, bad neighborhoods in Brazil, and large parts of Somalia are truly dangerous.  If you are going to those places, the safety of your DSLR will be the least of your concerns.  If you are travelling there, you will have someone who is managing your personal safety.

Assuming that your travel destination is not truly dangerous, but you are just perceiving it as such, your real issue has to do with the way you are travelling.  By backpacking you put your equipment in numerous situations where it may be stolen.  It really doesn't matter whether you are travelling with an XTi + kit lens or a 1Dx + L lens.  Thieves rarely know the difference between different models.  They just see a DSLR that may be an easy target.  In terms of camera equipment, therefore, my recommendation is to bring the best you can.  You likely will not be visiting these places again any time soon.

In terms of making sure whatever you bring is not stolen, the following are my recommendations.

- Learn the local language, especially if you will spend a lot of time in one place.  This shows respect to your hosts and you are less of a target when you show respect.
- Learn the customs of your area and obey them.  If local customs frown on photographing women, do not do it.
- Safeguard whatever is on you at all times.  When you sit down, wrap the straps of your backpack around your leg or chair.  Never leave anything of value unattended - even for a second.
- Be gracious with questions on your gear.  Do not shy away from questions on how much your gear costs.  People are just curious.  Be friendly, but of course never hand your camera over if they want to see it.
- Consult with locals on where it is OK to go and where it is not OK.
- If you can afford it, stay in better hotels.  In most better hotels you can leave your gear in your room and no one will take it.  Of course, this by definition is not backpacking. :)
- Trust the companions you happen across as much as you trust strangers with your gear.  You are more likely to have your gear stolen by a fellow traveller than by a local.
- Make sure you bag is not easy to open from the back and that it is well strapped to you.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 21