Messages

46

EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon user Swapping to Canon with a 5D3

« on: September 02, 2012, 07:03:23 PM »

With a 21/22 megapixel camera you can make prints in the range DIN A2 and you can crop in. The pixels on the D800E sensor are very small. If you have small pixel, then you have normally more noise, less light sensivity  and a poorer image quality. Same you get if you put 24 megapixels on an APS-C sensor.

But the pixels of the D800 are better than the Canon pixels. Especially at low ISO they have lower noise.

wow, it goes RIGHT to his argument of LESS light sensitivity... smaller pixel fit more onto any given grid, so for the sake of this silly 5D3 vs. D800 thing YES, more pixels = more res. but the NEW 22.1mp 5D3 sensor handles light BETTER, period!low iso is a stiffles me  in a lot of situations today. I dont always have a tripod for 800-3200 iso shots. All given I'd take the 3 compared to the 800 for my style of shooting anyway.

landscapes, studio, street and weddings have been shot LONG BEFORE THIS SILLY CONTEST!

as far as which is better- what are your end results with the kit you have???

47

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon or Zeiss lenses?

« on: September 02, 2012, 10:39:51 AM »

I do not shoot video, but in my research and testing of my 2/50 Zeiss Makro against the canon 50 1.2L and the zeiss 50 1.4, the Makro ROCKED THEM!!!!!

I bought the 2/50 Makro for personal enjoyment but it comes on every job now.

to me the Zeiss 1.4 was the worse ( not close to the sharpness of the other two and it fringed in the OOF areas too much for my tastes).

the depth on the makro is VERY shallow my friend, and @ 2 it is plenty wide. even on a cloudy day I can get the OE warning in the viewfinder, so light getting thru is no problem. And it's sharp throughout ( be careful not to severe your hands when stopped down!)

test them both in the store to see what fits best. for me the Zeiss color and contrast plus the sharp focus and seemingly 1/8 of an inch type of DOF @F2 from a foot away was the deal maker, besides saving a few hundred.

BTW the focus confirmation and the long throw of the focus ring gave me NO problems catching shots, EVEN doing weddings and street.

48

Software & Accessories / Re: ND Filters for Photography

« on: September 02, 2012, 10:28:01 AM »

check out 2filters.com
I just ordered a Cir-Pol a set of soft grads and a 10 stop ND. my budget was tight to outfit my 16-35L but i don't do much landscape. heard good reviews about the Hi-tech series. I hope they pan out.

I have B+W on all my kit, but my money is funny until more jobs come along, lol.

Ps. all for less than 300 the Cir -Pol is Murami Super DHG 82mm, I hope this Murami shoots close enough to the B+W

49

Lenses / Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II not fitting securely to 5DMKIII body???

« on: September 01, 2012, 06:43:28 PM »

I have that play in my 5D2 and the # with my 70-200mkii doesn't affect photos tho.

50

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lovin' my 5d Mark III

« on: August 01, 2012, 07:27:55 PM »

I have a question and I hope this is within the thread...

I LOVE the focus system, point blank period!!! I got the 5Dmk3 as a second to add to my 5D2 kit for pro work( I have made more than a few bucks with the 5Dmk2 and a 50D), so I have become accustomed to registering my quick menus on both cams.

the focus system on the mk3 with its shooting scenarios would be a beautiful thing to register to the quick menu ( ie, when pressing the menu button six custom often used choices pop up first).

So my question is, is there a way to place the entire scene selection tab onto the quick menu?
I do use and have my tracking sensitivity as an option on the quick menu, does anyone know how to add it to the quick menu? Or is it not as desired an item for an add candidate to the quick menu as it is for me?  maybe it'll be in a future firmware up grade I pray!

51

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MarkIII Low ISO performance in shadows

« on: June 27, 2012, 07:13:52 PM »

Another example of 5D MKIII shadow noise.

You can see the LR metadata.

Is that shadow noise acceptable?

I will have some 8x10's printed tomorrow to see how this noise looks when printed.

well first off is that i think you should have tried to pull more info from that shot. looking at the histogram and looking at the shot tells me that there is too much difference between the lights and dark's in the image to expect much detail from the shadows. its just not a properly exposed pic ( as Siliconvoid pointed out). The histogram should be a lil more to the right because the DR is great in that shot. its not high-key or low-key so you should have pulled for more detail in that fur if you wanted it exposed properly. 

I knew that the nose of my dog and the white fur were to far apart in range so had to expose as so, which meant popping the flash or using a tripod to get enough info.
I popped the flash.
-shot with a 50D and a Sigma 30 1.4

52

Lenses / Re: 70-200mm f2.8 to 70-200mm f2.8 IS II worth it?

« on: June 26, 2012, 07:14:39 PM »

I'm just looking at the lenses I own and wondering if upgrading my 70-200mm f2.8 to the IS II version would be worth it. Now I've upgraded to the 5D3 I'm doing more low light work and I'm thinking the IS will be a bonus.

The test shots make the IS II look a little sharper and also it seems to work better with extenders. I just wondered if anybody on here had used both and what their thoughts were.

I think by the time I've sold my old one and bought a new one it'll cost me about £1,000. For that money I could extend my reach and options by getting a 7D or put the money towards a 300mm or 400mm.

Thoughts please?

the V2!

53

Lenses / Re: Faster cheapish prime for a wedding?

« on: June 25, 2012, 09:13:16 PM »

when I shot my first wedding I had the Sigma 30/1.4 on my old 50D! saved a ton of cash and got GREAT results. it was sharp @ 1.4 and cut glass @ 2.0

first @2.8
second @5.0
third @5.6

I am interested to know what your opion of the 30mm siggy on a crop vs the canon 50f1.4 on FF I find the canon 1.4 not as sharp wide open as I would like.

50mm has been my biggest disappointment changing from nikon as their 50mm f1.4 is a stellar piece of glass for the price.

I feel the canon f1.4 is good but compared to the sigma 85 (my new benchmark for a sharp lens) its not in the same class

I have experience with both the 30 and the 50 Sigs.
 
The 50D with the Sigma 30 1.4 impressed me so much that I wouldn't think of anything besides the Sigma 50 on a FF when I upgraded to the 5D2.
 the Siggy 30 on the crop was FANTASTIC! the 50 on my 5D2 was a mess. I found it to not be as sharp the canon 50/1.8 I sold off. I tried three different lenses from Adorama (with MA'ing them all, shooting through the range of apertures) and finally decided I would not have the same luck as with the Sig 30. I also tried the Canon 50/1.4 and returned it because I found that the Zeiss 2/50 Makro best suited the performance, look and IQ I desired.

what I learned from it all was that there are very good optics out besides Canon L, sometimes saving you loads of cash,  but I got the best I could get with the money I had and worked gigs the best I could.

54

Lenses / Re: Faster cheapish prime for a wedding?

« on: June 22, 2012, 03:22:17 PM »

when I shot my first wedding I had the Sigma 30/1.4 on my old 50D! saved a ton of cash and got GREAT results. it was sharp @ 1.4 and cut glass @ 2.0

first @2.8
second @5.0
third @5.6

55

Lenses / Re: Battle of the 50mm's (1.2L , ZE 1.4, ZE 2.0)

« on: June 21, 2012, 10:54:43 PM »

I can't help wondering where those mtf plots came from - wide open the ZE 2/50 has 92% contrast at 10 lp/mm, 88% at 20 lp/mm and 75% at 40 lp/mm. This means that it runs rings around every one of the lenses that have been quoted at all resolutions. Note that this is a tested mtf, not a theoretical one.

Secondly - I have done a fair bit of testing of fast lenses. It's clear that light from the perifery of fast lenses does not make it down to the active part of a pixel. At f/1.2, less that 20% of the light from the f/1.2-f/1.4 ring actually gets to the sensor (the rest presumably bounces around or is absorbed elsewhere.) The f/1.4-f/2 ring looses about 50% of the light that should be detected. I've posted plots of this information elsewhere.

It seems pretty clear that if light doesn't get to the active part of the pixel, it cannot be detected. If it cannot be detected, it cannot contribute to lens speed or bokeh. If it cannot contribute to lens speed or bokeh, why spend money on them? Before spending kilodollars on ultra-fast glass, you might want to read this. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/an_open_letter_to_the_major_camera_manufacturers.shtml

And lets not forget it just takes better pics, lol.

Zeiss 2/50, 5D2. @3.5 1/125 iso200

56

EOS Bodies / Re: Shot wedding with 5DIII, dissapointed in AF

« on: June 21, 2012, 10:35:27 PM »

My rebel often locks AF like lightning in low light.  I generally do a double-take and ask it "Really?!" - the result is usually an out-of-focus shot when viewed at large size.

I know I'm comparing 5Ds and Rebels here, but my point is faster isn't necessarily more (or equally) accurate.

here here!
No prob focusing with my 5d2.... hand held Zeiss 2/50 Makro @F3.5 1/125 iso 200

and just for thought, I do shoot weddings with this puppy.

57

Lens Giveaway Contest / Re: *Contest* Flora - Post Here.

« on: October 31, 2011, 10:01:08 AM »

50D 200mm2.8L