April 16, 2014, 09:18:55 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 - J.R.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 95
Lenses / Re: Lenses sharper on FF
« on: February 22, 2014, 12:09:11 PM »
For a given output size, the image from the smaller APS-C sensor must be enlarged more and thus appears softer.  A higher pixel density gives APS-C higher spatial resolution, but in practice the images from a FF sensor do look sharper.

Thanks, but I am have been making the comparison on screen viewing pixels at 100% (not sure if I can call that output). Something seems to be different in sharpness on the APS-C and FF, I'm not able to figure out exactly what.

Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 11:53:44 AM »
When I had all I really needed I started buying stuff for my daughter.  Just go with the flow and buy for less than you can sell it for.  That way people are paying you to hold onto the gear.

Did you know ... Good, sensible practical advice counts for nothing when it comes to GAS?  ;D ;D ;D

Lenses / Lenses sharper on FF
« on: February 22, 2014, 11:49:14 AM »
Hi CR folks,

I've found that my lenses are sharper on FF as compared to APS-C cameras ... This is particularly true for the 100-400L and the 50 f/1.4. Is it because the FF is more forgiving and the higher pixel density of the APS-C highlights the problems of the lenses more? Just curious ...

Cheers and a happy weekend ... J.R.

Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 11:22:11 AM »
Also I agree about collecting enough lenses to mask the purchases. My wife would not know at this point which lens I added except maybe the 300-600mm super tele's. I want one of those but not going to be able to get away with a $6k lens.
He he he  ;D :D  ;D :D ... +1

I know...  I've purchased lenses which I've smuggled home with the box collapsed and the styrofoam in the front pocket of my laptop bag. Not sure i'll be able to manage with the 200-400 I have on order.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:53:10 AM »
A sunbird with my trusty 100-400 which is way much sharper on my 5D3 than my 6D and 600D.

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "Pancake"
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:03:51 AM »
Sometimes, the 40mm is the widest lens I'm carrying ... works pretty well IMHO, even though the plane of focus is slightly off

Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:56:52 AM »
I need help! Spring is in the air and I am coming down with GAS, I am spending to much time looking at lens reviews....how can I rid myself of this affliction?..? ;) ;)

Stop visiting CR ... you may just end up believing that to get a half decent shot of a doorknob, you need a 5D3 and a 70-200 II  ;D

Jokes aside, there is usually no way to resist. Once you've admitted GAS, I recommend getting only the "best" available gear. I've run through several lenses (24-105, 70-200 f/4, 100mm macro, etc.) and flashes (320 EX-II and 430EX-II) before getting better equipment which is considered future proof (for now). 

I'm not even considering the 200-400 at 10x the price!

Well, i already have a 2x TC III, so i might as well get the 300 2.8 II to make best use of it right? ;)

Not really ... the Canon 200-400 is only 7X the price of the Tamron  ;)
Who is selling the Canon 200-400 for US$ 7483?
The Tamron 150-600 VC costs $1069 ... the Canon EF 200-400 L IS costs $11299 ... if my math is not wrong the EF 200-400 L IS is pretty close to 11x the price of the tamron 150-600 VC.

Buy it from India ... Tamron for INR 90K, canon 200-400 for 630K

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Coming in March? [CR1]
« on: February 21, 2014, 07:56:00 AM »
Keep searching for Nessie  ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 21, 2014, 07:40:44 AM »
+1 Don ! I wouldn't have said it better.
Mirrorless as an image acquisition technology, not as a form factor, is definitely the future evolution of our current DSLR. The major roadblocks at the moment are the EVF quality and the AF, but I am confident that improvements of the dual pixel, the OLED and the overall video technologies will clear the way.

Another reason why the evolution towards mirrorless is bound to happen is the associated decrease in manufacturing and quality control costs that will result from the simpler overall camera structure (i.e. less components). This will definitely improve the profit margins for the manufacturers, an argument which is always music to the hears of big corporate managements!
In this end, it is this factor which may drive the transition from DSLR to "DSLM" rather than customer experience or any other marketting argument (although phasing out AFMA will be a very nice evolution step for the users).

+1 ... mirrorless still has some way to go before it replaces the current DSLRs.

Canon has the highest market share and has the most to lose if a product goes wrong, so I'm guessing that Canon is simply playing the waiting game (if it ain't broke, don't fix it) till the mirrorless market matures and it will come out with its own mirrorless which will blow the pretenders out of the water. I also expect that it will be perfectly usable with the EF lenses, so yes, mirrorless for the technological improvements, smaller form factor be damned.

It's a pity that people end up whinging on internet forums wanting their perfect (mirrorless) camera from Canon, NOW! The amount of entitlement shown in these forums is staggering.

I'm not even considering the 200-400 at 10x the price!

Well, i already have a 2x TC III, so i might as well get the 300 2.8 II to make best use of it right? ;)

Not really ... the Canon 200-400 is only 7X the price of the Tamron  ;)

So, the sum of all this discussion is as such:

Tamron - Excellent value lens with great IQ (beats competition in the range), and is the cheapest 600mm lens. However, f/8 is required at 600mm to get good results. It is a zoom, so more flexible.

Canon 300 II + 2xTC III - Better IQ, faster, better build quality/weather sealing. Option to use native 300 f/2.8. Less flexible and 5x more expensive.

Get the Tamron if money is tight and/or wildlife isn't your thing and/or low light shooting is not a frequent event. Get the Canon combo if lowlight is more of an issue, you have plenty of cash to burn and you need a tank of a lens and the best IQ?

Did i miss anything? I like to have a summary at the end of these discussions! :)

You missed out considering the 200-400  :P

TBF, everything you say about the 300mm + 2x TC applies to the 200-400 as well.   

There was a recent thread on CR where advice was sought as to how to trigger two cameras at the same time. During the course of discussion on the thread, I had asked whether it was possible to sync shutters on two cameras but got no response.

I am using 600rt x 2 and a ST-E3-RT.

Canon's official position is that shutter sync cannot be achieved using the 600 rt. does anyone know how to do this? Might come in handy one of these days ...

EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 20, 2014, 08:34:28 AM »
Dictating that he should only use primes is limiting his artistic options.  I did this really awful long exposure where I zoomed in during the middle of the shot... It wasn't good... but it also isn't achievable using a prime. 

Let him decide how and why... just because he has a zoom doesn't mean he won't zoom with his feet if he composes the shot he wants.

And shooting at wife open apertures and calling it artistic vision is a fallacy unto itself.

Yes ... I do a lot of foot zooming when I'm only with a single camera with the 24-70 mounted on it. I do sometimes need a closer shot at 70mm so the only option is to use my feet.

OTOH, if it were the 28-300L, I would (probably) understand.

Depth of field changes with focal length... so if you compose a shot art 24mm but you want to frame it... some people will walk forward to get the shot they want or they will move the zoom to 35mm... and I believe that is what the other guy is objecting to... because you aren't really composing the shot with depth of field in mind, but just framing.  Having said that.. having three focal length of four or five outings in one lens is convenient to.... 24, 35, 50, 60, etc... but it takes a little dedication to walk towards your target rather than zoom.

Oh ... I misunderstood in that case.

I agree with the point you make though and knowing the limitations / advantages of shooting at different focal lengths is important.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: February 20, 2014, 08:26:18 AM »
Montana bighorn at sunset (click for horn detail):

Nice shot

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 95