December 18, 2014, 10:34:48 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 - The Bad Duck

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
Canon General / Re: Why do you do Photography?
« on: April 16, 2013, 02:50:39 AM »
Photography and my girlfriend (6 years now) seem to be the only things I never get tired of. I get so much energy and inspiration and it makes me want to push myself to be better and never dissapoint. It must be love.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 DG OS HSM Delayed
« on: April 15, 2013, 09:49:05 AM »
I actually bought the old (current) version of this lens. It´s great!
I cant compare it to the Canon 300/2.8 as I have never used that lens but for the price it is absolutely great.

It´s well built, it is SHARP and it focuses well; although I have only tried it on tractors so far and they are not the fastest moving subjects (15 km/h heading straight for the camera). If focus misses it does hunt for a little while. I can see the use of a focus limiter but the extra premium to pay for that feature is not at all worth it to me.

I took some shots of fertilizing crops with artificial fertilizer with my mkIII and the lens @ 300 /2.8. When zoomed into 200% every grain of fertilizer is visible. It´s silly how sharp it is.
Then the "negative" side is that it has some pretty heavy vinjetting so the corners are pretty dark but there is no way I could afford the canon 300 /2.8 L IS anyway.
I´m most pleased. One thing that made the whole thing even sweeter was that I could haggle for the lens + 5d mkIII kombo, lowering the prize with about 15%, agruing that the lens is an old design that they soon could not sell.

If you want i can try to remember to post the photo later this evening.

Oh and one last thing, a lens this expensive is supposed to earn me money over a perriod of say ten years. In other cases a purchase would be hard to justify.

EOS Bodies / Re: diy ideas on how to protect camera from rain?
« on: April 07, 2013, 04:27:24 AM »
I took a plastic bag, made a hole in it that fit to put the lens (70-200 /4) through, and kept the rest over the body, a 30d. Pouring rain fot two hours while I photographed puffins. Worked perfectly but it felt strange to pull the bag over my head to get to the body. Like an old time camera. But hey whatever works...

Lenses / Re: Migration from zooms to primes...your suggestions?
« on: April 04, 2013, 04:03:07 AM »
I think of primes vs zooms like this; a prime is a specialist tool and a zoom is more general. When I mount a prime on my camera I have a specific type of image in mind and I look harder for that image compared to when I have a zoom mounted.

So, when you get yourself a prime, you need to think about what you want to do with that lens. Is it portraits of torso/head? Go 85/100/135.
Enviromental portraits? 35/50.
Street? Well... pick your favorite focal length.
Landscapes are usually done wide, but up to 200 mm can be usefull.

If your shot is done >f /4 then it is hard to see any reason to get primes, save for the t/s lenses already mentioned. So in a studio... not much need for a prime. For landscapes, no need for primes (but a good tripod and remote trigger). So, if I head out the door looking for landscapes I usually bring f/4 zooms (and tripod). If I shoot a wedding I use my primes most of the time, same for portraits and models. For my farmphotography, I am usually back to zooms or the samyang 14 /2.8 (and monopod). The right tool for the work ahead.

You need to start with what result you are after. If you do not know, then you are not allowed to buy more gear ;) . Figure out what you want to do, then get the tools to do so. And know that you have good equipment already.

Good luck!

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM
« on: March 08, 2013, 09:48:11 AM »
Great lens!
It´s better than I thought and gives great results, but I like primes more. Not for better quality or sharpness and not that I think every photo is better with shallow DoF but because... I like to use primes.

You guys already know all there is to know about the lens from photozone and the-ditigal-picture. No need to point out the obvious.

Lenses / Re: What's the best deal you've ever gotten on a lens?
« on: February 18, 2013, 05:07:00 AM »
Can´t remember the cost but ef-s 10-22 bought refurb. on a trip to London (I´m a Swede). Sold it used with profit 18 months later when I moved to FF. One of the best lenses I´ve owned, and I used it a lot "for free".

ef 85 /1.8 bought used very cheap in perfect condition. About 385 US$. Great great lens.

Then.... 35 L, 135L, 70-200L, 17-40L, 24-105 L IS, all new. They are worth every $. Lenses last.

Technical Support / Re: Connect DSLR to PC/Projector wireless
« on: February 11, 2013, 06:07:06 AM »
Eye-fi cards used with some of the CF-SD-adapters that do not block the wifi-signal (I assume that the adapters should contain a minimal amount of metal) are said to work at short distances.
However, reports also points to dataloss in the files meaning that it does not seem to work very well. I would NEVER use eye-fi for important photography combined with a adapter. Not because they are not supported but because I really do think there is a risk of dataloss.

WiFi grip is too expensive I´d say.
Find a friend with a 6D or a rebel with SD-slot + eye-fi?

Good luck!

Lighting / Re: Off camera flash
« on: February 11, 2013, 05:07:10 AM »
Learning to use the flash in manual mode is by far the best route to go UNLESS you have a lot of changing light in your frame or light/subject distance is varying a lot. After a little while you can get perfect exposure from manual flashes in just a few test shots. Or use a light meter :)

For everything you want to know, visit

good luck and welcome to the fun side of photography where YOU controll the light!

Lenses / Re: Need advice on telephoto zoom Lens
« on: February 08, 2013, 10:58:42 AM »
Now I´m going to make suggestions on lenses I have not used or just used once.

The 400 /5.6 is great if you can keep shutterspeeds up, and you can pump the ISO up quite a bit on a 5d mkIII. If you want a zoom, the sigma 120-300 /2.8 OS seems like a really nice lens. From looking at examples on the-digital-picture I got to the conclution that it takes extenders nicely and from 200mm and up it can compare with the 70-200 II /2.8 IS L. Up to 200 the L wins. On the other focal lengths I found the sigma equal or better. But that may be just me. The L is better in the bordes, the Sigma is quite sharp in the middle.
Then again, I don´t know if the sigma has some disadvantage in other areas that are important to you.

The 70-200 /4 and the 100-400 are quite a bit cheaper and that does make a differense. Both the 70-200´s are extraordinary good lenses but if you are used to 300 mm on aps-c, then 200 mm on FF will feel very short.

 So, my suggestion, have a look at the 400 /5.6, the 120-300 /2.8 OS + 1.4x extender, and the 100-400. Personaly I am seriously considering the 120-300.

good luck. This is not easy.

Lenses / Re: IS or no IS?
« on: February 08, 2013, 04:42:12 AM »
IS. No doubt about that.

One thing it does besides the things already mentioned above is to give you a steady viewfinder/LW while composing your image and help with panning. I´m no video guy but that seems helpful there too.

Canon General / Re: What's your definition of "Pro"?
« on: February 07, 2013, 04:10:25 AM »
Professional means making a living out of what ever you do. Amateur means doing it for fun, or for the love of it.

I consider myself a part time pro. I get 10-20 % of my income from paid shoots or photos sold. I could live with going up to 50% photography but the step from there to 100% is huge and would require me to do a lot of shoots that I would not want to do, just to make money. My ordinary job is great and more fun than doing shoots for clients that I dont´like. However the photography I enjoy is much more fun than work. It´s a balance for me.


Even though I traded my 7D for a 5D3 I would trade the 5D3 for a 7D2.  I'm hoping it's just an APS-C 5D3 that's a stop behind in the signal to noise ratio and dynamic range.

+1   Man I would be in heaven.

Agree'd, I'm upgrading from a 600D and I'm finding it difficult to not just blow it on a 7D instead of waiting for the MkII. While the 7D is still a hell of an upgrade over the 600D, I know I'll be kicking myself when the MkII gets released if I caved...


Buy a lens or some lighting equipment. Or a carbon fibre tripod. Or a bag. Or photography books. Or a printer. Or a monitor. Or.... Luckily there are plenty of stuff to buy while waiting for a new camera body!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: future of sigma art line
« on: February 04, 2013, 02:12:33 AM »
14 /2.8 would be sweet. I like the photos I get from my samyang but at times AF is nice to have. But I have to admit it feels good when I get those great shots from my MF lens, because I know that I did it.

120 /2.0 OS would be useful

Then, although it should be put in sports segment, a 300 /2.8 OS or a 400 /4 OS.

a 1,7x extender would be nice. A bit longer than the 1,4x but with better optics than the 2,0x? OR... a extender zoom. 1x - 2x or something. Would be cool but since nobody has done it yet it is probably not a good idea.

What else...?

Lenses / Re: Lens Help..EF 28mm f1.8 any good?
« on: January 30, 2013, 10:32:17 AM »
My copy is great! I feel it is as sharp as my 35 /1.4 L. If not sharper (or perhaps it is just more contrasty wide open than the 35 L is). However, I don´t really like the 28mm focal length as much as 35 so I don´t use it very much. That said, I knew I wanted the 35 /1.4 L when I got the 28 /1.8 and I really should just have bought the 35 right away. It was a waste of money to get the 28 that I seldom use though it is great.

But it is really good and has a bad reputation that it does not deserve. A theory is that f/1.8 is so shallow DoF that it is easy to mistake an out of focus photo with an unsharp lens. Also you should be aware that 28mm is a "boring" focal length (but that can also be seen as a challange!)

Have not used it for startrails.

So my advice is... although it is a good lens, DON´T buy it. Save for the 24 L that you really want - substitutes will not make you happy and you will end up loosing money. Or buy a used 28.

This is one of the best questions asked in a long time. I come from film myself and started out with a 30D (140 000 exposures taken), 70-200 /4 L IS and 17-40 /4 L.

Now I have a 5D mkII and I am very happy with that camera.
As you have noticed, at low ISOs cameras these days all look great. As has been said, IQ differences comes into play in more extreme situations. But there are other things that matters to your final image and that is how lenses behave on each camera.

On a full frame camera the lenses behave as they used to do on film. That is, f/4 gives a rather short DoF (yes I know, focal length, subject/background distance). I think of it as f/4 on FF is approximately f/2.8 on crop. That means you get less DoF at the same apeture and framing. That also means that for portraits the FF has an advantage for bluring backgrounds, but APS-C has the upper hand on sharp landscape shots with everything in focus. You would think that you can stop the lenses down even on FF to get a large DoF and while you can do that, diffraction will set in earlier compared to APS-C (I think). You also get the greater compression of for instance the 85mm lens on FF compared to a 50mm lens on APS-C, giving more flattering portraits.

Also, the 650D has no AFMA so there is a chance of having to send camera and lenses to Canon to get them all adjusted for maximum sharpness. Sometimes that is important - the need for 100% focus is much greater whit the high resolutions we have today. It is much harder to get a 100% sharp photo with the 5D mkII compared to the 30D I think.

There are great wide angle lenses for both formats, but to get greater reatch the tele lenses get more expensive if you are unwilling to crop in post.

The autofocus of the 5D is more capable than the 650D making it more suitable for action.

To me another thing is important - larger and brighter viewfinder: this is a big plus to me! It´s easier to use and feels better after a long day of shooting. Also I like that I can use my 5D mkII with my mittens since I live in Sweden and I don´t stop photographing in the winter. I don´t want a smaller camera body.

So what do you need?
If you want to do portraits, extreme low light, more action, shallow DoF, adjust focus on your lenses? Keep the 5D.
If you want to do landscapes? Keep the 650D.
But yes, both cameras are capable and they both are great imagecreating mashines. The difference is in the format and how that affect the image, not really the image quality itself.

I hope this helps you.
And don´t forget how to use your tripod!

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7