Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II

« on: Today at 04:55:40 AM »

Come on, does a built in flash really add much weight and bulk? I estimate the pop up flash of my 7D to weigh about 20 grams max.

You're right, but it's another part to get broken, to be weathersealed and to rely on your batterylife. The whole
effort to give you a 100% view is higher with a builtin flash (which will count on the costs after all). Builtin flashs
are to close to the lens axis, they're prone to red eyes and harsh lightning. I would like to see a buildin trigger,
but maybe that differs the users of pro- or semipro cams. Without running anyone down, really.

2

Lenses / Re: 50mm.. Upgrade or not?

« on: Today at 04:42:32 AM »

Get a 35mm, but get the new Sigma.

3

Lenses / Re: Do you wish your 70-200L were black?

« on: Today at 04:40:32 AM »

@Whodafunk

>Canon 20-700L f2.8 IS USM II

...is this lense white, too? Of course this monster has to be White. I just imagine a 250mm aperture in my Hands 

4

Lenses / Re: Do you wish your 70-200L were black?

« on: Today at 03:53:35 AM »

>somehow earned your wings once you upgrade your black tele to a white tele

There is no upgrade to a Magic Drainpipe!

5

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II

« on: Today at 03:52:04 AM »

So, everyone should carry more weight just for those who want a flash? I don't think so. I would like to see a
radio trigger inside and everyone could easily go out with a 90EX if he wants to. Normally never the build in flash
saved a picture for me, because frontal white light always looked like a compromise to me. On sunny days with
backlight you can maybe have some advantage. If the flash could be turned to the side or upwise I would try it
again.

6

Lenses / Re: 50mm.. Upgrade or not?

« on: Today at 01:18:59 AM »

>Awesome.  The only problem is, is that the OP is asking for advice based upon his current gear.  If he didn't
>already have the f/1.4 and the 24-70L II, then it would be different.  But since he already has those two lenses,
>he's thinking by spending a ton of money on the 50L that he's getting better gear and or IQ, only to find out
>later, he's not.

I totally second that. If he hasn't already the 50mm 1.4, I would suggest to try the 50 1.2, but with the 50mm 1.4
I think there will be no "wow"-effect with a 50mm 1.2.

@V_Raptor
I agree with you. If I would earn my money with it, the weathersealing would be a killerfeature, but I don't.
I just said that you get a less sharper lense from f1.4 to f2.5, what should be the aperture-range why I would
spend a grand more. On my 85 1.8 the update to the f1.2 was a immense difference, upon a already fantastic
85mm lense. I could pray on the 50 1.2, too, for the nice bokeh and build... but at the end. I don't think it's
worth it. The 50mm f1.0 is an even more fascinating lense everyone wants to hold in his hands... but this is
even less sharp. At the moment I don't have any 50mm lense left, because the range is too boring for me.
That's a punch in a face of classic artists, but I'm more addicted to 35mm.

I think Canon should make a 50mm 1.2 II with the specs of the 85mm 1.2 and everyony will hold still a moment,
bend down to their knees and buy it again.

7

Lenses / Re: Disappointed with 50 f/1.2 sharpness @ f/1.2

« on: May 22, 2013, 07:10:30 PM »

>The 85mm f/1.2...on the other hand...

Yes. There they showed what Canon is able to do...

8

Lenses / Re: Do you wish your 70-200L were black?

« on: May 22, 2013, 07:08:02 PM »

If you shoot football for hours, you may get heatingproblems in the full sun. Maybe. I think normal usage of lenses won't cause you troubles with black lenses. I like the smaller attention with a black lense, even if it's more prone to heating.

I guess Nikon has a lot of professional lenses, too, without painting them white. So... if I'd had the choice I would always buy black ones. Maybe we can meet us at 18% grey. So we can even adjust the whitebalance at any time on it? 

9

Lenses / Re: Do you wish your 70-200L were black?

« on: May 22, 2013, 04:01:25 PM »

Yepp. Mine, too. 80-200L

10

Lenses / Re: Disappointed with 50 f/1.2 sharpness @ f/1.2

« on: May 22, 2013, 03:59:59 PM »

So, to sum it up... you could also use a 50mm 1.8 and patch it to L



just kidding

11

Lenses / Re: Disappointed with 50 f/1.2 sharpness @ f/1.2

« on: May 22, 2013, 03:19:20 PM »

@BirgerNiss

That's normal for this lense. The 50mm 1.0 is even worse. http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14970.msg272132#msg272132

12

Lenses / Re: 50mm.. Upgrade or not?

« on: May 22, 2013, 03:13:18 PM »

@V_Raptor
Please submit something with f1.2, anything else dosn't make too much sense, I guess.   The problem of the 50L 1.2 is the aperture, wide open. I'm not someone who only reads specs, but this lense is far away from the 85L 1.2. The weathersealing is a nice *pro*, definately, so the bokeh is. But my cam isn't weatersealed, so mostly I don't care toooo much about the lenses. My only weatherproofed cam is my EOS 1n, so far   The colors of the L are far superiour in my opinion and if you make portraits the lense-unsharpness in the borders are more or less no problem. But if you use it as the normal 50mm alroundlense (as we all did back in the 70s/80s), you should know that the USM 1.4mm is overall the *better* choice.

50mm 1.4 (left) againt 50mm 1.2L (right)

13

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Coming in July? [CR2]

« on: May 22, 2013, 01:56:58 PM »

@Stuart
>Cool, if it come with a 50mm f1.4 lens thats nice too

I really would like to see some kits with fast primes, instead of those bad APS-C-Kit-Zooms. It even would improve Canons way to bring the people up on fullformat, later. Of course a amateur will not know what the advantages of  DSLRs are... they know their compact cameras and want to shoot landscapes, birds and whatever may come.

But the first time they tried a fast prime on open aperture, they'll get their mind blown away. To come back to the 70D, this cam is something for *semiprofessional* use. I think adapting a fast prime makes more sense than another 18-55. Maybe the 35mm 2 IS?

On a 1100D a Kitzoom fits, maybe

14

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files

« on: May 22, 2013, 01:44:43 PM »

To bring some new points to the discussion... the 1Ds Mark III and the 5D Mark II have both the same sensor, but a different CPU. The Digic III and Digic IV may differ a lot in signalprocessing. Which doesn't mean that one or another is better. The same goes to 1DX and 5D Mark III, of course they both share a Digic V+, but the 1DX has two of em.

As you all know from the Intel or AMD Market, a CPU has a lot of steps and internal improvement from one series to another, even if they share the same name (f.e. Core2).

Last but not least, the internal firmwarealghorithm may differ from cam to cam. So somethimes the raws are getting better with a firmwareupdate, no one knows why

15

Lenses / Re: 50mm.. Upgrade or not?

« on: May 22, 2013, 12:08:12 PM »

@iSy.

The Canon 50mm f1.2 would leave you with mixed feelings. Of course it's a L-Lense, which gives you great colours and a fantastic bokeh. Otherwise it's sharpness is below (!) the 50mm 1.4 and will start to kick in at f2.5 and more . So, you should ask yourself the question why to spend a grand or more over the existing one, if you can't use the open aperture. From 1.4 to 1.2 you win around 30% of light, but the image will be blurry. Really blurry.

So if you need the extra light, which mostly can be done with a 1/3 of higher ISO stop, too... you should get the 50 1.2. This will work for analog photos nicely. Otherwise you should lend the lense for a day and you'll love or hate it.

Hint: The lense is weathersealed, but just if you do a filter in front of the lense. The rest is well done.