March 02, 2015, 03:53:40 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 - preppyak

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 57
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony closing down?
« on: January 18, 2015, 10:17:38 PM »
Sony won't close down though. Their sensors are in the vast majority of cameras people are using today, so they can spin that off as a profitable business on its own. Especially since their major competitors rely on them. I'd actually argue their failure to produce a consistent lens line is a function of them not trying to overextend their camera division. Instead they let 3rd parties handle that and focus on making cameras people want. And ones that adapt to legacy lenses that are used in the industry (PL, etc)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony closing down?
« on: January 18, 2015, 10:14:25 PM »
I still wonder if the "hack attack" was a publicity stunt to get more people to see the movie. It is a second rate movie with second rate actors and never had a chance to be well viewed.... after the hacking stunt, I am sure it was seen by ten times as many people as otherwise....
Absolutely not. You're forgetting how many people go see comedies nowadays just because of who is in them. Nate Silver ran a prediction (based on similar movies, including Pineapple Express with the same cast) and it would have made $100mil. Heck, even if it made half of that, last estimate I saw was that the Interview might gross about $40-50mil now. So, at best Sony broke even on expectations, probably lost money in reality, and crumbled their entire studio in the process. Sounds unlikely to be a publicity stunt...

The fallout might cripple Sony Studios, but, truth is running a studio might not be a profit-generator much into the future anyway

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rokinon 12mm F2.8 Fish-Eye
« on: January 18, 2015, 10:05:35 PM »
Have anyone shot astrophotography with this lens?  I am trying to decide between Samyang 14mm f/2.8 and this lens.  :)
compare the two at Lenstip:

That said, the 14mm is one of the standard go-to's for astro work. From the comparison I see, I'd prefer the 14mm for having less coma and for not having the fisheye projection

Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 15, 2015, 04:22:05 PM »
not to mention 11-24 can also serve nicely as a UWA on a cropped camera body as well.
What a waste that would be when there are already great 10-xx and 11-xx options for <$500 on crop.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon EOS-1D C Coming Down in Price Again?
« on: January 14, 2015, 09:07:14 PM »
can anyone tell the reason to use this body for photography? I watched the victorias secret fashion show and saw a couple photographers using the 1Dc you can tell by the little red C on the body, kinda stands out with a black body. just wondering why pay the premium to use it for shooting?
Because its a one-size fits all solution for them. The 1D-C is the 1DX, but with video capabilities for 4k as well. So, if you're a fashion photog, odds are you pretty much have to be able to do both photo and video today. 1D-C is uniquely positioned to do both, and of course, have the ability to shoot high frame rates for other pro jobs.

Honestly, if the new price is true, the question is why anyone would purchase the 1DX. For $1000 more you get 4K video, etc.

with the 4k video you can probably use screengrabs from any video it outputs as photos
yeah, but they are jpeg compressed and prone to motion artifacts. Its the RAW cameras where 4k is really interesting

EOS Bodies / Re: Camera ownership on Flickr: 2013-2014
« on: January 13, 2015, 08:13:09 PM »
Will anybody be using flickr in 1 or 2 years from now? 
Yes, for the same reason Myspace still exists and old photo sites like Photobucket, etc exist. People have TB upon TB stored there, it will survive for that reason alone.

Lenses / Re: New EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Around the Corner? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2015, 10:37:19 PM »
I think that those of you who are poo-pooing this lens and lenses like this forget that a large percent of DSLR camera owners only have the kit lenses. 
Yep, even my friends that are into photography own lenses like the 18-200 currently, so, they no doubt have their market. In this forum, a lot might not buy it. But, in the real world, the most purchased lenses beyond the 18-55 kit are the 55-250 and the 18-XXX superzooms.

Otherwise every lens brand wouldnt have its own variation

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: CN-E 35-260mm f/2.8 Soft Focus Lens
« on: January 12, 2015, 10:31:41 PM »
In summary, it seems the only benefit is the bokeh, yeah? Not to be overly critical, but does that limit this soft-focus lens to backlit situations under warm sunsets and perhaps some night-on-the-street scenes?

I'm really racking my brains to think of a recent movie with a soft-focus scene. The image that keeps showing up in my head is some old Whitney Houston music videos.
Well, we are relying on a google translation of the terms, its quite possible that the practical effect could be similar to what Sony does with their 135 lens, which is genuinely unique.

Truth is, in the cine world, even 4k is only relying on about 8mp of resolution. So, what shows up as "soft-focus" on a 20mp modern sensor could have a very different use within the video world.

35-260 is an interesting range for that application. Maybe they intend it for things like broadcast news? Or a similar event/talking style, where background separation is key and "sharpness" in the traditional sense is not as crucial

Lenses / Re: What the better value?
« on: January 12, 2015, 07:07:43 PM »
I've finally saved up some money for a new lens and I wanted to take a little poll.

Would you rather purchase the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM ii, or purchase both the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro?

The way I see it, with modern ISO performance on FF cameras, f/2.8 isn't as critical as it use to be, but I wanted to read some discussion.


If you shoot a lot of action, then get the f/2.8 version. It makes a big difference for shutter speed reasons and for auto-focus reasons (most of the dual-cross points are f/2.8 reliant). If you arent shooting fast action, then I gotta say, the f/4L IS was my favorite lens I owned. Sharp, great AF, great build. If I didnt need the f/2.8, I'd have owned it a very long time.

An alternative to your problem may be the get the 70-200 f/2.8 and then look into getting a legacy, manual focus macro lens. Pretty easy to get ones that go down to 1:2 for fairly cheap, and even some 1:1 lenses can be had cheap too.

EOS Bodies / Re: A New xxD DSLR Coming From Canon [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2015, 07:04:08 PM »
Looks a lot like the 60D body too. My bet is that its the 70D sensor and auto-focus, but without some of the more pro features (frame-rate, AFMA, buffer, etc), just like the 60D had a while ago.

Wouldnt surprise me if they renamed it, since they've essentially left the Ti/xxxD line. They updated that thing yearly, yet the 700D hasnt been updated in almost 2 years (with a new sensor that came out in the meantime)

Lenses / Re: Samyang 135mm f/2.0 Announced?
« on: January 12, 2015, 12:50:14 PM »
Hmm, that'll have to come down to more like $400 to succeed. The 135L is at a street price of $7-800 used, and the refurb is right around $800. Cant see many (non-video) people saving $2-300 and losing one of the best AF lenses Canon has.

Also means the cine version would be like $700ish on release. Which is pricy as well.

EOS Bodies / Re: NEW CAMERA - EOS 80D?
« on: January 11, 2015, 11:41:28 PM »
Funny you should mention that, I'm fairly certain the 80D will be full frame.
If its full-frame, it will take on a different name. 8D or so. Otherwise they'd have made the 6D have an xxD name.

The camera in question looks exactly like a 60D shell without the AF-on button. So it'd make sense if the T6i is getting upgraded with a nicer body, the 70D sensor, but somewhat crippled specs (maybe 19pt AF, but, only 4fps and no AFMA). And they are saving money by just reusing the 60D body for that.

Would leave the SL2 (or whatever) to be the smaller entry level camera

Lenses / Re: Canon EF-S 55-25mm IS STM vs EF 200mm 2.8L II
« on: January 11, 2015, 11:37:57 PM »
I'm searching for a small(ish) and relative light telephoto of at least 200mm, mainly for still photography, that is black and inconspicuous to the layman's eye while traveling in "adventurous" offbeat areas in eastern Europe, Africa and South America, and photographing musicians and performers during concerts/festivals.
Seems an easy choice based on what you shoot, really. The 200mm f/2.8 is the winner. It'll allow you to combo with a TC to shoot wildlife and be good for general tele stuff as well. And you can use your 40mm and 100mm to fill the gaps that are left by not having the 55-250.

I've owned both lenses, and I must say I do miss the 200mm. I sold it because I needed the general purpose zoom, but, I'd own both if I had a reason to. Which, is a consideration, btw. Not sure what the used market in your area is like, but here in the US, the non-STM version is like $100ish, and the STM is $150-175. Would be worth owning in combo with the SL1 (and eventually maybe a 17-55 f/2.8) as a lightweight walkaround combo.

But in the short term, definitely get the 200mm. You can zoom with your feet if needed.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: CN-E 35-260mm f/2.8 Soft Focus Lens
« on: January 11, 2015, 11:20:01 AM »
Another reason for the existence of such lenses might be the fact that "hardware softening" changes the bokeh differently from the main subject - this would be a hard job (if possible) in post.
This is the reason. Achieving the softness of the object in focus is relatively easy in post with some diffusion, etc...but smoothing out the bokeh is borderline impossible. Especially if your subject is moving, since you'd have to mask that motion and not have it be noticeable.

Why do all that when you can flick a switch and voila, its done

Canon General / Re: Opinion: The myth of the upgrade path
« on: January 10, 2015, 10:22:58 AM »
Rather, the 'myth' to which he refers is that upgrading to full frame is a path.  He contends that it is instead a leap.
Yep, and I'd agree. As someone with a 60D who wants a 6D, part of what holds me off from doing that is that any upgrade requires 2x the price of the actual camera, when you get lenses involved.

My 17-70 and 55-250 obviously become useless, and the cheap options for replacing them are all $500+. To get the matching focal range of the 55-250, most of the lenses are closer to $1000.

And I do mostly landscape work, so I can go the manual/legacy lens route. Still doesnt make it an easy "path"

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 57