October 01, 2014, 11:27:04 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] 5 6 ... 53
Lenses / Re: Thinking of replacing a couple of lenses
« on: June 14, 2014, 08:26:36 PM »
The issue that you have with your 28 f/2.8 IS is most likely something that can be solved with AFMA because it focuses accurately with LiveView. 
T3i doesn't have AFMA...though I agree with you, it's something it would solve (and the 7D2 would have AFMA)

That said, if you've already got the 24-105, I don't see the point of having the 28mm. That extra stop won't make as big a difference as having something like a 35mm f/2 or 30mm f/1.4 would.

How about a 7D2, the 10-22, and a Sigma 18-35?

Sigma 18-35 would also be a nice option. You could turn the 10-22 and 28mm into a 10-18 and 18-35 and come reasonable close to break even.

Part of it depends on what you shoot. Unless you are doing night photography or some action work in mixed light, I don't find the wide, fast lenses that great on crop cameras.

Seeing as the old 7D was released at $1699, I'd say the new one has no shot of being in your budget.

That said, depending on when you actually need the camera, the best prices are usually in October/November for cameras. There will be even more rebates and lens combo deals then, if you had the time to wait.

But either way, I'd say you're getting the 70D, just a matter of when

EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Replacement Buzz Going Around [CR2]
« on: June 09, 2014, 04:02:04 PM »
I think you are right but the canon 18-200 desperately needs an update though,
the nikkors vr1 and vr2 leave it for dead
No doubt it needs an update, but, I wonder if they'd kit that with the new 7D2. I know they kitted the 18-200 with the 50D, but was it ever with the 7D?

I cant imagine they'd update the 28-135 to kit with this; that'd be an odd choice. So maybe the 17-85 or 15-85 would get an STM update?

Lenses / Re: purchasing 70-200 f4 IS now?
« on: June 02, 2014, 03:57:35 PM »
It's a great lens, I owned one for a while before deciding to move to the 200mm f/2.8 (I was moslty using the long end anyway)

If you want an even cheaper price, you might consider the used market. It's a lens that shows up fairly frequently in near-new condition with really great prices. Often from people doing the same thing as me (deciding between f/4 and f/2.8, or prime v zoom)

Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: June 02, 2014, 03:54:09 PM »
What "better and more expensive options" are there in the 10-18 range, on an APS-C?
(not trying to trip Northlight up, just genuinely interested)
Tokina 11-16, for one. What you lose in range (very little) you make up in aperture and sharpness. Sigma 8-16 is obviously much wider and well regarded. Really, the $4-500 street price wide angle APS-C market is pretty solid. I'm not even sure Canon could update the 10-22 and be competitive.

The 10-18 STM appears to be better than the Canon 10-22mm - at least on paper
Eh, it appears to be cheaper, but we still haven't actually seen the corner-to-corners performance, etc.  The 10-18 is giving up a stop to the 10-22, and nearly 2 stops to the Tokina; so it's a matter of your shooting conditions whether the IS makes up for that.

The sample images look great for it's target market (consumers with rebels who also have the 18-55/55-250 combos).

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 DO
« on: May 24, 2014, 09:09:21 AM »
Canon dropping the new 100-400 as a DO lens would make for some interesting reactions

Lenses / Re: The Next \
« on: May 20, 2014, 10:42:12 AM »
What's the lag time? There's always the spring migration season next year ;)
Well, the 16-35 and 10-18 were just announced at the start of May, and with zero delays, they release on June 30th. So, 2 months. Might be even longer if they are announcing the 100-400 and 7dII at the same time. With an August announcement, it'd appear late October at the earliest, more likely November. Any price drops would be next spring.

Lenses / Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Image Samples
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:51:51 PM »
But, the best I can do on the Rebel is the manual-focus 14 mm Bower. And manually focusing on the Rebel isn't really easy for my old eyes through the viewfinder.
There is actually a pretty long list of high quality and affordable UWA's for APS-C, with the Bower being kind of low on te list of them. The Tokina 11-16 and Canon 10-22 already exist in the $500 range for example
If I was a crop owner, I'd rather have the EF-S 10-22
I actually get this lens in the same way I get the 18-55 and 55-250 existing. Sure, there are better options in the $4-500 range for that focal length, and WAY better options in the $800+ range, but if its something you'll use sparingly, a $200ish lens is a good option. The retail price of the 55-250 is $350, but you can regularly find it used on and on sale at half that price. So, in a year, people will have a <$200 wide angle option on APS-C. Which is kind of cool.

If people need the extra light for stars or street shooting, they'd go Tokina. If they want sharpness and flare control, there's the 10-22. If they want something for rare occurrences, there's this.

The EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM would probably have to be a $3-400 lens to not be DOA. Especially at f/4.5-5.6. The IS would be a nice addition for video people, but, at the expense of that aperture loss. How many people would take the Canon when there are now a variety of 10mm and 11mm options at f/2.8...even worse when you consider the 2 stop loss at 16mm vs the Tokina (f/2.8 vs f/5.6), and the 3+ stop loss vs the Sigma at 18mm. That's basically the difference of IS

IS is not a good feature when shooting video because if you turn it on it both sucks back power and you can hear the IS on the soundtrack.
Well, you can turn it off if you have to. Or, the more reasonable solution is to capture audio not directly into the camera, since even with ML audio controls are limited.

Lenses / Re: New TS-E Lenses for Photokina [CR2]
« on: April 21, 2014, 10:13:54 AM »
Apparently "year of the lens" was meant to be fiscal year 2014

Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: April 15, 2014, 10:34:18 AM »
Do you have a homeowners/renters policy with them?  I'm pretty sure that's the only way they'll write a Personal Articles policy.
Nope, I have a personal articles policy with State Farm as a standalone thing in DC. My auto and renters insurance are through progressive.

Because Im in northern VA, the rate is like $12-13/$1k with a min premium of $25. But, it doesnt require me to attach it to other policies. Even nicer, I didnt have to have my items appraised, I sent them the retail value of them and they'll replace them at that price (with inflation calculated in each year).

Lenses / Re: Should I buy the 35L now or wait for the price drop?
« on: March 25, 2014, 05:21:44 PM »
There's also value in the shots you take between now and the actual availability of a 35L II. Even if Canon announced it tomorrow, odds are it'd be 2 months away from delivery, and that's assuming it doesn't back order. Others have already mentioned the fact that it wont be <$1400 on release ($2000 is more reasonable). By the time it actually is purchasable, you could have 100s or 1000s of shots on your lens.

But I'd like to hear how the non-resolution upsides of the Otus might benefit video -- after all, it's not $4k just because of resolution and build quality.   I hear it manages chromatic aberrations well, has low distortion, great bokeh, etc. -- are those especially desirable for video?
For those asking about the cost of cine lenses, I can tell you that sharpness is not the prime consideration.  Lack of chromatic aberration, distortion, and light fall off are important as those are very hard to correct in post on video. 
This is your answer, unless you are shooting in RAW for video, it's nearly impossible to correct CA and fall off. Distortion is more correctable, but, it can be a pain if the scene has multiple subjects. You certainly dont want to be correcting it shot to shot.

The good quality cine lenses are extremely expensive because they can be.  It's a niche market and the other production costs for shooting video are so high that the cost of the lens isn't much of a consideration.
Not to mention that a lens with a long focus throw and that is parfocal gives you so many more options on set. Renting the equipment is part of the expense, but having to do several takes cause the lens is crap to pull focus with costs more in time and energy

Now the 12mm f2.0
When they make that lens cine, it's gonna kill off all their 16mm f/2 sales. Cause the main users of it are video people, and a lot of them are moving to m4/3 mount.

That said, I'll eventually own that lens for m4/3 if its optically strong.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 53