November 23, 2014, 02:42:20 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 - preppyak

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 54
496
Technical Support / Re: 60D Dust Help
« on: August 20, 2012, 01:40:11 PM »
Have you tryed one of those little rocket blowers? might end up on the sensor by the time you are done tho, thats always a risk of blowing in the body
I actually tried messing with it a few different ways and was never able to get it to move. Mine is in the upper left corner of the frame though, so, it basically never messes with my composition

497
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 01:37:56 PM »
The current 7D is still usable at 3200 ISO, if you use raw and some NR in f.i. LR afterwards imho...
[/quote]Oh, I agree, but, the 1DX gets about the same results at 25600; it basically is a full 4 stops better than the 7D sensor. Which is understandable when you consider one is a 3yr old APS-C sensor and the other is the top of the line full-frame sensor.

My point was that I don't expect Canon to have any worries about whether a 7DII has 1DX features, because its low light ability will never be able to match it.
If Canon were listening to what photographers want, how near is this specification to what 7D users have been asking for in a MkII ?
Well, if it does video at 1080/60fps, it'd be more than most users were expecting. The fps and AF are about what most expect, and the sensor sort of goes either way. I think most wanted an improved 18mp, while others wanted more or APS-H.

If that spec list is true, it'd be a well embraced camera.

I hope the 7D MKII will inherit the 61-AF
- 61-point AF with up to 41 cross-type AF points
- ISO up to 25600 and Less high ISO noise at 6400 (would be great if that would be even 12800)
- dual slots
I do think they will have to reconfigure the whole 61pt AF system, since its a smaller image circle they are dealing with. It may well end up as a 41pt AF system (removing all the outside points), but with all cross-point or mainly cross-point. A stop improvement on the sensor would be nice as well.

Give it the same build quality, a better sensor, faster, better AF, and it sounds like a win. And maybe a nice option when fall 2013 comes around

498
Technical Support / Re: 60D Dust Help
« on: August 20, 2012, 10:10:18 AM »
If you're seeing actual small specs, it's unlikely to be on the mirror, since the mirror is not a focal plane (much like a speck on the front element, it won't resolve as a discrete point).  Rather, the dust is most likely on the focusing screen (the accessible bottom or the inaccessible top).
I have the same issue, a few specs of something in the top left corner of my view-finder. Since it has no effect on my images, I've decided to leave it as it. Not worth the cost of cleaning/repair to me since it has no effect

499
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 20, 2012, 09:24:28 AM »
So it would have a higher res than the 1Dx and just 2fps less?  That is the part I don't get.  I think the 7D is due for replacement, and these maybe the specs, but if they are, I don't see it getting here till mid next year.  1DX supply is tight still, eh?
We're talking entirely different sensors though. For outdoor sports shooters who get bright sunlight, sure, there might not be a big difference. But then again, the current 7D would probably be fine for them (though the AF upgrade would be nice)

But for anyone working inside or in lower light, the 1DX sensor can shoot comfortably at ISO 12,800 and even 25,600, and the current 7D struggles at ISO 1600. Even assuming they get an extra stop out of the 7D sensor, its still well behind.

500
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specs? [CR1]
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:17:01 PM »
Well, the one thing that is consistent between all these different spec lists is that it will be 10fps and a focus system that is a variation of the 61pt system from the 5dIII/1DX. Nothing else has been consistent. The sensor is either gonna be full frame, APS-H, 18mp APS-C, or 24MP APS-C w/ phase AF. Or it might not exist at all and the 70D will take its place.

When I see a CR2, or several posts in a row with matching specs (the last 4-5 have had nothing in common) then I'll believe a 7DII might get put in the "announce and don't deliver for a year queue" that Canon has set up

501
Video & Movie / Re: Time Laspe Program?
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:00:47 PM »
Is there any computer program for Mac that can compile a time lapse together other than cs6? Cs6 seems to take forever and doesn't seem to keep the quality of the photos
Any video editing program, and even Quicktime 7 Pro can do it. I'd suggest looking through some of the forum posts here to see if there is anything in Photoshop you are doing wrong:

http://forum.timescapes.org/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=8

502
Lenses / Re: quess how many lenses, ebay foolishness.
« on: August 19, 2012, 10:31:51 PM »
i swear i see a listing for a 2.8, then a photo of an f4IS, then a 2.8IS v2 box, then...? And i thought I had crummy ebay ads.
Yep, there are 3 photos of the f/4L IS in there; for whatever reason. But, they are all taken on the same tile floor, and he did leave a note clarifying that it is the vII of the new f/2.8 version, so, you'd at least have a claim if he sent you the f/4L

503
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II
« on: August 19, 2012, 10:17:58 PM »
Does anybody have a more useful update on the delays for this lens and what happened with delay?  I assume from Mr. Grumpy above that it's due next month?
Well, using the search function for the site, I found this. Answers your questions as completely as anyone can

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-delayed-again/

504
Just looking for an opinion. I want to get my first L lens and I'm tossing between Canon 70 - 200 f/4 IS vs. 70 - 200 F2.8 non IS. I'm looking to use it for sports photography, mainly outdoors but sometime indoors.
Its tricky, because the common sense is that the IS isn't going to do you any good for sports since people are moving so fast, but, there are definitely times where IS is the only way you get static shots.

I love my f/4L IS, and I've never had problem with getting fast enough shutter speeds for action with it outdoors. Indoors it would be lacking, but, I'm not sure the f/2.8 would fully get you there either. You'd probably find the 85 or 135 lenses better there

505
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: August 17, 2012, 02:21:45 PM »
It looks like you were pointing the camera downwards from a height. That's a bit like using a tilt and shift, which is why you were able to get more apparent DoF.
I was gonna say something similar; you can see what is out of focus and where the focus plane is when you look closely, but, on first glance you don't notice them and it seems to have endless depth. Saw this with another photo where I guy had used a T/S lens to get the entire scene in focus, but it made it seem flat. When someone add a little photoshop T/S effect to it, the scene came to life

506
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angle Zoom Discussion & Opinion
« on: August 17, 2012, 01:51:25 PM »
3. Patent from April 2011: EFS 11 f/2 - http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/04/ef-s-11mm-f2-patent/
Actually, this one was a lens for a projector; not for a DSLR

507
Lenses / Re: best wide or ultra wide angle lens for crop sensorh
« on: August 17, 2012, 01:41:03 PM »
Using any of the photomerge techniques, IMHO, offers a much superior image.
Except photomerging takes times, and if you are including anything in the scene that moves (wildlife, water, etc), its a big pain to deal with. I'd rather know exactly what my image is going to look like than hope I nailed my photo merges later. Plus, there are some things you can do with the distortion that photo merging can't really match.

The only way I'd agree with you is if we were talking a T/S lens and using it to do the photomerges. But, that's $2k+ I don't have.

my images just looked sharper with the canon, and with landscape shots its much more noticeable.
Weird, I didn't see any difference. I preferred the Canon's autofocus, as I find the Tokina to be slow, but, it's rare that I'm actually using AF in my landscape scenes.

I thought the Tokina had an easier distortion to correct, while the Canon flared less. Both were sharp and great, can't go wrong with either

508
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony NEX goes Full Frame!!!!
« on: August 17, 2012, 12:04:18 PM »
Would this use the NEX lens mount, or would they make a new mount? I'm all about competition in the industry so I think it's great to see more FF cameras on the market(hopefully)!
This might be the camera from this rumor: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-sony-approves-the-launch-the-new-hyrbid-alphanex-mount-camera-sort-of-fullframe-nex-7/

Sounds like it could handle E-mount lenses in crop mode, and would need alpha lenses for full-frame. Which is really actually good for users, cause Sony has some good A-mount lenses, where as I can't imagine any E-mount holding up to full frame. But with a crop mode, they'd be the same as they are on the NEX-7

Sony is doing some really cool engineering stuff; they just haven't translated any of it into a full-line yet. The NEX system is a little short, and they are only now really filling out their Alpha line.

509
Lenses / Re: Wider lens for new FF user - 35L vs. new 28 IS
« on: August 17, 2012, 11:22:20 AM »
It just seems like the 28 IS will work in my specific need (small, wide, low-light for non-moving stuff, still handles polarizers, not too wide for general walkaround use) without any degradation of IQ compared to the closest L lenses.  Seems like a win in my (admittedly bizarre) little world.
Yeah, seems like the IS would be important to you if you want to shoot lower light stuff (shutter speeds in the 1/8th, 1/15th area) without the need to carry around a tripod. If its a lens you'll use when you have a tripod around a bunch, then I'd just get the older 28mm f/1.8 and save a few hundred bucks, as it resolves nearly as well.

510
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony NEX goes Full Frame!!!!
« on: August 17, 2012, 11:01:30 AM »
Sony does have a few good lenses, but only a few.  They are badly overpriced for non IS lenses.
Yep, this is why I don't see them succeeding with this as a money-making venture. For people who don't mind manually focusing, it may have some great possibilities, but their NEX line of lenses is awful; none of them stand up to the 24mm APS-C sensor, so I can only imagine how poorly they'd perform for full-frame. And having to adapt A-mount lenses to it sort of defeats the size thing, so, might as well go with a full-frame DSLR.

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 54