August 28, 2014, 05:19:19 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 - Eimajm

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
Lenses / Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« on: April 22, 2013, 03:26:36 PM »
Re the photo above with the 400 f5.6 and 7D, please don't think that photos taken with this setup are reflective of that picture, which is a very poor shot.

I'm confused - I'll be grateful if you'll explain why it's a poor shot as it looks great to me (I was just about to comment to that effect when I saw your post). I'm probably showing my ignorance but hey ho! if you don't ask you don't learn anything!

It's lacks sharpness, suffers from from camera shake and has been heavily cropped showing a great amount of noise, I also expect it has been brightened up to bring up detail in the shadows exaggerating noise too. The has resulted in poor image quality. It does not reflect the photos you can get with this setup at that iso. Here are a couple of photos at various iso so you see the the appearance of noise. Notice the barn owl which is shot at 3200 iso which is not that noiser than the image I commented on.

ISO 1000

Sedge Warbler (Acrocephalus schoenobaenus) perched, singing. by Jamie Medford, on Flickr

ISO 200

Herring Gull (Larus Argentatus) diving. by Jamie Medford, on Flickr

ISO 3200

Barn Owl (Tyto alba) by Jamie Medford, on Flickr




17
Lenses / Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« on: April 22, 2013, 09:23:08 AM »
Re the photo above with the 400 f5.6 and 7D, please don't think that photos taken with this setup are reflective of that picture, which is a very poor shot.
I shoot with this combination and it is a stella performer, up to 800iso, with some clean up work needed at higher iso, 1600 is still perfectly useable with a well exposed shot. Things i miss with this set up are IS, which the 100-400 has, however I have no need for a zoom and always prefer primes for the image quality you get, which is not a diss at the 100-400 as the quality of this glass is very good to.
Either one will suit your needs for starting out bird photography and can produce exceptional results.

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Will the 70d have a new sensor?
« on: April 03, 2013, 07:24:09 AM »
Whats wrong with the current sensor, I'm very happy it in the 7D. If you want a better sensor buy a full frame camera with appropriate longer lenses. There are thousands or talented photographers making superb images with the current sensors, if your not doing this then a better sensor won't help you.
Crops sensors make cameras affordble, they are not intended to compete with a full frame, its just a cheaper option. If canon actually put a 1.6 crop sensor from the 1DX everyone would be moaning about lack of resolution and ability to print large.
If you want a better sensor pay the money and buy a better one, stop whining why a more affordable camera is not as good as a top end one.

19
Lenses / Re: New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: March 27, 2013, 09:58:20 AM »
I'm sure an upgrade on this lens will be a big seller, but for someone who has a 400 5.6 prime, I'm not excited.
Canon are missing a proper upgrade path from the already existing 400 f5.6s. A £4500 400mm F4 prime with 4 stop IS, lighter than 300 2.8 as a replacement for the DO would fill that gap nicely, and be a excellent match to the new 7D if it turns out to be a mini IDX. I could get excited about that.

20
Just a small question, and excuse me if i seem a little illeducated about a high MP sensors as i'm only a novice, but who is it aimed at? Are we looking at fashion pros producing life size posters / billboards and that type of things? My 18MP camera can print A3 at 300dpi so I'm assuming you all produce huge prints for one thing or another?

21
My 400mm f5.6 is sooooo sharp and I can highly recommend it. If you are cropping heavy then it would appear you need the reach rather the flexibility of a zoom / lens and t.c. combination. I don't particulary miss IS as need a high shutter speed for the photography I do (birds and birds in flight) if your are shooting planes in flight then I would assume similar.
If you want to see how sharp the 400 f5.6 is have a look at my bird photos on flickr.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/eimajm/

22
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D - Worth Buying ???
« on: February 14, 2013, 07:44:49 AM »
How about a 5D II? You can pick one up now for £1200 at some places, and the rest of the money you were going to spend on 5D III you can get yourself a nice lens.

I love my 7D, I dont have a problem with noise performance. i think that problem manifests itself with people who try to crop images down to 1/4 frame and expect it to be noise free.

23
Lenses / Re: I can't stop thinking about A MONSTER!
« on: February 08, 2013, 12:35:43 PM »
If you think a 400 f5.6 is, as you put it, chickens**t, then it shows your ignorance about this lens and wildlife photography in general. It seems that you think that having a 500mm will somehow make you into a great wildlife photographer which in itself shows you have a huge amount to learn about wildlife photography.
A car would be a much better investment as others have said.
That said if you want one go and get one, why you need to ask complete strangers for their opinion is beyond me....

24
Canon 600mm F4 IS II
Canon 300mm F2.8 IS II
Canon 180mm F2.8 macro IS (if ever they decide to release it)

And thats me done other than I also need to win the lottery to pay for them and a 1DX.  :-\

25
Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders
« on: November 06, 2012, 07:57:47 AM »
How glad am I that just bought a 24-105 F4 last month at half the price of the new 24-70 F4.

26
Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: November 01, 2012, 08:45:05 AM »
The 7D with 400 f5.6 is a good combination. I don't find that a lack of IS is too much of an issue, if you are shooting from a hide I use a tripod, down to 1/250 I can get sharp shots with a tripod. Your limited by the quick movement of the birds anyways so often need a higher shutter speed to freeze movement. Shooting handheld with a slow or stationary subject it where you'll find the benefit of IS.

Have a look at my Birds set of Flickr to see the results of this combination. http://www.flickr.com/photos/eimajm/sets/72157624573654777/

If you really want IS 100-400 is a popular lens, and good for general wildlife/nature due to the zoom, but more expensive that the 400 bare.

Have fun with whatever you decide.

27
I personally would go with the 600 MKII and the Canon 1DX for birds. Never used either of them but 600mm is what all the pros I aspire to use and the 1DX write up by Arthur Morris was pretty excellent.

Don't however think that good equipment will get you good photos, as a pro one advised me ' i'll take fieldcraft over reach any day'.

Have fun....

28
Lenses / Re: efs 15-85 or ef 24-105L
« on: October 24, 2012, 07:41:20 AM »
Had the same decision to make a couple of months ago for my 7D. I went for the 24-105 over the 15-85 as I have paired it with my 10-20 sigma which gives me the wide angle if I need it, which is very rarely nowdays. As a general walkaround lens I find the 24-105 a great lens which give a good focal length range, @ 105mm is  especially good for portraits. I don't find that 24mm is too narrow for anything other than landscapes and only then in particular circumstances, and I'm not particulary fond of the the distortion of UW angles on crop sensors anway, prefering 18-20mm shots. I'm very happy with the purchase and don't really miss the wide end, but I have another lens to cover that should the need arise.
From what I have heard the 15-85 is also a great lens, and I'm sure you'll be pleased whatever one you choose.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: do crop sensors really add reach?
« on: October 19, 2012, 09:00:11 AM »
No crop sensors don't add reach, a 400mm is a 400mm no matter what size sensor it is put on. It will give the same optical effect if you are at the same distance. You will see the difference when you display (print) your images; for instance comparing the 1DX and the 7D, both 18MP sensors. Imagine you take a picture at the same distance with both cameras, subject filling the frame of the 7D. You then crop the 1DX to the same framing. Your photos will look exactly the same, however when you print then out @ 300dpi the 7D will be roughly A3 size the 1DX slighly under A4 (18MP vs 7.2). What if you only print out at A4? You downsize the 7D and upscale the 1DX image a tiny amount, you then have exactly the same image (not accounting for pixel quality).

If your intention is to print and display your image at A3 300dpi, then your 7D requires no upsampling; the 1dX image will require considerable upsampling and will more than likely introduce artifacts which will degrade the overall quality of the image. So the benefit of the 7D over the 1DX is only when displaying images at large sizes like A3 where large scale upsmapling a cropped 1DX image is likley to intorduce unwanted artifacts which would degrade the image to that lower than the 7D (never tried this but would think it would).

Ever seen those beautiful bird portraits with the buttery smooth background taken with a FF and 600mm, you can't do that as well with a crop and 400mm lens at the same (similar) distance (640 effective focal lens). A FF allows you to get closer to the subject and still retain the same framing as crop with shorter lens, therefore the bokeh is far better and is a more desirable quality in photographs which is the benefit of FF with long lenses. I'm not going to mention any more benefits of FF like cleaner files as we all know about that...

30
EOS Bodies / Re: Red AF in AI-Servo fixed in 1D-X before 5D Mk III
« on: October 18, 2012, 07:11:23 AM »
I'm sure canon will get around to the 5d3 eventually. Hopefully.

Or not. Force us to upgrade to the 1dx. Make more money. You know, canon's usual. Or should I say, a sane company's usual.

I wouldn't count on it, they never bothered with the 7D.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4