So, its basically more than double the price of the Black Magic, but without even some of the same features. Yeah; I see this camera getting buried by the competition.
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.
PhotoRumors guy is reporting the next Sony a99 will have 102 autofocus points. This got me thinking – are we getting into overkill here?Yes, and mostly because of how Sony did it. Only 11 of those AF points are cross-point, so, by that measure, its really on par with the 60D/T4i AF for cross-points. So, chances are the 102 is more just for the number than for practicality. But, if we start getting AF systems even more complex than the 5dIII/1DX, they could genuinely be 100+ pt AF with 90 cross-points and be better.
Is this the next form of megapixel wars? "Your 1DX has a mere 61 autofocus points while we have 102."
Question: would the IQ be so much different if you took the same photo (something like an early evening sunset) with both lens, say at a setting of f5.6, ISO 100, 20mm length, using a tripod and remote release?The more you stop down a lens, the more comparable many of them become. The general consensus is that, stopped down, the 16-35 and 17-40 are very similar, and if you'll be using it a lot for f/8 landscapes, its easier to save money with the 17-40.
Can I assume that the shutter speed of the f2.8 would be half that of the f4? and with a tripod would the IQ be so different?At the same focal length, if your aperture and ISO are the same on both cameras, they will both give you the same shutter speed. Shutter speed, aperture and ISO are all inter-connected to set the exposure on your camera; if you lower one, you have to raise another to get the same exposure.
My first copy of a 24-105 had an air bubble in the outer element.An air bubble in the front element is a big difference from a little dust, which is something every lens ever has.
Is it a common thing to have dust in a brand new lens?Depends how much dust you really have; all lenses are gonna contain some level of dust, and my guess is that because its new, you are expecting it a little closer than someone who has had the lens for a year or two, and thus doesn't really look that closely. There's a good Lensrental article on dust. Basically, unless you have a LOT of it on your rear element, on a wide angle lens, at f/16 or f/22, where you are focusing fairly closely, you won't notice it. The same is true with scratches actually, you can get a pretty deep scratch, and only have it show up if you point at the sun.
Look at what happened to the 580 EXII. New ones are almost impossible to find and the price has gone up well above what it was before the announcement of the 600 EX.In the new market, yes, in the used market, not so much. That's one of things I think a lot of people are forgetting, there are a TON of 5dII's that were bought in the last year, and those people would probably upgrade to a better AF system if possible. There's also still the refurbished route, which Canon maintains on products they've discontinued like the T1i for example. I can get a refurb 580EX II for $339 +tax right now, and its $399+tax normally. I can't imagine the 5dII refurb disappearing from the Canon store, so, at worst, that price will stay the same
I don't think the price can go any lower. If Canon launches a 2K FF camera, I'd assume they would immediately discontinue the 5DII. The result could then raise the 5DII's price from smaller dealers. Just look what happened to the 24-70L as soon as it was discontinued!And that is because there is no replacement. Simple supply and demand; a lot of people need the 24-70 in their kit, and its impossible to get a new one from an authorized dealer. If Canon completely killed off the 5dII (0 stock anywhere, no refurbs) and didn't deliver the 6D for a year, then yes, 5dII prices would go higher. But they'd all be used, and it'd be a different story. It'd be a secondary concern to the fact they'd have destroyed their reputation and lost a lot of photographers who bought Nikon instead
Price will go UPI don't see that. If the new full-frame is announced at $2000, the 5dII price will plummet. If it's announced at $2500, then the 5dII price will stay the same. Remember, the 5dII is now retailing at $2200, so, they'll either discontinue it or have to drop that retail price when they announce a new version.
I never had good luck with video once I got over ISO 800 on my 5d2 while shooting video; it got noisy in what I thought was unattractive ways. And I preferred to be at ISO 400 or slower.That's because you don't want to use the standard ISO's for video; you want to work exclusively in multiples of 160. So ISO 160/320/640/800/1600...which doesn't leave you much room after ISO 800. But, ISO 640 will look better than ISO 100. http://www.petapixel.com/2011/05/02/use-iso-numbers-that-are-multiples-of-160-when-shooting-dslr-video/
The flash would still be a better option for wedding situations, where the rooms are dim and you're often taking group shots. Ideally, you would like to get both a flash and the Sigma 30 to cover your bases.For the pro hired to take the pictures, yes. For a guest just taking snapshots; flash is a good way to piss off people. I agree that there are situations where a flash will be nice (birthday parties, events, etc); but there's also plenty of times where its not socially acceptable; or worse, where your flash will actually ruin other's photos.
My question is, if I had the 17-50 Tamron f2.8 nonVC for indoor use how much would it of improved my ISO or pictures?Well, the difference between f/2,8 and f/4 is one stop. So, if you're shooting 3200 ISO and f/3.5 and f/4, then you'd be shooting at ISO1600 with the Tamron. Maybe ISO800 on shots you took at f/5.6.
Here are some examples:
1. Some of the really dark pictures from the rides I was at f3.5 at 3200 ISO and they were still not great. What the f2.8 of been able to capture the shot?
2. If I had indoor pictures at 3200 ISO from f4 to f5 then with the f2.8 what ISO would I get and would I be able to avoid using a flash?
You have used surprisingly low shutter speeds. I was shooting around 1/1000 of a second so as to avoid motion blur.Yeah, generally speaking, when I am shooting wildlife, I am putting the lens on the fastest aperture possible, because I am both trying to isolate the subject and avoid motion blur. That same shot at f/4 would still have the tree and squirrel in focus, but the background would be much more diffuse. The green area would be completely blurred, and even the limb behind him would be much more blurred. That would isolate the squirrel more where he now blends with the limb a little. And your shutter speeds would be more like 1/100th of a second, which would save you from getting blurred shots if he moved.
TRON: my needs are: portrait, food and indoor locations (as in restaurants) and concert.Sounds like you have a decent plan, but, aside from the concert stuff, the 5dIII would definitely be overkill for you in terms of AF. The 5dII AF would be the same as your 40D, and you'd be gaining probably 2 stops of light just by that sensor switch. But, based on your investment with EF-S lenses, and what you are shooting, I'd say spend all the time between now and October learning flash. You need it for portrait and product photography anyway, and it might take away the need for full-frame, allowing you to keep those lenses.
my equipment is: 40D, Canon 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 60mm macro, 17-55mm 2.8 and 55-250mm; Sigma 30mm 1.4 and 10-20mm 4-5.6... so I have a bit of investment in crop.
5Diii would be a dream, but not sure if it's realistic looking at my budget and if it would be overkill for me. I'm an amateur after all…
Not to hijack your thread, but where do you plan on selling the EF-S lenses? I have a new 17-55 2.8 IS that I want to unload and didn't have much success on Craig's List and some UK scammer tried to buy it on EBay ...FredMiranda, PotN, basically any photography forum with a buy/sell forum. Scammers are a lot less frequent there, though they do still exist.
JMHO - Since there was no mention of any video features, maybe to keep costs down, this will be a Photo Only Camera??? Good for Landscape and Portrait type work, than it really won't see much video work.Video costs Canon very little to implement. Seeing as Magic Lantern made the 50D a camera capable of recording video, I can tell you that the implementation is fairly cheap software. It may not be amazing video, but its video. If you would be fine with the camera not having Live View, then sure, they could possibly leave video out and save some money. Otherwise, once the tech is there, the choice to not record video is just silly and saves them nothing. But it does cost them buyers (a bunch might but the video-enabled D800 instead), and that means a higher price on the camera. Chances are Canon would have to charge 20-30% more for a video-less camera, which is why you will probably not ever see one