« on: September 30, 2014, 04:49:03 PM »
Camera body pretty irrelevant, when you say 'gear' I'm thinking lenses. I stayed with just a kit lens for way way too long, and I really should have known better. So I voted for the last option.
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.
What causes the annoying halo?
It's caused by the hdr
softwarephotographer being dumb and just assembling the source brackets according to exposure with no concern for the image content (how could it?). I find this to be a great problem with a *lot* of tonemapped shots, even with ones that are considered good by their authors.
Esp. with parts of trees or something else tall reaching into the sky, it's a halo and/or the top part of the object going suddenly very dark. The latter probably like our eye sees the world, but it isn't supposed to be in a single image.
And just like Neuro, this was one of my most frequently used mode
Zone AF was your most frequently used mode? What types of photography are you doing? For my wildlife stuff, I use spot AF / AI servo with my 7D almost exclusively. I have trouble enough getting the focus I want with that and can't see how zone AF would work.
No no, not Zone AF . Zone AF doesn't let you choose the initial AF point. The mode that Neuro and I were talking about is Automatic AF Point Selection (yes, the one for people who don't really care about what should be in focus). And when you are in Automatic AF Point Selection AND AI Servo, you can select the initial AF point for tracking (I know, it is not really intuitive, and may be that's why the feature's been there for 5 years and still is ignored by some). The advantage of this mode is that all the AF points are used for tracking, so when the subject quits the initial AF point, the other points will take care of it.
YMMV, but I'd avoid using Spot AF combined with AI Servo. Spot AF uses a narrower area for acquiring focus, so it is slower to acquire focus, and it is more difficult to keep the subject within that (narrower) area.
Here are some photos I took with my 7D and my 100mm L Macro, I wish I had the 1D X/5D III and the 70-200mm f/2.8 II L IS for these situations, but that was all I could afford
I think I see both sides of the argument. I think both are bogus.
I'm unconvinced that innovation would being stifled - whether Sony was the single source or not, I assume they would want to sell more sensors. This means their customers need to offer better imaging performance which - to the extent that the sensor dominates things - means the sensors need to develop.
Being held to ransom - well that's what contracts are for. So that's nonsense too.
There is risk because Sony could close their fab plant... Struggling companies do not close or sell business units that make money. If it's a profit centre, it is safe. This feeds back into my first point - to continue making money, Sony needs to continue selling sensors which means more innovation.
On the different "look" offered by various cameras - I think this is bogus too. Most on the forum will know how to change the colour mapping. (If not, download Lightroom and move the sliders around or look for a preset.) Secondly, a lot of Canon's "warm look" arises from the lenses. If you switch to Zeiss glass, suddenly your images are quite cool.
I like the Canon ergonomics, I do not like the Nikon's. I have lots of EF mount lenses and none with an F.2 mount. I have adapters that let me use legacy lenses on my Canon camera but they would not work on a Nikon. You might say I'm locked in... and I really would like to have a Canon camera with a sensor similar to that in the D810.
Judging from the published performance of the 7D2, Canon is still doing its own thing. That's ok too. Their business is selling cameras not making me happy....