July 29, 2014, 01:51:43 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 - wickidwombat

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 296
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:43:03 AM »
We shouldn't forget that the EOS M was "an experiment", as their CEO said. There are no real rumors about the long-awaited M3. I do still believe that Canon will go mirrorless with their 'normal' SLR's (I expect the 7DII to be the first one -> hybrid VF, stunning video functions, many autofocus points etc.) and they will have an EF mount, otherwise they would kill themselves after building up a lens system for, I don't know, 40 years?! I wouldn't bet on the M system.

an experiment where every piece of glass for the system so far is damn good

EOS Bodies / Re: ISO D+ function
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:37:01 AM »
I dont bother
it effects jpg files only
generally it will under expose the shot

EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: June 29, 2014, 07:33:41 AM »
a 15-85 EF-M would be a winner

If Canon bring back the APS-H, It must be in the niche market and meet the following requirement.
1. Smaller than the 6D for portability
2. Same pixel density(or even smaller) than the 1Dx for low light/high ISO performance.
3. Very fast FPS for sports photographer due to lower MP.
4. At least half of the price of 1Dx
Question is at this day of age, how many photographer can live with a 10 to 12 mp camera as a general purpose camera?

Why does it have to be smaller than the 6D when you're going to be hanging big whites off it?
I think a 7D size 24+MP APS-H body would be attractive since the 1D4 is 16MP and $3500 complements the current line alongside the 5D3

yeah I'd be all over that like white on rice if it had the 5D3 AF hell make it 22MP that would give it video abilities similar to the 5D3 too with its 3 to 1 pixel binning for those that care

Lighting / Re: Elinchrom - turn off single flash
« on: June 28, 2014, 08:46:54 AM »
i use the odin system with my elinchroms

buy the strato 2 recievers for the elinchroms which are much cheaper than the odin recievers for speedlights
then assing the groups and control everything from the odin controller
another benefit is getting high speed sync out of elinchrom studio lights ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 5 Layer UV, IR, RGB Sensor
« on: June 28, 2014, 08:43:37 AM »
Purely coincidence of course  ;-)

...but a week or two before the 7D was announced, there was a Canon multi-layer patent, which was apparently related to the dual layer one that appeared in the 7D as its metering sensor.

Keith, thanks for the great info as always, and I'm curious, how does the 7D metering sensor compare to the 1D X metering sensor?
the 7D licks balls and the 1Dx doesn't... well thats the short version ;)

Re: 16-35mm f/4 IS vs 16-35mm f/2.8 II

From these tests, it looks like
* At f/2.8, the 16-35 II is better because the 16-35 f/4 IS can't do it.

* The 16-35 f/4L IS USM is superior from f/4 through f/8, though at f/8 the difference between the two gets significantly smaller.

* At f/11, the two appear close in sharpness, but the 16-35 f/4 squeaks out a win with just a tad better sharpness and significantly less CA.

Overall, the 16-35 f/4L IS appears to be the superior landscape lens; that being said, the biggest difference appears to be from f/4 - f/8; at f/11, the 16-35 f/2.8 II is quite close.

Canon did a great job on updating the 17-40 with this lens. 

As I stated in other threads, I am holding on to my 16-35 II for f/2.8 at events, especially seeing how close the two are at f/11, where I commonly shoot landscape.  But, if you are primarily a landscape photographer the 16-35mm f/4 IS looks like a must have.

i'm 100% in agreement although i do find i'm using the 11-22 IS on the M alot more for wide stuff where i dont need f2.8 then i have the 50 art on the 5d3 this covers most stuff if i need longer i'll throw the 70-200 on either body or the 135 depends what i have at a particular time

EOS-M / Re: What is wrong with the AF speed of the M?
« on: June 27, 2014, 12:21:20 AM »
Dear All,

After running a few tests I was indeed surprised to find out it was kind of 'All in my head' this "the AF being faster with those settings" thing...  :-[ Maybe it was the case before I updated my firmware?? Or maybe I was just dreaming: I am probably not the only M owner having this 'wet' dream about being able to make their baby focusing faster  :P :P :P

Anyways, sorry for making you guys excited for no reason.........don't hate me for it (you hear me Polack dude!)  >:(

different USM lenses perform very differently to each other on the M some are fast while other quite slow also the 22mm pancake is slow but the EF-M STM zooms are faster

Now im eyeing on Voigtlander 20mm.  ;D

when when oh when.
It really is a great partner to the 40 and they both use 52mm filters so can share!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810!!!
« on: June 26, 2014, 12:09:19 AM »
Seems like the 5D iii just got pooped on.  For anyone who can stomach 36MP that is.

Luckily for Canon they have the better lens line-up.  Which is what really matters.
Yeah totally. So now everyone with 5 d 3 had better stop taking good photos because the d810 pooped on em....
Soooo  tired of reading this increscent useless drivel in every single thread

Photography Technique / Re: The definition of insanity
« on: June 25, 2014, 10:26:53 PM »
it may have been shot a million times before, but it's the first time for me, so I still enjoy it.
+1 ... life is all about experiencing it personally ... just because someone else has experienced something and captured it, does not mean we shouldn't capture it with our camera ... much of what we do in life has been done by billions of people before us, yet we find joy, happiness and fulfillment in experiencing it ourselves for the first time ... so why should it be any different just because others think we shouldn't be photographing the same scenery shot a million times before!
BTW, that's a very nice image ... I've never seen lava in real life, one day I'd like to and I'm sure I'll go crazy photographing the lava, even if there are a billion of those photos on the internet.
I agree billions of people have had sex but it still never gets boring! ;)

Photography Technique / Re: Shallow DOF vs lighting
« on: June 25, 2014, 10:23:07 PM »
Ahahhahah. Funniest thing ever.

If you have to ask, your answer is DOF, and you know it.

Why, because there is a little thing called the sun, plus if you know what you're doing, you can make magic with reflector and single continuos light.

Lighting is everything, irregardless of shallow or Deep DOF. Lighting can be anything from a flashlight to a reflector to a bank of broncolor strobes to shade under a tree but getting the proper light is what makes great portraiture.

Now if I had to choose natural light or off camera flash, I'll shoot flash when I can use it and natural if I can find it. Either way I'll be manipulating the light somehow to make it better.

True, but there is simply no way to get shallow DOF in post production, while there is plenty of ways to light an image properly without an actual flash unit.
You are still effectively saying lighting is more important which it is regardless of how the lighting is achieved it is still much more important be it window light , studio strobes, speed lights or a simple reflector or scrim. Light is king . the end.

"Tested" some FD lenses with the EOS M via FD->EF-M Adapter
FD 4.0 17 / FD 2.8 28 / FD 3.5 50 Macro / FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. (chrome ring) / FD 1.8 85 / FD 3.5 135 / FD 2.5 135 / FD 4.0 200

Only the FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. showed very good quality and is interesting for me because it has a higher aperture than all my other lenses. This one might be in the photo bag you mentioned.
In the tele range the EF 4.0 70-200 is far superior to the above mentioned lenses. The EF-S 60 Macro is crisper than the FD 3.5 50 Macro.
FD 4.0 17 never was a very sharp lens but is interesting for video because it has very low distortion.

The major drawback of the EOS M is the fact, that you cannot find the right focus setting via the display easily. A electronic viewfinder of a future EOS M would be very helpful for that.
But if you use more or less static objects/subjects using the FD lenses via EOS M might be a good way to experiment with these older lenses.

If you want use the lens on your 5D, this link might be helpful:
There you can convert one or two of the most promising FD lenses into an EF mount version - for me I am thinking about the FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. ... but still waiting what Canon will do in the 50mm range ...

actually on the M if you install magic lantern and enable focus peaking it lets you use manual focus lenses incredibly accurately

EOS-M / Re: What is wrong with the AF speed of the M?
« on: June 24, 2014, 08:40:03 PM »
I've done this, you can set back button focus to one of the wheel buttons. (The leftmost part of the wheel). I m a DSLR backbutton focuser so this makes it a little easier for me.

My one complaint is that this is an awkward button ergonomically for backbutton focus on the M. The logical choice would be the movie record button, which is disabled while shooting stills anyway. It's a natural spot near your thumb, I don't know why they didn't think of this.

I don't find it makes the AF any faster or more reliable, but it suits my style of shooting more so I stick with it.

+1, it's a bit to awkward for me (on the M) and doesn't make the AF any faster. I've found the focus speed acceptable for my type of shooting anyway
ditto i tried it. hated the position and turned the function off. I would like a firmware update to enable assigning the movie record button to this function too

EOS-M / Re: Is there a group anywhere of eos m owners?
« on: June 24, 2014, 08:37:46 PM »
... eos m. I have it since a week ...

Hello and welcome to "the M club" here. :-)

What lens/es do you use with your EOS-M?  EF-M  or also EF-S/EF via adapter?

Myself I got my M for about 1 month now. It's my light and compact "go everywhere camera".
ALso got the EF-M 18-55 kit zoom, EF-M 22/2.0 and EF/-M adapter, which I use fairly regularly to connect my EF-S 55-250 STM and EF 40/2.8 STM (pancake) and sometimes my EF-S 10-22 and EF-S 60/2.8 Macro.

In my experience, lenses with STM AF drive work better on the EOS-M  than EF/EF-S lenses with USM AF which was optimized for DSLR phase AF.

you should try the 135L on it in servo mode its damn quick and i would say i was getting 90% keepers with the combo
other USM lenses not so much but the 135L is amazing on the M

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 296