December 19, 2014, 11:51:56 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 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 54
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

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

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

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

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 -
Actually, this one was a lens for a projector; not for a DSLR

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

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:

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.

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.

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.

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: August 16, 2012, 11:03:56 AM »
A few from Glacier NP

And a recent one from MD

Lenses / Re: best wide or ultra wide angle lens for crop sensorh
« on: August 16, 2012, 10:19:38 AM »
I hear the Tokina 11-16 is as sharp or sharper than the Canon 10-22(my 10-22 is damn sharp), it is for sure faster and evidently built better.
Having used both, I'd say the Tokina is built better, and is obviously faster, but I can't really say it's sharper. Plus, it has half the range. If you were doing video work, or were always going to be shooting in low-light, I'd have suggested the Tokina. Otherwise, get the Canon 10-22, as its more versatile, and as mentioned, the flare handling is better. Especially since price wise they are very similar.

Also, the 10-22 can focus slightly closer (9" v 12"), so for that specific purpose its better. You will likely find the distortion of both to be a little frustrating for shooting historic buildings, but, that's the nature of any wide angle lens.

PowerShot / Re: PowerShot SX160 IS & PowerShot SX500 IS
« on: August 14, 2012, 07:35:03 PM »
With the masses using iPhones and the like, to whom is Canon marketing these cameras?  Most people only need Facebook resolution, so the de facto standard smart phone is a better choice for the application.
There are still a lot of people who take pictures of their kids/family and print the pictures to put on their wall. Still lots of people who travel or do outdoors stuff where an iPhone is lacking either on the zoom, focus, or detail side of things. I'm not super familiar with the iPhone, but what is its burst rate? Oh and you can't replace the batteries, so, there goes multi-day trip use. Not to mention, an iPhone by itself costs $500+.

The market for P+S's is definitely shrinking; which is why they've become more niche products. You get these super-zoom ones, or the big sensor P+S cameras like the G12/G1X. Kinda hard to find the standard cheap 5x zoom P+S anymore because of camera phones.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: What to tell a newbie?
« on: August 14, 2012, 03:48:49 PM »
Sigh... Why does everyone always get so caught up on just the camera bodies. The lenses are a huge consideration when buying into a system, not just the body. Sure, the nikon body might have more resolution or more dynamic range, but what it doesn't have is that awesome canon glass.
Yep, does Nikon have the 100-400L or 400mm f/5.6 as cheap options for if he gets into wildlife photography? Maybe he needs something like a G1X for travel, and a DSLR with a tele lens wildlife. Canon suits him quite nicely there, and better than Nikon's offerings. Whether the D3200 is better or not is irrelevant if his only option is the Nikon 300mm or $5000+ lenses.

If you're a teacher, you should be taking the broad view of things. Sure, I'd tell a landscape photographer to go Nikon, because their future is the D800 and the 14-24. For wildlife, Canon would easily be the winner for me. For someone with a video heavy focus, I might point them to Panasonic. For someone wanting to do a bit of everything, I still think Canon is a great option because they have great variety

Software & Accessories / Re: Other photography websites...
« on: August 14, 2012, 09:46:26 AM » isn't too bad, not as much variety as flickr though.
Yeah, it's great for seeing other's work, but, not so much for discussion. Still a cool site, but I agree that its not gonna replace that aspect of Flickr

Canon General / Re: Insurance for Camera gear
« on: August 13, 2012, 06:09:39 PM »
I've been wondering about this myself, is it possible to insure my gear if I'm not a homeowner?
I'm not a home-owner either, no problems getting the insurance. As another user mentioned, it might be why my rate was a little higher, but, it could also be that I'm in a big city and my gear is a higher risk of being stolen

Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 54